In Brown County, the Republicans have a monopoly on political power. The winners in the  Republican May primary have a very high probability of winning in the Nov General Election.

Primary deadlines and position for 2024 (courtesy of Sherrie Mitchell).

This monopoly on power leads to a situation where if any county citizen wants a voice in their county government, they need to vote in the Republican Primary. They can then vote for either the Republican or Democrat candidate in the Nov elections.

• • If any citizen wants to run for office in the Republican primary, they need to be considered a “Republican in Good Standing” per Rule 1-24 or 1-25 (see below – Indiana GOP Rules).  This rule is currently being challenged – The Indiana Supreme Court will be hearing arguments on February 12, three days after the filing deadline. (see below).
    •  Feb 12, 2023, Audio – IN Supreme Court – Oral Arguments https://independentvotersofbrowncountyin.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/in-supreme-court-party-rules-240212.mp3
    • Brown County Matters

“If” the Supreme Court determines the rules are unconstitutional, should any candidate that may not meet the current rules submit their nomination as a candidate?

Candidates. All Republican precinct chairs will be on the May primary ballot. In addition, 2 commissioners (District 1 and 3) and three at-large council seats.  The precinct chairs elect the county chair in March following the Nov election.

Indiana Precinct (PC) Project — “Learn how to protect the Foundation of the Republican Party. Learn about the MOST POWERFUL role in politics!”

2024 Elections Candidate Information – Secretary of State

• • 46439 fill-in CAN-2: Declaration of Candidacy for Primary Election in 2024

Oct 2023. Indiana GOP Rules of the Indiana Republican State Committee

• • “Rule 1-24. A “Qualified Primary Republican” is a voter who cast Republican Party ballot at the two (2) most recent primary elections in Indiana which the voter voted, and who is a Republican in Good-Standing.”  (1)

• • “Rule 1-25. The term “Republican in Good-Standing” shall be defined as a Republican who supports Republican nominees and who does not actively or openly support another candidate against a Republican nominee.”
  • (1) Note: This law does not mean the candidate must have voted in the two (2) most chronologically recent primary elections and requested a Democratic or Republican ballot; instead, the person’s vote history must demonstrate that the last two (2) primary elections in which the person voted must align with the party the candidate seeks to affiliate in the primary election. For example, if a candidate pulled a Republican Party primary ballot in 2019, did not vote in the 2020 and 2022 primary elections, and requested a Republican Party primary ballot in 2023, then this candidate meets the requirements set forth in state law to file a declaration of candidacy (CAN-2) for the Republican Party primary without attaching the chair’s certification.  Ref: Indiana SOS, 2024 Indiana Candidate Guide.
• Indiana Statute: IC 3-8-2-7 Declaration of candidacy; contents

Challenges to Rule 1-24 and 1-25

Dec 18, 2023. Rust challenge set for argument in February By NIKI KELLY, INDIANA CAPITAL CHRONICLE Posted December 18, 2023

• • The Indiana Supreme Court has set oral arguments for Feb. 12 in John Rust’s legal challenge. (Lauren Chapman/IPB News)
  • The Indiana Supreme Court has set arguments in John Rust’s election law challenge for February 12, three days after the filing deadline to run for U.S. Senate.

Dec 15, 2023. Indiana Supreme Court – Order – Expedite, briefing scheduled

• • Additional Info: MyCase.In.Gov  Diego Morales, et al. v. John Rust,
    Case Number  23S-PL-00371 
  • Amended Opposition to Motion to expedite … 

Dec 11, 2023. Indiana AG appeals ruling favoring Rust’s ballot access
By Indiana Capital Chronicle

• • Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita on Friday filed a notice of appeal, requesting the Indiana Supreme Court step in after a trial court judge last week found a state elections law unconstitutional.
  • Court action will likely be swifter than usual with key election deadlines coming in January and February.

Dec 8, 2023. Indiana Secretary of State Appeals Ruling for US Senate Candidate Seeking GOP Nod.   The Indiana secretary of state is appealing a ruling that a law stipulating voting requirements for a candidate’s party affiliation is unconstitutional

• • Rust voted as a Republican in the 2016 primary but as a Democrat in 2012. He did not vote in the 2020 Republican primary because of the pandemic and the lack of competitive Republican races in Jackson County, the lawsuit said. Rust said his Democratic votes were for people he personally knew.

Dec 7, 2023.  INDIANA ELECTION LAW FOUND UNCONSTITUTIONAL

• • “A Marion County Judge has ruled that an Indiana election law that limits candidates from appearing on the ballot in primaries is unconstitutional.
  • The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by Southern Indiana egg farmer and U.S. Senate candidate John Rust. Rust had filed to get on the ballot but had not voted in the last two Republican primaries and was told by his Jackson County Chairwoman she would not sign a letter that Rust was in good standing with the party, two elements required by law.
  • Judge Partick Dietrick, a Republican, held the law violated the federal and state constitutions on several grounds. He ruled the law violated the 1st and 14th Amendments, saying the state had no compelling interest in keeping Rust off the ballot.
  • In addition to the U.S. Constitution, Dietrick ruled the law also violated the State Constitution, saying it adds extra requirements to qualify for office which are not on the ballot.”

Feb 23, 2022. Brown County Democrat. Election board reviews multiple candidate challenges, more discussion set this week, by Suzannah Couch

• • The five challenges were due to either a candidate voting only once in an Indiana primary as a Republican or voting in two primary elections, but once as a Republican and the other as a Democrat.

• • 2021 $1,221,412.15
  • 2022 $1,161858.25
  • 2023 $1,327512.15

• Revenue from the innkeeper’s tax generated over 2 million dollars in 2023.   (Source: Brown County Treasurer)

o.  More money for the county? If more of the revenue was used to pay the operating expenses of the Music Center, and if 100% of excess profits were returned to the county, the county would have a needed source of revenue to deal with emerging issues.   

• • o. Do any Indiana statute restrict how “profits” from “investments” (Music Center) can be spent?
  • o. The county is not reimbursed for the expenses associated with tourism which would include police and emergency services to the State Park and the costs of any prosecution of offenses from arrests through sentencing, incarceration, and probation.

Council Agenda Dec 18, 2023

Audio – Council Meeting 20231218

County Council Meeting Notes – Dec 18, 2023

This post at Brown County Matters.

Agenda Items included:  “Allowing” citizens to ask questions and make comments, approving the salary ordinance, Indian Hill RR Crossing, turnover in the sheriff’s office, and hiring a new attorney.

Citizen Comments and Questions.   Similar to comments made by the president of the commissioners (Pittman), the council president Gary Huett, reinforced that they do not have to allow ANY public comments or questions at their meetings.  Citizens can ask to be placed on the agenda and approval of this request is at the discretion of the council president.

Huett’s policy is to allow an individual “2 minutes” for questions/comments at the “start” of the meeting.  The time allowed is arbitrary. This control prevents citizens from asking questions about anything discussed by the council before they vote on a specific issue.  Last fall, the local GOP advocated for the no-question/comment policy but it was ignored at the time.

De-funding the HR Director Position. Several citizens including Commissioner Sanders opposed the decision to de-fund the HR Director position. I reinforced that the commissioners have provided no justification for the decision which increased staffing costs, nor did they vote on this decision at a public meeting. Councilman Rudd stated that the council did not need a justification for increasing the budget and adding to our deficit.

In defense of the changes, Commissioner Wolpert stated that he “feels” the changes would improve efficiency. Commissioner Sanders stated the changes were not needed and are more expensive by around 20K.

The council voted 5 to 2 to approve the salary ordinance that included de-funding the HR Director position and the commissioner’s part-time receptionist/clerical position. They approved adding a second staff position for the commissioners – an assistant to the assistant. Council members Redding and Swift-Powdrill were the No votes.

Indiana Hill RR Crossing. Randy Pflueger of the Knowbstone Hiking Trail Association who has extensively researched the issues, provided an update on the county’s options. Councilman Rudd who has the lead for the county on the re-opening, stated that they will be meeting with INDOT to discuss the way ahead.  INDOT approved the re-opening on Sept 28 given that certain conditions were met.

Sheriff Staffing and Pay.  The sheriff’s office is experiencing turnover due to uncompetitive salaries. Surrounding counties have increased their salaries which can be 10-20K more for some positions.  The county is operating at a deficit.  Options could include hiring freezes and staffing cuts to free up more money to fund higher salaries and benefits

Public Comment Policy.  Not allowing citizens to ask questions is one of those rules that although you can enforce, should you?  The intent of laws like this is to ensure that the government can take care of business during a meeting. We are a small county and addressing questions and comments before a vote on an agenda item has never been a problem. There were probably only 2-3 meetings over the 100 I’ve attended where things got a little heated and a sheriff’s deputy was able to calm things down.   Recently, commissioner Pittman directed a citizen (Sherrie Mitchel) to be removed from a meeting. She was on the agenda and was not allowed her two minutes.

New Legal Representation. The council has been using the same attorneys as the commissioners – Barnes and Thornburg and chose to make a change.

Before their meeting, the council interviewed two attorneys. At the end of their public meeting,  they voted to hire Lorenzo Bevers Braman & Connell from Seymour.  Susan Bevers will be the attorney supporting the county. She has over 15 years of experience supporting county government including representing the various county departments and boards. Should help bring some needed guidance for the council.

Audio of the Meeting

Agenda Commissioner Mtg Dec 15, 2023

This post at Brown County Matters.

Commissioner and Working  Session Meeting  Notes Dec 15, 2023.

Working Session

Working Session – Commissioners and Council. Salary Ordinance.  I attended the working session today from 9-12.  Council members approved eliminating the funding for the HR Director position and funding a second and new position for the commissioner’s office.  The funding decision by the council is not final until it is approved via a vote at a public council meeting which is scheduled for Dec 18, 2023 at 6:30.  Funding for positions  are identified in the salary ordinance and the budget.

Working Session – Other Topics.  A lot of firefighting on recurring issues without addressing the root causes of the problem. A non-systemic approach to improvement typically results in 95% of changes resulting in no improvement.

Misc. In response to an idea about contracting for a study, Commissions Pittman pushed back and stated that the county has spent “millions” ( a little hyperbolic) on studies that sit on a shelf.  He was referring to studies from over 10 years ago or longer.   Typically, contracting for studies that are determined to be of little value are the result of incomplete or vague requirements and oversight.

Transparency. It was acknowledged that a better process is needed for publicizing the schedule of these working sessions. These meeting are about the only time the public has an opportunity to listen to discussions that support the decisions made at public meetings.    At a minimum, notice of the these meetings are supposed to be posted at the location 48 hours in advance .

Common cause or special? Another insight from these “working meetings” is gaining insight on process problems. There are  generally only two categories of “problems” – is the issue recurring /common (the majority) or does it represent an outlier/special ? On eliminating recurring issues, this requires a fundamental change to the process.

Commissioner Meeting

Courthouse Project – Change Order.  DLZ made an error on the plans that resulted in additional costs of around 24K.  They offered to provide services in lieu of paying for the additional costs.  Options are being considered.

Commissioner Staffing.  Council members did not request to see any analysis that justified the commissioner staffing changes.  Note last fall the council and commissioners decided a full-time commissioner assistant position was not needed. They developed a new HR Director position and a part-time receptionist clerk position.  This year, they decided the HR Director position was not needed and approved two new positions for the commissioners.  No analysis was ever provided by the commissioners or requested by the council.

Additional Commissioner Position.  Commissioners Pittman and Wolpert approved the new position; Sanders  voted No. Commissioner Sanders also asked for a legal clarification from the county attorney regarding  the defunding of the HR Director position. No vote was taken by the commissioners on the decision to defund the position. Commissioner Pittman stated a vote was not needed.

De-Funding the HR Director Position – An unethical and immoral process.  The HR Director first learned that the commissioners wanted to defund her position at a public meeting on Nov 6. 2023. No advance warning, or discussion They claimed at the time that the council had approved their decision which was not true.  Nov 6 Commissioner meeting notes provided at the following:  https://independentvotersofbrowncountyin.com/2023/11/07/commissioner-meeting-notes-part-1-nov-6-2023/

I sent a letter to Governor  Holcomb on Dec 12, 2023, questioning Indiana’s internal control statutes and policies that were applied to approve the Brown County Regional Sewer District’s (BCRSD) application for funding ($39 million) to expand sewers throughout the county.

Indiana’s internal control statutes were derived from guidance provided by the federal government.  “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, known as the “Green Book.”   “The Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA)  requires that federal agency executives periodically review and annually report on the agency’s internal control systems.”

• • Federal Govt.  “The Green Book may also be adopted by state, local, and quasi-governmental entities, as well as not-for-profit organizations, as a framework for an internal control system.”
    • Updated Green Book Standards (Executive  Overview)
    • GAO WatchBlog
  • Indiana – Internal Control Standards, State Board of Accounts (SBOA).
    • Indiana – Office of Inspector General (OIG)
  • Counties.  “Internal controls are designed by the county offices based on the identified risks of not achieving their objectives and the available resources to address those risks.”

The purpose of internal controls is to help improve the efficiency and effectiveness of operations and to help prevent waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement of taxpayer-provided funds.

This year (2023), the State Legislature voided county septic system ordinances that included requirements that exceeded state standards.  The BCRSD in justifying the need for their project, also included conclusions that contradict state standards.

• • June  1, 2023 – IDOH – Briefing Slides on the changes
  • MAR 29, 2023. House bill would let property owners ‘supersede’ Indiana health officials over septic systems – Indianapolis Business Journal
    • Now, House Bill 1402, authored by Rep. Jim Pressel, R-Rolling Prairie, intends to transfer authority over residential onsite sewage systems from IDOH to a Technical Review Panel, or TRP, made up of various state officials, scientists, academics and industry professionals. That panel would then be “in total control of Indiana’s septic code,” Pressel said, making it responsible for amending the existing state requirements and authorizing new sewage system technology.

Correspondence – State and Federal Elected Officials

Dec 22, 2023.  Inquiry to the Indian Department of Health (IDOH)

• • New state legislation that voided county septic-related requirements that exceeded state standards also created a Technical Review Panel (TRP). The TRP is to review any new septic system standards proposed by the counties.
  • The Brown County Regional Sewer District (BCRSD) has received initial approvals for its $39 million dollar sewer expansion project from the IFA/SRF. 
  • The BCRSD Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) justified a need derived from the BCRSD Wastewater Strategic Plan and Watershed Study. This plan and study did reference novel approaches for determining the effectiveness and useful life of a septic system, the adequacy of soils, and the interpretation and relevance of water samples in projecting the extent and scope of a problem.   Their strategy is available at the following: https://browncountyregionalsewerdistrict.wordpress.com/strategic-plan/
  • If counties cannot develop septic system-related standards that exceed what the state has identified, then why should county RSDs be allowed to develop new methods and standards without first being reviewed and approved by IDEM, IDOH, Others?   

Dec 18, 2023 – Cover Letter and Transmittal – State and Federal Elected Officials:
20231218 Letter Elected Reps – State and Federal

Dec 12, 2023 – 20231212 e Governor – Suggestion  Internal Control Policy
Extracts:

• • I have concerns with Indiana’s statutes and policies regarding the management of Internal Controls. State and federal statutes provide guidance regarding the development, application, and review of controls. The purpose of internal controls is to help prevent waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement of taxpayer-provided funds.
  • It is not evident that the State’s internal control program as it applies to funding of a wastewater treatment project in Brown County Indiana, is at the level that provides citizens with assurance regarding the effective and efficient use of tax dollars.
  • Note that locally developed septic system standards included in ordinances were voided by the state in 2023 and now require an independent review and approval process. Why isn’t this process being applied to locally developed standards that are being used to justify the replacement of functional septic systems for a sewer system?[1]
    • [1] Indiana Dept of Health, 2023 Legislative Update – County Septic Ordinances Voided on July 1, 2023. https://independentvotersofbrowncountyin.com/2023/06/20/indiana-dept-of-health-2023-legislative-update-septic-ordinance/

• • In summary, I request that your office direct an independent and objective assessment of IFAs internal control program in respect to their review and approval of the BCRSD wastewater projects. I also request that this review clarify the role of the state vs the county in the clarification of state standards. This would the adequacy of soils, soil testing, septic system permitting, RSD oversight, and clarification on methodologies regarding water sampling that justifies the level of funding that is provided.

Encl 1 Indiana Office of Inspector General (OIG)

Encl 2 State Board of Accounts (SBOA)

Encl 3 Indiana Finance Authority, State Revolving Fund

Encl 4 BCRSD Response to Comments provided by Lynda Sandow and Tim Clark

 Project Context:

• • BCRSD Sewer Expansion Project on “Trial” – For The Record
  • Sewer Expansion -Phase I PERs – Initial Submission
  • Nov 14, 2023. Helmsburg RSD (HRSD) Updated Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) as of Sep 21, 2023. SRF Approved. (No updated PERs available from the Brown County RSD and posted on their website. 

Cottonwood Road. Excellent presentation and discussion regarding the conditions and policy regarding gravel roads.

Dec 6, 2023, Commissioner Meeting Notes

1:05:14 Audio 

This meeting was more than interesting.   The county GOP chairman’s contempt for residents concerns with safety on a road was “unexpected.” This post at Brown County Matters

Audio of the meeting: https://independentvotersofbrowncountyin.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/audio-commissioner-meeting-dec-6-2023.mp3  

• • Excerpt – 7 minutes Audio https://independentvotersofbrowncountyin.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/excerpt-audio-commissioner-meeting-dec-6-2023_08-12-23_07-55-13-505.mp3
    • Commissioner Pittma “assumed” that Sherrie would be discussing a different ordinance so he was prepared (scripted?) to shut her down and have her removed. Sherrie was going to discuss another ordinance (building permits for small structures) and prefaced her comments with big govt/small govt policies. Included in the cast of the show was our local GoP – Mark Bowman (GoP Chair) and Clint Studabaker (BCRSD VP – we will get rid of your septic system and you will like it) were in the front row. Robyn Bowman (4th commissioner?) usually sits in the back row with her supporters. Conflicts between Sherrie and the Bowmans are legendary. Ron Sanders was the adult in the room – and tried to keep things rational.
    • Govt Meeting Policy:  Commissioner Pittman was correct in that the commissioners do not have to let anyone comment. They can choose to allow a citizen to ask questions, be placed on the agenda, and they can limit time. – Options that the local GoP via the commissioners, tried to institute last fall. I challenged the policy when they were discussing funding for the BCRSD and would have welcomed being escorted from the room. Jerry allowed me to speak and they abandoned the formal policy. Jerry has invited anyone with a question to ask it – raise your hand, be acknowledged, go to the podium, state your name, and ask away. And, you can also ask to be placed on the agenda – sometimes at the last minute depending on the issue. This meeting was an “outlier.”

Agenda Comm Mtg Dec 6, 2023

• First Amendment Rights – ACLU?  Audio: 57:58 and 1:22.  A county citizen(Sherrie Mitchell) asked to be on the agenda to discuss an ordinance-related issue.  She wanted to make the case that the county square foot requirement  (per an existing ordinance) for requiring a building permit for a new structure be increased.  Commissioner Pittman assumed she wanted to discuss a different ordinance.  He directed the Sheriff to remove her from the meeting.  Following the meeting, Mrs. Mitchell filed a complaint with the ACLU alleging a violation of her First Amendment rights.
• County GOP Chairman contempt for a resident.  Audio 1:05.  A resident on Cottonwood Road shared her experience,  frustration, and requests in trying to resolve safety issues with the road and submitted a petition from the other residents asking for a range of improvements that include gravel, ditching, a guardrail, and paving.   I was not the only one that heard the Chairman of the local GOP, Mark Bowman, refer to her as a “bitch.”   (Note: The highway superintendent is Mike Magnor who is also a GOP precinct chair.)
  • Cottonwood Rd Gravel Road Policy – Safety, Maintenance, Costs
    • This post at Brown County Matters
• Indiana Hill Railroad Crossing. Audio: 46:25. and 1:26.  Scott Rudd provided an update.  The target date for re-opening is May 1, 2023. Commissioners Pittman and Wolpert were not aware that INDOT reportedly has the money needed to make the necessary changes.   My comments on the funding issue were provided at the end of the meeting.  It was thought that grants or other fundraising efforts would be needed.  Background Info on the Indian Hill RR Crossing
• Commissioner Staffing -Re-Org.  Audio 14:31 Commissioner Pittman and Wolpert want to defund the HR director position that the council and commissioners approved last fall.  They signed an undated memo to this effect and distributed it to council members.  However, there was not  a vote on this decision at a commissioner meeting.  The rather absurd justification for the defunding is that the HR director has no direct reports.   Commissioner Sanders contacted the county consultants to confirm that the requirement for direct reports was bogus.
  • Email: Commissioner Sanders — HR Director-Direct reports not needed

Background on Staffing Issues. Last fall, the commissioners, council, and auditor decided that a full-time commissioner assistant (a position held by Melissa Stinson) was not needed. They determined that the position should be replaced with a full-time HR Director. They also decided to fund a part-time commissioner receptionist/clerical position.

Last fall, Melissa Stinson accepted a new and higher-paying position with Monroe County. This year, she decided to return to the county as a contractor supporting the development of the commissioner’s budget.  Commissioner Pittman and Wolpert agreed to create a new full-time commissioner assistant position and to de-fund the part-time position. Melissa was selected for the position.

Commissioner Pittman and Wolpert then decided to defund the HR Director Position and modify the position description for Melisss Stinson (commissioner assistant) and add another full-time position for the commissioner’s office to assist Melissa. At today’s meeting, they just introduced the new position description for the additional position that included references to the requirements to coordinate with the HR Director.  Appears Commissioner Sanders was the only commissioner who actually read the position description and asked questions.  The decision to approve the position was postponed pending clarification of the position requirements.

Does it get any more “interesting”?  We’ll see. The county council has to approve funding for the staffing-related changes. The council has a working session meeting scheduled for Dec 7, 2023, from 6:00-7:30. Their regular meeting is scheduled for Dec 18, 2023, starting at 6:30.

Justification?  Note that I have yet to see any documentation or credible analysis that justifies the elimination of the HR Director position and the addition of the two new positions for the commissioner’s office.

Contempt for Voters. In America, We the People are “top management.” Elected officials are “employees.”  In the case of “commissioner staffing”, we have “employees” who want to spend more money and refuse to make the case to top management that the changes and additional funding are needed.  Why do Brown County voters tolerate this behavior?

Nov 27, 2023. This post at Brown County Matters. (Received copies of the slides).

Background Info – READI Grant Funding- Round 1.0 – 2021/22

Nov 9, 2023. An information session on Round 2 of a Regional Opportunity Initiative (ROI)  referred to as READI, was hosted by the Community Foundation on Nov 9, 2023, from 9-11.

“Eligible project activities are limited to capital projects or infrastructure improvements.   Matching Requirements: Attracting private investment is a major goal of the READI 2.0 program. ” Regions should attract a minimum 4:1 match at a regional level across their portfolio of projects. • This includes a required 1:1 match from local public funding and 3:1 match from private and philanthropic sources. • At least 60% of the match should be from private sources.”

• • Presentation Slides – ROI 2024 READI-2-REVISED-Charts-Unlinked-Brown 2

The fact that the Brown County Community Foundation (BCCF) is serving as a coordinator/facilitator of this process is interesting and problematic.

• • Brown County Comprehensive Plan (PDF)

Background information:

• • BCRSD Sewer Expansion Project on “Trial” – For The Record

  • Sewer Expansion -Phase I PERs – $50.5 million