Get Adobe Flash player

 

BE IT REMEMBERED, that the White County Commissioners held a regular meeting on Monday, December 15, 2008, at 8:00 a.m. at the White County Building, 2nd floor in the Commissioner’s Conference room.

Commissioners present were President John C. Heimlich, Vice President Steve Burton, and Commissioner Ronald Schmierer. Also present was the White County Auditor Jill Guingrich, White County Attorney George Loy, and the Commissioners’ Secretary Donya Tirpak.

Commissioner Heimlich called the meeting to order.

MINUTES

  • Commissioner Burton made a motion to approve the minutes as presented from the regular meeting held on December 1, 2008, seconded by Commissioner Schmierer. Vote: Unanimous

PAYROLL

  • Commissioner Schmierer made a motion to approve the payroll as presented for December 15, 2008, seconded by Commissioner Burton. Vote: Unanimous

ACCEPT BIDS FOR FARM LEASE

White County Attorney George Loy announced that the Commissioners have legally advertised for the collection of bids to lease the County’s 75.6 acres of farm ground.

The following bids were received to lease the county’s 75.6 acres for one year:

Steven Carlson, Monon $13,343.40

Michael Schroder, Reynolds $13,600.00

Mark Lear, Wolcott $15,500.00

The Commissioners announced that they will take the bids under advisement and award the bid at the next Commissioners’ meeting on December 29, 2008

AREA PLAN

Area Plan Director Diann Weaver presented the following to the Commissioners:

Rezoning Petition #967

Floyd & Janice Lee Fultz are requesting to rezone 1 ½ acres from an R-2 (Single and Two Family Residential) to an A-1 (General Agricultural). The property is located west of Monticello at 1320 Hanawalt Road.

The Area Plan held a public hearing on December 8, 2008, regarding this request and there were opposers at the meeting. The APC voted to give no recommendation for this rezoning to the Commissioners by a vote of 1 yes and 8 no.

Commissioner Heimlich asked if there was anyone present wishing to speak about this request.

Sue Smith, 1296 Hanawalt Road , said that changing the zoning of the property is not going to help the problem. She complained that the dogs bark all the time and Mr. Fultz does not live at the property to be able to control the dogs. She argued that Mr. Fultz should keep the dogs in town where he lives and take care of them.

Commissioner Burton asked how many dogs are allowed on an R-2 zoning. Director Weaver said that he is allowed to have four dogs with an R-2 zoning and currently Mr. Fultz has nine dogs.

Director Weaver explained that the properties along Hanawalt Road, the front portion of the properties, are zoned R-2 and the back portions of the properties are zoned Agricultural. Commissioner Heimlich verified that there are properties that have horses and other livestock on the back portion of their properties.

Mr. Fultz presented a petition signed by his neighbors on Hanawalt Road stating that the dogs do not bother them. He said that they are barking at the deer, raccoons, or cats.

Don Pauken, 1186 Hanawalt Road, complained that the dogs do bark for hours at a time during the night. He said that his wife is homebound and when they have their windows up during the summertime, it is quite a nuisance.

Commissioner Heimlich said that if they deny the kennel request for Mr. Fultz, he still has the authority to have four dogs on the property and to him four dogs are just as loud as nine.

Sue Smith argued that she rather deal with four dogs rather then nine because they are positioned right next to her property.

Commissioner Heimlich asked Mr. Fultz if he has ever considered moving the dog privacy fence to the back of the property. Mr. Fultz said that he would hate to see all of the dogs moved to the back of the property because he would like to keep some of them up front for protection of the house. His daughter is currently living at the property and she comes home late at night from work.

Commissioner Heimlich suggested that if the dogs were positioned on the north side of the privacy fence then the sound of the dogs barking would be muffled from the neighbors and you wouldn’t have as many distractions.

The Commissioners discussed sending the rezoning back to the APC Board with Mr. Fultz submitting a commitment letter stating that he will move the privacy fence, with the dogs, to the back of the property.

Director Weaver said that the Commissioners have 90 days from the date that they revert it back to the APC board to make a decision.

Commissioner Heimlich said that the Commissioners will table their discussion and put it on the agenda for the next meeting on December 29, 2008. Commissioner Heimlich said that he would like to see a decision made where everyone is happy, but he could see a resolution made where no one will be happy.

AREA PLAN – AMENDMENT TO THE WHITE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE

White County Area Plan Director Diann Weaver presented an amendment to Chapter 13 in the White County Zoning Ordinance. The proposed amendment was properly advertised by the White County Area Plan Commission and a public hearing was held on December 8, 2008.

The APC voted to recommend this amendment to the Commissioners by a vote of 9 yes and 0 no. This amendment will replace the current Chapter 13.

Director Weaver presented a copy of Chapter 13 as follows:

chapter 13

enforcement

13.0.1 Issuance of an Improvement Location Permit

No Improvement Location Permit required by this Ordinance shall be issued on any property governed by this Ordinance which is in violation of the requirements of this Chapter or that which is not in substantial compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.

13.0.2 Executive Director

It shall be the duty of the Executive Director to enforce these regulations and to bring any violations or lack of compliance to the attention of the Plan Commission Attorney, who may from time to time, with the approval of the Area Plan Commission, recommend filing a complaint against the person and prosecute the alleged violator.

13.0.3 County

The County, by its authorized official, may, by suit in the Circuit or Superior Court(s) of White County, enjoin violations of this Ordinance.

13.0.4 Area Plan Commission

The Area Plan Commission, by mandatory injunction in the Circuit Court or Superior Court(s) of White County against the owner or possessor of the real estate, may require the removal of a structure erected in violation of this Ordinance, or the removal of any use or condition permitted in violation of this Ordinance.

13.0.5 Liable party/parties

A use that violates this Ordinance shall be treated as if it were a common nuisance, and the owner or possessor of the structure, land, or premises upon which the use is maintained shall be liable for the nuisance.

13.1.1 Procedures

A. Any person who uses property in violation of this Ordinance shall be deemed to have committed a civil zoning violation and may be issued a warning ticket or citation by the designated enforcement entity.

B. Each day a violation remains uncorrected shall be considered a distinct and separate civil zoning violation and may be subject to an additional citation and fine in the amount prescribed by the provision below, provided a warning ticket has first been issued pursuant to the Citation for Civil Zoning Violations under Section 13.102, Citations, of this Chapter.

C. The monetary fine for each civil zoning violation shall be officially set by the County Commissioners.

D. All fines prescribed by this Chapter for civil zoning violations shall be paid to the Executive Director within thirty (30) days. The Executive Director shall render to the person making the payment a receipt stating the amount and purpose for which the fine has been paid and a duplicate of which shall be made a part of the records of the Plan Commission. If a violation is to be appealed, the procedures set forth in Section 13.103 (B), Trial, of this Chapter shall apply.

13.1.2 Citations

A. The Executive Director may issue a civil zoning violation to a person who commits a zoning violation to the legal owner, the contract vendee, or any person or entity with a possessory interest in the real estate upon which the violation occurs. The citation may be served by personal service, by certified mail, or by placement in a conspicuous place on the property where the violation occurs and shall serve as notice to a person that he or she has committed a civil zoning violation.

B. No citation shall be issued for the first offense unless the legal owner, the contract vendee, or any person or entity with a possessory interest in the real estate upon which the violation occurs has been issued a warning ticket. A warning ticket shall be issued prior to the issuance of the citation to allow said person to correct the violation to come into compliance with the prescribed regulations.

C. A person who receives a warning ticket or a citation may either choose to abate the violation or file a petition for a variance, special exception use, rezoning, or other means provided by this Chapter to correct the violation, as prescribed by this Chapter. A person who elects to file such a petition shall indicate this intent in writing to the Executive Director. A person shall have ten (10) working days after issuance of the warning ticket to file the petition. Any additional monetary fine, as prescribed by the Official Fee Schedule, shall be stayed upon the filing of such petition, as long as the violation continues at the subject property. A person who files the petition within said time period shall pursue the petition in an expeditious fashion. A person who files the petition within the allotted time period shall have the petition heard at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Area Plan Commission or Board of Zoning Appeals, as prescribed by the Calendar of Meetings and Filings Dates. If the petition is denied, withdrawn, or dismissed for want of prosecution, and the civil zoning violation continues at the real estate, then a lawsuit will be commenced by the designated enforcement entity in a court of competent jurisdiction in White County, Indiana.

D. If a person believes that the warning ticket or citation received results from an incorrect interpretation of the White County Zoning Code by the Executive Director, the aggrieved person may file an appeal of the decision for a hearing by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Said appeal shall be on the form prescribed by the Board of Zoning Appeals and shall include payment of the appropriate filing fee. A person who elects to file such an appeal shall indicate this intent in writing to the Executive Director. A person shall have ten (10) working days after issuance of the warning ticket to file the appeal. Any additional monetary fine, as prescribed in Official Fee Schedule, shall be stayed upon the filing of such petition as long as the violation continues at the subject property. A person who files the appeal within the allotted time period shall have the appeal heard at the next regularly scheduled Board of Zoning Appeals meeting, as prescribed by the Calendar of Meetings and Filings Dates. If the board upholds the interpretation of the zoning ordinance which led to issuance of the warning ticket or citation, and the civil zoning violation continues at the real estate, then the citation will move forward. The applicant can conform to the Ordinance, correct the violation and pay the fine, or request a trial on the citation for determination by a court of competent jurisdiction in White County, Indiana.

E. If the violation is determined by the Executive Director to be a threat to public health or safety, the Executive Director may order the land use or activity to cease and desist immediately, regardless of whether a warning ticket or citation has been issued.

F. The warning ticket shall be in the form prescribed by the Area Plan Commission.

G. The Citation shall appear on the form prescribed by the Area Plan Commission.

13.1.3 Trial

A. A person who receives a citation may elect to stand trial for the offense by indicating on the citation his intent to stand trial and returning a copy of the citation to the Executive Director. The returned copy of the citation shall serve as notice of the person’s intent to stand trial. Any additional monetary fine, as prescribed by the Official Fee Schedule, shall be stayed upon receipt of the notice. On receipt of the notice of intention to stand trial, a lawsuit will be commenced by the Area Plan Commission Attorney in White County, Indiana court. The matter shall be scheduled for trial, and a Summons and Order to Appear shall be served upon the Defendant.

B. If a person who receives a citation fails to pay the assessed fine within the time limit as established by the County Commissioners or fails to give notice of his intention to either file a petition as prescribed in Section 13.102, Citation For Civil Zoning Violations, sub-section C, file an appeal as prescribed in Section 13.102, Citation For Civil Zoning Violations, sub-section D, or stand trial as prescribed in sub-section above, the Area Plan Commission Attorney may file a civil lawsuit as prescribed by applicable laws and ordinances, and seek penalties as prescribed in this Section.

C. A person adjudged to have committed a zoning violation is liable for the court costs and fees. No cost shall be assessed against the enforcement agency in any such action.

D. In proceedings before the court for a zoning violation, the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure shall govern. The designated enforcement entity has the burden of proving the civil zoning violation by a preponderance of the evidence.

E. Seeking a civil penalty as authorized by this Section does not preclude the County from seeking alternative relief from the court in the same action, or from seeking injunctive relief or other remedy in a separate action for the enforcement of this Code.

F. A change of venue from White County shall not be granted in such a case, as provided in IC 36-7-4-1014, as amended from time to time.

Director Weaver presented a copy of the proposed (changes in red) Chapter 13 as follows:

chapter 13

enforcement

13.0 general provisions

13.0.1 Issuance of an Improvement Location Permit

No Improvement Location Permit required by this Ordinance shall be issued on any property governed by this Ordinance which is in violation of the requirements of this Chapter or that which is not in substantial compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.

13.0.2 Executive Director

It shall be the duty of the Executive Director to enforce these regulations and to bring any violations or lack of compliance to the attention of the Plan Commission Attorney, who may from time to time, with the approval of the Area Plan Commission, recommend filing a complaint against the person and prosecute the alleged violator.

13.0.3 Area Plan Commission

The Area Plan Commission, by its authorized official, may, by suit in the Circuit or Superior Court(s) of White County, enjoin violations of this Ordinance.

13.0.4 Area Plan Commission

The Area Plan Commission, by mandatory injunction in the Circuit Court or Superior Court(s) of White County against the owner or possessor of the real estate, may require the removal of a structure erected in violation of this Ordinance, or the removal of any use or condition permitted in violation of this Ordinance.

13.0.5 Liable party/parties

A use that violates this Ordinance shall be treated as if it were a common nuisance, and the owner or possessor of the structure, land, or premises upon which the use is maintained shall be liable for the nuisance.

13.1 civil zoning violations

13.1.1 Procedures

A. Any person who uses property in violation of this Ordinance shall be deemed to have committed a civil zoning violation and may be issued a warning ticket or citation by the designated enforcement entity.

B. Each day a violation remains uncorrected shall be considered a distinct and separate civil zoning violation and may be subject to an additional citation and fine in the amount prescribed by the provision below, provided a warning ticket has first been issued pursuant to the Citation for Civil Zoning Violations under Section 13.1.2, Citations, of this Chapter.

C. The monetary fine for each civil zoning violation shall be officially set by the County Commissioners.

D. All fines prescribed by this Chapter for civil zoning violations shall be paid to the Executive Director within thirty (30) days. The Executive Director shall render to the person making the payment a receipt stating the amount and purpose for which the fine has been paid and a duplicate of which shall be made a part of the records of the Plan Commission. If a violation is to be appealed, the procedures set forth in Section 13.1.3 (B), Trial, of this Chapter shall apply.

13.1.2 Citations

A. The Executive Director may issue a warning ticket or citation to a person who commits a zoning violation. Which may include the legal owner, the contract vendee, or any person or entity with a possessory interest in the real estate upon which the violation occurs. The warning ticket or citation may be served by personal service, by certified mail, or by placement in a conspicuous place on the property where the violation occurs and shall serve as notice to a person that he or she has committed a civil zoning violation.

B. Delete

C. A person who receives a warning ticket or a citation may either choose to abate the violation or file a petition for a variance, special exception use, rezoning, or other means provided by this Chapter to correct the violation, as prescribed by this Chapter. A person who elects to file such a petition shall indicate this intent in writing to the Executive Director. A person shall have thirty (30) days after issuance of the warning ticket or citation to file the petition. Any additional monetary fine, as prescribed by the Official Fee Schedule, shall be stayed upon the filing of such petition, as long as the violation continues at the subject property. A person who files the petition within said time period shall pursue the petition in an expeditious fashion. A person who files the petition within the allotted time period shall have the petition heard at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Area Plan Commission or Board of Zoning Appeals, as prescribed by the Calendar of Meetings and Filings Dates. If the petition is denied, withdrawn, or dismissed for want of prosecution, and the civil zoning violation continues at the real estate, then a lawsuit will be commenced by the designated enforcement entity in a court of competent jurisdiction in White County, Indiana.

D. If a person believes that the warning ticket or citation received results from an incorrect interpretation of the White County Zoning Code by the Executive Director, the aggrieved person may file an appeal of the decision for a hearing by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Said appeal shall be on the form prescribed by the Board of Zoning Appeals and shall include payment of the appropriate filing fee. A person who elects to file such an appeal shall indicate this intent in writing to the Executive Director. A person shall have thirty (30) days after issuance of the warning ticket to file the appeal. Any additional monetary fine, as prescribed in Official Fee Schedule, shall be stayed upon the filing of such petition as long as the violation continues at the subject property. A person who files the appeal within the allotted time period shall have the appeal heard at the next regularly scheduled Board of Zoning Appeals meeting, as prescribed by the Calendar of Meetings and Filings Dates. If the board upholds the interpretation of the zoning ordinance which led to issuance of the warning ticket or citation, and the civil zoning violation continues at the real estate, then the citation will move forward. The applicant can conform to the Ordinance, correct the violation and pay the fine, or request a trial on the citation for determination by a court of competent jurisdiction in White County, Indiana.

E. If the violation is determined by the Executive Director to be a threat to public health or safety, the Executive Director may order the land use or activity to cease and desist immediately, regardless of whether a warning ticket or citation has been issued.

F. The warning ticket shall be in the form prescribed by the Executive Director.

G. The Citation shall appear on the form prescribed by the Executive Director.

13.1.3 Trial

A. A person who receives a citation may elect to stand trial for the offense by indicating on the citation his intent to stand trial and returning a copy of the citation to the Executive Director. The returned copy of the citation shall serve as notice of the person’s intent to stand trial. Any additional monetary fine, as prescribed by the Official Fee Schedule, shall be stayed upon receipt of the notice. On receipt of the notice of intention to stand trial, a lawsuit will be commenced by the Area Plan Commission Attorney in White County, Indiana court. The matter shall be scheduled for trial, and a Summons and Order to Appear shall be served upon the Defendant.

B. If a person who receives a citation fails to pay the assessed fine within the time limit as established by the County Commissioners or fails to give notice of his intention to either file a petition as prescribed in Section 13.1.2, Citation For Civil Zoning Violations, sub-section C, file an appeal as prescribed in Section 13.1.2, Citation For Civil Zoning Violations, sub-section D, or stand trial as prescribed in sub-section above, the Area Plan Commission Attorney may file a civil lawsuit as prescribed by applicable laws and ordinances, and seek penalties as prescribed in this Section.

C. A person adjudged to have committed a zoning violation is liable for the court costs and fees. No cost shall be assessed against the enforcement agency in any such action.

D. In proceedings before the court for a zoning violation, the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure shall govern. The designated enforcement entity has the burden of proving the civil zoning violation by a preponderance of the evidence.

E. Seeking a civil penalty as authorized by this Section does not preclude the County from seeking alternative relief from the court in the same action, or from seeking injunctive relief or other remedy in a separate action for the enforcement of this Code.

 

F. A change of venue from White County shall not be granted in such a case, as provided in IC 36-7-4-1014, as amended from time to time.

The Commissioners decided to table their decision to the next meeting on December 29, 2008, which will allow theCounty’s Attorney to look over the changes.

REPORTS

At this time, the White County Council President Richard “Buzz” Horton called the Council members to order in joint session with the County commissioners. County Council members present were:

President, Richard “Buzz” Horton Raymond “Butch” Kramer Dennis Carter

Kevin “Casey” Crabb Bruce Clear Gary Hendryx

Denny Cain

HOSPITAL

White County Memorial Hospital CEO Paul Cardwell presented the Financial Analysis report for November 2008.

Mr. Cardwell said that they are officially in the new hospital now. It was expected that they would break even for the month because of extra expenses. They did have their second highest revenue in history last month, $3.6 million, but there were many expenses with the move and also putting some money in their bad debt/adjustments.

Mr. Cardwell said that they are currently up $2.5 million for the year on a budget of about $300,000. He said that they have been absolutely packed in the emergency room, oncology, deliveries, etc.

Mr. Cardwell said that they did make their first payment on the new hospital in October this year and their next payment will be due October 2009. They will continue to put away $75,000 each month for that payment.

BUILDING INSPECTOR

White County Building Inspector Dave Anderson reported that they issued eight building permits last month for building stick built homes. Mr. Anderson presented a 2008 Monthly Census Report comparing to the last seven years.

2000 2008

Single Family Home 74 60

Manufactured Homes 50 5

Other Non residential buildings 135 172

ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER

White County Environmental Officer John Raines presented the Complaints & Violations report for November 2008.

E-911

White County E-911 Director Terri Conwell said that the purchase for the radio update is still on hold. The White County EMA Director, Rose Brady, will know if a grant is available in January to make the purchase.

Terri said that Commissioner Schmierer attended a state board meeting in Indianapolis with her and they do not expect to be receiving any extra funding any time soon.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

White County Economic Development Connie Neininger presented the Director’s Activity report for November 2008.

Connie said that she held an annual employer breakfast in November, which was paid for by the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, and there were thirty-eight employers present. The discussion at the breakfast was internships.

Connie said that she is currently working with Horizon right now because they are looking for a site for their operations and maintenance facility.

Connie reported that they did go through an audit for the WIRED grant, funds used to purchase the technology equipment at the Ivy Tech building, and everything went very well.

Connie said that she is currently working with Janet Ayres, Purdue University, to help our county with the Leadership Academy, which will focus on leadership skills. The first session will be held on February 4th and it will be an 8 week program costing $100.00 per person.

TIOGA BRIDGE

Darryl Johns, SFLECC representative, appeared before the Commissioners stating that the county has received two grants for raising and refurbishing the Tioga Bridge and he wanted to know who was going to take the lead on this project. He asked how we could get Carroll County off.

Commissioner Heimlich said that the Commissioners never received anything in the mail officially saying that the grant was approved for the raising of the bridge.

Mr. Johns asked if the Commissioners would take the lead on this project and get it started. Commissioner Schmierer said Carroll County is responsible for 40% of the match money on the whole project and he is not in favor of White County paying 100% if Carroll County can’t come up with their share.

The Commissioners suggested waiting until after the first of the year because Carroll County will have a new Commissioner in office.

Mr. Johns said that he would like to ask Mr. Brooke, Highway Superintendent, to further investigate and see if we can stay on top of this project so the grant won’t be lost.

Commissioner Heimlich said that he will talk with Mr. Don Ward and they will discuss it again in January.

BRIDGE #92 ~ WEST SHAFER DRIVE OVER BIG MONON BAY

White County Highway Superintendent Steve Brooke presented Supplemental Agreement No. 2 for Bridge #92, West Shafer Drive over Big Monon Bay, from USI Consultants.

In the original agreement dated November 4, 2002, the right-of-way services were to be supplemented later due to unknown appraisal types that would be required at the original agreement. This supplemental agreement covers the cost incurred for the right-of-way services. The cost for this supplement is $34,365.00.

  • Commissioner Burton made a motion to approve Supplemental Agreement No. #2 for the White County Bridge #92 Replacement, seconded by Commissioner Schmierer. Vote: Unanimous

SMITH OFFICE PLUS

Deb Goyer, Sales Representative for Smith Office Plus, appeared before the Commissioners introducing the company and expressing interest to do business with White County.

There being no further business to come before the Commissioners, their meeting was adjourned.

____________________________ ______________________________ ____________________________

John C. Heimlich, President Steve Burton, Vice President Ronald Schmierer, Member

ATTEST: _________________________

Jill Guingrich, Auditor