Vigo County Council (Sunshine)Aug 4, 2026

Highlights

• Unverified item. Flagged · Unverified

  Council to consider a $4,500 clothing allowance for security officers, missed in last year's budget

  Outcome: Presented for adoption; no vote taken tonight

  0:21:12 — open the recording, cued to 21 minutes 12 seconds
• Unverified item. Flagged · Unverified

  Council revisits restoring $200,000 to Community Corrections after it was pulled from the budget by mistake

  Outcome: Presented for consideration; no vote taken tonight

  0:41:51 — open the recording, cued to 41 minutes 51 seconds
• Deferral

  Courthouse's only secure inmate elevator failed inspection; $500,000 fix request pulled for more bids

  Outcome: Withdrawn from next week's agenda at the commissioners' request, to gather more repair estimates

  0:31:29 — open the recording, cued to 31 minutes 29 seconds
• Money

  County group homes ask for $158,980 in repairs, with a $150,000 Lilly Foundation grant possibly on the way

  Outcome: Presented for consideration; no vote taken tonight

  0:57:33 — open the recording, cued to 57 minutes 33 seconds
• Unverified item. Flagged · Unverified

  IT staff seek $40,000 transfer for internet upgrades and a website overhaul, but council wants an itemized list first

  Outcome: No vote taken; staff agreed to bring an itemized breakdown of the $40,000 before further action.

  0:07:03 — open the recording, cued to 7 minutes 3 seconds
• Money

  Lost Creek fire district asks county for $50,000 after paying to fix a truck's pump mid-fire

  Outcome: Presented for consideration; no vote taken tonight

  0:39:58 — open the recording, cued to 39 minutes 58 seconds
• Unverified item. Flagged · Unverified

  Commissioner proposes funding a 3% county raise by cutting public defenders' health insurance

  Outcome: No vote taken; floated as a funding option only

  0:01:05 — open the recording, cued to 1 minute 5 seconds
• Money

  Prosecutor asks for $10,000 more to bring wanted suspects back to Vigo County

  Outcome: Presented for consideration; no vote taken tonight

  0:50:07 — open the recording, cued to 50 minutes 7 seconds
• Money

  Prosecutor asks to spend $502,000 in seized drug-case money on police vehicles and gear

  Outcome: Presented for consideration; no vote taken tonight

  0:52:29 — open the recording, cued to 52 minutes 29 seconds
• Money

  County's school oversight committee reports $87,146 balance, sets September date for a school funding proposal

  Outcome: Informational report only; no vote taken. Committee to present to commissioners August 12, and to bring a funding proposal to the council September 1

  0:05:40 — open the recording, cued to 5 minutes 40 seconds
• Deferral

  Council questions whether it can legally make the sheriff's office an 'ordinance bureau'

  Outcome: No vote taken; council questioned whether the change is the commissioners' to make

  0:10:09 — open the recording, cued to 10 minutes 9 seconds
• Money

  County asked to give Susie's Place $15,000 as federal funding for child abuse interviews shrinks

  Outcome: Presented for consideration; no vote taken tonight

  0:23:33 — open the recording, cued to 23 minutes 33 seconds

Who spoke

From the recording’s speaker labels — who was heard, not who attended. The archive publishes no attendance roll for this meeting.

• Mike Morriscommissioner
• Gretchen Atlingpublic_defenderIdentification is probable
• ScottstaffIdentification is probable
• JudyauditorIdentification is probable
• Jeff Foxstaff
• David ThompsoncouncillorIdentification is probable
• DevinstaffIdentification is probable
• Mark Clinkenbeardcommissioner
• Kathy Stollresident
• Ricky Hammondsstaff
• John Hendrixstaff
• Bill Watsonstaff
• Deanna Griffinresident

7 more voices were separated on the recording but could not be named. They are in the transcript below under their speaker labels.

Transcript

Open the transcript on its own page

Meeting

Vigo County Council (Sunshine) · Aug 4, 2026

Length

1:17:31

Lines

349

Transcribed by

mlx-community/whisper-large-v3-turbo

1. 0:00:00 — open the recording at 0 secondsSpeaker 0: Please rise for the pledge.

2. 0:00:08 — open the recording at 8 secondsSpeaker 3: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

3. 0:00:22 — open the recording at 22 secondsSpeaker 7: All right. You guys want to proceed with the roll call?

4. 0:00:31 — open the recording at 31 secondsSpeaker 9: David Thompson? Here. Brad Anderson?

5. 0:00:34 — open the recording at 34 secondsSpeaker 12: Here. Vicki Wager? Here. Steve Ellis? Here. Randy Gentry?

6. 0:00:40 — open the recording at 40 seconds Here. Nancy Alsop?

7. 0:00:42 — open the recording at 42 secondsSpeaker 17: Here. Brenda Wilson? All right. We're going to start off with communications from elected officials.

8. 0:00:47 — open the recording at 47 secondsSpeaker 19 (chair): I'll make a quick announcement that the Sheriff's Office has turned in their commissary report. Thank you to Devin for page numbers again.

9. 0:00:56 — open the recording at 56 secondsSpeaker 20 (chair): All right. Before we get to the oversight committee, are there any other elected officials?

10. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Commissioner proposes funding a 3% county raise by cutting public defenders' health insurance

    0:01:05 — open the recording at 1 minute 5 secondsMike Morris (commissioner): Good evening. Mike Moore, Spiegel County Commissioner. You guys, as you know, you made a recommendation, no pay increases for county employees. The county commissioners are recommending a 3% pay increase for county employees. This would be approximately $630,000 in addition to the budget or cost the county $630,000. So there's a question, I suppose, on how to accomplish getting this revenue. So tonight I'm offering some suggestions on how to fund this. So one of those suggestions would be that the public defenders be made contractors and

11. 0:02:00 — open the recording at 2 minutesMike Morris (commissioner): that the health insurance that the county pays on them would be dropped.

12. 0:02:08 — open the recording at 2 minutes 8 secondsSpeaker 25: amount of money is $523,044.72. Let me say that again, $523,044.72 for health premiums for public defenders.

13. 0:02:27 — open the recording at 2 minutes 27 secondsMike Morris (commissioner): I think in addition, there's three offices that probably could use one less staffing member. I know I've talked to one of the office holders about that, and she said she could use one

14. 0:02:38 — open the recording at 2 minutes 38 secondsSpeaker 25: less. So I think that would probably come up with your $630,000.

15. 0:02:42 — open the recording at 2 minutes 42 secondsSpeaker 26: Are you at liberty to say which three offices are willing to give up a position?

16. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Commissioner proposes funding a 3% county raise by cutting public defenders' health insurance

    0:02:49 — open the recording at 2 minutes 49 secondsSpeaker 25: I think that the recorder could give up one, a treasurer and area planning.

17. 0:02:56 — open the recording at 2 minutes 56 secondsSpeaker 27: Is there any chance you've got a printout that we can have of that?

18. 0:03:00 — open the recording at 3 minutesSpeaker 30 (councillor): I have a question.

19. 0:03:04 — open the recording at 3 minutes 4 secondsSpeaker 32: public defender do does public defender have to match prosecutor Gretchen Atling could you answer that for me I wasn't prepared for this I'm

20. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Commissioner proposes funding a 3% county raise by cutting public defenders' health insurance

    0:03:20 — open the recording at 3 minutes 20 secondsGretchen Atling (public_defender): Commissioner Morse did not speak to me regarding this it's that figure that you're giving including the reimbursement back from the state that we get on that figure I think so so one of the reasons that the insurance is so important in our positions is that we have to maintain that staffing to be able to be in compliance to get the 40 percent back for reimbursement and it is very difficult to fill these positions the reason we do fill them is because we do offer health insurance we would have many people that would go to other positions if they didn't have health insurance so that is not

21. 0:04:00 — open the recording at 4 minutesGretchen Atling (public_defender): a fiscally responsible offer to reduce the benefits because you'll lose the reimbursement because we'll be out of compliance because we won't have staff to meet the quota as we do and the numbers of the cases that the attorneys are hiring now and handling is very high and we are even trying to find people to do contractual without health insurance for our escalating shins of TPR and we can't get anybody to take the position so those are factors that I would take into consideration but as to your question for pay parity yes we do have

22. 0:04:39 — open the recording at 4 minutes 39 secondsGretchen Atling (public_defender): to have equal footing as the prosecutor's office and I think you're on the Commission the council for the the County Council is on the Commission that would be a issue for the Commission of whether or not that would conclude pay parity as far as health insurance benefits as well but as we know there is a dramatic shortage of attorneys that are in the county even more dramatic for people that are willing to do public defender work and if you take away that health insurance benefit which is a different figure than he presented with

23. 0:05:08 — open the recording at 5 minutes 8 secondsGretchen Atling (public_defender): the reimbursement we get that would not be beneficial long term for the in dollar

24. 0:05:14 — open the recording at 5 minutes 14 secondsSpeaker 45: amount for the county thank you thank you Commissioner Morse do you have

25. 0:05:20 — open the recording at 5 minutes 20 secondsSpeaker 20 (chair): anything else okay all right any other comments from public officials all right

26. 0:05:32 — open the recording at 5 minutes 32 secondsSpeaker 17: view County oversight school or site committee report

27. Highlight · drawn from this moment: County's school oversight committee reports $87,146 balance, sets September date for a school funding proposal

    0:05:40 — open the recording at 5 minutes 40 secondsSpeaker 55: good evening as required by appropriation 2025-56 I'm tasked with providing you the following update first we have not entered into any new contracts since our last update second we have not entered into any new service agreements third we have received a total of four invoices for services rendered through june 2026 from barnes and thornburg the balance on our account net those invoices and accrued interest is 87 146.33 finally we are scheduled to present our recommendation to the county commissioners here at the annex next wednesday

28. 0:06:18 — open the recording at 6 minutes 18 secondsSpeaker 55: august 12th at 5 p.m and we'd love you all to attend thank you thank you thank you

29. 0:06:27 — open the recording at 6 minutes 27 secondsSpeaker 20 (chair): all right any uh any further comments from any public officials council

30. 0:06:36 — open the recording at 6 minutes 36 secondsSpeaker 19 (chair): all right moving on to reports from committees budget committee update

31. 0:06:40 — open the recording at 6 minutes 40 secondsSpeaker 32: We have meetings set coming up until we're blue in the face.

32. 0:06:48 — open the recording at 6 minutes 48 secondsSpeaker 35: You'll recognize us. We'll be blue in the face.

33. 0:06:51 — open the recording at 6 minutes 51 secondsSpeaker 67: Like Smurfs. All right.

34. 0:06:53 — open the recording at 6 minutes 53 secondsSpeaker 19 (chair): There are three budget committee meetings scheduled for next week for anyone that would like to attend. I believe that's the 12th, 13th, and 14th, if I'm not mistaken.

35. 0:07:02 — open the recording at 7 minutes 2 secondsSpeaker 69: You'll be sorry.

36. Highlight · drawn from this moment: IT staff seek $40,000 transfer for internet upgrades and a website overhaul, but council wants an itemized list first

    0:07:03 — open the recording at 7 minutes 3 secondsSpeaker 19 (chair): All right. Moving on. Resolutions and ordinances other than appropriations. resolution of reallocation of existing appropriation 2026-2 page 9 this is going to be a transfer of funds

37. 0:07:21 — open the recording at 7 minutes 21 secondsSpeaker 71: is there any questions on that we transferring funds from the new

38. Highlight · drawn from this moment: IT staff seek $40,000 transfer for internet upgrades and a website overhaul, but council wants an itemized list first

    0:07:27 — open the recording at 7 minutes 27 secondsScott (staff): equipment budget to pay for several internet setups we've got and for the revamp of the starting of the weaver revamp of the website

39. 0:07:38 — open the recording at 7 minutes 38 secondsSpeaker 74: Any question from Council?

40. 0:07:40 — open the recording at 7 minutes 40 secondsScott (staff): Yes, sir.

41. 0:07:42 — open the recording at 7 minutes 42 secondsSpeaker 75: Do we have a list of the $40,000?

42. Highlight · drawn from this moment: IT staff seek $40,000 transfer for internet upgrades and a website overhaul, but council wants an itemized list first

    0:07:50 — open the recording at 7 minutes 50 secondsSpeaker 76 (councillor): The only thing I'm seeing right here, maybe I'm missing it, but it just says new equipment, contractual services, $40,000. So is there a...

43. 0:08:01 — open the recording at 8 minutes 1 second No, no.

44. 0:08:03 — open the recording at 8 minutes 3 secondsSpeaker 76 (councillor): You're just transferring $40,000 from...

45. 0:08:06 — open the recording at 8 minutes 6 secondsSpeaker 79: Yeah, that's correct, yeah.

46. 0:08:08 — open the recording at 8 minutes 8 secondsSpeaker 80: So the contractual services are not itemized anywhere? What are we adding exactly?

47. 0:08:15 — open the recording at 8 minutes 15 secondsScott (staff): Just from new equipment into a different series, right?

48. 0:08:20 — open the recording at 8 minutes 20 secondsSpeaker 81: It's just a different series, just from one series to another.

49. 0:08:23 — open the recording at 8 minutes 23 secondsJudy (auditor): Instead of asking for additional appropriation, he's asking to move from one area to another area. And we can't do that in our office if it's out of series.

50. 0:08:33 — open the recording at 8 minutes 33 secondsSpeaker 85: I think my question though, Judy, is what is it?

51. 0:08:41 — open the recording at 8 minutes 41 secondsSpeaker 87: What's the $40,000? That's all I was asking.

52. 0:08:45 — open the recording at 8 minutes 45 secondsScott (staff): Coming from new equipment to pay for other things like the website, the start of the website, re-host for additional internet service we've installed at the South Highway, one of the group homes, and some other place. I can't remember. Yeah, it's to pay for other things. from new equipment to.

53. Highlight · drawn from this moment: IT staff seek $40,000 transfer for internet upgrades and a website overhaul, but council wants an itemized list first

    0:09:05 — open the recording at 9 minutes 5 secondsSpeaker 76 (councillor): And that's what I, my question stands is what are the other things? You've mentioned a few of them, but by next week could you tell me what the other things are so at least I'll know?

54. 0:09:15 — open the recording at 9 minutes 15 secondsScott (staff): I mean it's a website, pre-hosting, several internet connections that have been put in place and there's a lot of equipment involved in that. I can't remember, there's maybe another thing that I can't remember off the top of my head, but I think that was the majority of it.

55. 0:09:31 — open the recording at 9 minutes 31 secondsSpeaker 93: i think one of the things you had mentioned earlier during the budget committee hearing

56. Highlight · drawn from this moment: IT staff seek $40,000 transfer for internet upgrades and a website overhaul, but council wants an itemized list first

    0:09:34 — open the recording at 9 minutes 34 secondsSpeaker 20 (chair): our meetings was on the website we're revamping that completely because we're losing our hosting

57. 0:09:40 — open the recording at 9 minutes 40 secondsSpeaker 95: and also you wanted to make an ada compliant that's correct yeah there's a lot of work in

58. 0:09:44 — open the recording at 9 minutes 44 secondsScott (staff): making an ada compliant yeah okay so all right do you have any further questions i i'll get with you

59. 0:09:52 — open the recording at 9 minutes 52 secondsSpeaker 85: this week how about that okay thanks all right thank you scott all right moving on to ordinance

60. 0:09:58 — open the recording at 9 minutes 58 secondsSpeaker 20 (chair): 2026 an ordinance establishing the view county sheriff's office ordinance bureau page 11.

61. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Council questions whether it can legally make the sheriff's office an 'ordinance bureau'

    0:10:09 — open the recording at 10 minutes 9 secondsJeff Fox (staff): good evening council jeff fox for the sheriff's office the ordinance that you have before you is simply basically a legal technicality that we need to clean up under normal conditions traffic citations and other infractions and other types of criminal violations are we utilize the Indiana electronic citation and warning system which is managed by the Office of Court Technology so that's the standard practice there are two county ordinances that were written several years ago that direct violators of those two ordinances one being the false alarm

62. 0:10:52 — open the recording at 10 minutes 52 secondsJeff Fox (staff): ordinance and the other one animal control ordinance that direct people to the sheriff's office to pay their fines and then that money is routed to non reverting funds and that's been in place for some time however prior to to this action those violations were done by simply sending letters to the offenders and asking them to come to the sheriff's office and pay their fines. Well, we feel like that that is not necessarily an appropriate path of travel and that we should standardize our method throughout Indiana.

63. 0:11:24 — open the recording at 11 minutes 24 secondsJeff Fox (staff): And so, as an example, the county commissioner's office is a current ordinance bureau. And they then, when the county building inspector issues a citation for violations of county ordinances, then they come to the commissioner's office and the disposition is settled there or pass along to the prosecutor's office. We simply want the two ordinances that the sheriff's office are impacted by to follow that same procedure. And so the trial court technology or the state of Indiana requires the council to establish the sheriff's office as an ordinance bureau.

64. 0:12:01 — open the recording at 12 minutes 1 secondJeff Fox (staff): it really changes nothing other than we will simply then instead of sending a letter to somebody who violates those ordinances we can issue a citation account it through the state's electronic citation and warning system as we do for many other thing if the ordinance or if the violation is issued to somebody and they choose to dispute it then it is managed to the prosecutor's office like all of our other charges and so that brings us into synchronization with the prosecutor's office we worked with Rob and his staff to ensure that if

65. 0:12:37 — open the recording at 12 minutes 37 secondsJeff Fox (staff): somebody wants to dispute it then they can take that citation and then reissue it to the court of record and so we're really just formalizing a process that's

66. 0:12:46 — open the recording at 12 minutes 46 secondsSpeaker 105: been in place for some time but just trying to get it into a standard

67. 0:12:50 — open the recording at 12 minutes 50 secondsSpeaker 107: practice okay you wanna go first it sounds like there's a few questions go

68. 0:12:56 — open the recording at 12 minutes 56 secondsSpeaker 109: Do you collect the money at the sheriff's office?

69. 0:12:59 — open the recording at 12 minutes 59 secondsJeff Fox (staff): That's correct. So there are two ordinances, those two that I mentioned. And so if somebody pays a fine, the ordinance requires them to come to the sheriff's office. We receipt that money in, and then it goes to the auditor's office, and then it's specified. There are two non-reverting funds, Brad, that we use. One for false alarm ordinance, and the ordinance specifies how those funds are, A, to be collected by the sheriff, and then to be deposited into that non reverting fund and then it specifies what that money can be

70. 0:13:30 — open the recording at 13 minutes 30 secondsJeff Fox (staff): used for and then the second one is the animal control ordinance which if we cite under animal control there's really two options you can cite under county ordinance or you can cite under Indiana statute and depending upon the violation that's how those are managed so if our officers choose to cite under county ordinance which running at large would be an example of that there is a fine assessed for that. They come to the sheriff's office. That money is deposited into that non-reverting fund, and then that money can be used for animal welfare. So our animal

71. 0:14:04 — open the recording at 14 minutes 4 secondsJeff Fox (staff): control officer can use that money as an example. If we have to harbor an animal or if there is some

72. 0:14:10 — open the recording at 14 minutes 10 secondsSpeaker 105: type of injury, then we can assist with the cost of those. You know how much money you've collected

73. 0:14:17 — open the recording at 14 minutes 17 secondsSpeaker 113: Is that non-reverting violence?

74. 0:14:20 — open the recording at 14 minutes 20 secondsSpeaker 105: I would defer to the auditor, Councilman. I don't have any idea.

75. 0:14:24 — open the recording at 14 minutes 24 secondsSpeaker 114: We're just maintaining the path of travel here as opposed to what's being collected.

76. 0:14:30 — open the recording at 14 minutes 30 secondsSpeaker 118: We can find out next week.

77. 0:14:32 — open the recording at 14 minutes 32 secondsSpeaker 60: What's that?

78. 0:14:33 — open the recording at 14 minutes 33 secondsSpeaker 118: We can have that next week.

79. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Council questions whether it can legally make the sheriff's office an 'ordinance bureau'

    0:14:35 — open the recording at 14 minutes 35 secondsSpeaker 20 (chair): To clarify, you're asking us to basically pass this as an ordinance, if I'm understanding it. Okay, so my question, partially for our attorney,

80. 0:14:45 — open the recording at 14 minutes 45 secondsSpeaker 17: do we have the legal right to to pass such an ordinance or is that something the commissioners would need to do I know we're limited to anything that deals with fiscal responsibility which I

81. 0:14:55 — open the recording at 14 minutes 55 secondsJeff Fox (staff): suppose that could be argued do you know I would defer to to Mr. Modis it so when we started this process we deferred that to his office and his attorneys at that office said that this should be addressed by the council so that's why we brought it to you so I know that the commissioners write the ordinance and specify but I believe and Mr. Modessa can speak much better than I can about this but I suspect because it involves the collection of revenue that that might be why the council has to be involved

82. 0:15:27 — open the recording at 15 minutes 27 secondsSpeaker 123: okay

83. 0:15:33 — open the recording at 15 minutes 33 secondsSpeaker 125: right right yeah

84. 0:15:36 — open the recording at 15 minutes 36 secondsSpeaker 128: okay

85. 0:15:39 — open the recording at 15 minutes 39 secondsJeff Fox (staff): So there was not an original ordinance establishing the ordinance Bureau of the sheriff's office. What happened was the ordinance was passed by the commissioners and they then they directed the violators to the sheriff's office to collect revenue. However, that process involves simply sending letters to violators as opposed to issuing them a citation. And so therefore what happened was I think it just fell through the cracks because we never used the electronic system. I think that there was never a request for the ordinance bureau to be established.

86. 0:16:17 — open the recording at 16 minutes 17 secondsJeff Fox (staff): And so now that we want to use the system, the state of Indiana, the Court Office of Court Technology requires an ordinance.

87. 0:16:25 — open the recording at 16 minutes 25 secondsSpeaker 129: Sure. Do you want your ordinance to establish the ordinance bureau that has ever done the law? Correct.

88. 0:16:32 — open the recording at 16 minutes 32 seconds Okay.

89. 0:16:33 — open the recording at 16 minutes 33 secondsSpeaker 132: OK. Either way. I mean, it is. Well, we have a bureau that oversees every organization.

90. 0:16:43 — open the recording at 16 minutes 43 secondsJeff Fox (staff): No, it does not. So no, it would not because every county. Correct. So there are only two of all the county ordinances. There are only two that direct the offender to the sheriff's office for payment. And so this ordinance bureau would only reflect those two ordinances. The other ordinances that are cited as an example by the county building inspector, those are cited to the commissioner's office. So the commissioner's office is an ordinance bureau and they manage those ordinance violations. We just have two that are.

91. 0:17:19 — open the recording at 17 minutes 19 secondsSpeaker 135: I understand all that. I think he is getting, he wants to know who should be the ordinance, making you, I guess, the ordinance violation bureau.

92. 0:17:29 — open the recording at 17 minutes 29 secondsSpeaker 138: The purpose of collecting.

93. 0:17:31 — open the recording at 17 minutes 31 secondsJeff Fox (staff): The ordinance language was established through the county attorney. His office reviewed this document and then referred it to the council for approval. So we didn't write it.

94. 0:17:43 — open the recording at 17 minutes 43 secondsSpeaker 135: I get that. I think the president's, his question is, should the county commissioners pass this or should it come to council?

95. 0:17:50 — open the recording at 17 minutes 50 secondsSpeaker 138: Because they are a physical body. And this body will only the commissioners, did the commissioners create the other one?

96. 0:17:57 — open the recording at 17 minutes 57 secondsSpeaker 142: They created the one for the commissioner's office.

97. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Courthouse's only secure inmate elevator failed inspection; $500,000 fix request pulled for more bids

    0:18:01 — open the recording at 18 minutes 1 secondJeff Fox (staff): I can't speak to that one because that one was done outside of my purview. Only thing I can tell you is when we address these two ordinances we reached out to the state of Indiana they said yes you have to establish an ordinance bureau we reached out to Mr. Modisett and his law firm as a county attorney and ask him this was prepared and they defer to the council because of revenue.

98. 0:18:24 — open the recording at 18 minutes 24 secondsSpeaker 146: Yes sir.

99. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Council questions whether it can legally make the sheriff's office an 'ordinance bureau'

    0:18:31 — open the recording at 18 minutes 31 secondsSpeaker 148: We're not going to vote on anything tonight.

100. 0:18:35 — open the recording at 18 minutes 35 secondsSpeaker 93: Yeah, if you two want to have a conversation about it, just to make sure we're following the law and not doing anything wrong.

101. 0:18:41 — open the recording at 18 minutes 41 secondsJeff Fox (staff): At the end of the day, we don't care as long as we can start issuing citations for the violations and not send letters. Yes, sir.

102. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Council questions whether it can legally make the sheriff's office an 'ordinance bureau'

     0:18:51 — open the recording at 18 minutes 51 secondsSpeaker 76 (councillor): Mr. President, one of the things that I think the lawyers should look at would be from the standpoint if the commissioners established the original ordinance it would be simpler and probably more prudent for them to modify the Ordinance to establish whatever is needed for this rather than involve the council

103. 0:19:11 — open the recording at 19 minutes 11 secondsDavid Thompson (councillor): Yeah, yeah, yeah

104. 0:19:19 — open the recording at 19 minutes 19 secondsSpeaker 76 (councillor): Yeah, yeah Seems like that's that's where it should go back because otherwise we're going to have an ordinance over here in an ordinance over here

105. 0:19:27 — open the recording at 19 minutes 27 secondsDavid Thompson (councillor): almost in a competing scenario.

106. 0:19:30 — open the recording at 19 minutes 30 seconds Right, and if they agree to that one, I would say that a fiscal attack is going to be well as good counsel.

107. 0:19:36 — open the recording at 19 minutes 36 secondsSpeaker 158: Thank you, Mr. President.

108. 0:19:37 — open the recording at 19 minutes 37 secondsSpeaker 20 (chair): All right. Any other further questions here? I'm curious of one thing. I don't necessarily, it's not relevant to us,

109. 0:19:44 — open the recording at 19 minutes 44 secondsSpeaker 95: but what happens if somebody, you cite somebody and they don't challenge it, but they just decide to ignore it? Do you have recourse?

110. 0:19:50 — open the recording at 19 minutes 50 secondsSpeaker 105: You defer to the prosecutor's office, and the prosecutor's office then elicits either their decision as to whether to file a formal charge in a court of jurisdiction or whether they would defer it and say leave it alone just like they do every day with every charge that we ever issue they have the final say.

111. 0:20:08 — open the recording at 20 minutes 8 secondsSpeaker 164: Sure. Yeah okay.

112. 0:20:13 — open the recording at 20 minutes 13 secondsSpeaker 105: I can't that's that's over my okay I just issued the citations and the prosecutor's office manages them from there so I can't speak to how that's

113. 0:20:22 — open the recording at 20 minutes 22 secondsSpeaker 167: managed

114. 0:20:35 — open the recording at 20 minutes 35 secondsSpeaker 171 (chair): all right good thank you so much all right thank you uh council for those of you didn't see the

115. 0:20:40 — open the recording at 20 minutes 40 secondsSpeaker 19 (chair): ordinance started on page 12 if you need that all right moving on to amended salary ordinance 2026-4

116. 0:20:49 — open the recording at 20 minutes 49 secondsSpeaker 171 (chair): building security officer clothing allowance page 17.

117. 0:21:01 — open the recording at 21 minutes 1 secondSpeaker 178: Do we have anyone here on this? Sure.

118. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Council to consider a $4,500 clothing allowance for security officers, missed in last year's budget

     0:21:12 — open the recording at 21 minutes 12 secondsDevin (staff): So this is kind of a two-parter. So you have the amended salary ordinance first and then right after you have the additional appropriation. This was something that we discussed at the last budget hearing last year. It was supposed to be put on for the budget for this year. Unfortunately, it got left off. It is for three part-time security officers to get a $1,500 stipend for their clothing. Oh, yeah, this is the clothing on out.

119. 0:21:36 — open the recording at 21 minutes 36 secondsSpeaker 186: Yes. It was discussed with budget.

120. 0:21:38 — open the recording at 21 minutes 38 secondsDevin (staff): Yes, and your recommendation was favorable, yes. It just unfortunately got missed and it was left off. It was never brought to the full council for your guys' vote. not included in the adopted budget or anything like that so this would be an amended version for the salary ordinance if you guys would like it is on page 19 in your packet um we can rewrite however i would defer to samantha on how we should word it if you want it's highlighted it's underneath the building security line where it says that you have three part time and then it would fall under

121. 0:22:16 — open the recording at 22 minutes 16 secondsDevin (staff): section 5 where it says that all those employed under as building security would receive the $1,500 per year clothing allowance. So if that suffices, we can leave as is or we can change.

122. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Council to consider a $4,500 clothing allowance for security officers, missed in last year's budget

     0:22:30 — open the recording at 22 minutes 30 secondsSpeaker 17: So it would be three of them at $1,500 for a total of $4,500?

123. 0:22:33 — open the recording at 22 minutes 33 secondsSpeaker 192: Yes, because at the time that's how many we had.

124. 0:22:35 — open the recording at 22 minutes 35 secondsSpeaker 17: Yep, okay.

125. 0:22:37 — open the recording at 22 minutes 37 secondsSpeaker 76 (councillor): So Devin, is what is in our packet, is that the amended language?

126. 0:22:42 — open the recording at 22 minutes 42 secondsSpeaker 192: The highlighted is the only thing that has changed.

127. 0:22:46 — open the recording at 22 minutes 46 secondsSpeaker 60: perfect thank you i'll ask one follow-up question you said at the time that's how many we had do we

128. 0:22:50 — open the recording at 22 minutes 50 secondsDevin (staff): have more now or less um there might be another one coming at the end of the year and if that's the case then that they would need to come and amend it again okay all right any further questions

129. 0:23:03 — open the recording at 23 minutes 3 secondsSpeaker 19 (chair): council all right moves us on to number six additional appropriations uh so 2026-35 if you If you didn't have questions on C above, you may not have questions here. Any questions on this?

130. 0:23:18 — open the recording at 23 minutes 18 secondsSpeaker 203: Just the voting sheet that would have been it. That's the total for three.

131. 0:23:23 — open the recording at 23 minutes 23 secondsSpeaker 19 (chair): All right, moving on. 2026-36, Commissioner Susie's Place.

132. 0:23:31 — open the recording at 23 minutes 31 secondsSpeaker 204: Good evening, Mr. President and members of the council.

133. Highlight · drawn from this moment: County asked to give Susie's Place $15,000 as federal funding for child abuse interviews shrinks

     0:23:33 — open the recording at 23 minutes 33 secondsMark Clinkenbeard (commissioner): My name is Mark Klinkenberg, Vigo County Commissioner. Tonight we are here asking for $15,000 out of the general fund to support Susie's Place. As most of you know, Susie's Place has had severe budget cuts. Just a little bit about Susie's Place before I introduce Kathy Stoll. Susie's Place conducts forensic interviews to children on behalf of multiple agencies in the community. These children are often in terrible abuse, neglect, or physical violence situations. Susie's Place is a key partner in the child protection system,

134. 0:24:08 — open the recording at 24 minutes 8 secondsMark Clinkenbeard (commissioner): working alongside the Sheriff's Office, local police departments, prosecutors, DCS, and healthcare providers to coordinate investigations while minimizing additional stress or trauma to children. And at this time I will turn it over to Kathy Stoll with Suzie's Place to give you a little more information and answer any questions you might have. Thank you.

135. 0:24:30 — open the recording at 24 minutes 30 secondsSpeaker 209: He said it so well I don't know if there's anything left for me to say. I'm Kathy Stoll, I'm the Chief Development Officer for Suzy's Place so thank you for the opportunity to share

136. Highlight · drawn from this moment: County asked to give Susie's Place $15,000 as federal funding for child abuse interviews shrinks

     0:24:39 — open the recording at 24 minutes 39 secondsKathy Stoll (resident): about Suzy's Place's contribution to preventing and intervening in crimes against children here in Vigo County. We are grateful for the really excellent partnership we have with the Department of Child Services with local law enforcement and the prosecutor's office to be an integral part of that 24-7 first response to crimes against children where the child is the victim or the child has been the witness to a serious crime in 2025 we conducted information forensic interviews information gathering forensic interviews with 185 children from vigo county

137. 0:25:13 — open the recording at 25 minutes 13 secondsKathy Stoll (resident): in our trauma-informed trial child-friendly space at susie's place here in terre haute the total caseload in that terre haute center was 399 children in 2025 as of the end of june of this year we've seen 209 kids at our Terre Haute Center which even if you annualize it that puts us ahead of where we were at the center for 2025 and the likelihood that those numbers get higher in the second half of the year is pretty good because of the prevention education that kicks in when school starts that tends to not only help I help children prevent being victimized in at home or

138. 0:25:54 — open the recording at 25 minutes 54 secondsKathy Stoll (resident): online but it also serves as a victim identification opportunity for kids to learn about the things that are happening to them that may not be right and a safe space to let someone know what's happening to them so that we can begin their journey toward healing and justice as as as we've been teed up here that increase in demand for services at susie's place is hitting at the same time that like many not-for-profits in our in our communities our federal funding has become decreased and less reliable and that's creating a

139. 0:26:32 — open the recording at 26 minutes 32 secondsKathy Stoll (resident): sustainability gap for our organization for this year and into next year we are working hard on some long-term solutions we're having really meaningful conversations with state legislators about adding funding for child advocacy centers across the state into the state budget that would be the first time that's ever happened. Indiana is one of just six states in the country that doesn't provide state funding for child advocacy centers and those services for child victims of crime. So we're hopeful about that. And also, my role is new. For Suzy's Place, I'm partially grant-funded.

140. Highlight · drawn from this moment: County asked to give Susie's Place $15,000 as federal funding for child abuse interviews shrinks

     0:27:06 — open the recording at 27 minutes 6 secondsKathy Stoll (resident): And my role is to maximize that private philanthropic energy with individuals and corporations and foundations. But even if we assume both of those long-term solutions successful it will take a little bit of time to realize to realize that so we're grateful to mayor sackman for committing bridge funding from the city for the remainder of this year next year and he appropriately challenged us to have a similar conversation with the counties that also see children who receive services at susie's place so that's what's brought us here today

141. 0:27:41 — open the recording at 27 minutes 41 secondsKathy Stoll (resident): to answer any questions you might have about susie's place or the request for funding and also to confirm that this is not a we're not seeking a long-term solution from the county we are not going to be back again and again and again about operating finance is truly a bridge we think to get us over this hump to a time when we will have created solutions for ourselves so I'm happy to answer any

142. 0:28:06 — open the recording at 28 minutes 6 secondsSpeaker 20 (chair): questions thank you so much for all that you guys are doing start over to this

143. 0:28:10 — open the recording at 28 minutes 10 secondsSpeaker 214: direction huh are you doing a fun fundraiser coming up or something we are

144. 0:28:14 — open the recording at 28 minutes 14 secondsKathy Stoll (resident): we are news today yeah oh no good we yeah we have a fundraiser coming up August 15th at the casino which has been a lovely host for that event it's called sipping for Susie's place so it is a it's a bourbon tasting 21 and older event at the at the Terre Haute Resort Casino Casino Resort I should have that straight

145. 0:28:38 — open the recording at 28 minutes 38 secondsSpeaker 221: in my head and I don't but thank you for asking about that so that's a great

146. 0:28:41 — open the recording at 28 minutes 41 secondsSpeaker 224: opportunity to help us and have fun the second thing is you're taking us out community development fund instead of the general is that right Commissioner

147. 0:28:51 — open the recording at 28 minutes 51 secondsSpeaker 227: Mr. Swetsch is not here tonight but I know that he requested out of general the general fund

148. 0:28:58 — open the recording at 28 minutes 58 secondsSpeaker 223: well on the thing it says community development

149. 0:29:08 — open the recording at 29 minutes 8 secondsSpeaker 236: But it's the general fund. Okay.

150. 0:29:14 — open the recording at 29 minutes 14 secondsSpeaker 60: All right. Any other questions? Thank you so much.

151. 0:29:17 — open the recording at 29 minutes 17 secondsSpeaker 171 (chair): Thank you.

152. 0:29:18 — open the recording at 29 minutes 18 secondsSpeaker 238: All right.

153. 0:29:19 — open the recording at 29 minutes 19 secondsSpeaker 171 (chair): 2026-37, Commissioner's Courthouse Elevator.

154. 0:29:23 — open the recording at 29 minutes 23 secondsSpeaker 240: Good evening once again, Mr. President and members of the Council.

155. 0:29:31 — open the recording at 29 minutes 31 secondsMark Clinkenbeard (commissioner): I am Mark Lingenberry, Vigo County Commissioner, and with me is Ricky Hammonds, Director of of facilities maintenance. Before we get into the elevator, I will turn that part over to Ricky. I just wanted to take this opportunity to give a shout out to Ricky. This past weekend, he worked pretty much throughout the weekend dealing with an issue at the jail. This is not uncommon for Ricky. Just so everybody knows what he is in charge of, Ricky's, the facilities he's in charge of are the courthouse, the annex, the jail, juvenile detention, general services building, Purdue Extension,

156. 0:30:15 — open the recording at 30 minutes 15 secondsMark Clinkenbeard (commissioner): Vector Control, both North and South group homes, both North and South Highway Garage, Gilbert Avenue Soul and Water Office, 601 South 3rd Street, and the 13th Street Records buildings, both A and B. This is 15 buildings that he combined that he takes care of. These have a combined occupancy, if you include inmates, of 1,250 people. He does this with a staff of eight employees, including himself. So, I would like to give Ricky a round of applause for all that he does. It's a daunting task.

157. 0:30:56 — open the recording at 30 minutes 56 secondsSpeaker 242: We have buildings that are 200 and over, let's see, 140 years old. Yeah, 140 plus.

158. 0:31:04 — open the recording at 31 minutes 4 secondsMark Clinkenbeard (commissioner): Yeah, 140 plus. We've got new buildings. We've got lots of buildings. And what we're talking about tonight is what's called the secure elevator. It's in the courthouse. This is the elevator that you come in on the north side, and this is only for transporting inmates. It is, we believe, 50 to 60 years old.

159. 0:31:25 — open the recording at 31 minutes 25 secondsSpeaker 246: Yeah, from what we can tell, it was anywhere from 50 to 60 years old.

160. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Courthouse's only secure inmate elevator failed inspection; $500,000 fix request pulled for more bids

     0:31:29 — open the recording at 31 minutes 29 secondsSpeaker 247: I'm going to let Ricky take it from here because you know all about it. I'll try. And I'll stand up in here. There you go.

161. 0:31:35 — open the recording at 31 minutes 35 secondsRicky Hammonds (staff): Yeah, so as Mark had mentioned, this elevator is pretty important. It's the only elevator in a secured hallway and the only way to get inmates from in and out the court. And the only other elevator we have in there is the public elevator, which is not in a secured area at all. And this elevator is 50 to 60 years old. it's at its end of life. It did have a controller mod around the 1980s, early 90s, and we've been doing a lot of research on what we could do to modernize this elevator. The hard part is, is this elevator was put in place in an old chimney chute, from what I understand. It's all

162. 0:32:17 — open the recording at 32 minutes 17 secondsRicky Hammonds (staff): a brick chute, the hoist way, sorry, the hoist way is a brick hoist way, so we've been doing a lot of research and trying to find the best way to resolve this issue and from what we can tell and what we put together a traditional mod is the best way to do so it allows us to grandfather a lot of stuff in being that it's in the situation that it's in in in the location that it's in we feel like that's probably the best solution traditional mods still updates all the equipment is but it still allows us to grandfather some of the stuff in that would in a

163. 0:32:53 — open the recording at 32 minutes 53 secondsRicky Hammonds (staff): and a full modernization you wouldn't typically be able to do so. And we recently did our five-year inspection and I mean Kone came out and we're pretty much been told that it's at its end of life. There's some small things that we could probably do to get it by but at this point we just feel the best is to do a traditional mod and replace all the equipment that's necessary being the importance of this elevator. If we don't have this elevator you're gonna have a security risk. You're gonna put all the inmates in a public elevator, try to you know separate the public from the inmates,

164. 0:33:34 — open the recording at 33 minutes 34 secondsRicky Hammonds (staff): get everybody up to court. It's gonna be a nightmare honestly. We get it Ricky.

165. 0:33:41 — open the recording at 33 minutes 41 secondsSpeaker 35: We pronounce it dead.

166. 0:33:45 — open the recording at 33 minutes 45 secondsSpeaker 255: If we could add just a couple things.

167. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Courthouse's only secure inmate elevator failed inspection; $500,000 fix request pulled for more bids

     0:33:47 — open the recording at 33 minutes 47 secondsSpeaker 257 (commissioner): We did have another meeting today about the elevator, and we have asked for $500,000, and we do believe that that would take care of it. But in this other meeting today with somebody from Garmong, they would like to look at it also with us, with Kone. We've reached out to Otis, and they did give us an estimate that is would be more than the $500,000. So with all this being said, we would like to push this till next month to give us a little more time to do a little more investigation and make sure that we're asking you for everything that

168. 0:34:25 — open the recording at 34 minutes 25 secondsSpeaker 260: we need and we don't come back later on. Was that it? Yeah, I knew. Sorry. I do know that

169. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Courthouse's only secure inmate elevator failed inspection; $500,000 fix request pulled for more bids

     0:34:34 — open the recording at 34 minutes 34 secondsRicky Hammonds (staff): we are on kind of a time crunch, but it's like Mark said, we want to make sure that we're all in on this and there's no surprises later on. We've had Kona. I mean, it's kind of been a short notice deal. Again, five-year inspections only take place every five years, of course. So it's, I mean, not an inspection that's done every single year. So it's not something we knew last year. We knew the age of the elevator, but again, the lead times on all this from start to finish would be 43 to 49 weeks. So even if we made a decision next week.

170. 0:35:10 — open the recording at 35 minutes 10 secondsSpeaker 263: How do you get them up and down in the meantime?

171. 0:35:13 — open the recording at 35 minutes 13 secondsSpeaker 264: You're going to come over there and winch them off.

172. 0:35:15 — open the recording at 35 minutes 15 secondsSpeaker 257 (commissioner): No, they'll go through the public elevator. But that's why we want to go ahead and wait another few weeks to make sure we get everything right because we're still talking almost a year before we're done. So in the meantime, if it breaks down, we're going to have to make do with the one elevator and the stairs.

173. 0:35:31 — open the recording at 35 minutes 31 secondsSpeaker 275: Go ahead.

174. 0:35:33 — open the recording at 35 minutes 33 secondsSpeaker 274: Mr. President.

175. 0:35:34 — open the recording at 35 minutes 34 secondsSpeaker 276: Yes, sir.

176. 0:35:35 — open the recording at 35 minutes 35 secondsSpeaker 274: Is it broken right now?

177. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Courthouse's only secure inmate elevator failed inspection; $500,000 fix request pulled for more bids

     0:35:37 — open the recording at 35 minutes 37 secondsSpeaker 276: Currently, no.

178. 0:35:38 — open the recording at 35 minutes 38 secondsSpeaker 274: Did it pass inspection?

179. 0:35:40 — open the recording at 35 minutes 40 secondsSpeaker 276: It did not.

180. 0:35:41 — open the recording at 35 minutes 41 secondsSpeaker 277: It did not pass inspection. Can we legally use it if it's not passed inspection?

181. 0:35:46 — open the recording at 35 minutes 46 secondsRicky Hammonds (staff): I guess that would be a question for what had happened is we did a five-year inspection on it. We did a load test. I'm sorry. we did not not the county cone a did a load test on the elevator um the capacity is 4 500 pounds they did a load test which is putting 45 pound 4500 pounds of weights in the elevator and seeing if it works it did not lift it they put it in inspection mode it lifted the elevator with no problem so what they believe was wrong with it is the driver the driver's a hundred thousand dollars and they they can say that it could be replaced but they can't guarantee it's

182. 0:36:23 — open the recording at 36 minutes 23 secondsRicky Hammonds (staff): going to fix the problem it could be the whole motor so that's why we're looking at the mod but to answer your question um they there's breaks there's safety breaks on the elevator that and if there's an issue with the elevator they activate stop the elevator so cone had came back and i have it in the email from actually today just said not to occupy the elevator more than three people at a time. So they presumed it safe to be able to use until we make a decision, I guess.

183. 0:36:54 — open the recording at 36 minutes 54 secondsSpeaker 281: Does the state inspect these? Correct. Okay, all right.

184. 0:36:57 — open the recording at 36 minutes 57 secondsSpeaker 282: They do one every year, but then a different one every five years, correct?

185. 0:37:02 — open the recording at 37 minutes 2 secondsRicky Hammonds (staff): Well, that's KONE itself. So we do one inspection. KONE does one inspection a year, and then there's a five-year test as well. But the state, I mean, they kind of come and go. So they don't ever, of course, tell us. I assume that they come every year.

186. 0:37:17 — open the recording at 37 minutes 17 secondsSpeaker 76 (councillor): So in this process, are we going to seek – I think I understand the whole idea that Garmong's coming in and looking at it. We're looking to, in some way, get the best bang for our buck

187. 0:37:33 — open the recording at 37 minutes 33 secondsDavid Thompson (councillor): and to get this to where it will no longer be a problem, correct? Correct. Thank you.

188. 0:37:40 — open the recording at 37 minutes 40 secondsSpeaker 20 (chair): I just have a curiosity question really not for us to be concerned with but just out of curiosity is the elevator currently supported by a freestanding structure within the elevator shaft or is it supported by the building itself?

189. 0:37:58 — open the recording at 37 minutes 58 secondsSpeaker 248: So I think there's some if I if I remember right I think there is I don't think there's any still

190. 0:38:04 — open the recording at 38 minutes 4 secondsRicky Hammonds (staff): support beams inside the hoist it's a cable driven elevator so up on the fifth floor i mean the building's 140 years old so up on the fifth floor there is a pulley system up there with a motor

191. 0:38:17 — open the recording at 38 minutes 17 secondsSpeaker 24: and it drives on a pulley system and a cable so the building's supporting it correct building itself

192. 0:38:22 — open the recording at 38 minutes 22 secondsSpeaker 288: correct so you want to ride it i take the steps thank you so much you're welcome is there any other questions for us

193. 0:38:34 — open the recording at 38 minutes 34 secondsSpeaker 289: I think we're good.

194. 0:38:36 — open the recording at 38 minutes 36 secondsSpeaker 257 (commissioner): Thanks. I'm going to take this time to just in full transparency. When we talk about the number of buildings we have, we do have a new jail. It's four years old. With that being said, there are some issues that we're working through on that jail that we need a little more time on. But Ricky, he's out of the budget this year. So I'm just saying we may have to come back to this body in addition to this elevator for some additional requests. So we're working through those. We have another meeting set up next week. We were in a three hour meeting this morning to try to go over

195. 0:39:14 — open the recording at 39 minutes 14 secondsSpeaker 257 (commissioner): some of the issues that we're having that are out of warranty now.

196. 0:39:18 — open the recording at 39 minutes 18 secondsSpeaker 293: So you're talking about the jail?

197. 0:39:20 — open the recording at 39 minutes 20 secondsSpeaker 257 (commissioner): The jail, yes. So when you have 15 buildings, there's a lot that can go wrong, and unfortunately it seems like a lots went wrong this last few months. Sure, thank you.

198. 0:39:30 — open the recording at 39 minutes 30 secondsSpeaker 20 (chair): Thank you. Just to clarify, we are not going to be voting on this next week.

199. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Courthouse's only secure inmate elevator failed inspection; $500,000 fix request pulled for more bids

     0:39:33 — open the recording at 39 minutes 33 secondsSpeaker 257 (commissioner): taking it off we would like to ask that it be taken off we just want to go ahead

200. 0:39:37 — open the recording at 39 minutes 37 secondsSpeaker 171 (chair): and give you the information we had perfect thank you moving on to 2026-38

201. 0:39:42 — open the recording at 39 minutes 42 secondsSpeaker 19 (chair): lost creek fire protection district pump truck repairs and purchase fire ppe washer and dryer page 29 in your books

202. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Lost Creek fire district asks county for $50,000 after paying to fix a truck's pump mid-fire

     0:39:58 — open the recording at 39 minutes 58 secondsJohn Hendrix (staff): mr president members of the council uh fire chief john hendrix cityville fire department here on behalf of lost creek fire protection district lost creek nevins fire protection district so early in the year we had a substantial cost to one of our engines we had a pump that catastrophically failed during a fire and we had to spend a substantial amount of money getting that pump replaced obviously it was cheaper to replace the pump than it was to go out and purchase a half a million dollar truck so that put us a little bit short so

203. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Lost Creek fire district asks county for $50,000 after paying to fix a truck's pump mid-fire

     0:40:32 — open the recording at 40 minutes 32 secondsJohn Hendrix (staff): So we are asking you guys to consider the additional appropriations of $50,000 from our cumulative fire fund to offset. Questions left?

204. 0:40:45 — open the recording at 40 minutes 45 secondsSpeaker 32: Do you have access to get another pump pretty quick?

205. 0:40:50 — open the recording at 40 minutes 50 secondsJohn Hendrix (staff): That truck has been repaired. We've already repaired it. That's pretty quick. But in doing so, it put us short.

206. 0:41:00 — open the recording at 41 minutesSpeaker 305: Deplated your fund.

207. 0:41:02 — open the recording at 41 minutes 2 secondsSpeaker 171 (chair): yeah okay questions right all right thank you so much thank you your time 2026-39 community Corrections supplement page 31

208. 0:41:19 — open the recording at 41 minutes 19 secondsDevin (staff): bill before you start on page 32 and 33 are some our letters in support of this so I just wanted to point that out as well okay thank you so much

209. 0:41:32 — open the recording at 41 minutes 32 secondsSpeaker 317: Thank you, Jeff.

210. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Council revisits restoring $200,000 to Community Corrections after it was pulled from the budget by mistake

     0:41:51 — open the recording at 41 minutes 51 secondsSpeaker 319: Yes, sir. Okay, this is the follow-up to our previous meetings where there was

211. 0:42:03 — open the recording at 42 minutes 3 secondsBill Watson (staff): discussion about putting $200,000 back to the fund that provided for the substance abuse mental health treatment at Community Corrections that had been removed previously that we did not become aware of that removal until a later date. Our last meeting there was questions about did the council have the authority to put that back at that time what the means were to try to remedy that and it was continued over till the council addressed that I believe

212. 0:42:31 — open the recording at 42 minutes 31 secondsSpeaker 30 (councillor): is where we were left off at okay this was a kind of a conglomeration and misunderstanding when it was removed from the budget when you know we had some

213. 0:42:51 — open the recording at 42 minutes 51 secondsSpeaker 32: miscommunication and so I just am going to insist that we put this back in the

214. 0:43:01 — open the recording at 43 minutes 1 secondSpeaker 325: budget because it was removed inadvertently doing any other quick yes

215. 0:43:08 — open the recording at 43 minutes 8 secondsSpeaker 329: sir bill you're just asking for an additional appropriation correct yeah

216. 0:43:13 — open the recording at 43 minutes 13 secondsSpeaker 35: that's all this is simple it's taken out and should be put back in yes yes

217. 0:43:18 — open the recording at 43 minutes 18 secondsSpeaker 333: Councilman Thompson yeah any other questions this direction questions this

218. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Council revisits restoring $200,000 to Community Corrections after it was pulled from the budget by mistake

     0:43:23 — open the recording at 43 minutes 23 secondsDavid Thompson (councillor): way yes sir mr. Watson I want to thank you and the community Corrections executive team meet with several of the council members one of the things as I told you at that meeting and the auditor was there my concern was when you asked for the $700,000 in April I flat out told you I thought you're going to need more now we've got this 200,000 and unless the auditors changed the position the auditor told us at that meeting that you were very hot on your budget right now in the sense that you're going to be over and we're going to have to appropriate more money.

219. 0:44:12 — open the recording at 44 minutes 12 secondsDavid Thompson (councillor): So the first thing I ask you is you are going to get with the auditor's office and somebody was going to give us some type of view as to how much more you're going to need beyond the 200,000. Has that been done yet?

220. 0:44:26 — open the recording at 44 minutes 26 secondsBill Watson (staff): My financial person has looked at that. I don't know what the communication has been with the auditor. I've been out and I know there was discussion with Larry. our end the 700,000 you were talking about before was for the insurance benefits and at that time when I told you I didn't need any more I was not aware this 200,000 had been removed by the council prior to that I learned that after that meeting that that 200,000 had been removed so at that time I answered your question honestly based on what I knew I did not know the 200,000 was gone

221. 0:44:59 — open the recording at 44 minutes 59 secondsBill Watson (staff): until after that so that's why I told you I did not need any more do we know

222. 0:45:03 — open the recording at 45 minutes 3 secondsSpeaker 341: how much more you're going to need beyond the $200,000 by the year end?

223. 0:45:07 — open the recording at 45 minutes 7 secondsBill Watson (staff): My financial person says nothing. You're covering the insurance benefits, and that's where she doesn't understand where the auditor's office says we're going to be short based on what they take monthly from us for insurance, where we pay them and then they pay it back. She says that will be covered. Let's just ask the auditor. That will be covered, she says. She doesn't see where they're finding a shortage.

224. 0:45:28 — open the recording at 45 minutes 28 secondsSpeaker 76 (councillor): Okay. Auditor, do we have any additional information on shortage by year end? you were concerned about? Has that been resolved or is that still under discussion?

225. 0:45:38 — open the recording at 45 minutes 38 secondsJudy (auditor): I didn't. I mean, I think there was a misunderstanding here. What I showed was that the work release, you may have to come back for work release to get, because we're running real short on that. On work release, I don't understand. Work release through the courts.

226. 0:45:54 — open the recording at 45 minutes 54 secondsBill Watson (staff): Oh, but that's not part of, yeah, the work release, she's talking about, Councilman, I think I can clear this up real quick. When he gave numbers the other day, he was talking about numbers that he thought was directly driven by community corrections. Those were court programs, as I told him the other day. When he started rattling off all those numbers, I said, whoa, whoa, whoa. Those are not part of the controlled community corrections budget. The work release he's talking about, that's the indigency fund program that the council budgets to the courts to put people in work release.

227. 0:46:27 — open the recording at 46 minutes 27 secondsBill Watson (staff): That's not an actual budget item under community corrections.

228. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Council revisits restoring $200,000 to Community Corrections after it was pulled from the budget by mistake

     0:46:30 — open the recording at 46 minutes 30 secondsDavid Thompson (councillor): Okay. Thank you for that clarification. You're welcome. Mr. Watson, I think it's very apparent to me that, and I said this at the meeting, so again, I'm repeating this for public to understand what I said at that meeting, and I said this to you and your executive team, is that obviously there is a known revenue decrease in your program coming from the state. And that to continue community corrections, there's going to have to be some hard decisions made. And you promised me that you will work your darndest to try to pinch every penny and to make this work.

229. 0:47:17 — open the recording at 47 minutes 17 secondsDavid Thompson (councillor): My fear is that the $200,000 doesn't bother me at all. But I still think that the system has to get addressed, because otherwise councils in the future are going to face this over and over again. And if the state continues to cut your revenue, as has been telegraphed, although we know it can change tomorrow. So my fear is that there has to be somebody to address this moving forward so that we get a grip on this, because it can't just continue, and the money can't just continue.

230. 0:47:57 — open the recording at 47 minutes 57 secondsDavid Thompson (councillor): So less worried about the $200,000 and encourage you and your team to get together, make some tough decisions, and try to determine how we slow the exit of the dollars and get the maximum bang for your buck. So thank you, sir.

231. 0:48:18 — open the recording at 48 minutes 18 secondsBill Watson (staff): Absolutely. And I will tell you, since we did meet, those have been ongoing discussions, looking at things that that can be done and how things can be reallocated. I promised you we would do that and we started that the afternoon you left in fact with my financial person and others within the agency so we are looking at

232. 0:48:36 — open the recording at 48 minutes 36 secondsSpeaker 171 (chair): that Thank You director thank you all right moving on to additional appropriation 2026-40 veterans insurance page 35

233. 0:48:50 — open the recording at 48 minutes 50 secondsSpeaker 359: good evening council I'm William Caldera I'm the Vigo County Veterans service officer we're requesting an additional amount of five thousand four hundred forty six dollars and ninety two cents to cover employee health insurance experience or expense we usually don't have health insurance budget historically we've just hired veterans who were covered through VA insurance medical so during our hiring this last year there was an oversight on Shelby's insurance and this minor standing every employee for the county gets eligible for health insurance through the county she took that she did

234. 0:49:33 — open the recording at 49 minutes 33 secondsSpeaker 359: analyze it and she found that her husband's insurance was better for her to be on so she did that but before that she did acquire some financial debt for that so we're just here to ask for that amount this would be just a one-time thing we don't expect it to happen again thank you any questions thank you very

235. 0:49:55 — open the recording at 49 minutes 55 secondsSpeaker 171 (chair): much thank you all right 2026-41 prosecutor return of fugitives page 37

236. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Prosecutor asks for $10,000 more to bring wanted suspects back to Vigo County

     0:50:07 — open the recording at 50 minutes 7 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): mr. president members of the council this is a request for an additional appropriation for $10,000 for our line item of return of fugitives I think we started the year out with $8,000 in there and we're down to less than $1,000 now. This is the account that we use when we have to extradite or transport someone from out of state back here to face charges. I would tell you kind of comes and goes. I mean you may go quite a while not have one of these. Just depends on kind of the timing but we try not to extradite any more than we have to but

237. 0:50:45 — open the recording at 50 minutes 45 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): If it's somebody that's really dangerous or we have a real serious charge here, then those are the ones that we're talking about that come into play here.

238. 0:50:55 — open the recording at 50 minutes 55 secondsSpeaker 366: Questions left? Questions right? Yes, sir.

239. 0:50:59 — open the recording at 50 minutes 59 secondsSpeaker 85: How much have we spent so far this year on bringing?

240. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Prosecutor asks for $10,000 more to bring wanted suspects back to Vigo County

     0:51:02 — open the recording at 51 minutes 2 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): Around $7,000. And I will tell you that the Sheriff's Department and THPD both have trained people in their departments and tried to increase their training. So if it's not too far away that we send, you know, law enforcement from here to go get him to obviously save money. But there's actually a service. So like, for instance, say we've got someone out of California that we have to bring back here that's suspect in a murder or something really serious. You have to actually hire a private service, private jet that does nothing but transport, you know, dangerous fugitives, et cetera.

241. 0:51:40 — open the recording at 51 minutes 40 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): So we haven't had to do that a lot, but that's also always a possibility of something we have to look at.

242. 0:51:47 — open the recording at 51 minutes 47 secondsSpeaker 60: If those funds go unused, do they revert back?

243. 0:51:49 — open the recording at 51 minutes 49 secondsSpeaker 372: Yes. Okay. Sorry.

244. 0:51:52 — open the recording at 51 minutes 52 secondsSpeaker 373: As a follow-up, so what do we normally spend on an annual basis to do this? Are we running hot higher than normal?

245. 0:52:00 — open the recording at 52 minutesSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): I would say a little bit higher than normal. But, I mean, we don't spend like $20,000 or $30,000 a year at this. I mean, it's usually somewhere around $10,000, I think.

246. 0:52:08 — open the recording at 52 minutes 8 secondsSpeaker 373: So this is also preventative in the sense that you're afraid you're going to get the zero and not have it, so you're asking ahead of time? Correct. Thank you, sir.

247. 0:52:16 — open the recording at 52 minutes 16 secondsSpeaker 44: Yes. Anything further? Moving on. Thank you, sir.

248. 0:52:21 — open the recording at 52 minutes 21 secondsSpeaker 171 (chair): Moving on to 2026-42, prosecutor, Seize Assets, Drug Task Force, page 39.

249. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Prosecutor asks to spend $502,000 in seized drug-case money on police vehicles and gear

     0:52:29 — open the recording at 52 minutes 29 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): So this is actually a good additional appropriation we're asking for. So obviously as prosecutor, we have cases, especially like drug cases, where we can do forfeitures. And so we've had a couple big forfeitures recently. And as you can see, this is all found money. So we're not asking to spend anybody else's money. We have this in our seized asset account right now. We just got the money in a couple weeks ago on a forfeiture. and so we're looking at $502,000. By statute, there's administrative costs, and we have an outside law firm that handles these because of ethical reasons.

250. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Prosecutor asks to spend $502,000 in seized drug-case money on police vehicles and gear

     0:53:11 — open the recording at 53 minutes 11 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): If you're prosecuting someone and also trying to take their assets away from them, cause us serious ethical issues. But anyway, once the expenses are paid, then the money comes to our account, and then by statute, the majority of it is to be spent on law enforcement. So that's where this is at, and there's a small percentage that goes to the state school fund as I recall so we're asking that $250,000 be appropriated for vehicles $52,000 for contractual service which that's the leads online that THPD has it's a three-year contract and that would pay it for the three years and then the last

251. 0:53:51 — open the recording at 53 minutes 51 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): one is $200,000 for needed equipment for all the way from firearms to protective equipment tactical

252. 0:53:58 — open the recording at 53 minutes 58 secondsSpeaker 325: gear etc you do this every year or so yeah whenever we have forfeiture forfeitures we obviously have

253. 0:54:05 — open the recording at 54 minutes 5 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): to come to you and ask you to appropriate the money this is just a bigger one than normal

254. 0:54:10 — open the recording at 54 minutes 10 secondsSpeaker 86: the cat i checked the cash balance earlier it's 621 708 yeah we are going to be coming back we

255. 0:54:17 — open the recording at 54 minutes 17 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): are waiting right now the law firm that handles this has not been paid yet so we will be coming back but there probably will be another three or four hundred thousand before the year in too that

256. 0:54:28 — open the recording at 54 minutes 28 secondsSpeaker 370: that we will be asking you to appropriate to law enforcement also. Yeah, it says it is.

257. 0:54:36 — open the recording at 54 minutes 36 secondsSpeaker 76 (councillor): Mr. President. Yes, sir. Mr. Modisette, are there restrictions as to what this money can actually be used for when you seize it? Yes. What are just in?

258. 0:54:47 — open the recording at 54 minutes 47 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): There's a statute. I think that 90 some percent of it has to be used towards law enforcement, as I recall.

259. 0:54:52 — open the recording at 54 minutes 52 secondsSpeaker 387: OK. Thank you, sir.

260. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Prosecutor asks to spend $502,000 in seized drug-case money on police vehicles and gear

     0:54:54 — open the recording at 54 minutes 54 secondsSpeaker 20 (chair): I have one further question. Is there even a remote chance that any of this would be spent at a business that I own?

261. 0:55:03 — open the recording at 55 minutes 3 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): Just so I know if I need to abstain. That I don't know because the money would just be appropriated than to be up to THPD to determine. And by the way, THPD, the Drug Task Force, was vital in getting this done, too.

262. 0:55:16 — open the recording at 55 minutes 16 secondsSpeaker 370: I mean, they were doing the legwork and investigation and all that. And that's why I'm asking for the appropriation to be the way that we're requesting.

263. 0:55:23 — open the recording at 55 minutes 23 secondsSpeaker 392: So don't be offended, but I will abstain from that one. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Question? Yes, sir. Terry?

264. 0:55:32 — open the recording at 55 minutes 32 secondsSpeaker 224: Well, you know, in the past we've bought bulletproof vests out of this. Right. We've bought radios.

265. 0:55:37 — open the recording at 55 minutes 37 secondsSpeaker 397: We've bought a lot of stuff through the year out of this fund.

266. 0:55:41 — open the recording at 55 minutes 41 secondsSpeaker 365 (prosecutor_office): And I think that that's where, you know, under the third one there, the $200,000 for equipment. I mean, as far as how I came up with this, as far as the requested amount, is I've been working closely with the chief of police at THPD and talking to them about their needs and those type of things. We kind of broke it down like this based upon their general needs at this point.

267. 0:56:01 — open the recording at 56 minutes 1 secondSpeaker 30 (councillor): You guys bought radios, you bought vests, and all that kind of stuff for the undercover guys. Right.

268. 0:56:07 — open the recording at 56 minutes 7 seconds Go ahead.

269. 0:56:08 — open the recording at 56 minutes 8 secondsSpeaker 76 (councillor): Ms. Montes, just for giggles and laughs,

270. 0:56:13 — open the recording at 56 minutes 13 secondsDavid Thompson (councillor): can any of this money ever be used to possibly assist like community corrections or other jail issue you say law enforcement i just wanted to i don't believe so i haven't heard of that happening

271. 0:56:25 — open the recording at 56 minutes 25 secondsSpeaker 375: i mean that's something i can try to explore a little further but i don't think so just it was

272. 0:56:30 — open the recording at 56 minutes 30 secondsSpeaker 402: just out of curiosity we've got a need there too so yeah thank you sir thank you all right moving

273. 0:56:37 — open the recording at 56 minutes 37 secondsSpeaker 171 (chair): Moving on, 2026-43, Auditor Juvenile Medical. Pitch 41.

274. 0:56:44 — open the recording at 56 minutes 44 secondsJudy (auditor): I'll speak on this. This was something that was just left out of the budget, and so I went back and calculated and it looks like 108,300 is what they would need to elect correctional rehab. We did find out from State Board of Accounts that we could use it for the juvenile detention center.

275. 0:57:05 — open the recording at 57 minutes 5 secondsSpeaker 190: You said it was left out. Is it something we previously discussed and we just forgot to?

276. 0:57:13 — open the recording at 57 minutes 13 secondsSpeaker 407: Yes.

277. 0:57:14 — open the recording at 57 minutes 14 secondsSpeaker 60: Okay. Questions to the left?

278. 0:57:18 — open the recording at 57 minutes 18 secondsSpeaker 336: Questions to the right?

279. 0:57:20 — open the recording at 57 minutes 20 secondsSpeaker 19 (chair): All right. Moving on to 2026-44, Homes for Children, Non-Reverting Fund Request, page 43.

280. Highlight · drawn from this moment: County group homes ask for $158,980 in repairs, with a $150,000 Lilly Foundation grant possibly on the way

     0:57:33 — open the recording at 57 minutes 33 secondsMike Morris (commissioner): Hello people, Mike Morris, Vigo County Commissioner, with Director Norm Loudermilk of the group homes. We are requesting $158,980 from non-reverting fund 4952 as requested by the council. There is a itemized sheet of those expenses with a summary at the bottom of the sheets, and then this nice summary sheet that the auditor made up. And the commissioners have reviewed with the director the different items requested here. He's done his research and pricing. We find it in line, and we find that these repairs and materials are needed. Interesting point. Today, they had an open house.

281. 0:58:43 — open the recording at 58 minutes 43 secondsMike Morris (commissioner): And I got to talk to a previous councilwoman, Marie Fies. Her new position with the school, for the Vigo County School Corporation is what I would call a mental health liaison. She's very excited. I point blank asked her if she felt like group homes were a good thing and should be continued. And she emphatically said yes. She believes that she can help connect people and agencies to make it even a better operation. I believe the attendance at this time, I wasn't told by Norm, but I was told by Heather that works there that they had nine boys and eight girls right now. Is that correct? Yeah.

282. 0:59:32 — open the recording at 59 minutes 32 secondsMike Morris (commissioner): So any questions about the itemized requests here?

283. 0:59:42 — open the recording at 59 minutes 42 secondsSpeaker 32: Let me also say, Mr. Commissioner, I was president of the event today.

284. 0:59:49 — open the recording at 59 minutes 49 secondsSpeaker 30 (councillor): I was very impressed at the circumstances of the building and the repair that has happened there. Commissioner Klinkenbeard, I see your fine hand and your eye in some of the reconstruction of the place. It's extremely well done. It's remarkably well constructed. reconstructed and the kids were having a blast it was it was really nice and and I heard a story of one of the employees they're telling that one of the children had been adopted by a family he didn't want to leave he wanted to stay there because he liked it so much. It's clean and sparkling and it's my mother

285. 1:00:45 — open the recording at 1 hour 45 secondsSpeaker 30 (councillor): was raised in the Glen home by the way and we always heard stories about the Glen home. I was it touched my heart to see that happening again in our community.

286. 1:00:56 — open the recording at 1 hour 56 secondsMike Morris (commissioner): So I was really pleased. I was tickled to death to see Marie because she has a lot of really valuable insight into these children over the years and she's very

287. 1:01:10 — open the recording at 1 hour 1 minute 10 secondsSpeaker 25: upbeat and positive about what's been going on. She really was. She was so excited. Any other questions left? Councilman Anderson you were there. You got any observations?

288. 1:01:20 — open the recording at 1 hour 1 minute 20 secondsSpeaker 418: Yeah the hamburger kind of made me feel kind of funny that Norm cooked but other than that it was pretty good. No it is because I can remember going through it ten years ago and you know

289. 1:01:33 — open the recording at 1 hour 1 minute 33 secondsSpeaker 224: it's amazing what you've been able to do with it and everything looked good and I understand why the expense in that old building wiring and all has been conduit you know to run through those can't go through those walls and stuff so you

290. 1:01:53 — open the recording at 1 hour 1 minute 53 secondsSpeaker 425: know my eyes very good and and director louder milk is received what

291. Highlight · drawn from this moment: County group homes ask for $158,980 in repairs, with a $150,000 Lilly Foundation grant possibly on the way

     1:02:02 — open the recording at 1 hour 2 minutes 2 secondsMike Morris (commissioner): $150,000 grant from the Lilly Foundation for development of plans for expanding it or remodeling or building something new. And we're very optimistic that he may get a very substantial grant from the Lilly Foundation to accommodate some more construction. So it seems something that this Noy Foundation wants to put their funds toward.

292. 1:02:37 — open the recording at 1 hour 2 minutes 37 secondsSpeaker 427: It's working.

293. 1:02:39 — open the recording at 1 hour 2 minutes 39 secondsSpeaker 60: Questions right? Norm, the only thing I notice is $2,500 for bird and pest control. I hope the squirrels do not fall under the pest control.

294. 1:02:50 — open the recording at 1 hour 2 minutes 50 secondsSpeaker 427: I think that was stated that he wants to contract for termites. No, I was joking.

295. 1:02:58 — open the recording at 1 hour 2 minutes 58 secondsSpeaker 429: The squirrels there are. We won't bother the squirrels. All right. Combined feeding.

296. 1:03:03 — open the recording at 1 hour 3 minutes 3 secondsSpeaker 19 (chair): All right. Moving on to 2026-45, recorders record perpetuation.

297. 1:03:17 — open the recording at 1 hour 3 minutes 17 secondsSpeaker 434: That would be our office.

298. 1:03:20 — open the recording at 1 hour 3 minutes 20 secondsJudy (auditor): When they were doing the budgeting for last year, they only appropriated for one employee out of perpetuation, and there's actually two employees that are paid from that. That's fund 1189, reported perpetuation that can only be spent for upkeep of their office and employees in their office.

299. 1:03:44 — open the recording at 1 hour 3 minutes 44 secondsSpeaker 386: recorder's office what what what all i'm sorry well it says recorders record so is it the recorder's office that we're talking about what what what office what office needs the money

300. 1:04:03 — open the recording at 1 hour 4 minutes 3 secondsJudy (auditor): recorder it's the insurance we only appropriated for one employee and there's two that are paid

301. 1:04:09 — open the recording at 1 hour 4 minutes 9 secondsSpeaker 373: out of it that's what i was asking what what office for sure i just wanted to make sure that

302. 1:04:12 — open the recording at 1 hour 4 minutes 12 secondsSpeaker 441: was the recorder's office

303. 1:04:17 — open the recording at 1 hour 4 minutes 17 secondsSpeaker 19 (chair): any further questions moving on 2026-46 juvenile justice center non reverting

304. 1:04:24 — open the recording at 1 hour 4 minutes 24 secondsJudy (auditor): page 60 same thing here is that there was one employee paid out of that last year and then when we did our you know we had to have our advertisement and everything in before the end of the year or mid-year there was one person that took the employee only and she moved over to another fund. They promoted her. They put someone else into that position and they took I think employee child. So we only budgeted enough for employee insurance so we need to and they pay that out of their non reverting fund.

305. 1:05:05 — open the recording at 1 hour 5 minutes 5 secondsSpeaker 448: Public comments.

306. 1:05:09 — open the recording at 1 hour 5 minutes 9 secondsSpeaker 257 (commissioner): This is a public comment, but I did want something I forgot to mention a little bit ago. When we come back, we will be asking for this out of Lit 1233, which is correctional rehab for the elevator and any other repairs at the jail. There's $24.5 million in it right now, so this would not be coming out in general. Just want to make sure. Perfect.

307. 1:05:30 — open the recording at 1 hour 5 minutes 30 secondsSpeaker 453: Thank you.

308. 1:05:31 — open the recording at 1 hour 5 minutes 31 secondsSpeaker 44: Any other public comment?

309. 1:05:33 — open the recording at 1 hour 5 minutes 33 secondsSpeaker 454: Steve, I got something.

310. 1:05:34 — open the recording at 1 hour 5 minutes 34 secondsSpeaker 456: Yes, sir. Mark or Mike.

311. 1:05:39 — open the recording at 1 hour 5 minutes 39 secondsSpeaker 458: Are you going to present next month from the school oversight committee?

312. 1:05:46 — open the recording at 1 hour 5 minutes 46 secondsSpeaker 450: Yes, we will be presenting.

313. Highlight · drawn from this moment: County's school oversight committee reports $87,146 balance, sets September date for a school funding proposal

     1:05:49 — open the recording at 1 hour 5 minutes 49 secondsSpeaker 257 (commissioner): They are presenting to us next Wednesday the 12th, and then we would ask to be on your calendar next would be the first, September 1st, to present our proposal for the school funding request.

314. 1:06:02 — open the recording at 1 hour 6 minutes 2 secondsSpeaker 459: Do you think it is a good idea to have it at a larger facility?

315. 1:06:08 — open the recording at 1 hour 6 minutes 8 secondsSpeaker 257 (commissioner): I expect a large crowd, judging by what we had last year. So.

316. 1:06:14 — open the recording at 1 hour 6 minutes 14 secondsSpeaker 462: It would be a lot like the jail, correct? Probably.

317. 1:06:18 — open the recording at 1 hour 6 minutes 18 secondsSpeaker 463: Yeah.

318. 1:06:19 — open the recording at 1 hour 6 minutes 19 secondsSpeaker 462: I'd make the recommendation that we have it at a large facility.

319. 1:06:24 — open the recording at 1 hour 6 minutes 24 secondsSpeaker 466: Like we have a way to do, like, home and center?

320. 1:06:27 — open the recording at 1 hour 6 minutes 27 secondsSpeaker 459: Sure. No. Suggestions?

321. 1:06:28 — open the recording at 1 hour 6 minutes 28 secondsSpeaker 469: Well, I'm serious. I think we had a school at Woodrow Wilson. We did it at Wilson. We did it south before.

322. 1:06:35 — open the recording at 1 hour 6 minutes 35 secondsSpeaker 463: south or north or Wilson or I will say going back to the elevator and

323. 1:06:46 — open the recording at 1 hour 6 minutes 46 secondsJudy (auditor): correctional rehab I don't think anyone has the approval yet for State Board of Accounts or for the council attorney to look into it to see if it can be paid

324. 1:06:57 — open the recording at 1 hour 6 minutes 57 secondsSpeaker 257 (commissioner): out there okay we did look into it and we were told that it could be now we We'll double check on that.

325. 1:07:02 — open the recording at 1 hour 7 minutes 2 secondsSpeaker 480: OK. OK. We didn't know that.

326. 1:07:06 — open the recording at 1 hour 7 minutes 6 secondsSpeaker 257 (commissioner): OK. Anything else?

327. 1:07:07 — open the recording at 1 hour 7 minutes 7 secondsSpeaker 481: Any other public comment?

328. 1:07:16 — open the recording at 1 hour 7 minutes 16 secondsSpeaker 486: Hello. Good evening, council.

329. 1:07:19 — open the recording at 1 hour 7 minutes 19 secondsSpeaker 490: My name is Deanna Griffin. Kind of short, so I'm going to put it down.

330. Highlight · drawn from this moment: Council revisits restoring $200,000 to Community Corrections after it was pulled from the budget by mistake

     1:07:24 — open the recording at 1 hour 7 minutes 24 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): I'm the executive director of Phoenix House of Terre Haute, nonprofit structured recovery residents here in Vigo County. I'm a certified peer recovery coach. I serve as supervisor of peer recovery and family recovery court. And I also serve as a chaplain assistant with the Vigo County Sheriff's Office and have for the past eight years. I'm also a person in long-term recovery with a history of incarceration. Those roles have given me an opportunity to see our community from many different perspectives.

331. 1:07:56 — open the recording at 1 hour 7 minutes 56 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): I work alongside people in recovery, families, our courts, law enforcement, treatment providers, and many other community partners. I've seen firsthand just how connected all of these systems really are. I'm not here tonight asking for anything for Phoenix House. We have no financial interest in whether Community Corrections receives the funding that they've asked for. In fact, there have been times when Phoenix House has used donor-supported resources to help individuals coming from Community Corrections to afford recovery housing, and times when

332. 1:08:32 — open the recording at 1 hour 8 minutes 32 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): we've simply absorbed the costs because we believe someone deserves the opportunity to keep moving forward. I'm here because I care about our recovery community and because I believe Community Corrections is an essential part of that community. I'd like to ask you tonight to look at community corrections from a certain perspective. When many people hear community corrections, they think of offenders. And I see people. People with substance use disorder, people living with mental health conditions, people with trauma, people who need accountability but also need an opportunity to address the

333. 1:09:12 — open the recording at 1 hour 9 minutes 12 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): issues that brought them into the justice system in the first place. Some are awaiting trial and others already have been sentenced. Regardless of where they are in the process, Community Corrections provides an opportunity to begin addressing the issues that brought them there. I believe in accountability. In fact, accountability is one of the most important parts of recovery. But accountability alone is not enough. Community Corrections gives people the opportunity to begin changing the direction of their lives while still being held accountable.

334. 1:09:49 — open the recording at 1 hour 9 minutes 49 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): I don't know that everybody understands what actually happens when someone enters a program like work release. They aren't simply just given a bed and are supervised. They are assessed. Do they have substance use disorder? Are there mental health needs? Do they need treatment? Have they gone without medication? Do they have health coverage? Are they eligible for it? Do they even have something as basic as a Social Security card or state issued ID? Community Corrections has social workers and professionals that begin helping people work through those barriers.

335. 1:10:26 — open the recording at 1 hour 10 minutes 26 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): Individuals can begin connecting with treatment providers, addressing their mental health needs, obtaining identification and other essential documents, finding employment, participating in programs like MRT, and beginning to build stability. And all of that happens while they're being held accountable. To me, that is one of the most important things Community Corrections provides. Recovery is continuum. People don't just simply leave jail and walk into recovery and suddenly have their lives together. Recovery happens one step at a time.

336. 1:11:01 — open the recording at 1 hour 11 minutes 1 secondDeanna Griffin (resident): For many people, Community Corrections is that first step. It provides the structure, accountability, and stability they need before they're ready for that next step. For some, that next step may be Phoenix House. For others, it may be another recovery residence. For others, it may be a different level of support altogether. Recovery isn't a one-size-fits-all. But every person needs a path forward, and that's why every part of this continuum matters. Not one organization changes a life. Community Corrections has a role. The courts have a role, the treatment providers have a role,

337. 1:11:41 — open the recording at 1 hour 11 minutes 41 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): recovery housing has a role, family recovery court, drug court, DCS, employers, law enforcement, peer recovery professionals, our faith communities, every one of us has a role. When one part of that continuum is weakened, every part of it is felt. Phoenix House has worked alongside community corrections for four years, and I worked alongside them at another recovery residence for several years before that. We've received women who modified from work release into Phoenix House while remaining on electronic monitoring. Community corrections continue providing the accountability

338. 1:12:21 — open the recording at 1 hour 12 minutes 21 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): while we provided structured recovery housing, and treatment providers continue providing the clinical services. We've watched that collaboration work. One of those women came to Phoenix House pregnant. Through that collaboration of community corrections, the courts, the treatment providers, our recovery housing, and many others, she continued moving forward in her recovery, had her baby, reunified with her children, and eventually closed her DCS case. I've watched this same process work with the fathers of our residents, with children, and other residents as well.

339. 1:13:00 — open the recording at 1 hour 13 minutesDeanna Griffin (resident): Those successes didn't happen because one organization did everything. They happen because everyone did their part. It has taken years to build these relationships. I have spent years meeting with Mr. Watson, learning from one another, talking about accountability, addiction, recovery, and how our organizations can work together while respecting the different roles we each have. Those relationships did not happen overnight. And right now, I believe protecting this recovery ecosystem is more important than ever. Indiana is going through significant changes.

340. 1:13:39 — open the recording at 1 hour 13 minutes 39 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): HEA 1296 has changed the landscape of recovery housing in Indiana. It now requires recovery residences to become certified and registered in order to continue operating. I support higher standards and accountability, but the reality is that some residencies and probably many won't be able to meet those requirements here in Vigo County and will lose many recovery beds. That makes community corrections and the rest of this recovery continuum even more important. When our communities continue facing challenges related to addiction, mental health, homelessness, re-entry, and

341. 1:14:25 — open the recording at 1 hour 14 minutes 25 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): jail overcrowding, these issues don't exist separately. They're connected. When one part the system weakens, the need doesn't disappear. The impact is simply felt somewhere else. Our jail, law enforcement, our courts, DCS, our emergency rooms, our neighbors, and ultimately our taxpayers of Ego County. We often ask what someone wants. We often ask what something costs. I think we also need to ask what it costs us when it's not there. That's why I don't see the approximately $200,000 being discussed tonight as simply just another budget item. I see it as protecting a system

342. 1:15:12 — open the recording at 1 hour 15 minutes 12 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): that helps move people from crisis to stability. I also hope we think beyond simply maintaining what we have today. Imagine what Community Corrections could accomplish if they had the resources to strengthen services, expand and partnerships and continue building on the work they're already doing. Personally, I believe we should be talking about how to strengthen community corrections, not why we're trying to restore $200,000 in the first place or even cutting their budget. Before I close, I'd like to leave you with one final thought.

343. 1:15:50 — open the recording at 1 hour 15 minutes 50 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): Tonight, I've tried to show you how connected all of this really is. the courts, community corrections, the providers, housing, law enforcement, employers, DCS, and so on. None of these systems stand alone. They depend on one another. But there's one more important part of that recovery continuum. It's you, the county council. The decisions you make here help determine whether these partnerships have the resources they need to continue serving our community. I know budgets are difficult and I know you have a responsibility to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars.

344. 1:16:33 — open the recording at 1 hour 16 minutes 33 secondsDeanna Griffin (resident): But I also know what I have seen. I've seen what happens when people work together. I've seen lives change. I've seen families reunified. I've seen people become productive members of our community. Those things don't happen by accident. They happen because the community chooses to work together. I hope tonight you'll consider continuing strengthening those partnerships by restoring this funding and supporting community corrections.

345. 1:17:03 — open the recording at 1 hour 17 minutes 3 secondsSpeaker 496: And this need is to be continued by serving by Go County. Thank you.

346. 1:17:08 — open the recording at 1 hour 17 minutes 8 secondsSpeaker 497: Thank you. Any other public comments?

347. 1:17:13 — open the recording at 1 hour 17 minutes 13 secondsSpeaker 170: All right. Appointments. There are none. Adjournment. Anybody?

348. 1:17:19 — open the recording at 1 hour 17 minutes 19 secondsSpeaker 498: Make a motion.

349. 1:17:20 — open the recording at 1 hour 17 minutes 20 secondsSpeaker 170: motion by Brad second by Vicki all in favor say aye a's adjourned

Marked moments above are where the archive's reviewed highlights were drawn from. Everything else on this page is unreviewed.