[0:00] I can get any
[0:26] Heat. Heat.
[1:01] Heat. Heat.
[1:22] Heat. Heat.
[1:30] Heat. Heat.
[1:51] All
[2:03] right, we'll go ahead and call the work
session to order
[2:07] and start with the discussion on the
school.
[2:14] You want to start off?
>> Sure, I'll start. Go straight to Don.
[2:17] » Yeah. Um, I'll I'll introduce a little
bit and then Don can share his thoughts
[2:21] or share what information he has. Um,
Mr. Hodson from the election board came
[2:27] to uh previous one of your council
meetings, spoken out of public comment,
[2:31] made you guys aware there was a law
change uh in last year's legislative
[2:35] session uh to allow municipalities if
they chose to to change their elections
[2:41] from off years, which in off years we
have to pay for our elections when
[2:46] they're not on a presidential year or
they're not on an even year. So you are
[2:50] given the option of choosing to do that.
Now, there are some implications from
[2:54] doing that. You do have a memo from the
town attorney. Dan may want to share
[2:59] some as well, but you guys do have to
pass an ordinance. You have to do it by
[3:02] the end of the year. Um, you have the
option of giving people one-year terms
[3:07] or three-year terms if you choose to try
to get them to an even year election.
[3:13] Just as a reminder, the way our election
cycle is set up is we already have the
[3:18] three wards on even years. So it's the
two at large and the clerk treasurer are
[3:24] the positions that are currently
municipal elections in odd years
[3:30] and so with that Don is that good you
want to take from there share your
[3:35] information but I've got some other
information to share with you too but we
[3:38] can kind of start there
[3:44] and the money is just
what you
[3:49] Um and so president I did provide some
information sheets. I think you kind of
[3:57] but like you said three more seats are
elected in each year this year. Um what
[4:05] I did is I mentioned the 2022 election
in the primary election you had 819
[4:11] votes cast for each of those offices
and then general election it was up to
[4:16] 559
because you had tested too
[4:29] and cost for the town for election
because the reason
[4:34] county election every two years federal,
state, township, local school board
[4:42] instead of how
two years the municipal elections are
[4:49] done in municipal year after the midterm
and so 2023 is when the large race were
[4:57] elected along with clas. Uh what I've
given you is the primary election there
[5:03] 224 votes uh cast for the primary and
for each of those offices and then 849
[5:11] cast each office in the general election
cost for the primary election was
[5:16] $6,7507
[5:21] and so I the number of those primary
$29.98
[5:27] cost through those tax for the general
election was $15,3754.
[5:34] So that came out to $181
per load tax and the total cost
[5:39] altogether for that year was $22,91.31.
[5:45] The way the the costs passed on, what
the clerk's office does is they take the
[5:51] total amount of the cost that's paid out
to hire pole workers, pay for locations,
[5:59] um
different
[6:02] to
etc. take that total cost and then by
[6:07] state statute they invoice it based on a
ratio that's you know on the number of
[6:12] notes that's cast in each house. So the
only town that doesn't hold a hot year
[6:18] is you know say
[6:22] so everybody else and sharing in that
cost
[6:26] if you wanted to change the process okay
first of all the
[6:32] changing to the even you don't have to
pay
[6:36] that we'll get a bill for those three
[6:41] and then uh
If you change those other three offices
[6:46] over here
second have a higher turnout. If you go
[6:53] back when we look total number of voters
I have
[6:58] primary wise in 2022 we had basically
four times the number of voters as
[7:05] compared to 23 and then for the general
election it was like seven times the
[7:10] amount of people that voted in 23
voted in 22
[7:18] he wanted to change it um basically
board one, two, and three alone. And you
[7:25] can have a quick and long
one year or threeear terms after four
[7:31] years out. Now, you want to continue to
stagger terms, you have to do one year.
[7:37] So those two at large,
you go for a one year term. After that,
[7:44] you would go for
term train
[7:48] one year or three year.
I know the ratings probably three year
[7:55] stand
one year and have to learn everything.
[8:00] So benefit three doing that office to
run at the same time
[8:08] and so they
offer
[8:15] so I've given you the year of meeting
that's the
[8:23] need to be done by the end of year the
lunch is actually possible
[8:29] you have
October
[8:32] some extra time
together right now. I told you Dan
[8:37] already
[8:40] had that on their on their council
agenda next Tuesday
[8:45] has it on their agenda
[8:51] where the meeting is on their
coach too.
[9:01] Those are the ones they contacted. I
think the uh
[9:07] allies
receiving a resolution.
[9:14] So again
[9:18] questions.
I have a quick one if they don't mind.
[9:22] Um
it only makes sense if every
[9:27] municipality does it in the county. So,
is every municipality going to change?
[9:34] » I don't know yet. Keep in mind, those
that don't will still pay for the
[9:40] election.
>> Yeah.
[9:42] » So, if you go from I don't
say district takes 10,
[9:49] those two
normal cost.
[9:53] Now the referendum at Avon schools last
year
[9:58] Avon school build $56,000.
Now people they have they have five
[10:04] points because we have what call
the state says if we have that we have
[10:11] to have a voting site election for every
10,000 voters in county. So that's why
[10:17] we had to have
>> piggy back on that question of cost. Is
[10:23] it a fixed cost to our town or is it a
general cost divided by the number of
[10:28] particip
[10:46] and then for you know location that kind
of stuff. So then the cost and the depth
[10:52] during the maluction would only be
whatever counts are effect.
[10:58] So, and then that cost is told and then
state statute I guess dictates that has
[11:04] to be appropriated type thing and it
breaks it down basically how many voters
[11:12] the voters in the town and the township
duplication they're separate
[11:21] » I think well u in 2022 the primary
election there were 14,000 911
[11:28] registered voters in
[11:32] the general election there was 15,2327
voters registered
[11:38] and then in 23 primary there was 15,47
register voters in
[11:45] general 15
[11:49] but
[11:55] » so if everybody doesn't do
your shrink, your pole worker strength,
[12:01] all of them are shrink
where they're at
[12:11] because the law says
[12:17] » So you're promoting this just to save us
$6,716272,000
[12:28] 2015,000
but it varies.
[12:31] » That's what it
could be.
[12:35] Let's say
[12:40] let's say
[12:44] let's say you
are going to share that total cost to
[12:51] run those two elections
will be the same vote because they'll
[12:56] have five points in the township.
[13:03] Those are all dictated by law.
[13:16] One thing that I was talking to Ryan
about,
[13:20] this was difficult to mention was um how
we discussed West Central Conservancy
[13:28] and how we have gone to our legislators
even and asked that they be more
[13:34] transparent and that they be on too. So
I don't I mean to me kind of if we're
[13:42] asking for that then I think we should
be at least willing to consider doing
[13:49] the same
[13:58] » has WCC
interest probably not
[14:04] » no that's why it's going through the
legislator legisl We're going to have to
[14:08] make that change.
[14:12] But you know
again maybe like 224
[14:19] votes that's not a very big percentage
of the people in our town that are
[14:26] making decisions on their elected
servants.
[14:34] People just don't show up for that.
This basically affects me, Jason,
[14:41] and Robert.
So, what do you
[14:48] I think that financially it's a good
decision to switch it. Um, I also agree
[14:54] that it would be nice to have more voter
turnout.
[14:59] It's not going to be very much fun for
us to have to improve on in a year.
[15:10] I am humbled enough to know that I'm not
so staring and awesome that I was the
[15:14] one who who just walked out and won in a
municipal year. There's an advantage to
[15:21] having only 224 people turn out for an
election. It allows someone to actually
[15:27] go talk to residents. Something that I
can look at the four of you, you've not
[15:32] done in a general election. You just
don't have to.
[15:35] You're a Republican. You put your name
on the ballot, you win.
[15:40] This is nothing more than a ploy by the
Republican party to ensure that no
[15:45] Democrat will win again in this county.
You had a Democrat win here and then you
[15:51] had a Democrat win in Brownsburg. And
now all of a sudden this this law was
[15:56] changed three years ago, not last year.
We had it on art. We discussed it three
[16:04] years ago because it changed.
Why is it now being brought forward? I
[16:10] hear you. Saving 6,000 bucks.
But something Don Hodson
[16:17] continues to say is it could go up, but
he's not saying if there's only two of
[16:22] us, two communities running an election
in that year, guess what the cost of?
[16:26] It's going to go down. does not share
that because the intention here is not
[16:32] just to save money. It's to ensure that
voters don't really have a say in what's
[16:38] going on in their community. that the
Republican party gets to pick.
[16:51] » Dan, do you know the law?
[16:56] » I believe it was passed last year.
Um I yeah I made sure that I did reach
[17:03] out to AIM as well just being that that
they're kind of our lobbying body and
[17:09] just had a conversation with them. I
know you guys get copied on some of the
[17:13] AIM uh communications especially during
the legislative sessions they sent some
[17:18] of these things out. uh when the bill
was was there, AIM opposed the bill. And
[17:26] so I I reached out to AIM because I
thought that was interesting to at least
[17:29] be able to share their perspective with
you guys on why they they weren't
[17:32] against it. I asked if they had like a
one pager or something that they could
[17:35] share with people and they didn't. Um
but they did share that they said, you
[17:40] know, generally municipal elections are
more nonpartisan and that uh
[17:46] presidential elections are more
partisan. And so when you have those
[17:50] municipal which are typically local
issues which is why fewer people tend to
[17:55] vote they are local issues but the value
of those voters those are people who are
[17:59] familiar with local issues and those are
the people that are voting so that
[18:02] there's maybe that you're not getting as
many votes but those voters are more
[18:06] valuable because they are people who are
up on what the local municipal issues
[18:10] are. Uh they also said that when it's on
a presidential ballot specifically,
[18:15] which is why it's still in a in a
midterm, the other elections in a
[18:19] midterm is when it's on the presidential
ballot, it's so far down the ballot that
[18:24] no one even pays attention in the
municipal elections. There's all these
[18:27] elections and so down at the very bottom
is going to be our two or three
[18:31] municipal elections, whatever they are.
So they said those tend to get buried on
[18:35] the ballots. uh they said their
experience was that both state parties
[18:39] have opposed moving the municipal
elections. Clearly that's not the case
[18:44] because it did it did pass and it's a
law. So um at least somebody had to do
[18:50] it. Um the other issue is they said
typically then municipal issues are
[18:55] ignored because the issue on people how
people are voting is on the presidential
[19:00] election not actually on the municipal
election. So they offered those as just
[19:06] talking points on on why they don't
think you should change your municipal
[19:11] election to a presidential election
cycle again for whatever it's worth.
[19:18] Yeah. The bill the bill was uh the bill
to allow municipalities to change their
[19:22] offer election was changed in 2020.
Although I'll say um
[19:33] there I don't know why the bill changed.
I know that
[19:39] the election board came to us this year
and I don't recall it coming to us in
[19:43] the prior year. So that's just to say
Robert may not be about that but the
[19:49] bill was passed in 2020. I agree with
right about it. It's always been my
[19:55] understanding that the parties wanted to
be off year because they thought that,
[20:01] you know, the municipal elections were
going to get the attention they deserve.
[20:05] We were going to be able to talk about
municipal elections that that election
[20:08] should not be the same as the general
because it gets lost. And I think I
[20:13] agree with Brown. I think traditionally
that's what political operators would
[20:18] have told you in the past that that's
why the fact that municipalities pay for
[20:24] these election is not new that is not
you've always paid for your elections
[20:29] and so that part is not new this idea
that maybe municipalities don't want to
[20:33] pay them anymore pay for them anymore is
a new part and so the state legislature
[20:38] said well if you don't want to pay for
them then move it to the to the even you
[20:42] have to pay for it but I mean, I would
say that there was not, to my knowledge,
[20:47] a rush after July 1st of 2020. There was
not a rush of municipalities to get rid
[20:53] of their offer elections. Um, I know it
seems like there's movement here in
[20:58] county, but I don't see I don't see this
changing elsewhere. So you can you can
[21:04] do whatever you think is right. But I
think there is to the idea that um you
[21:11] know that you have the all fear exist so
that you can have so it could be your
[21:15] election. Now you have fewer
participants. Absolutely. You have fewer
[21:20] participants, but um it gives you an
opportunity to have an election about
[21:25] it.
I would say one other thing in my memo
[21:30] is whatever you decide
you're you're
[21:35] not
12 years. So that is something
[21:39] legislation put in there. Obviously,
they don't want you going back and forth
[21:42] back and forth. They want you to stick
with something because it's a lot of
[21:45] administrative part in order to make
these changes. So if you do it, it'll be
[21:51] a 12 year at least period where you get
that they don't let you go back and
[21:56] forth come up with 12 years.
>> I don't know. I wasn't arbitrary.
[22:00] » It's three election cycles. We know that
it's three full election cycles, but I
[22:04] don't know. And we don't have you can
only do this during hot or even years,
[22:08] but we don't do it this year. We have
2020.
[22:18] I would also add a did say that if you
guys wanted someone to attend that they
[22:22] could send someone to your meeting to to
give perspective. Um I know I' I've had
[22:29] a brief conversation. I think I had
heard Planefield wasn't doing it. Um AIM
[22:35] also shared that they had not they were
a little surprised when I reached out to
[22:38] them. They said they hadn't heard of
people actually changing their
[22:41] elections. So he he kind of asked me he
said well do they want to do it or what
[22:46] why are they discussing it and I just
said well it got brought up and so we
[22:49] were having a conversation a was a
little surprised to be having that
[22:53] discussion and certainly if this was
going on across the state having a
[22:55] discussion wanting to change I think we
we'd be hearing about it a lot more so I
[23:00] wanted to share that comment from them
as well.
[23:02] » Well I think we need to understand what
everybody else is doing because we share
[23:06] the cost with everybody else.
I I want to make sure we're clear about
[23:12] this, but if you look at number one in
my memo, you you only have an
[23:17] opportunity to do this once every four
years. You don't have opportunities to
[23:23] because the way the statute is worded it
says that you can you can adopt an
[23:30] ordinance in an even number of year
which is immediately preceding
[23:36] a municipal election on 2028. There is
no municipal election in 29.
[23:43] So you you you can only do this you can
do this this year 26 or you the next
[23:47] time you would be looking at it would be
2030 there is some information out there
[23:54] uh you know being communicated that you
can do this every two years that's wrong
[23:59] you look at statute I I'm quoting here
number one the country is not enough
[24:08] even number
[24:12] well in your particular situation, your
misalures, your next ones are 27 and 30.
[24:20] So you can't do it in 29 because you
don't have you don't have an election.
[24:25] You don't have election 28
a municipal election in that year coming
[24:30] up in 29. So So you have one shot the
way your current is structured, you have
[24:35] one shot every four years to do this.
[24:41] And I think that's what Don told you a
couple months ago. He's right about
[24:44] that. There's some other information out
there that I think again maybe there are
[24:50] they have two off years and two odd
years. Maybe they in 27 and 29. Well,
[24:55] that would be true for them.
[24:59] So just one thing I was not
election.
[25:07] So be the three of us knew about the law
like to make everybody win. It's up to
[25:13] you guys what you want to do. But
anybody surprises where
[25:18] decided on their own go do it all said
you're getting a heck of a lot higher.
[25:25] Why didn't somebody tell us we can do
that? So that's the whole it's up to
[25:31] you. We're not We're not pushing
[25:48] any questions.
[25:53] » Thank you.
[25:59] So we'll move on to Avon logistics tip
five number two.
[26:06] » Um yes so as you guys are aware um
Chicago industrial has started their
[26:13] next building uh in Avon logistics with
it which is the
[26:18] 613,000 foot building. Um they had
actually approached and so you have a
[26:26] nice colorful exhibit in here. It looks
like this. You guys see this? So, I'm
[26:30] going to refer to these roads that
they're showing by their colors. So,
[26:35] they actually approached earlier this
year the redevelopment commission about
[26:40] supporting the construction of the red
road. Um the town's position, especially
[26:45] when we're providing economic
development incentives are typically
[26:49] that if we're going to pay for
infrastructure, it should be
[26:52] infrastructure that benefits the public.
So the red road as they had originally
[26:57] proposed it was just going to be a
culde-sac which meant it was only
[27:00] basically going to serve the benefit of
building six. And so we had given
[27:05] feedback back to Chicago Industrial that
unless they eventually built a
[27:10] connection road to the back that we
weren't willing to pay for the cost of
[27:15] construction of that red road. So um
Chicago Industrial has since modified. I
[27:20] know this looks a little different than
what you guys had previously seen in
[27:24] some of their layouts. So, I had some
conversation with them about that. They
[27:28] are looking at starting building five
potentially next year. So, they would
[27:34] I'm going to call it maroon or mauve.
I'm not sure what color that purple
[27:38] maybe. The purple road they would then
potentially build next year. And then
[27:43] they have a third phase which would be
the middle of blue road which would
[27:48] essentially create a backage road along
the back of the entire industrial park
[27:54] which again would be beneficial to us.
You know we talk a lot about traffic. We
[27:58] talk about being able to dissipate
traffic and if people don't have to
[28:01] drive down to 100 south and get on 100
south to go two buildings down. That's
[28:05] good for us. So the these roads would
serve a value to us in the manner in
[28:10] which they're showing in this exhibit.
So that's the first thing. Uh the second
[28:16] issue then was I asked them if they
would be willing to provide costs for
[28:20] what they thought construction of those
roads were. So they did provide a tip
[28:26] bond infrastructure budget. So you'll
see it's about $9.5 million.
[28:31] Um
that has all the costs they expect for
[28:35] again it be phased. Uh so it would be
all three of those roads paid over time
[28:41] which is a little bit similar to what we
did with them. If you guys recall on um
[28:45] on the first two buildings we also did
what we call like a draw bond. So we'd
[28:50] have the council approved the nine and a
half million but they would only draw
[28:54] what they need for the first piece and
then they draw what they need for the
[28:57] second piece and then they draw what
they need for the third piece. So and
[29:01] again just to go back these are all
developer purchase bonds what we're
[29:04] proposing. We're not proposing town or
taxpayerbacked bonds. These are Chicago
[29:10] industrial would purchase the bonds and
then whatever tiff revenue we get would
[29:15] be used to pay them back for those bonds
for the infrastructure which is the
[29:19] model we've used as an economic
development incentive on on these other
[29:24] industrial projects as well.
The redevelopment commission when I
[29:28] talked to them about it last month were
were generally positive. they uh liked
[29:34] the layout better and I think it's more
consistent with what you guys at the
[29:38] council have shared. You want in terms
of economic development too which is
[29:42] variety in building types. It's not that
it's all million or 800,000 square foot
[29:47] buildings that there be some diversity
in the building size. Again the thought
[29:51] process is the bigger buildings lend
themselves to logistics and lower paying
[29:55] jobs whereas the smaller buildings
become more like manufacturing and that
[30:00] have higher paying jobs. the some of the
smaller buildings that they're
[30:03] proposing. I think the redevelopment
commission thought that that was
[30:07] favorable and that they liked that
layout. They did have some discussion
[30:11] about well what if we agreed to pay for
the roads and then they changed their
[30:16] mind and they just want to build new
buildings and they just showed us that
[30:20] because they thought we'd like it and so
we had a little bit of discussion about
[30:23] how the agreement is written to make
sure that you know they comply with
[30:28] that. I shared that concern with Chicago
Industrial as well. Chicago Industrial
[30:32] said, "Hey, this has been we've been
studying this and we've been talking
[30:36] about it. If you guys recall, Chicago
Industrial holds these properties. These
[30:40] are not for sale." And they have said
they want the diversity in their
[30:44] portfolio as well. They don't want it to
all be million square foot buildings as
[30:49] well. So, he didn't seem to have any
issues uh with that as well. And the
[30:54] next thing the redevelopment commission
asked was, well, will that building
[30:58] layout actually generate enough to to
support a $9.5 million bond? And so I
[31:04] did ask Greg Gar.
Oh, there he is. Sorry, Greg. So Greg
[31:11] asked them to do a quick revenue bond
analysis and see what it would generate
[31:16] in terms of tip revenue and if it can
actually support it. And not that all
[31:20] these other pages aren't important, but
if you work yourself all the way to the
[31:24] back,
I want to say it's page
[31:35] uh page seven. It's exhibit F.
It has a proposed layout which this is
[31:43] the same layout we did with them on the
first phase of the project. We asked
[31:47] them to forgive interest for the first
three years. And so you can see how the
[31:52] three different draws and the payments
would work out um and what that actually
[31:59] how it works out. And so uh it does
generate there the column is estimated
[32:04] tiff revenue would be $25 million and
then the debt service would end up about
[32:10] $12 million. So there is double the
coverage to be able to do it. And the
[32:15] analysis by FSG does include the
assumption that we would also give them
[32:19] the tax abatement.
And so again, if it's if it's something
[32:24] the town's willing to do, um the
redevelopment commission has not seen
[32:28] this analysis yet that I just got that.
So I'll share that with them next week.
[32:33] But I wanted to have a conversation with
the council and see what your guys
[32:37] thoughts were so that I could share
those back to the RDC and certainly
[32:39] Steve is a leazison of the RTC so he can
help me carry that message back to them
[32:44] as well. So, just wanted to get your
guys thoughts and input
[32:48] and Julie says that
[32:57] unless it was public,
[33:06] I mean, how do you see the public?
>> Well, I mean, it would be if there was
[33:11] an accident or there was something, the
public could use it. Now it does serve
[33:14] the industrial park as well and so yes
maybe it would provide a greater benefit
[33:18] to the industrial park but it doesn't
have no value if it doesn't connect to
[33:22] anything that has no value to the
public. So yes you may
[33:28] typically yes it does. So yeah, people
could walk there. There's other reasons
[33:32] that there'd be benefits and if there
was an accident and they needed to
[33:35] divert traffic back there, the public
could use it and drive on it versus the
[33:40] alternative is it ends up there's fences
between every building and there's no
[33:43] connectivity and so that connectivity
does provide some benefit as well. But
[33:49] good point D that would be the
alternative argument. It still does
[33:53] benefit. Would this be ours to maintain?
>> It would be. Yes. which if you guys on
[33:59] the other exhibit you can see that
there's already kind of an existing loop
[34:03] road that is a public street over by
those two buildings and the town does
[34:08] maintain those
[34:14] sense
I like the draws and phases
[34:20] it's developed by have we had our
engineer look at these numbers and make
[34:24] certain
they say accurate Right. But they're not
[34:28] buying this guy.
>> Not yet. But we can we we certainly as
[34:31] we get further in the process, we do
that. And I will say, you guys may
[34:35] recall on the first one, I think we did
a $5.5 million was what you guys
[34:39] approved. It actually came in at like
four 4.6 million or something. So, we
[34:45] only issue bonds at what the actual cost
is. And so, even if it's an estimate,
[34:49] we'll end up even if they're estimating
at nine and a half and it ends up at
[34:52] eight, we only do an $8 million bond.
and they have to prove their actual
[34:58] cost, not
>> but if we're doing it in basis and costs
[35:03] go up before we get to the session and
we might exceed the
[35:08] » but then they then they just have to pay
for whatever goes over and you that
[35:12] happened on Reagan logistics if you
remember their costs ended up going up
[35:16] and we said sorry we said we agreed to
do x amount of a bond or you just have
[35:23] to eat whatever goes over that amount.
That's what we don't have to do. We can
[35:28] choose to say, "Well, we'll give you $8
million towards incentives to pay for
[35:33] infrastruure." We don't have to full.
That's
[35:38] negotiable.
I I think it it would help on building
[35:43] this making work together. And then I
like the the commission did feel that
[35:49] they like the size of the building
smaller that this seemed to fit well. So
[35:54] that was one thing that was pretty
strong.
[36:03] » We all have smaller buildings. Not
everybody wants.
[36:09] » Well, they've changed their tune.
>> They have that be like two million
[36:13] square foot,
>> right?
[36:17] And Greg, that's exactly why I think the
redevelopment commission had the
[36:20] question that they asked because they
said, "Well, I thought they were saving
[36:22] the middle for a 2 million square foot
building. Are they just showing us
[36:25] something smaller because they think
that's what we want versus what they
[36:29] really intend to build?" So, I do again
that was a fair question by the RDC.
[36:40] Questions or comments?
[36:50] Which one's up first? Right.
Sustainability analysis. Let's show
[36:55] you it. And do they have it? They have
it, but Oh, they have it. If you don't
[37:01] have it, a physical copy with you. You
do have a copy in your email. Greg, they
[37:06] do have Oh, here. You need this, right?
Is this the sheet, the one sheet?
[37:25] they do have that Greg
is in their packets. Great. Um, I think
[37:31] Greg's gonna start on, and this is hot
off the press, so we haven't had a lot
[37:38] of time to analyze it, but in your
packet behind the sustainability
[37:42] analysis, the first spreadsheet you have
is
[37:48] looks like this.
Says assessed value on the top.
[37:53] And if you guys recall, the number one
thing that drives our entire budget is
[37:57] how our assessed value looks. And this
is a perfect discussion. I'm gonna lead
[38:02] Greg into what I wanted to talk about a
little bit, but you guys will recall
[38:08] that about five years ago, your guys
goal was that you wanted to move towards
[38:13] diversifying our tax base and getting
more economic development in that 3%
[38:18] range. Um, and so you can look on here.
This is something I started tracking.
[38:23] Actually, the county started splitting
up the 1% 2% 3% a few years ago. And so
[38:28] I started tracking it and I find it to
be fabulously interesting. Greg and I
[38:32] figured out on it earlier today, but um
if you look at our 3% assessed value
[38:38] growth, we had 11.78%.
And if you look at our tiff, we had 23%
[38:44] growth in our tiff as well. So those are
great things. But with that, I'll turn
[38:49] it over to Greg and let him share what
what he wants to share. And then that
[38:52] will kind of lead us into the
sustainability analysis. By the way,
[38:56] here thank you Ryan and I'm used to
standing so I might stand up here for a
[39:02] little bit. So this is the assessed
valuation on a preliminary basis for
[39:08] 2027.
What is notable is I believe the county
[39:13] as a whole was just slightly around 1%.
Okay, so you're bucking the trend or
[39:22] higher than the trend. And keep in mind,
we've been lucky in any county and we've
[39:28] seen two or 3% growth because of the
supplemental deduction and those that
[39:36] are phasing in on the 1% property over
the five-year period. We're also looking
[39:42] at that the special deduction that was
given to the 2% property and that's
[39:49] trending down and personal property is
trending down. But here what we see on a
[39:55] preliminary basis is we've kind of
bucked that and basically we have some
[40:02] growing AB in your sustainability. We
originally projected a negative 2%.
[40:10] Because we projected that that would
really start kind of those supplemental
[40:16] deductions would really start trending
you and that may be the way we go in the
[40:21] future here. Just keep in mind those are
over five years. Okay? But the but the
[40:29] still the gross AB of your home uh may
have gone up because major desiraability
[40:36] factor and all of those things. So this
is not to be individualized.
[40:42] This is all the classes of property at
the 2.54
[40:46] together. This could be revised down
slightly once the state get it literally
[40:53] was this week that it was being put
together
[40:56] » yesterday.
We've seen personal property change
[41:01] because utility distributed property has
been refigured and sometimes checked out
[41:08] a couple times. So So this is good news.
Okay. And I I want to start off on that
[41:14] is that is awesome news. Now I'm going
to go through the sustainability. But
[41:19] before I do that, I want you to kind of
look at this page because this kind of
[41:24] keys into the council meeting. and when
Ryan and I go through the fund totals,
[41:31] but we've been doing a lot of work
behind the scenes. And I kind of want
[41:35] you to understand that when I make the
statement that I believe Avon is in good
[41:42] position to weather the 10,00ear storm
that I think I swam through yesterday in
[41:49] in Rushville. Uh, you know, and and so,
you know, we're in a great position. Do
[41:56] I mean that we should go out and spend
money like uh drunken sailors? No. I I
[42:02] believe though we're in a very good
position as you know as SP1
[42:08] 1210, SP2, SP3, SP4, all of those when
they come, you know, we want to be in
[42:15] the best position. We want to be in the
best position you can be in 26 and 27.
[42:20] And that's where we're at, I believe. So
what what did in order to put all these
[42:26] opinions together of where our budget
ought to first of all we had the special
[42:32] lit distribution and you did very well
in that distribution you received um
[42:38] Julie got it back in I think the
document came out in May and I think you
[42:42] deposited in June and and that was
additional edit that was additional uh
[42:48] basically income taxes and I'll call
them lit because that's what we you call
[42:52] them all. Now u that went into the
general fund also.
[42:57] Next we got uh news from then the state
that the growth quotient was released at
[43:04] 6%. So the growth quotient never been
heard of never in my life have I seen a
[43:11] 6% growth quotion. Okay. I I was quite
surprised that there wasn't a memo that
[43:16] came out later and said no it's going to
be four. If you remember it was capped
[43:21] in the past at four and so do I believe
that it will be capped in the future? Uh
[43:27] very much so. Okay. Now now they they
understood this 6% but also understand
[43:34] that when we get to the sustainability
we believe the realizable
[43:40] revenue is more like between three and
4%. Why? Because with a 6% growth
[43:47] quotion and 2% AB growth, the tax rate
will grow and the tax rate will grow for
[43:55] everybody, county, you know, school,
township, and everything. So that'll
[44:01] push up circuit breaker. So that means
our realizable revenue that comes into
[44:07] the bank account will be less. So
everybody might say, you know, when
[44:12] everybody ran around and said, "Oh, we
can give a 6% raise in salary was like
[44:18] time out. You don't understand the
numbers." And now we've got a lot of
[44:22] communities saying we can't afford zero.
We have, I believe, been using 3%. Is
[44:28] that correct? And that's generally what
I'm seeing around the state of Indiana.
[44:33] Like I said, I've been all over with
mushrooms and everything else. The next
[44:37] thing is then we put together this draft
sustainability. Okay. And worked real
[44:42] hard on it and looked at the both the
income factors and the revenue on the
[44:48] expenses. Next then we got uh Julie's
closing of her 630. Remember this is an
[44:56] 18month budget, right? So when it shows
up in Gateway it's 18 months. It's the
[45:02] last half of this year and it's all of
next year. Okay. 27. And so where she
[45:09] stood as of June 30th gave us a real
good indication on if revenues were
[45:16] declining, if food and beverage was
increasing or holding its own, if storm
[45:20] water was doing good. And those were all
putting kind of put into the
[45:24] sustainability and kind of our next
version of the sustainability clear. And
[45:29] those all indicated that everything was
going good. Okay. the 6:30. Next, then
[45:35] we sat and spent the entire day. We sat
down with the chief of police and kind
[45:41] of went through his budget, went through
where we are on all the others, and then
[45:47] we kind of formulated the opinion on
what we will present during the council
[45:52] meeting. And so, we spent looking at
again updated revenues, updated
[45:57] expenses, and things like that. Next, we
got busy and we put together the capital
[46:02] improvement plan. And Ryan, have you
given the council that? They've seen it
[46:07] and reviewed it. Yes. Okay. Since that
was July 30th, then on July 31st,
[46:13] we got the county level lift. What is
that? That means the amount of lift that
[46:19] is expected to be settled to all
jurisdictions within Hendricks County.
[46:25] And that was up 7.5%.
So you could maybe yield five maybe six%
[46:33] of that. Remember any any in communities
that had a higher levy since we're a
[46:38] levybased system remember that we're
levy based not tax ratebased yet like
[46:45] representative Thompson says will be
happening in the future. So if someone
[46:50] Brownsburg increased their levy more
than you did because of annexation or
[46:56] whatever they would get more share.
Okay. So now where we are is we're at
[47:00] August 13. We want to get your feedback
on the on the budget amounts and then
[47:05] what we're waiting on next week we
should get Ryan this is late breaking
[47:10] news but we should get the
individualized Avon LIIT for 2027
[47:18] next week. So that'll really help us and
really kind of fit into your timeline. I
[47:24] have here somewhere for our budget
approval and how we move forward. So we
[47:28] got a b a lot of information in gateway.
We've been working with Julian and Ryan
[47:35] and we're we're going to be getting the
other funds in there too. So okay, any
[47:41] questions on what we've been doing to
get to here? Okay. So now what I want to
[47:48] do is also tell you that there is no
doubt in you know like I said when I was
[47:56] kind of swimming back from Rushville
last night um I was like wow if you look
[48:02] at the things that Avon has accomplished
and how we've gotten to what I call the
[48:08] good position is that from several
things we many many years ago we we
[48:15] approved and implemented and the food
and beverage and I remember that and
[48:20] remember going through all that and it
it was a hard kind of a you know
[48:25] everybody's concerned with it going up
but that was the really paid dividends
[48:30] and it shows up in in the sustainability
the wheel tax doing the wheel tax a year
[48:36] or two ago you know actually got it back
you know Brownsburg is trying to catch
[48:42] up with you they're trying to do it this
year now everybody's mattering heck
[48:46] because of everything else. And so our
timing on the wheel tax couldn't have
[48:51] been better. And you saw Ryan, I'm sure,
told you the lane miles, the lane mile
[48:58] revenue that we got in that will be our
new match for our new grant next year
[49:06] and that's automatic because you have
the wheel tax and things like that.
[49:09] Okay. So that's awesome. the fact that
we brought on, don't throw anything at
[49:15] the we brought on Geo bonds very
strategically, not not a ton, but we
[49:23] brought those on because guess what?
Those are going to be harder in the
[49:27] future. There's no doubt about it. Okay?
And so, you know, bringing those on and
[49:33] then bringing the storm water on just
again set the whole table. You know, I'd
[49:41] like to say if we are Christmas dinner,
we got a nice table table set and we've
[49:46] got a lot of things on the table to eat
from or to enjoy and that has gotten us
[49:52] to this point. Okay. So, those are key
things to kind of remember. So, when I I
[49:58] want to go to the recommendations and I
want to update number three where I
[50:02] talked about the rainy day fund and Ryan
and I talked about this and we looked at
[50:08] um we looked at it and what I'd like to
do is make the suggestion on the 300,000
[50:14] that we actually split that 150 to the
insurance
[50:19] reserve front. We can't call it rainy.
There's only one rainy day in this
[50:24] state. uh and then 150 to the rainy day
fund. That would bring up the rainy day
[50:31] fund a little bit, bring up our self
insurance up a little bit and we'll be
[50:37] then on on our way to the goal of $2
million that I set forth here. So, we're
[50:44] hoping we can give it a nod from the
council and be able to head in that
[50:48] direction and then a resolution would
probably be put together. Okay. So
[50:55] other things in there I think those are
I'm on the second page of any
[51:02] recommendation. I guess I will pause
here for a second and say if anybody
[51:06] read through these and have questions,
you know, address them at any time. I
[51:12] can stop on a dime and get started on
the dime. So, um, any questions on some
[51:18] of these recommendations or observations
that I think within the document?
[51:34] different different thing. So that's
showing the proposed appropriation for
[51:38] next year, not the transfer.
He's talking about the transfer and in
[51:45] this is we appropriate
250 in case we have to spend. So that
[51:51] would be if there was a tornado and we
need the money to spend from the rainy
[51:54] day. That's the 250 that he's showing.
But you'll notice on here for the uh
[51:59] insurance reserve fund, there's a
footnote that says we're not expecting
[52:04] to spend any of that. So there's no
appropriation to the insurance reserve
[52:08] fund. So we're not
in my it's our my understanding we did
[52:13] do our our transfer this year
>> and this is what we're setting up for
[52:18] next year.
>> Correct.
[52:20] » So when do we want to get that $2
million goal?
[52:24] Uh it would be nice before LIIT comes to
a theater near you.
[52:29] » Which is when uh 2028 2029 and 23rd.
Very clear, right? So there's a
[52:38] implementation in 28, collection in 29
and and then maybe you receive it 30.
[52:45] But guess what? I expect every a lot of
things to change.
[52:50] So, but that's because of the state
lagging part of that. They figured out
[52:55] there was going to be a lag from the
state of Indiana on tax returns and
[53:00] things like that. So, imagine that.
>> So, we'll move 150 at the end of this
[53:05] year
from next year.
[53:09] » It'll really be beginning of we'll have
you pass a resolution at the end of this
[53:13] year and then we will tell Julie to do
it before March 1st of next year. And
[53:19] then we always catch up with
you
[53:27] the other 300,000.
>> Yeah.
[53:31] » Which we want to be careful and cautious
and you know and and keep the keep the
[53:38] ship head in the right direction.
Okay. Any other questions on any of
[53:43] those? If not, I'm going to jump through
some of the uh specific information kind
[53:50] of in in the back and kind of talk about
is unless you've got some specific
[53:56] questions on any of the actual funds
like the general fund, the addit or or
[54:03] anything like that. If you've got
anything on the cash flow, now keep in
[54:07] mind we will this this set our tone for
the numbers at the council meeting. like
[54:14] I said within the and then once we get
those uh the details of those the
[54:20] sustainability will be updated for those
and we got most of the general fund in
[54:24] and Brian's been working on that.
questions on specific funds.
[54:32] If not, I'd like you to turn to page 79,
which is the circuit breaker. And this
[54:39] is the one that that I've been talking
about. and the fact that we really were
[54:47] quite lucky uh that the circuit breaker
on page 79 from 25 to 26 went down by
[54:56] 91,000
even though the total went up u you know
[55:02] with the tip in it our total loss was u
basically eliminated or the incremental
[55:11] loss was very very left, right? So that
really helped. Now we believe that as
[55:17] you can see in 2728
probably even given now where we are the
[55:22] growth push came out a little later
we're we're going to have bigger circuit
[55:27] breakers than these numbers. So, keep in
mind what that means is when we put
[55:32] together a budget and we say we're going
to levy $3 million of general fund
[55:38] property taxes, we'll only yield 3
million minus 625.
[55:44] So, we'd only get $2.5 million of real
cash. So, you know, that's how it works
[55:51] and how it meets the comes into the fund
balance. Questions on that?
[55:59] not uh we also then put together the um
I want to point you to page 82. Now
[56:06] we've been uh we've been looking at Oh,
by the way, I probably should
[56:13] mention this too. We do have the
possibility of a annexation deal. Matter
[56:20] of fact, I have one, two, three, four,
five, six, seven, uh, fiscal plans that
[56:28] we could use for an appeal. And the
total is around 75,000.
[56:33] So, we like to get your again thumbs up
to apply or advertise that in the budget
[56:41] and be able to move. Now, why I brought
that up, it it will the tax rate's going
[56:47] to come up from the 33 ps, right? it's
going to come up because the growth
[56:52] quotient and because of the cess
valuation the 75
[56:57] 75,000 won't move it much but that is
something that once you get the 75 as
[57:05] you know by the way the SC the
three-year growth quotient all of those
[57:10] excess levy appeals that used to be back
there in the old days or even a year ago
[57:17] those are all gone this is the
annexation and physical plan are the
[57:22] only deal cities and towns got left.
Okay? So, it's your only bite of the
[57:29] apple. And what they recognize is they
want to incentize if you increase your
[57:35] border, they want to make sure that you
can match your revenues with the
[57:39] expenses or who would ever increase the
border. Okay? and and they believe
[57:44] increasing your border and providing
additional services like police
[57:49] protection and things like that benefit.
So they've kind of left the average
[57:55] appeal alone at least so far, right?
It's the only
[58:01] recall it's the only appeal left the
growth appeal has gone away. So this is
[58:06] the one they reminded us last year.
>> Yes, they reminded of us last year. Even
[58:10] though we were eligible for it, we
didn't get it anyway. Yeah. Yeah.
[58:16] There could be I mean there's no
guarantee at all
[58:21] but we didn't you know my suggestion is
we at least try you know because these
[58:26] are legitimate annexations based fund a
legitimate um fiscal plans and hopefully
[58:33] Dan legitimate ordinances.
>> Right.
[58:37] » And I got a lot of faith in you on that.
>> Which son do we have? Are you
[58:41] referencing?
>> Um, you're welcome to see these. I I
[58:47] just have one sheet. Um, you've seen
this. I have
[58:54] the council want.
[58:59] » That was our quick inventory of the ones
256.
[59:21] So, I'll turn to page 83. And 83 is your
projected assessed value or your actual
[59:28] assessed valuation. And what's
interesting is we're going back to the
[59:33] days of 2013 and 2016 when we had 35%
growth in AB and you see what we enjoyed
[59:43] in the past and that's due to annexation
that's due to um all the you know people
[59:50] building homes and all the things that
Ryan showed you on that AB sheet. And
[59:57] so, you know, I I I expect very highly
that we will not have those growth
[1:00:05] numbers in the future. You can even see
your personal property at one it was 148
[1:00:12] million 149 million and it's going down
like a rock too at 114.
[1:00:19] Okay. So that so that what I mean by the
perfect storm is we're going to have a
[1:00:28] lot of pressure on AB. We're going to
have tax rates going up. We're going to
[1:00:33] have circuit breaker until you hit $3.
Everybody told tax rate hits $3. We're
[1:00:40] going to have a new regime on
okay coming to an theater near you.
[1:00:47] That's why I want you to be as strong as
you can before you go into those. Now,
[1:00:54] the the lid discussion, as Brian has
shared with you, looks like we'll be
[1:00:59] fairing well, maybe better than others,
but the fact of the matter is u you
[1:01:05] know, it's going to change and there's
going to be a lot of hard decisions.
[1:01:10] Now, if you turn to page 88,
page 88, this shows the h how the 2026
[1:01:18] uh property tax rate is broken down.
This is our 3.33
[1:01:24] pennies. And uh as you can see, we've
got a very low debt rate of one one
[1:01:30] penny. That that's very very low. And
keep in mind again, most of the debt
[1:01:37] that we've incurred recently is the
developer bonds and they're on the hook.
[1:01:42] It doesn't use our one at all. And by
the way, on that one that you presented
[1:01:48] just a little bit ago, we I really love
the three-year forgiveness
[1:01:54] because what a lot of people do, as you
know, Greg, they capitalize that
[1:01:58] interest. That just makes the bond size
higher. that just makes the taxpayers
[1:02:03] use that money for that. And by using
the and and if we can get them to stay
[1:02:08] with the forgiveness, it really just
gives us more money back in the pocket
[1:02:12] of the tax eventually. So that's, you
know, that's really I love that they
[1:02:17] they laugh that they agree with us on
that because a lot of developers don't
[1:02:22] want so just come out. So um next one is
on page 92. We got that. We've got the
[1:02:30] comparison of the 2026 rate and this is
the one that um you know we're at our
[1:02:37] total rate on Avon is 79880
playing field with their two billion AB
[1:02:45] of captured just in their tiff district
and three billion in their town uh yield
[1:02:53] a little bit better than us at 7958
but uh you know That's that's the way it
[1:02:59] is. But we're still right there. And and
we've got it and and this kind of breaks
[1:03:04] them all down and puts them puts it in
the debt serve the fire too. And so it's
[1:03:09] an all inclusive rate. It's not your 33
pes, right? It's your 79 to make you
[1:03:15] comparable to everybody.
Okay. Um and there's a graphic depiction
[1:03:22] of that on page 93.
So um ultimately then I guess if you
[1:03:30] turn to page 110 this is our weighted
cost of cap capital calculation that
[1:03:38] I've gone through in the past and you
can see our overall cost of capital in
[1:03:43] 2012 was 4.3. We're at 3.1.
So, we've got everything we've done,
[1:03:50] even with the least rental bonds of
3.79, which was in 2025, we got very low
[1:03:57] cost of capital. And our 2016 bonds,
we'll be paying off in a few short
[1:04:03] years. So, even though we did issue
that, we issued that a very low price.
[1:04:10] And Greg, you know, as a result of your
bit yesterday, interest rates are more
[1:04:15] like four and a half.
And so
[1:04:20] » okay,
you should have been 43 and maybe
[1:04:26] but um so you know that's that's very
very good and and I think really kind of
[1:04:32] sets us up by again we are using very
very very little of our 1 cent of our
[1:04:39] tax. I'm sorry Julie but that's not a
lot. So, you know, and that's for our go
[1:04:46] and keep in mind that you've built some
really good assets and what we've been
[1:04:52] able to do with the TI and you know,
when we all go up on the hill, that's
[1:04:57] one heck of an asset that that we're
going to have up there. And so, you
[1:05:02] know, we've come a long way on things
like that. So, Ryan, what else do you
[1:05:07] want me on the sustainability to cover?
Um because again if you looked at the
[1:05:15] funds the fund trend most of them are
holding their own going up a little bit
[1:05:20] and again that will be updated for once
you get once we get the 27 budget
[1:05:27] solidified but you can kind of see where
like overall I think it's a lot of good
[1:05:33] news.
[1:05:38] talk about this
uh when in the future
[1:05:43] » and the decisions that we may have to
make.
[1:05:45] » Well, the decision that's going to come
to you all is going to be whether you
[1:05:53] opt in or opt out and I'm talking to
you. Okay. Um, you happen to be I I put
[1:06:00] it in the tale of two cities in my write
up to the mustard or two tabs and that
[1:06:08] was playing field and a
look at it your population is x%
[1:06:15] and you know your uh your basic levy is
x% but they've been around a long time
[1:06:24] levy of lift they've been around a long
time. So they've grown their property
[1:06:30] tax levy. So since they've grown their
property tax levy each and every year
[1:06:38] and annex and grown and growth quotient
and all that that they've grown to a
[1:06:43] level that they need x amount of of
lick. When you calculate that out and
[1:06:52] you use the right of each town over 3500
to levy their own lit rate of one up to
[1:07:02] 1.2 too. It's not It's not enough for
Brownsburg.
[1:07:10] Dan probably maybe Danville was okay,
but Brownsburg and Plane
[1:07:16] for you it it is it actually will pay
substantial dividends possibility of you
[1:07:24] doubling or more your LIT total. Okay.
Now, so that's if you opt out and create
[1:07:34] your own tax.
All the other towns will more than
[1:07:39] likely when we went around, I don't know
if any of you went to the bus group.
[1:07:42] Yeah. And so, and you're coming to us
too, right? The second one. Um, and so
[1:07:50] most of them will say we want to opt in
and use the adjusted gross income of the
[1:07:58] county as a whole as opposed to the town
as a whole. Okay. Now, keep in mind we
[1:08:07] have done estimates and everybody's done
estimates and at this point in time it
[1:08:12] looks like you could do your own and you
could farewell, but you could also
[1:08:18] farewell if that tax if you stayed in
with Planefield and Brownsburg because
[1:08:24] they need a higher tax rate to fund
their lift. They need let's say about a
[1:08:30] 0.8. Okay, that's still higher than what
you need. Now, what do we need?
[1:08:36] » Uh, we had it I don't have those numbers
right at my fingertips, but about 50
[1:08:41] basis point 48 cents I think just to
break even.
[1:08:45] » Yeah, to break even. And the definition
of break even has been cussed and
[1:08:51] discussed. It is what what the reason I
say that is that
[1:08:58] there is a general perception of break
even is lit plus cap loss, circuit
[1:09:06] breaker loss and things like that. That
should be it. That's not given by by
[1:09:12] anybody. Okay? That's what the towns are
are asking. Cities and towns think is
[1:09:18] fair. Counties don't need it so much.
And the overall fact is everybody's
[1:09:24] going to say, "Well, you've survived
with those circuit breaker caps now. Why
[1:09:28] do you need to increase the lip rate
that much more?" That's a big debate and
[1:09:33] I guarantee you that's coming in SP2
something of that. So, so Greg, that
[1:09:40] would then give us dividends, too. So
right now either opt in or opt out would
[1:09:48] end up to be more of a political
decision than a maybe an economic
[1:09:55] decision because you would you would now
if you opt out you would be able to go
[1:10:01] up to 1.2 as it is stated now and it
would be up to you to calculate and then
[1:10:09] not impose a rate. the state would
impose the rate but basically have that
[1:10:13] rate. Okay. If you opt in, then the
county council will mandate the rate.
[1:10:20] Okay. So to speak to make everybody to
give everybody lit,
[1:10:26] you know, that won't make everybody.
>> Well, they they may they may not. I
[1:10:33] don't know. Right. That that will be
the 180 and we certainly
[1:10:40] at 50.
>> Yeah.
[1:10:43] » And if they don't, then you're down 120.
Maybe you're still w. But then how much
[1:10:49] can we
>> right? You can do up to 120 as it stands
[1:10:55] today. Um but then again what you might
say then is if they opted in in they
[1:11:03] became 50 basis points and you said we
want to opt out create our own tax rate
[1:11:08] at 100 basis point you'd be twice as
high. Okay. And so that will also have
[1:11:16] in my opinion annexation.
It will impact your annexations.
[1:11:23] Okay. because one might become savvy
enough to say if I stay out here I'm I'm
[1:11:29] going to pay less income tax you know so
still so my recommendation to ride is
[1:11:35] you know we keep on our trail of
annexation because we we may do the same
[1:11:41] rate but if we have to end up going and
creating our own rate that might change
[1:11:47] that story a little bit but u and you
know getting that donut hole legisl
[1:11:53] ation, you know, is really, really
important in my opinion. And I I think
[1:12:00] the state's going to hear us loud and
clear on that because they're going to
[1:12:04] say, "Oh my gosh, we got to put a a
virtual fence
[1:12:12] around Jason's neighbor because he
happens to be out of the out of the town
[1:12:16] limits."
I'm just saying as an example. We've
[1:12:20] known that for years,
but Jason's in. And so, you know,
[1:12:25] creating those virtual fences to capture
people's trash don't
[1:12:33] ain't going to work. Okay. To be Mr.
Office. Um, and so, you know, that's
[1:12:39] that's where it's going to come down to,
Greg. And and you know you in one hand
[1:12:46] you get to choose your own destiny for
the rest of your life. In one other hand
[1:12:51] you might uh choose the other for the
rest of your life so to speak. And once
[1:12:56] you opt in it is my understanding you
cannot opt out. So you don't get to play
[1:13:01] the game of one year one year one year
one year.
[1:13:04] » Is it locked for three years?
>> Well the rate is locked for three years.
[1:13:09] » You can't even read the that's often in
one. and you don't know what the
[1:13:13] county's going to do. So, you'll be
surprised by what they choose and then
[1:13:18] you're locked in for three years.
Whereas, if we do do our own, we control
[1:13:24] our destin and and and that's not going
to that's not playing real good in, you
[1:13:31] know, I I do Martin County, their income
doesn't grow from one year to another.
[1:13:36] You lock in a rate. uh how do you give
Shelby a 3% rate raise if you don't get
[1:13:44] any more lit you're not going to get
much more property taxes so you're not
[1:13:48] going to get much lit in that case and
so you're going to be so dependent on
[1:13:54] the budget is going to be driven by the
lit increase
[1:13:59] and the lit increase is is driven by the
adjusted gross income in the town of
[1:14:06] Avon or the ity of Hendricks.
Now, the the goal is not to pit anybody
[1:14:13] against anybody. You know, as I said in
the opening thing of of of the Hendricks
[1:14:18] County month, we got to all be in this
kind of fish ball all together because
[1:14:24] it's the county as a whole that's the
important thing. Okay? And so that's
[1:14:30] what I still believe and I think the
county council believes that. let their
[1:14:34] structure.
[1:14:38] It sounds like we're going to be much
better if we do stick with our have our
[1:14:42] own and a lot of what you mentioned
about the we did well with the wheel tax
[1:14:47] food and beverage you know our history
of that. So if we can control our own
[1:14:51] and it seems pretty darn logical that we
should stick with that rather than just
[1:14:56] going on the tail of the county on
regular basis.
[1:15:00] It's going to be a tough call. Okay. And
the good news is, guess what? You don't
[1:15:05] have an ordinance in front of you
tonight. Uh, so, you know, that won't be
[1:15:10] until 28, maybe 29. So, we've got some
time. I I do believe SB2 is coming. I do
[1:15:17] believe it's going to change things. And
so, Steve,
[1:15:24] your observation at this point is you've
managed your finances very, very well.
[1:15:30] you should be able to manage it very
well in the future. So I don't disagree.
[1:15:35] » But either way, when we saw this great
presentation, if it must be
[1:15:41] » put on by this company that is topnotch,
we make out either way.
[1:15:48] » But what would be better for our future
if I like the idea that we control it?
[1:15:53] » And that's I mean it's gonna be a tough
decision for you guys. So that's okay.
[1:15:56] So
Greg has a beautiful model that we can
[1:16:01] spend an entire hour and a half moving
things around and letting you guys see
[1:16:06] what the different things are. I don't
think today is that
[1:16:10] » but I Greg and I would like to do a
specific lit meeting with you guys pre
[1:16:17] » because at some point we are going to
have you are going to have to give Julie
[1:16:21] guidance on how to vote at a meeting
because Julie is our representative on
[1:16:26] the must on the must board or whatever
they're calling it. So I think late
[1:16:32] August or early September
we'd probably like to
[1:16:36] » yeah probably conversation that's just a
meeting where all we talk about with you
[1:16:41] guys is the must where Greg can put his
model up, show you the different
[1:16:45] scenarios. Let's just assume the county
approves an 80 cents. What is the impact
[1:16:50] of the town? What is the impact of the
town does 80 cents? What is the impact
[1:16:53] of because it changes under every
scenario. What if playingfield opts out?
[1:16:57] That's going to change the scenario and
what everybody gets. What if Avon opts
[1:17:01] out? How does that impact? So,
>> and Brian, I think the integration
[1:17:05] between Avon and Washington Township
Fire is so so important because the the
[1:17:12] one version you shared with me, you
know, we talked about today, right? Avon
[1:17:17] fire gets nothing.
Now, they might be assuming that you're
[1:17:22] going to give them your extra. Well,
that's not a good decision. And that may
[1:17:26] be another thing that comes into play
which will make your decision even
[1:17:29] harder is depending on what decision it
is. We could get a huge influx of
[1:17:34] additional lit revenue but like the
school is no longer going to be able to
[1:17:38] get lit. So the school corporation may
come and ask you guys for a portion of
[1:17:43] your lit money or the Washington Fire
Department may come and say hey council
[1:17:48] will you support us and give us lit
money. So all of these things you're
[1:17:51] going to have all these decisions to
make that are going to impact other
[1:17:55] entities. And so we're gonna have a
friendly consolidation discussion then
[1:17:58] is what you're saying.
>> I'm not saying that it would maybe be a
[1:18:02] great idea but I I I don't know.
>> Just Donald was there too. You see all
[1:18:07] the scenarios we are just finally
getting
[1:18:11] and I don't like to share. That's just
>> I'm with you there.
[1:18:19] So if you thought this job was boring
now just wait.
[1:18:28] So yeah. So we'd like to and and and
that's what we want to do is just get
[1:18:33] you get it up on the screen, get my
analyst and and we're going to do some
[1:18:38] some whatifs in there and and take you
as deep in there as you want to go. And
[1:18:43] I'm telling you this when you get all
the nuts and bolts together, there's a
[1:18:48] lot of changing things. And and what I'd
like to do is get you educated on where
[1:18:53] it is today. So you'll understand when
SB2 and again I call it that, right? SB2
[1:19:00] comes through the theater near you. Um
that then you'll be able to see the
[1:19:06] change and understand the change. That's
what's critical for you because yeah,
[1:19:12] we're going to be in in September here.
We're going to be looking at Julie and
[1:19:16] saying, Julie, you may have to sign on
the dotted line somewhere here. Now, I
[1:19:20] don't like what the Association of City
of Counties put out is that everybody
[1:19:26] would agree to a rate. I don't like that
because I don't think you want to agree
[1:19:33] to a rate at this point in time because
then you'd be agreeing to one. I think
[1:19:38] the concept I've been trying to always
push the concept they're pushing for the
[1:19:43] town needs to say what its rate needs to
be and the county needs to say. I'm not
[1:19:48] sure the county is going for that
either. But you know I'm I don't speak
[1:19:52] for any of you. I just got
so
[1:19:56] » well hand out that information before we
talk about it. So
[1:20:00] it's impossible to do. You're going to
have to sit here and look at it with us.
[1:20:05] C can we have these some of these charts
and uh some interactive uh you know
[1:20:10] graphs that it kind of showed a little
better because you can get lost in
[1:20:13] spreadsheets is it can be we can see
about that now we may need a a week
[1:20:19] later
for that but sure yeah you know yeah I I
[1:20:24] have a graphics person that can do that
>> on some of the key points you can't make
[1:20:28] a real tight too much to do everything
the key points okay when's that must be
[1:20:35] » it is next week I believe is or the week
after and
[1:20:41] » the 17th
>> be careful but they said the 26th
[1:20:46] » yeah and then they also said that it
still may not depending on if we get the
[1:20:51] data they may move it forgive me you're
you're saying that you're saying our
[1:20:55] next with you guys that Julie's going to
need some guidance from us you said
[1:21:01] » no these are discussion meetings
>> got When when is when is the decision?
[1:21:07] » That's not been said.
>> It will be sometime in September, maybe
[1:21:12] later in September. Okay. So, sometime
late August, late August, early
[1:21:16] September, we will want to sit down with
you guys to look at. Now, most of the M
[1:21:20] discussion is going to be more focused
on what are we going to do in 28 or 29
[1:21:25] versus what Julie's going to do because
we don't have the option to create our
[1:21:29] own right now. So no matter what
happens, we're still opting in with the
[1:21:32] county at this point because we don't
have that other option yet. So the
[1:21:36] county is making the decision really at
this point. Correct.
[1:21:39] » Now, why are you saying that? You're
over 3500,
[1:21:43] » right? But we can't establish a rate
until 28.
[1:21:46] » Oh, I'm saying 27 28. We are with the
county no matter what.
[1:21:51] » Well,
>> but we're under the weird system, not
[1:21:54] the same, not the way the system's going
to shape.
[1:21:57] » Yeah. But you know that may be where
since you have the right you may say I
[1:22:04] need to reserve the rights correct okay
and and get that because otherwise you
[1:22:12] might be sending a false signal
you see what I'm saying but we we need
[1:22:18] to talk
>> yeah we'll talk further
[1:22:20] » yeah so
[1:22:25] any other quick questions on
sustainability Again, Greg will be at
[1:22:29] the council meeting to talk about the
his recommendation fund for the funds.
[1:22:35] But I think it's important again each
and every year. I wanted to write this
[1:22:39] down and show you everything that we
went through to get to these points
[1:22:44] because you know man, you know, the data
just keeps coming and the hits keep
[1:22:50] playing. Okay? And so we just don't sit
down in a vacuum and say we can't afford
[1:22:57] this or we can't afford this or
whatever. We really I mean we really put
[1:23:02] some time and effort in it and we know
exactly where you are. We know in 27 28
[1:23:09] where you're likely to go. We don't know
too much after. Okay. It's a little
[1:23:14] murder but it looks like it's a good m
if that makes sense.
[1:23:22] Okay, Ryan, you told me they needed. So,
>> thanks.
[1:23:26] » Yes, thank you.
[1:32:35] Let's
[1:32:47] go
[1:32:52] ahead and call the meeting to order
[1:32:59] to the flag of the United States of
America and to the republic for it
[1:33:04] stands.
One nation,
[1:33:08] indivisible, with liberty and justice
for all.
[1:33:18] » Robert
[1:33:21] Susan
>> Jason.
[1:33:30] Is there any discussion?
[1:33:35] Make a motion to approve the consent
agenda for the check register for August
[1:33:38] 13th. Approval of July 23rd as present
[1:33:45] » Jason Pucket
>> four
[1:33:47] » four
>> four
[1:33:52] » four.
Next is public comment period. The
[1:33:55] public can comment on items on the
agenda that are not part of a public
[1:33:59] hearing this evening or on any specific
matter's jurisdiction. If you would like
[1:34:04] to speak, please come forward. My
phone's not working. My phone's not my
[1:34:09] phone's not working. So, you don't have
to press the green button, but please
[1:34:13] state your name and your address,
please.
[1:34:24] Hi, John Taylor 217.
[1:34:29] I'm here tonight to let everybody know
that we have someone to run the economic
[1:34:34] development partnership and I brought
with me so a chance to say hello and I'm
[1:34:39] gonna let her say a couple things
but I'm going to say one thing before I
[1:34:43] leave. Thank you all for what you did
for me the last seven years and
[1:34:48] believing in what economic development
is and what it will bring to the
[1:34:52] community. I think Greg wouldn't have as
much to talk about if it wasn't for all
[1:34:58] the new development that's happened the
last few years. And thank you for every
[1:35:02] time I've come before you for a a tax
abatement or use tip dollars. You always
[1:35:08] were supportive and understood. So, um,
continued success to the community. And
[1:35:14] this is
>> Oh, I'm Jennifer.
[1:35:19] Thank you, John. Um, my first question
is, is this guy ever tired?
[1:35:26] » No, I'm I'm Jennifer Chamberlain.
honored to be the next executive
[1:35:30] director with county and development
partnership and um I'm really looking
[1:35:35] forward to using my past experience in
the public sector and the private
[1:35:39] sector. Um I started my career in I got
my master's degree in geography. That's
[1:35:45] kind of a fun fact unique but then um
served in community and economic
[1:35:51] development departments in Portage and
Fisers. did that for eight years in both
[1:35:57] those communities throughout the state
and then um I worked in the private
[1:36:01] sector for the last 14 years. I was most
recently with Thompson Thrift and worked
[1:36:07] in multif family development over the
last year, but the real bulk of my
[1:36:11] career was at Simon Property Group and I
was there for 13 years um helping
[1:36:17] leasing and development or redevelopment
of anchors and um the common thread is
[1:36:23] just trying to attract business and
investment to a location whether it's at
[1:36:28] a community or finding an apartment site
or at a shopping center. So, I look
[1:36:34] forward to doing that here in Hendris
County. And um at Avon, I'm so excited.
[1:36:39] There's so many exciting things. John
has really done a great job setting me
[1:36:44] up for success um with Eastern Gray and
the Mormon Church and all of those
[1:36:50] opportunities and I look forward to
building upon that. And my last thing
[1:36:55] that before I sit down and let you move
on is that I want to let you know that I
[1:37:00] am our organization's here to serve you
as a partner and as a resource. My
[1:37:06] personal goal is to make that a reliable
resource and a trusted partner. So
[1:37:11] please don't hesitate to reach out and I
I would love to meet with each of you
[1:37:15] and get to know you better and what your
priorities are and make sure that aligns
[1:37:19] with our organization. And thank you for
your time. I look forward to working
[1:37:24] with you all.
[1:37:32] » Anyone else like to come forward?
>> Thank you very much.
[1:37:40] » Hey, no one else coming forward. So,
we'll close public comment and move on
[1:37:44] to department updates.
[1:37:56] Steve Moore works director. Uh
first on the list is a 100 north race
[1:38:03] roundabout making some really good
progress out there. Um utility re
[1:38:07] relocation will be complete overnight
tonight.
[1:38:11] That'll be the last one. Then aes will
remove the remaining poles hopefully
[1:38:15] next week and the drill crews and the
storm water crews can do what they need
[1:38:22] to do where those poles were
interfering. Uh that said the storm
[1:38:27] water crews doing great. They have
already completed the south leg, the
[1:38:31] south side of the east leg and they're
going to be working on the north side
[1:38:34] and east leg for the next week. Dirt
crews are out there working. Milling is
[1:38:38] done of the road. So we're doing pretty
well.
[1:38:42] Um, here's a revised completion date.
I'm going to say the end of October,
[1:38:50] early October, which I would say the end
of the year. So, this is an improvement.
[1:38:54] Okay.
Set that far kind of low, but yeah. So,
[1:38:59] end of October is when we think that'll
be complete. They should hopefully meet
[1:39:04] that date. Um, road widening on Dan
Jones Road phase three. The utility
[1:39:10] relocation work continues. The trans
transmission poles are done. Uh, the
[1:39:15] electric distribution, they'll still
have some polls to set later this year.
[1:39:18] AT&T will begin their relocation on the
west side as soon as
[1:39:24] clear. Once they're out of the way, our
road contract will be able to then
[1:39:27] temporary temporarily widen west side of
the road so we can shift the two lanes
[1:39:32] to the west and then work on the east
for next year. Um
[1:39:38] widening phase four design is
progressing to allow for bidding
[1:39:44] design should be done for this fall. I
don't know why bid this fall being
[1:39:47] pushed to 27 based on
utility locations but that's making good
[1:39:52] progress.
CCMG all the concrete work is done. Um
[1:39:59] they're doing full depth patching on 200
South right now and then hopefully
[1:40:03] they'll get paid next week and then
they'll jump into all the neighborhoods
[1:40:07] where they've got the concret
sidewalks. We have a sidewalk and curb
[1:40:13] project going out for it's out right now
waiting for them to come in and that
[1:40:19] work will be done again this year.
stormwater utility. Uh we received the
[1:40:24] quote today for the K10 drainage
project. We only received one quote. Not
[1:40:28] sure why. We had five of our river
biders. Um nobody responded but one. Not
[1:40:35] sure why. Um I will be finding out why.
But uh it was good price. It was 15,800
[1:40:42] and the estimate engineers estimate was
62. So it was under that. So annoying
[1:40:46] the other guys. Um so the storm board
will be considering that acceptance of
[1:40:50] that quote at their next meeting. Um
being excavating by the ones who didn't
[1:40:55] quote um completed their reund
and 200 north that area there's
[1:41:04] another section that has done yet and
that's pretty much it. Any questions?
[1:41:12] Speak just a little feedback. Did are
you feel like you're getting good
[1:41:16] feedback from the utilities? Are they
being responsive to you? You know, as
[1:41:20] far as communicating well.
>> Oh, you love me.
[1:41:28] » I sense a little sarcasm.
>> We have we we have the healthy
[1:41:31] relationship.
>> Oh, I sense a little more sarcasm.
[1:41:35] No, I I know. Um, I guess I just throw
that out there in case there's comment
[1:41:41] or room. You utilities are difficult to
work with and that's that's the that's
[1:41:45] the long part of it. I've actually
revised our um contract agreements form
[1:41:52] for our consultants on each
coordination. Lessons learned, right?
[1:41:56] You know, things that we want to make,
you know, better and try to avoid, you
[1:42:01] know, pitfalls in the future. So, you
know, as things happen, you know, try to
[1:42:06] counter them with contract language for
the future projects.
[1:42:09] » I think that's probably the best way go
forward on that. So, that's good. I I
[1:42:14] know you're in tough position, so I was
mainly asking is to see if there's room
[1:42:18] for movement in that direction.
>> I I think honestly I think they're they
[1:42:22] all are working well with us. I I think
as well with us as anybody, maybe better
[1:42:27] with us than most. Okay,
that's enough. That's good.
[1:42:32] » I have a question. Um, I thought I read
recently that there made some
[1:42:37] announcements about CCMG money.
>> Yes. Avon was not on that list.
[1:42:42] » I don't know what you're talking about
the congestion. They were awarding the
[1:42:47] next round. There's a second Yeah, there
was a second round, but we weren't
[1:42:51] eligible for the second round because we
were funded in the first round.
[1:42:54] » Oh, yeah.
>> They changed the program. It's not
[1:42:57] working the same way. So basically the
state came up with like another $75
[1:43:00] million for the one state awarded in the
first round. There were some some
[1:43:04] administrative issues with but we were
we were fortunate enough to have all our
[1:43:09] issues resolved and we were awarded in
the first uh award for the year. Then
[1:43:14] the second round came out for people who
did not get that did not include us. Uh
[1:43:19] but we do now that you mentioned CCMG,
we do have our
[1:43:25] designer working on our application for
the next round that's coming out in
[1:43:30] October. I think October. So yeah, we're
already working on that. So our
[1:43:35] engineers has been a walk all the
projected sites next Thursday.
[1:43:41] I didn't want to miss out
[1:43:56] planning and building updates on our
hearing agendas. We have one case next
[1:44:02] week on BCA agenda. We have now down to
three cases on the plan commission for
[1:44:07] this month.
um after the development plan and plat
[1:44:12] that were proposed for the commercial
area were drawn. Um not sure what
[1:44:18] actually precipitated that. So that's
not going forward at this time. We had I
[1:44:23] think four new filings for September
planning commission. Not sure if those
[1:44:27] are all on the agenda because they're
working on getting additioners to uh
[1:44:32] complete their submissions actually. So
that's TBD. Um, we're still making
[1:44:37] progress on setting up our online
application submission process through I
[1:44:42] work. Um, getting closer to going live
on that. We have our engineering
[1:44:46] consultant moved in so they can review
everything um through that portal now
[1:44:52] without having to come in pick up paper
and thumb drives.
[1:44:57] So, continuing to do some uh testing and
troubleshooting on that, but hopefully
[1:45:01] that'll be live in the next couple
months for the public. to submit to. And
[1:45:08] then we're still hoping to have
comprehensive UDO revisions um later
[1:45:15] this year, but we are working on
possibly doing a smaller revision that
[1:45:20] might come before you sooner as we've
identified some uses that would be
[1:45:27] considered kind of high impact uses that
aren't very well
[1:45:31] called out or delineated at all right
now in the video. And we want to make
[1:45:35] sure that we have those in the
appropriate classification most likely.
[1:45:40] So that before something like that would
go in by right, it would have to come
[1:45:46] through the council presumably for
resuming. Um
[1:45:52] and from the building side of things,
you should have Mike Ty's building
[1:45:55] activity report for July. You have any
questions on any of that, just reach out
[1:46:01] to him directly. and the building permit
fee increases that you all adopted
[1:46:07] earlier this year will go into effect in
two weeks.
[1:46:12] Happy to answer any questions.
[1:46:25] » Good evening. Shelby Craig, parks
recreation director.
[1:46:29] um updates on our construction projects
at the pickle patch. We've ran into some
[1:46:34] unexpected drainage issues, so push our
timeline back a little bit. Um we have
[1:46:39] to repair a pipe underground,
push pavement back, I think three times
[1:46:43] now. Hopefully we can still get pavement
down next week. Um and then smooth
[1:46:48] ceiling from there. The foundation for
the shelter has been poured and the
[1:46:52] sidewalk from Avon Avenue to the pickle
patch is complete
[1:46:58] at Bernett. The contractor has mobilized
and the first round of invasive species
[1:47:04] removal by Williams Creek has been done.
We actually have a meeting out there on
[1:47:08] Monday to go over what that project
entailed. We actually got a credit back
[1:47:12] for some of that. So,
looking good there. Our PRBC met last
[1:47:18] night. I shared the capital improvement
plan and 2027 budget with them.
[1:47:23] Obviously, they don't have any voting
powers, but I just
[1:47:27] they are my sounding board for
everything. So, I just bring them up to
[1:47:30] speed on all that. And then upcoming uh
Tiffany has been working with um
[1:47:39] uh Crossroads on potentially maybe this
year bidding two trails. um the 150
[1:47:45] South to Dan Jones project and the
Waywood Trail to 625 at 800 sports
[1:47:51] project potentially getting those
together. Um if not this year definitely
[1:47:56] next year.
Any questions?
[1:48:00] » What we have on the sewer connection?
>> Um it is scheduled day is scheduled to
[1:48:06] be there the last week of August
25th. Is that Monday?
[1:48:11] » I think those are deadline.
How long?
[1:48:17] » A week.
>> A week. I'm not going to finish that.
[1:48:36] » Good evening. Sean, chief police. Um,
Officer Adam St. Jack. He'll be
[1:48:42] graduating from Indiana law enforcement
academy next Friday on August 21st
[1:48:50] High School
[1:48:54] this year for sure, but could be one of
those two. If you're never that I
[1:48:58] encourage you to go watch that
[1:49:02] more information on that officer Jacob
Redmond, he'll be reporting to for
[1:49:08] training August 31st. came out going in
and then on Monday a police department
[1:49:16] air board met and convened and voted
unanimous state vote to tender two final
[1:49:22] conditional offers of employment to two
other new officers. Uh both of them are
[1:49:27] completing their final per retirement
physical, psychological examinations and
[1:49:31] other remaining portions of background
investigation
[1:49:35] and as long as all of those uh go
through successfully then they'll get an
[1:49:39] official start date probably within a
month or so.
[1:49:43] Uh we received our annual reimbursement
from the Indiana Crime Guns Task Force
[1:49:48] in the amount of approximately $12,000
that goes to reimburse our payroll and
[1:49:55] our cell phone forensic technology
platforms that we help support that
[1:49:59] program investigations.
Happy to answer any questions you are
[1:50:05] expenses that we already incurred
[1:50:10] on your two new officers. How many
officers will we have on board?
[1:50:16] » That will be 44
[1:50:21] beginning.
>> Yes and no. because we originally set
[1:50:25] aside the two positions that were going
to fill because we weren't sure how the
[1:50:32] impact that
[1:50:37] allian
[1:50:51] I believe as of yesterday. Um, and it's
towards the bottom of the list. So, it
[1:50:58] is harder to get quality candidates once
we get down there. We just got two of
[1:51:03] them there. So, they're really good. So,
this has been unusually good. Um,
[1:51:09] usually after we got a list of 30, we
might get maybe three, maybe four. I
[1:51:15] think right now we got six up for this
list. We have some others pretty
[1:51:19] promising still.
[1:51:23] Yes.
[1:51:35] That's me.
[1:51:39] » I sent you guys reports. We rolled um
into we rolled our July. Send you guys
[1:51:44] reports. So, check your emails. If you
have any questions, let me know. Um
[1:51:48] you'll hear about it later. We started
budget season. Greg's gonna go over
[1:51:52] everything. My favorite time of year.
Um,
[1:51:56] and just he'll be talking to you a lot
more about the must. I am your
[1:52:01] representative. So, whatever you guys
decide, just give me direction and
[1:52:04] that's how we go. But, um, most
importantly, just review those reports
[1:52:10] if you have any questions.
[1:52:15] All right, moving on to council comment
and reports state.
[1:52:20] » I think our work session
I think our our work session we covered
[1:52:26] a logistics about the the background
with the comments the board members had
[1:52:31] Ryan was very good about covering all
that. So I I won't want to go on
[1:52:35] anymore. I'll just say that they're
they're having good interaction. uh
[1:52:39] you're not just having a a board that
meets and approves funding. Um they are
[1:52:43] going through and as as Brian relayed
there in the work session, they're
[1:52:48] they're wrestling with some of these
copies and they're thinking through and
[1:52:51] they're making sure there's there's
clawback that that there's not an open
[1:52:56] book and the bonds are being bought in
this case by Chicago Industrial. But uh
[1:53:04] I have to say I've been impressed
listening to it. It's kind of fun.
[1:53:09] being on the listening end and not being
able to say anything. It's kind that's a
[1:53:13] tough part. But Ryan Ryan puts this back
to me when I'm back there behind him and
[1:53:18] I I'm trying to get his motions, but
boy, he just he ignores them. I feel I
[1:53:24] feel terrible.
No, that's all. Thank you.
[1:53:28] » Thank you. Great. Nothing.
[1:53:33] » Um, I'll just say that there's a tuxway
day coming on Saturday, August 22nd.
[1:53:39] That will be at the fairgrounds this
time in Hendricks County Fairgrounds
[1:53:43] entering 85. And then there's a
community shred happening Saturday,
[1:53:48] October 22nd. That's going to be at the
Plfield Library.
[1:53:54] That's it for me. New business 2027
budget introduction.
[1:54:01] » It's just got a copy.
>> Okay.
[1:54:06] I didn't Thank you. I'm getting
>> Oh, okay. I've got one. I've got one.
[1:54:14] » Thank you. And good evening. I I told
you that in work session, we we've
[1:54:19] actually been working on the budget
since May 11th. We've gone through about
[1:54:22] eight different items. And what we're
showing then tonight or giving you
[1:54:27] tonight is our usual uh step one which
is kind of giving you the trend of the
[1:54:35] budget since 2021
and where we're paying the 27 total
[1:54:42] budget by each fund. Okay. Now, you
might notice you've got a brand new
[1:54:49] fund, and you might say, "Well, where
did the building and construction fund
[1:54:54] come from?" And did you and Ryan just
decide to do a new fund? Well, obviously
[1:54:59] we didn't because Julie would have had
something to say about that. The state
[1:55:03] of Indiana uh believes that actually the
builders association believes that uh
[1:55:11] most municipalities are making any kind
of money off of building and peries.
[1:55:16] Well, I haven't found one yet. I'm still
looking for the county or city and Jan
[1:55:22] maybe you saw some but I don't know
anybody that's making a ton of money.
[1:55:26] And so they required us now effective
127 to set up a brand new fund. And so
[1:55:33] that's what we've done here with the
635,000.
[1:55:38] Now that's not the total budget. It's
more like 900,000. So we've had to keep
[1:55:43] some of it in the general fund
because and that's what the footnote
[1:55:50] says down there if you can read it. Uh
but what we've said is that it's going
[1:55:55] to take basically on January 1st, we're
not going to have any revenue. Okay? And
[1:56:01] so we're going to have to pay some of
the starting starting numbers out of the
[1:56:06] general fund. Now, what we've made the
suggestion, and Hendricks County is
[1:56:11] doing this too with their building and
planning is that from from here on out,
[1:56:16] they're taking their money that they
collect on building and permit and
[1:56:21] putting it into this new fund. I am
suggesting that's probably what we
[1:56:26] should do. So not put it in the general
fund, but now start transferring it by
[1:56:32] resolution subject to a resolution. So
that Julie's just not doing it because
[1:56:37] she wants to with council's approval.
And so we would then fund that like
[1:56:44] September, October, November, December
and hopefully have a beginning balance.
[1:56:48] We may have still a negative in that
fund that we'll have to make up, but
[1:56:52] ultimately we want to get all the
expense in there, get all the revenue in
[1:56:57] there, and then if it takes refilling it
with some other revenue, you know,
[1:57:03] that's what we're going to have to show
because they're going to come back and
[1:57:07] say either see you uh are making a lot
of money or they're not going to say
[1:57:12] anything and you're going to say this
was a huge waste of money. Okay. It's
[1:57:18] kind of like when we created the LIT
general fund on the county level and
[1:57:24] that went away about three years because
it was a huge pain and wasn't worth it.
[1:57:29] So, so we've got some of the about
300,000 within the general fund. We've
[1:57:34] also then given you the updated fund
balances. Keep in mind income. Uh
[1:57:41] Julie's been doing a fine job and we're
getting a lot of interest income, but
[1:57:45] that's really what built up our cash
balance along with what I call the
[1:57:50] pennies of from heaven, which is the
supplemental width that drops in. And so
[1:57:56] we peg the general fund at 106.
And as you can see with the MVH, we've
[1:58:02] got the MVH restricted and or
unrestricted and restricted, the 2
[1:58:07] million 150, the 450, the LRS keeping it
the same. And and by the way, you know,
[1:58:15] we we do believe that we'll be made
whole with the gas tax. And so, you
[1:58:21] know, from this the quote surplus and so
everybody's depending on that and we're
[1:58:27] keeping the budgets of expecting that
money to come in and I think you even
[1:58:33] got some of it. Sure.
[1:58:38] » Pardon? How much are we expecting to do?
>> I don't think we've I don't know if
[1:58:43] we've got a tally on what we've lost so
far. Do you
[1:58:48] » know that?
[1:58:54] » Yeah. The amount that we're not getting
in gas tax right now because of
[1:58:59] » um
>> we have to get you that.
[1:59:01] » Yeah. We can look up like 70 something.
It was like 79
[1:59:08] » that in total.
>> Yeah.
[1:59:10] So, um, the municipal sir tax and wheel
tax obviously that's new was new for 26
[1:59:18] and we've got it pegged now and and
we've got a better handle on the
[1:59:22] revenue. remember they were
gueststimations at the time. All the way
[1:59:27] down there's our new lane miles which
we're expecting to use that money as the
[1:59:33] GR as the grant match for the CCMG
along with the wheel tax too. And we we
[1:59:41] talked about budgeting that specifically
for the grant match so that we can say
[1:59:46] your local dollars that you're paying in
are paying two for$1 dollars. is
[1:59:52] building $2 of roads for every dollar we
use. So that's awesome. And and it's
[1:59:58] being spent now you've got it where it's
being spent here in Avon. So that's
[2:00:04] really awesome.
CCI, CCD, we left those fairly close to
[2:00:10] the same. Food and beverage, uh we did
we're keeping that the same. We do have
[2:00:17] uh fine support for the bonds out of
that. Um so the bonds are not at risk in
[2:00:23] any way, shape or form. Our um
parks and recreation fund, we're
[2:00:29] depending on those dollars coming in
around 1 million of user fees, I
[2:00:34] believe, right? And so those are are are
building up a little slow, but we're
[2:00:40] we're hoping that that will continue.
Riverboat, we don't really do much with
[2:00:46] roundabout yet. And then the rest of
them on down are pretty insignificant
[2:00:53] other than the storm water. Again, we
were reconciling the first half of
[2:00:59] revenue and reigning anytime we thought
that revenue was not sufficient to
[2:01:05] support these levels and things like the
rainy day fund 250,000.
[2:01:12] You know, I can tell you at the work
group. I swam here from Rushville
[2:01:17] yesterday and so u you know they
sometimes some things happen and you
[2:01:24] know tornadoes hit hit. We've had
catastrophic floods. This money is is
[2:01:29] pinpointed for emergency only. But if
that happened to you yesterday, you
[2:01:35] could be using it today. So it's already
appropriated would be already
[2:01:39] appropriated and set aside. So, that's
kind of a rundown. What uh we're doing
[2:01:45] now with Ryan is we've met with the
police chief and that went real well.
[2:01:49] We've met with parks and things like
that. We're building the individual
[2:01:54] department outline budget up to this
amount. And you know, and that this
[2:01:59] gives the department heads a little
understanding that, you know, we're not
[2:02:03] able to fund things a million dollars
more. So we all have to kind of share
[2:02:09] those dollars in that we're going to be
increasing the budget. So that kind of
[2:02:15] gives us an understanding of where we
can allocate and share.
[2:02:19] So Ryan, anything you think I missed?
[2:02:26] Okay.
questions from council again. Step one
[2:02:30] of many steps to go
on that building and construction
[2:02:35] account
fund. You said that we were going to
[2:02:39] move some money from our fees and
permits and stuff. What number we have
[2:02:44] now?
>> Well, there's nothing in there now
[2:02:47] because the fund so our attorneys will
be drafting the resolution for you guys
[2:02:51] to create the funds. Once the funds
created, then we can start transferring
[2:02:55] money. But currently we're bringing in
about $600,000 a year in planning and
[2:03:01] building permit fees.
And so that's why it's based on 635. You
[2:03:07] guys amended the fees. So we think we'll
bring in a little more than the 600 next
[2:03:10] year, but that is a loss of $600,000 in
revenue in the general fund though as
[2:03:16] well. So you're really moving in
between. And there's a net of still 300.
[2:03:22] Correct. And so when you guys actually
see when we do the general fund
[2:03:25] presentation at the next meeting, you'll
notice that several employee salaries
[2:03:29] from planning building are actually now
in my budget because
[2:03:35] they didn't necessarily fit the purpose
of the building and construction. So
[2:03:39] like our code enforcement officer, what
he's doing doesn't necessarily isn't
[2:03:43] being covered by those fees. We need to
show a direct correlation between those
[2:03:47] fees and covering the actual costs. Same
with the administrative assistant or the
[2:03:52] receptionist. I moved that position into
the town manager's budget. So, we were
[2:03:59] subsidizing
that department with around $330,000
[2:04:05] of of general fund money or property tax
dollars to fund that whole department.
[2:04:10] So, it's going to look a little
different when when you guys see it when
[2:04:13] we do the general fund presentation. And
by the way, at most of the legislative
[2:04:18] conferences, this was not covered. the
the guidance from state board accounts
[2:04:22] has been pretty limited but and
everybody thought they had to do it July
[2:04:27] one then state board accounts came out
and said no that's not practical it's
[2:04:31] January one and so it was kind of a big
surprise and again I think it's a lot of
[2:04:39] effort for nothing but we got to do it
and we want to we want to try it this
[2:04:45] way for 27 if we can move over all all
the expenses in 28. You want to do that
[2:04:52] because like I told you, someone will
they'll take your annual report and
[2:04:58] they'll run an analysis on it when they
after they do the audit and they'll say
[2:05:03] if you have 250,000 in there we'll say
see they're overcharging.
[2:05:08] So stay stay tuned for that.
>> Yes sir. Well, I agree with what Fred
[2:05:16] says. The analysis is going to show that
the taxpayers of the town are
[2:05:20] supplementing new homeowners.
That's what it's going to show. And the
[2:05:26] builders don't pay that cost. They pass
that money to the sale of the home. So,
[2:05:30] I'm not sure what their complaint is.
That's what it's going to show. It's
[2:05:34] going to show that existing taxpayers
supplement new homeowners.
[2:05:39] And I think that's that's what the data
is going to show. So then the data
[2:05:43] should if you're driving policy with
data then we should raise our fees again
[2:05:48] right so the taxpayers are not
supplementing that but that is what
[2:05:53] you're going to be talking to your
legislators and I think that the stark
[2:05:57] reality is different than the narrative
you should be prepared to you know
[2:06:01] confront them with the fact
>> and and Dan as you know in the law you
[2:06:05] can only raise your fees once in five
years
[2:06:08] » it's the current law see that's why it's
a dumb law Because prior law said you
[2:06:13] cannot have a fee which exceeds your
cost of delivery of services. That made
[2:06:17] sense to everyone. Well now what they've
done is they've said you can't even have
[2:06:22] a fee that covers your cost of services
because we actually think that you're
[2:06:26] making money. It's not a fact-driven
conversation. When it is a fact-driven
[2:06:32] conversation, we can get back to the way
it was. But you guys are going to need
[2:06:36] to be adding this
>> because let's face it, if you do one
[2:06:39] raise in one five years, you know, you
would like to give your employees 3%
[2:06:43] raise maybe or 2% raise each and every
year, you'll be behind the eight for
[2:06:49] your legislators are telling you that
they want your tax to they want all the
[2:06:53] citizens of Bayon to pay for the new
houses.
[2:06:57] That's what they're saying. That's
what's going to happen. So, we should
[2:07:02] protest that.
>> I agree.
[2:07:05] So summary or questions on what we've
done here on high level and you'll be
[2:07:11] getting all the great details soon.
[2:07:17] » Thank you. Any other questions? Okay.
Thank you.
[2:07:22] To make this another quick reminder,
this was first step in the process. your
[2:07:26] your first your second meeting in
August, August 27th, we're going to
[2:07:29] present the general fund with the
detailed information and then the first
[2:07:35] meeting in September, we'll present the
non- general fund and then you'll still
[2:07:39] have another discussion the second
meeting in September and then budget
[2:07:42] adoption is first meeting in October.
[2:07:47] Okay, moving on to ordinance final
reading 2026-10
[2:07:51] authorizing the bond series 2026
for the LAR.
[2:07:57] » Yes, this ordinance is final reading on
the ordinance which establishes the
[2:08:01] authority for the bonds to be issued.
As I explained last time, this is uh
[2:08:06] anticipated to be $5.35 million in
developer purchase bonds for the LAR
[2:08:14] phase 2 project. The bond establishes
not only the authority to issue bonds
[2:08:19] but also with the parameters of the
bonds authority. With approval of bonds,
[2:08:25] you also be approving two other
documents that are also in your packet.
[2:08:29] The first supplemental trust and venture
and the trust and venture is like the
[2:08:33] mortgage on the bond. Uh it's an
agreement with the town and ARJ will be
[2:08:39] the trustee. Uh and also then the first
supplemental financing agreement and the
[2:08:44] financing agreement just is the
underlying agreement between the
[2:08:48] developer and the town as to how the
funds could be used for the issuance.
[2:08:52] I'd be happy to answer questions.
[2:09:00] No discussion. We'll entertain a motion.
[2:09:08] » A motion that we approve the 2026-10
authorizing sponsors 2026b
[2:09:15] for the book two project as presented.
Second
[2:09:23] I'll defer to Jason in a second. I'll be
the third though.
[2:09:33] » Jason bucket
>> four
[2:09:37] legal council report.
>> Nothing tonight. Thank you.
[2:09:41] » Second of the two publications or
comment periods. you'd like to come
[2:09:46] forward. Same rules applies your name
address.
[2:09:54] No one hurrying up the speaker. So,
we'll move on to council comment.
[2:10:02] No one talking.
>> Uh yes. So, as a reminder, we did talk
[2:10:07] about at the work session. Your next
meeting uh is August 27th. We will have
[2:10:12] an executive session at 5:30 followed by
um the town council meeting at 7 PM and
[2:10:20] then there's one other date to celebrate
and that is Don Lad's birthday tomorrow
[2:10:26] on the 14th. So happy birthday Don