2024 PERSONNEL POLICIES HANDBOOK Revised 01-25-2024

The APC voted 4 to 3 NOT to recommend approval of the change. The commissioners meet on Dec 4, 2024, at 2:00 p.m. and can vote to approve the change. (Although the topic is on their agenda for their meeting on Nov 20, 2024, they cannot vote on the APC recommendation without first receiving a certification by the Planning Director.

• • Nov 19, 2024. Plan commission recommends against rezoning Tilton property, by Dave Stafford, BCD

Appeals.  A zoning change can be challenged/appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) or judicial court. The BZA meets tonight at 6:00.

APC additional info provided by the Planning Director

APC Follow-Up Questions Regarding the Tilton Project –  Anonymous

Trail_Town_Manual_web

The North Country Trail Association

The human, health, and community benefits associated with the North
Country National Scenic Trail (NCNST) have been widely realized in many
communities. The NCNST helps encourage healthy lifestyles and active living
by supporting hiking and other recreational activities. The trail provides
environmental benefits by protecting important human and wildlife corridors
and enabling alternative modes of transportation. The North Country National
Scenic Trail also helps foster a strong sense of community and place, providing
an opportunity for social interaction and access to community amenities such
as parks, neighborhoods, schools, and downtowns.

Noelle Szydlyk

Indiana Destination Development Corporation

Director, Sports Tourism and Event Planning

(m) 317-416-3470

Helmsburg (HRSD) IDEM Recommended Order

Gnawbone. IDEM Recommended Order

Gnaw Bone received approval from IDEM for their customers to vote on board members.  The commissioners made a recent appointment to fill a vacancy. (To Do: Obtain the supporting paperwork)

The first four attached documents are from County records regarding the establishment and funding of Gnaw Bone Regional Sewer District.

• 1999004157
• 1999002012
• 1997000850
• 1997000851

 Also included a document from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management regarding the establishment of the District. The IDEM Virtual File Cabinet can be searched here:

https://ecm.idem.in.gov/cs/idcplg?IdcService=GET_DOC_PAGE&Action=GetTemplatePage&Page=HOME_PAGE

Bean Blossom – Brown County Regional Sewer District (RSD)

Question: Why was this RSD initiated by the council vice commissioners? Was and is this approporate?  The Commissioners are the executive body of the county.  Commissioners appoint board members of the Helmsburg and Gnaw  Bone RSDs.

• • June 14, 2006.  Bean Blossom RSD Formation
  • May 13, 2013 Bean Blossom Expanding Territory 68116921
  • Dec 23, 2013. 1st order Modifying the Bean Blossom RSD 3 to 5 members 80339407     

Last updated: Nov 13, 2024

Context:  Commissioner Meeting Notes, Nov 6, 2024, 2:00 p.m., Amendment to Sign Ordinance
Two commissioners whose terms of office end in December voted to approve an amendment to a sign ordinance.  The amendment was passed despite the unanimous recommendation by the Area Plan Commission Not to approve it. A survey conducted by the APC and citizen input provided at commissioner meetings supported the  APCs recommendation not to approve.

• • Executive Summary – Amendment to the Sign Ordinance

How do you challenge a county government ordinance?

ChatGPT

Challenging a county government ordinance involves a legal process where an individual, group, or entity argues that the ordinance is invalid or unconstitutional. Here are the general steps for challenging a county ordinance:

1. Review the Ordinance

• Understand the Ordinance: First, thoroughly review the text of the ordinance to understand its provisions and the grounds on which it might be challenged. It’s important to determine if the ordinance violates any higher laws, such as the U.S. Constitution, state constitution, or other laws.

2. Determine Grounds for Challenge

• Constitutional Violations: One of the most common reasons to challenge an ordinance is that it violates constitutional rights, such as freedom of speech, equal protection, or due process.
• Preemption: If the ordinance conflicts with state or federal law, it may be preempted (overridden) by those higher laws.
• Improper Enactment: If the ordinance was not passed according to proper legal procedures, such as public hearings or required votes, it may be challenged on procedural grounds.
• Vagueness or Overbreadth: If the ordinance is unclear or too broad in scope, it might be challenged for lack of clarity or specificity.
• Excessive Delegation of Authority: If the county government exceeds its authority or delegates too much power to a body or official, that could be another basis for a challenge.

3. Exhaust Local Remedies (If Applicable)

• Petition the County: Before moving to court, some jurisdictions require residents to first address the issue with the county’s governing body (such as the Board of Supervisors or County Commissioners). This could involve submitting a petition, presenting a formal objection, or attending a public meeting.
• Engage in Public Advocacy: You can attempt to convince local lawmakers to repeal or amend the ordinance before pursuing legal action.

4. Consult with an Attorney

• Legal Advice: Consult with an attorney experienced in constitutional law, municipal law, or administrative law to assess the strength of your case and guide you through the process. A lawyer can help determine if the ordinance is indeed unlawful and provide strategic advice.
• Class Action or Community Support: In some cases, an individual challenge might be more effective if supported by a broader coalition or class action, especially if the ordinance affects a large number of people.

5. File a Lawsuit

If informal remedies do not resolve the issue, the next step is to file a lawsuit in court. The steps generally include:

• Jurisdiction: Determine which court has jurisdiction over the case. In most cases, challenges to county ordinances are filed in the county superior court or state court. If the issue involves a constitutional violation, a federal court might have jurisdiction.
• Standing: You must have legal standing to challenge the ordinance, meaning you must show that you are directly affected by it. For example, you may live in the county, own property impacted by the ordinance, or have some other personal stake in the matter.
• File a Complaint: The complaint should outline the legal basis for challenging the ordinance, including any constitutional or statutory violations, and request specific relief, such as an injunction or declaratory judgment that the ordinance is invalid.

6. Preliminary Injunction (If Needed)

• If the ordinance is already in effect and you believe it is causing harm, you can request a preliminary injunction to temporarily block enforcement of the ordinance while the case is being decided.

7. Court Process

• Motion to Dismiss: The county government may file a motion to dismiss your challenge, arguing that your lawsuit should be thrown out. The court will review the legal arguments from both sides before making a decision.
• Trial or Summary Judgment: If the case goes forward, there may be a trial or a motion for summary judgment, where the court will make a determination based on the law and evidence. For legal challenges, summary judgment (a ruling based on the law without a trial) is often sought.

8. Appeal (If Necessary)

• If you lose the case in the trial court, you may have the option to appeal to a higher court. The appellate court will review the legal issues and decide if the lower court made errors in interpreting the law.

9. Other Legal Remedies

• Petition for Repeal: In some cases, if legal action is not successful, residents may also attempt to organize a petition drive to repeal the ordinance or request that the local government reconsider the law. This could involve getting signatures from voters to force a referendum or ballot initiative.

Common Grounds for Challenging a County Ordinance:

• Unconstitutional under state or federal law (e.g., violating due process, free speech, or equal protection).
• Conflict with state or federal laws (i.e., the ordinance exceeds the county’s authority or is preempted).
• Failure to follow required procedural steps (e.g., improper public notice, insufficient public hearings).
• Vagueness or lack of clarity (i.e., the ordinance is unclear or overly broad, leading to arbitrary enforcement).

Conclusion

Challenging a county ordinance typically involves understanding the ordinance’s legal foundations, consulting with an attorney, and filing a lawsuit if informal methods fail. If successful, the court could declare the ordinance invalid or issue an injunction to block its enforcement.

What is a “stay of enforcement”?

ChatGPT

A “stay of enforcement” is a legal order that temporarily halts or suspends the enforcement of a judgment or court order. This means that any actions required to implement the judgment—such as collecting a debt, carrying out a penalty, or executing a decision—are put on hold for a specific period.

Stay of enforcement is often granted while an appeal is pending or when the party affected by the judgment requests more time to comply or to challenge the decision. In essence, it provides a temporary reprieve from the consequences of a court ruling.

For example, if a person loses a lawsuit and is ordered to pay damages, they might request a stay of enforcement to delay having to pay until they can appeal the decision.

The Area Plan Commission (APC) held two meetings with unanimous support for recommending a No vote. Two commissioners voted to approve.

• • Amendment Sign Ordinance -Signed and Recorded

Background Information and Timeline: Aug 14 – Nov 26, 2024

• • Aug 14, 2024.  Background: Internally Lit Signage (24-M-01 BLAKE WOLPERT, PETITIONER WITHDRAWN)
  • Aug 27, 2024.  APC Meeting Notes, Internally Lit Signs, Comp Plan, Code and Zoning Enforcement

  • Oct 2, 2024. Commissioner Meeting Notes, Oct 2, 2024, 2:00 – 4:00, Internally Lit Sign – ‘Tabled” 

  • Oct 16, 2024,  Commissioner Meeting Notes, Oct 16, 2024. Internally LIT signs, bricks
  • Nov 19, 2024. Split vote OKs internally lit signs, BCD.
    • Internally lighted signs will be permitted in Brown County — at least for the next couple of months — after a bitterly divided 2-1 vote of the county commissioners on Nov. 6.
    • “We have a commissioner sitting there that got in that seat by seven votes. … We have another commissioner that didn’t win the primary, and both of you are out the door in two months,” Sanders said after the 2-1 vote adopting the sign ordinance. …. “I think for you to be making this decision before the comprehensive plan is even done and you’ve really took a hard look at it is offensive to me and a lot of other people, and I’ll be glad when the door shuts” when their terms as commissioners expire in Jaunary, he said.

    • Commissioner-elect Tim Clark, who will succeed Pittman on the three-member board, agreed that any decision should wait. He also warned that the ordinance opened the door to electronic messaging signs.

    • “Delay it and let the comprehensive plan address it,” Clark said. “… If you make any kind of change, have public input.”

    • Along with Clark joining the commissioners in January, Kevin Patrick will replace Wolpert. All the current and outgoing commissioners are Republicans.

    • Despite passage of the ordinance, Sanders suggested it may not stand after the new commissioners take office.

    • “We will be readdressing it,” Sanders said after the ordinance was adopted on a split vote.

  • Nov 20, 2024.   Commissioner Meeting. Commissioner Sanders made a motion to repeal the ordinance. Citizens spoke out – again, in support of a repeal. There was no support from Commissioner Pittman and Wolpert to repeal.
    • The county attorney identified legal options for citizens: A zoning change can be challenged/appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) or judicial court. The Indiana Codes:
      • IC 36-7-4-1600 Series-Judicial Review
      • IC 36-7-4-900 900-Series Board of Zoning Appeals
  • Nov 26, 2024. Bid to repeal lighted sign ordinance falters
    By  Staff Reports
     

This post at Brown County Matters.

Audio of the Meeting:

• • 27:01 —  An amendment to the sign ordinance to allow internally LIT Signs and allow Electronic Signs with Messaging was approved despite opposition from the public and the recommendations from the Area Plan Commission (APC).
  • APC members stated that they were not necessarily opposed to Internally LIT signs but the ordinance as written was too vague and unenforceable. They recommended the change be discussed during community conversations regarding changes to the County Comprehensive Plan. The APC also conducted an online survey that indicated the lack of community-wide support for the change.
  • Further, the details regarding electronic signs and messaging were not discussed. This proposed change was debated on social media and overwhelmingly rejected in 2018 and rescinded. It was proposed by the Music Center.
  • Commissioners Pittman and Wolpert, whose terms expire Dec 31, 2024, voted to approve. Commissioner Sanders voted NO and criticized his colleagues for not allowing the new commissioners – who will take office in Jan 2025, to consider the changes.
  • Background. Away a Day RV park was erroneously issued a permit for an internally LIT sign. After spending about 15K, they were told the permit was issued in error. Commissioner Wolpert then proposed requesting a special exception which was later changed to requesting an amendment to the ordinance.  

Distribution – Excess Revenue from the Music Center.  The commissioners tabled the vote to approve a change from 75% to the Foundation and 25% to the County to a 50/50Split.  John Elliott from the Foundation requested that the commissioners reconsider their vote and will be placed on the agenda to suggest that they retain the 75/25 split.

Supporting Information

• • Brown County Matters: Meeting Announcement and Draft Ordinance.

  • APC Meeting Notes, Internally Lit Signs, Comp Plan, Code and Zoning Enforcement

20241106 Highway Supt Report

 11 6 2024 Agenda Commissioners

Letters Brown County Democrat Oct 30, 2024

• • Voter supports Clark in race for commissioner, by Ben Phillips
  • How will GOP division  impact local party?  by Vivian Wolff
  • Republican commissioner candidate claims local party ‘abuse of power, By Tim J. Clark
  • Candidate appeals  for unity, common good, by Greg Taggart

Individual Letters available  online:

• • Letter: Voter supports Clark in race for commissioner by Ben Phillips
  • Letter: Republican commissioner candidate claims local party ‘abuse of power’ by Tim J. Clark
    • Democrat on Sep 17, 2024, “Reader does reversal on commissioner candidacy.” by Clara Stanley
  • Letter: Democrat.9/17/24. We need a change in the leadership of the Brown County Republican Party. Richard Stanley
    • Reply and Counter

The following letter was published in the Oct 30, 2024, edition of the Brown County Democrat with the title: Candidate claims ‘abuse of power.’

The local elections in Brown County are a little different this year. The campaign strategy posted on my website reinforces that a monopoly on political power leads to a centralization of power that can benefit the few at the expense of the many.

With your vote, I will work to ensure that all citizens will have the opportunity to help identify the best solutions for the county. This will be supported through better communications regarding the scope and extent of a problem, holding as many public meetings and working sessions as needed, and supporting a collaborative decision-making process.

Many voters may not be aware that just a few individuals in the Brown County Republican party can influence:

1. Who will be supported as a candidate,
2. Who can be selected for boards and commissions,
3. Who can keep and get county government jobs, and
4. Who should be appointed to fill a vacancy in an elected office.

Six people – 2 of 3 commissioners and four of 7 councilmen, can determine the fate of the county. And 7 of 11 precinct committeemen can determine who can fill a vacancy in an elected office.

As a conservative who consistently votes in the primaries as a Republican, I opted out of an association with the local Republican party, which functions more like a small club. The leadership did not welcome debate on positions and hijacked conservative values and principles to pursue personal agendas.

I consistently vote Republican in the primaries, which qualifies me under state law and party rules to run as a Republican. However, the Chair of the county GOP challenged my candidacy, believing that his opinion should take precedence over state law. The Election Board quickly and unanimously rejected his challenge.

The assessment regarding this abuse of power was further validated when their preferred candidate was defeated in the primaries. A few in their small club recruited and now support an independent candidate. This support for the independent meets the State GOP definition of “Not” being Republicans in Good Standing. Their hope is that the independent, with name recognition and little to no experience with county government, can pull enough votes from Republican and Democrat voters to get elected or at least get the Democrat candidate
elected. They perceive that either candidate would be more accommodating to their agenda.

The strategy to prevent me from being elected is supported by a smear and disinformation campaign that becomes successful when individuals do not challenge and investigate false and misleading narratives. Their strategy is motivated by panic and desperation over their potential loss of political power and control. They fail to see that their strategy is an insult to all the citizens of Brown County.

Clara Stanley is among the individuals who discovered the deception. She shared her experience in her Letter published in the Democrat on Sep 17, 2024, “Reader does reversal on commissioner candidacy.”

Voters have a responsibility to vote for the best candidate. I am the better candidate that will serve the interests of all citizens. Leadership and collaborative decision-making supported with facts will allow us to better understand our challenges and develop the best solutions for the county. The result will be an improved quality of life for us all.

Additional details are available on my campaign website at TimJClarkforCommissioner.com.

Tim J. Clark
Republican Candidate for Commissioner, District 3

Additional Context

• • Commissioner Candidate Forum – Sep 21, 2024  – Video

  • Election 2024: The Local Political Dramas – For the Record

  • Letter: Change needed in local Republican Party Leadership

Had to miss this meeting but did get a copy of the audio.

Audio of the meeting – dead space for the first 2 minutes

2:00 – 17:00 Mark Williams – Mainstream – Tax exemption

18:56 – Recovery Wellness Coalition – Kathy Rountree, et. al.

Back to Mainstream

46:13 Contract 43K – Job classification, Salary Grades – Approved – 1 No vote

49:17 1:20-43 Budget Adoption

• • County Budget – Form 4 at Gateway – formal document -100K overspending will need to be addressed.   Jacquee Clements (consultant for the auditor) on Statewide 911 employee salary.  Get 22,500 a month x 12 – 270K … hole this year …  we are 40K over and can reduce in Jan – move back into county general to fund dispatchers …. (equipment not budgeted?). Not sustainable past 2025. Contract costs from AT&T going down a little … Doing good on interest income (which varies).  We have structurally balanced the general fund accounty- dependent on interest income – not out of the woods ….
    • Challenge to other funds —  600K available revenue from income taxes – lowered one rate, increased the EDIT rate … in 2026 may have to bring down and increase another account LIT rate ….
    • Rudd – 600K available (pushing for funding mental health services) –  No, has been allocated – not available ….  400k “projected” revenue over expenses …..  Cannot increase budget now (Julia Reeves).  May not get supplemental  LIT next year … E911 will be a very important and emerging need (Greg Guerrettaz ).  Sheriff revenue from Dept of Corrections (DOC) not yet received ….
    • Vote to approve: (4 to 3) Redding motion — Byrd seconded -opposed Rudd, Abstain – Swift Powdrell
  • Hamblen Township budget – approved.
  • Solid Waste budget – approved.

Additional Appropriations

• • Assessor – $863.00 – new line item – appeal hearing with the state – approved
  • Circuit Court – Psychology expenses – higher than avg year – $10K – approved
  • Coroner – 14K – autopsy fund – approved
  • Auditor – digitize property books – transfer of funds $42,985 – approved
  • Clerk – transfer -FYI
  • Health Dept –  transfer $8,200 – council must approve before the state
  • Auditor – transfer 1K
  • Rudd – 400k left  this year — public safety, mental health needs — appropriate Jan 1, review in Nov and Dec.

Motion to adjourn