[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

Town of Avon Indiana Town Council Work Session & Meeting - August 13th, 2026

Transcript