PLAINFIELD TOWN COUNCIL. April 8, 2002

Transcription

1 PLAINFIELD TOWN COUNCIL April 8, 2002 The Plainfield Town Council met on Monday, April 8, In attendance were Mr. Brandgard, Mr. Young, Mr. Kirchoff and Mr. Ward. Mr. McPhail entered the meeting under Old Business. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of the minutes of the regular Town Council meeting of March 25, Approval of the March, 2002 monthly reports for the Park and Recreation Department, Department of Planning and Zoning, Town Court, Department of Public Works and the Human Resources Director s Report dated April 8, Approval of the Third and Final Readings of Ordinance No : Amendment to the Plainfield Sign Ordinance; Ordinance No : Rezoning from I-2 Warehouse Distribution Industrial District to I-3 Light Industrial for Opus North Corporation; Ordinance No : Downzone Saratoga PUD for Saratoga Associates LLC and Ordinance No : Rezoning from I-2, Warehouse Distribution Industrial District to I-3, Light Industrial District for Pizzuti Companies. 4. Second Reading of Ordinance No : Rezoning from AG Agricultural to R-3 Single-Family Medium-Density Residential and AG Agricultural to R-4 Single-Family Medium-Density Residential for Precedent Residential Development and C. P. Morgan. Mr. Kirchoff made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Second by Mr. Thibo. Motion carried. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR None. TOWN MANAGER S REPORT Mr. Carlucci said the first item that I have tonight, and there is a resolution in your binders, has to do with Puritan-Bennett Corporation s request for a personal property tax abatement. We have referred to them in the past as Tyco but when they turned the application in, it was Puritan-Bennett. But it is the Tyco project. Tyco is the larger corporation and Puritan-Bennett is one of their subsidiaries. They are requesting a 10-year personal property tax abatement for new equipment to manufacture liquid oxygen systems in approximately 140,000 square feet of Pizzuti building number one. It is located at 2800 Airwest Boulevard. The project will retain the 282 existing jobs and will create 180 additional jobs by Puritan- Bennett will invest 5.5 million in new manufacturing equipment and an additional 5.4 million to improvements to the 140,000 square feet. The total annual payroll at full employment is estimated at 16.9 million. I believe you have actually done the rezoning tonight for that property so that is completed. That will come up later. The public hearing on this, because this is only the declaratory resolution, will be at the April 22 meeting. Someone from Puritan-Bennett will be there. Hopefully, I m sure they will bring a sample of the liquid oxygen system and show how really neat and compact that is for the people who need to have that portable oxygen. The second item that I have has to do with the 8K Springfest Run, which is on Saturday, May 18 between 8:00 and 10:00 a.m. The coordinator this year is Steve Huckstep who is an avid runner and a former member of our Plan Commission who lives in Hardin s Creekside Estates. He took over for Jeff Banning who has gone into retirement for at least a couple of years. They have really changed around a little bit. It now has a group called the Runners Forum and they have a series of races that their group participates in. Then at the end of the year they add up the points and they give out awards. They expect people to be participating in this race, which is substantially larger than what we have had in the past. Most of it is not on Town streets. There is nothing on Center Street. They are not going to be on Hadley Road but will be on the path along Hadley Road. However,! 1

2 they will be on Mallard Way and Overlies Way and then they will head north to where the short path connects into the main path system in Hummel Park. They will be on the Hummel Park paths and go across the bridge and at one point during the race they will head up to Broadway North and Broadway South and make a loop around those streets and come back down. So, they would like the Council s approval to be on Town streets for the race. I exchanged s with Mr. Huckstep and gave him the names of Mike Wolfe over at the fire department for the EMS and Captain Mitny at the police department to coordinate it with them. He is very excited. That is a lot of people to bring into the Springfest. I think it will be a real exciting event. But we do need the Council s consent for the route. Mr. Brandgard asked, is there consent? Consent given. Mr. Carlucci said I also have a letter that is dated March 19, It was addressed to Ms. Mitchell and is from the Sheet Metal Workers. It is from Jay Scott Parks, Business Representative. I m writing to you on the behalf of the Central Indiana Building and Construction Trade Department Local Council to request permission to solicit donations during Father s Day weekend for the benefit of the Diabetes Research Institute at the University of Miami School of Medicine. They go on to talk a little bit more about diabetes and the AFL-ICO. They would like permission for solicitation on Saturday, June 15, We have allowed collections a couple of times that I m aware of but we have kept them off of U.S. 40 and SR267 just because of the hazard and liability. We have allowed them to be at the intersection of Stafford and Brookside Lane. I think it has been twice that it has been conducted out there. But again I bring this to you for discussion to determine if this is something that you want to be done on Saturday, June 15, which is the day before Father s Day. Mr. Ward asked, are they asking for a location or what are they doing? Mr. Carlucci said they didn t specify any locations in the letter whatsoever. But as bad as the traffic is anymore on SR267 and U.S. 40, I would suggest that they could probably do just as well at a neighborhood location as opposed to being in the middle of those two busy streets. Mr. Ward said we have refused other groups at that location in the past so I think we should stick with our guns on this one and let them use Stafford Road and Brookside. Mr. Brandgard said as long as there is a four-way stop, that is about the safest location to have something like that. Is there consent? Consent given. Mr. Carlucci said I will see if that will work for them and if not, I will say that it will be at this location or it won t be. Mr. Kirchoff said or if they would have a specific location that they are interested in that we could respond to. Mr. Brandgard said I think the general thing is to stay off of the main highways. REPORTS Mr. Kirchoff asked, Mr. Carlucci did you have any phone calls on recycling not occurring last week? Mr. Carlucci said I received a call about not picking up recycling on Clarks Creek Road. Mr. Kirchoff said Crystal Bay was scheduled for Thursday and they didn t get there until today. Mr. Carlucci said that is good to know because there was no holiday in between. There are only three or four houses on Clarks Creek. I don t know if they missed them or not or if people didn t put it out but I sent a fax down there. I didn t get any calls in terms of missing but I need to keep track of these if they have missed those. Mr. Ward said they didn t get our street either. There were five boxes out at Garden Place last Friday.! 2

3 Mr. Kirchoff said this was Thursday. They didn t get it Thursday, Friday or Saturday but they did get it today. Mr. Carlucci said I need to find out why they haven t done it and will keep good records of them. Mr. Kirchoff said I had a question on your report. I m still trying to learn how this works. On the Pan Am flights didn t we approve a tax abatement for a new site? Mr. Carlucci said we approved a tax abatement for the new site and we need to go through the process of basically rescinding that abatement because they are not going to be here. We will start that process and it goes pretty quick. What happens is you pass a resolution and we send that to the County Auditor. It is done by legal description and it is taken off. Mr. Kirchoff said the last thing that I had is in reading the Plan Commission meeting s minutes from March 4 I really appreciate the efforts that has been put into the residential housing standards. That was very encouraging reading and I appreciate what the Plan Commission is doing there. They had some discussion about some of our concerns and I was glad to see that. Mr. Daniel said on March 28 we closed on a Robert and Alice Collins property as part of the park project so that has been completed and the Town now owns that property. That was in the morning and the same day in the late afternoon they closed on the Cagle property on Dan Jones Road so that transaction has been completed. We have sent, as you know, the 25-day letter to Mr. & Mrs. Ross and that period was up as of today. In the mean time I talked to Doug Meyer who represents the Ross s and we have exchanged appraisals on that. They had their property appraised and I got a letter from him setting up the issues on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Ross. We are in the process of negotiating that situation to see if we can resolve that. We have this evening an agreement from White River Environmental Partnership, which we talked about in terms of WREP. It is an assignment as a result of the sale to the Indianapolis Water Company. This, in fact, transfers and assigns to United Water Resources, Inc. responsibilities of WREP and it releases Indianapolis Water Company and it s parent Indianapolis Water Company Resources Corporation. I have examined the document and it accomplishes what it set out to accomplish so the Town Council can act on it this evening if you would like to and get that signed as part of that entire transaction of the City of Indianapolis and WREP. Mr. Kirchoff made a motion to approve the agreement. Mr. Young made a second but wanted to comment that there has been expressed general areas needing improvement especially in the area of billing by a number of citizens and users. I think we should use every opportunity while we have their attention to let them know that the agreement that we entered into has not been faithfully discharged to the satisfaction to the Town of Plainfield, as I understand it. I m sure I understand just a very small fraction of what is going on out there but everything that I hear is generally unsatisfactory. So, I would recommend that any correspondence like this that will be read by a human being and not by a machine we should voice the concerns of the citizens of this community. Mr. Brandgard said absolutely. I think you know that both myself and Councilman Kirchoff have had the pleasure of experiencing the response that they provide to their customers. Mr. Kirchoff said help me understand the contract. Were there segments of them or was it just one complete contract or was it divided up into various services? Such if we wanted to break out a piece. Mr. Brandgard said I think Mr. Carlucci has given everybody a copy of a proposal relative to billings. We had some conversations and he has come back with a plan and I think it is one that we need to look at and probably act on as soon as we can to try to address the billing problem. Mr. Young said I certainly want to second the motion for the assignment but I don t want to miss any opportunity to let people know that they have a responsibility along with accepting that assignment.! 3

4 And that responsibility has not been discharged to the satisfaction of the community to the best of my knowledge. Mr. Kirchoff asked, should I make some kind of amendment to the motion? Mr. Brandgard said yes. Mr. Kirchoff said we would agree to this but with some correspondence concerning the level of service that we receive from the billing. Second by Mr. Young. Mr. Brandgard asked, is there any further discussion? Mr. Carlucci said I would like to address Mr. Kirchoff s question of how that contract is divided up. IWC is what is being discussed here tonight. UDC is a subsidiary of IWC Resources. However, if you look through the contract, the contract becomes pretty seamless because WREP is an umbrella organization for all of it. The situation that we have here is that UWC s costs are really being paid to the umbrella organization, which is now really United Water. So, if we do anything with the billing and change that, they are just paying to UDC anyway. So, that would stop and that money would then stay with the Town however we want to change it. In terms of the meter readers those are under the WREP s contract so they would stay. Those employees would still read the meters and we wouldn t have to do anything with that part of it. We can resolve some of the other things but the biggest issue is getting through that phone number. It has been very difficult. We have met with them various times to try to get this worked out and express our concerns. Especially if it happens to a Council Member, we express that concern. It has not improved. So, my draft memo was a way of moving this forward because I don t think the status quo is very good at all right now. Mr. Young said it was a good business decision and it was a good strategic plan. But to make it so that the citizens were not injured as an out-fall of this they had a representative here in Plainfield that served our community and served our customers during the transition period. It was hands on and people could actually come and there was a real person that you could talk to. I recommend that you go back to that until they get everything straightened out. Give them a phone and temporary quarters and let them take care of our patrons because our contract is too important to treat the citizens of this community the way that they are being treated now. Mr. Carlucci said I think you make a good point because what I m proposing will take several months to implement and in the interim we haven t gotten to that point. We haven t corrected the problem. So, I appreciate that because that is a good point Mr. Young said during the period of time that we were on WREP and they had a representative in Plainfield, I personally didn t hear of any complaints. It doesn t mean there weren t any but at least people could voice their concerns to a real person. As they change ownership and there is turmoil, putting a person out here would not be asking too much and we should be offered that consideration. Mr. Brandgard said we have a motion and a second to approve the document for the transfer of the Indianapolis Water Company s entire partnership interest in White River Environmental Partnership to JMM White River Corporation and LAH White River Corporation is acceptable to the Town of Plainfield. This should be sent with a letter statement of our displeasure with their service at least in regards to answering customer questions and/or complaints of service. All those in favor signify by aye. Non opposed. Motion carried. Mr. Daniel said, as you know, we have been working on our park project and I have drafts of a proposed contract with our construction manager. I m going to send copies of these down so that the board members can start to take a look at that. There are some significant differences between that and the normal AIA contract so I m sure the board members will spend a little bit of time with that. Mr. Brandgard asked, is this one that we prepared? Mr. Daniel said yes. I ed it out to Ken Sebree and we sent it to Summit and will let them make their comments.! 4

5 I just learned today that the Plainfield verses Avon matter we got a report from the Supreme Court today and they turned down our petition to transfer that Appellate Court decision. So, they are not going to review the Appellate Court decision on that. It took a long time for them to decide not to do that but they have their schedule. Mr. Brandgard asked, did they give a reason? Mr. Daniel said no. I will pass out the one paragraph response that we got. That takes care of that one. On the other side, the Washington Township verses Plainfield matter the time for filing the notice of appeal has expired on that decision from Judge Coleman. So, maybe that case is complete. Chief Anderson said we had a couple of people off last week that do a lot of our monthly report so that is why it was not submitted. Ms. Holland said I was at a conference all last week so that is why I didn t have my report. Mr. Prince said I have something that I would like to show you tonight. I sent an additional communication document out to you. I don t know whether you got it or not but this year in our budget we had requested money in our parks maintenance lines to replace the signs at Swinford and Franklin Parks, the entry signs. Maybe since you got the communication you took time to drive by and take a close look at those. Maybe over time we get used to seeing those and we forget about them but when you take a close look at them, they are in need of replacement or renovation. We looked at the options available and we thought maybe we could do a little bit better job and maybe be a little bit more creative. I have a design here that I would like for you to take a look at. This is the sign that we are proposing for both the parks. The color on the signs are just about what they might be. I don t think the printing on this example is exactly what they are going to be but this is a multi-level multi-façade sign. On the lettering there will be some inlays. They will be dimensional in other words. The sign is made out of a PVC material that is dimensional stable. What this means for us is that it should last a lot longer. It will not expand and contract with the weather and the paint will stick to it, etc. The sign comes with a five-year warranty but it has a life expectancy of years providing nobody smacks it with a baseball bat or runs into it with a car. With that in mind I made a call into our insurance company and made sure that if that were to happen, that this sign would be totally covered. This is not a sign that you could quickly repair. If it was damaged, it would more than likely need to be replaced. So, we wanted to check with our insurance carrier and make sure that our signs that are fairly low in the park that if they were damaged or if there was an accident with a vehicle, we could replace the sign in its entirety and they assured me that our coverage does allow for that. Mr. Brandgard said the silhouette next to the sign, is that in scale? Mr. Prince said that is a six-foot tall individual. This sign will more than likely be a little shorter than our existing signs but it will be a little bit wider too. We are hoping to play upon the colors in the park and have a complementary sign when you enter into the park. Mr. Brandgard asked, does that fit our ordinance? Mr. Higbee said I will have to double-check the height. I know we discussed the size. It should be 32 square feet unless he wants to request a waiver. Mr. Prince said we measured the sign and it will require a Special Exception. It is larger than 32 square feet. This one will require an exception. We will have to put it through the zoning process and get it approved but we do have money budgeted for it this year and I wanted to just let you see the direction that we were going with it and get your consent to move ahead with it. Mr. Brandgard said take that design and see what it would look like if it met our ordinance. I say that because people have come in with these things and they have not gotten very far with approval.! 5

6 Mr. Prince said the existing signs don t meet the ordinance I m sure. Mr. Brandgard said that is probably correct but if you were to do anything with them, they would have to meet the ordinance. What I m saying is take a look and see what it would look like within the box that fits our ordinance and see if that works. Mr. Higbee said it is not as far out of line than what you might think considering the type of facility. It is a park and 64 square feet would be the same standard that we would use for a single use commercial site. So, it is comparable to what would be permitted on some types of commercial sites. Mr. Prince said to get an idea these posts here are the existing posts. Those posts would be reused. The park sign that we have now, believe it or not, is really close to that size. I understand that doesn t meet the existing ordinance. I ll do whatever the Council wants me to do. Mr. Ward said I think you ought to stick to what our zoning allows. Mr. Kirchoff asked, why should we treat ourselves differently than our citizens? Mr. Brandgard said that is where I am. So, take a look at it and see what it would look like if you stayed within the ordinance. If that doesn t work, then come back to us and see what we think. We have been pretty adamant on holding to our ordinance and I don t think the BZA has given much sway on the signs either. I want to do something that I m not allowing the citizenry to do. Mr. Young asked, are we planning to light this? Mr. Prince said no. be lit. The signs aren t lit right now. They could Mr. Young said I would because our parks are used an awful lot in the evening hours and they are an attraction to our community. And I would think that would be something that you might give consideration to. Mr. Prince said I will consider that. They are not lit now and I didn t even thing about lighting them but I would certainly give it some thought. I can talk to Mr. Ward about it. Mr. Young said even in the summer time there are people using our parks and enjoying our parks in the evening hours. Mr. Prince said if you like the design of it that was important too because we would like to follow through with that as we develop parks. If it is something that you like, it would be something that we would want to carry through our other developments. We have a couple of new parks on the erosion and we might want to consider similar looking signs for that. Mr. Carlucci asked, where did the 32 feet come from? measure the sign can add feet to it. How you Mr. Higbee said that would be considered basically a type of ground sign in our ordinance. There are different types but that would be a version of a ground sign. There are three different size limits for ground signs, the smallest being 32 square feet because you are in a Residential District. The next one up would be 48 square feet. That would be for a commercial outlot and then 64 square feet for a commercial single use site that I was talking about earlier. The idea is if you are in a residential setting, you want these things to have less impact than a comparable commercial setting. Mr. Brandgard said I think the design is good. Mr. Prince said we will see what they can do about fitting that into something more in line with our ordinance. Mr. Brandgard said the key word is how can we make that work in the context of the ordinance.! 6

7 Mr. Higbee said as you know, I sent out the RFQ for the Comprehensive Plan in March. It had a response date of April 15 on it so that is about a week away. I had a few come back to me with wrong addresses so I sent them back out again. Given that I would like to extend it at least a week to give people the additional time to respond because it didn t get to them in time. Having said that, I don t know how many responses I m going to get at this point. I have gotten a few phone calls but that doesn t tell me how many responses I m going to get. I got one letter today from a firm saying that with their workload they can t handle it. That is the only one for sure that will not bid. But we will need at some point to name a review group when the RFQs come back in April. I had said to them in the RFQ that we would have a selection of final candidates made June 1. So, sometime between the middle of April and June 1 we need to name that review panel, do the review and make a selection of up to four people who would be invited to do an RFP. So, if you want to think about who that could be tonight or you want to do it at the next Council meeting, that would be fine. Just to follow up on Mr. Kirchoff s comment our first meeting of the Residential Standards Committee is going to be this week, Thursday afternoon. That was named at the March 4 Plan Commission to start to develop standards and a method to get them in place whether that would be adopting changes to the Zoning Ordinance or by some other mechanism. Mr. Brandgard said regarding the extension I think since you had some come back it is a valid reason for extending either one-week or to the 30 th. Mr. Higbee said the 30 th would be fine. It would give a little extra time given the quite response that I got. I can send out a letter to all of the consultants and let them know. Mr. Belcher said I will get my report to you the second meeting for last month. I wanted to report on one thing. Mr. Ward and I met with the audiovisual company that we are working with on the Town Hall area. I wanted to at least give you the concept. I m not looking for any discussion but if you have some concerns about this, you can tell me now and we can make some changes. The idea that we have gone forward on is having three cameras at the front of the room that would shine out toward the person who is standing at the podium. One on the person and two on the side of the podium. Those cameras could be focused on that board that you are already looking at, which is obviously close enough for you but then that would be projected onto two screens. We are looking at those flat panels, television type monitors, rather than a pull-down type of screen like we have in the back of this room. That room we don t have that option because the wall moves. We felt like the screen at the back like it was before made all of you get out of your seats and come down and look back and that wasn t very practical. That is the direction that we are going and we think that is really going to be workable. When Mr. Carlucci made presentations a lot of times on annexations in the same area that we are thinking about the monitors, he would put the map up. That is sort of the direction that we are headed. It seems like it is going to work real well for everybody who is at the podium and for anyone sitting in the audience, the public who wants to see what is being talked about. That is the real issue that we were trying to get at. Mr. Kirchoff asked, does this also include the capability for Power Point? Mr. Belcher said yes, that will be in the actual podium. It will have the ability to set a laptop if someone brings one or it could be supplied and plugged into that location. Another idea is there is a device that we hope to purchase within this budget, which is like a fancy overhead. You can basically lay any kind of flat piece of paper on it and it is a camera that could project on that same screen. You could lay a budget or something on there and be projected to anybody in the room. We were not trying to change the ways the commissions and boards saw the presentations because the presenters are now doing a good job. But it is everybody who comes, a citizen that can t see what is being talked about, that we are solving that problem. We found that the budget was very similar to buying a camera like this, a projector type, and the screen and all of the work that we have to do in the building to fit it compared to putting a flat screen monitor types on the walls. As you get farther away from those screens, if you happen to have a full house, if you open the door up, there would be another monitor hung from the ceiling type that would fill the other room. If! 7

8 we wanted to use that conference room, that could also be used for that for just audiovisual for that conference room. It seemed to all jell together and I wanted to at least report it to you. Things are going pretty quickly now. We are looking for a May completion. If there were any major problems that you saw with that company, we could still make some changes. But if it sounds good to you, we will keep heading in that direction. go. Mr. Brandgard said I think that is the direction that we want to OLD BUSINESS Mr. Kirchoff said a meeting or two ago Ms. Mitchell made us aware of changes in the billing of ambulance services. I was just checking with Mr. Ward to see if I m reading this report correctly? I don t know who it came from. Are we running those kind of outstanding Accounts Receivables every month for ambulance services? Ms. Mitchell said that collection isn t directly related to that billing. That is cash in house and billing going out so cash in house may be a two year old bill but it will have the billing, which is so current there is no way for it to have a payable time. So, you are probably 60 days out on the billing and two or three years out of bills trying to collect. They are not specific. Mr. Brandgard said, as I understand the problem, most of the problem that we have with ambulance billing goes back to Medicare reimbursements and Medicaid. I was talking to Ms. Mitchell and Mr. Carlucci before the meeting and asked if we could construct a letter and send it to our congressmen and senators and ask them to explain why as workers, we get taxed Medicare and Medicaid now. Our ambulance service is subsidized by the taxpayers in this community. What we bill does not near cover the total cost of operating the system. But yet Medicare and Medicaid does not reimburse us for that service so in effect the citizens of the community are triple subsidizing the service for that. That is part of the problem that we are in here. Mr. Young said one thing that I think is worth noting is the last time that we reviewed rates I worked with Chief Anderson on the dual rate structure. And I think we are very mindful and very careful that we certainly wanted to be fair to the taxpayers of Plainfield but fair to everyone in general. What we found was that our rates were competitive or lower than surrounding rates for similar services. And that even when we went through the restructuring we were by no means near the middle of the pack. We did it last in 1997 so it might be time for us to look at it again. Mr. Kirchoff said where I was coming from too if I read this right we started out at $792, in January and by the time we got to December we had gone to $942, We slipped $150, in a year s time. Ms. Mitchell said we have developed a problem with the Medicare side. Because we don t take assignment, Medicare pays the patient directly. The patient chooses not to pay us. Mr. Kirchoff asked, is there recourse? Ms. Mitchell said the only recourse I have is through Statewide Credit, which is what we have been doing. If they still choose not to, then we have to take them to court to get that money. But what can happen is the person will die, the family doesn t know the person had it as they state, and then there is no estate and the money has been spent and you can t get it. Mr. Kirchoff asked, are you saying there is money that we ought to write off? Ms. Mitchell said we will. We just haven t written off anything until we absolutely know there is no way that we can get to it. But now with the new Medicare rules when they say you have to take assignments in the geographical area they give you a fixed amount that they will pay and that is all that you can get. The difference that we have been collecting is going to be a write off all of the time. It will be a monthly write off.! 8

9 Mr. Kirchoff said we are almost to a million dollars and I was just blown away by the magnitude of the outstanding receivable. Mr. Mitchell said we have never written off as long as we have had an ambulance service. Mr. Brandgard said the problem is getting that balanced down by writing it off does not remunerate the Town for services rendered. As Ms. Mitchell said, the problem is going to get worse under the new rules. NEW BUSINESS Mr. McPhail said the reason that I was late is because I attended a planning meeting with the Town of Avon. It was a public meeting that they held to discuss the two new potential PUDs between CR300S and CR200S. One of them goes farther north than that. It is about 1,000 acres in total. The meeting was chaired by their planning consultant. They gave a brief description from both developers about their plan and about what they plan to do in those two areas. They asked the audience for their input. I counted 43 people one time so there probably ended up being 50 people there. They divided them into groups and asked them to state the main reason that they were there to review those projects. They were going to have a spokesman take those down. I sat at a table with one of the current Town Council members and with two candidates for the Town Council and a member of their Plan Commission and the Director of Planning for the County. I ended up at a pretty good table. I conveyed to them with what I thought were five major issues for the Town of Plainfield. Number one, being roads. I told them that anything that was developed south of U.S. 36 we felt made a major impact on the road system. We were concerned about the impact on the schools because we have people within the Town of Plainfield in the school system. I told them that we were concerned about the wastewater treatment because it was in our planning area. We were concerned about the water in the area, drinking water, because that is also in our planning area. And that we were concerned about stormwater runoff because of particularly the new regulations that we are faced with. I asked them to incorporate all of those when they made the presentation to a full group. I told them that I had hoped that my being there would help promote some better communications and a conciliatory type relationship where we could work together constructively as the areas are planned. I met privately with the two developers as I was leaving and expressed some concerns to them. Mr. Daniel said I have one item that is on the agenda so I m sure that everybody is familiar with what has occurred. When we started the park project, we contacted property owners on the north side of Pike Lane and indicated that if any of those property owners might be interested in selling their property while we were acquiring property on the south side of Pike Lane, the Town would consider that. Mr. & Mrs. Elmore indicated some interest early and then I talked to them and they were still thinking and hadn t made any decision. They called me last week and said they were seriously considering going ahead and talking with the Town about possibly the Town buying their property and gave me the name of the appraiser that they would be using. The appraiser is out of Mooresville so I told her I would prepare a resolution for them to bring to the Town Council tonight. And we would go forward with the appraisals and see where we go with that. RESOLUTIONS Mr. Ward made a motion to approve Resolution No : Interest by the Town to acquire the Elmore property. Second by Mr. Kirchoff. Roll call vote called. Mr. Ward yes Mr. Kirchoff yes Mr. McPhail yes Mr. Young yes Mr. Brandgard yes 5-ayes, 0-opposed, 0-absent. Motion carried. Mr. Young made a motion to approve Resolution No : A Declaratory Resolution for 10-year Personal Property (New Equipment) Tax Abatement for Puritan-Bennett Corporation. Second by Mr. McPhail.! 9

10 Mr. Kirchoff said I have a question on this one. It relates to a question that Mr. Young made a meeting or two ago. As we talked about going north with some of this land purchase, there was a concern about a former landfill. Is this close to or adjacent or is there any risk at this point? Mr. McPhail said we already approved that one. Mr. Brandgard said your question is a good one. Mr. Ward said it is close. Mr. Daniel said there was a project on that landfill with the County and the State and the Town of Plainfield is cooperating. My understanding is that is on the Elmore property where I believe that project was conducted, the old Shouse Landfill. The resolution is for the purpose of authorizing appraisals at this point. It doesn t obligate either the Elmore s or the Town. Mr. Brandgard said there was a motion and a second to approve Resolution No Roll call vote called. Mr. Ward yes Mr. Kirchoff yes Mr. McPhail yes Mr. Young yes Mr. Brandgard yes 5-ayes, 0-opposed, 0-absent. Motion carried. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Kirchoff made a motion to sign the necessary documents and adjourn. Second by Mr. Young. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned. Robin G. Brandgard, President! 10