COUNTY SERVICES

Approved 2/19/08

COUNTY SERVICES

February 5, 2008

Minutes

Members Present: Deb Nolan, Debbie DeLeon, Dale Copedge, Tim Soule, Mark Grebner, Mike Severino and Board Chairperson Marc Thomas

Members Absent: None

Others Present: Matthew Myers, Tony Lindsey, Ernie Wallick, Sue Pigg, Paul Kindel, Stacy Byers, Dr. Sienko, Randy Bell and Becky Bennett

The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Nolan at 7:00 p.m. in the Personnel Conference Room of the Human Services Building, 5303 S. Cedar, Lansing.

Approval of the January 15, 2007 Minutes and December 4, 2007 Closed Session Minutes

MOVED BY COMM. SOULE, SUPPORTED BY COMM. DELEON, TO APPROVE THE JANUARY 15 MINUTES AS AMENDED AND THE DECEMBER 4, 2007 CLOSED SESSION MINUTES AS SUBMITTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Absent: Comm. Grebner

The Minutes were amended to reflect the following:

Page five, item 2, last paragraph: Chairperson Nolan stated Comm. Grebner had a concern that properties close to the county borders are benefiting the adjacent counties by participating in the farmland preservation program. The system should be skewed to address this Committee’s concerns about the properties that are adjacent to outlying counties as opposed to interior municipalities.

Additions to the Agenda: None

Limited Public Comment: None

MOVED BY COMM. SOULE, SUPPORTED BY COMM. SEVERINO, TO APPROVE A CONSENT AGENDA FOR THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:

1. Circuit Court – Resolution to Enter into an Agreement for a Policy for the Operation of Computer Network, Internet Access and Email with the Circuit Court

3. Ingham County Economic Development Corporation

a. Resolution Approving a Revised Brownfield Plan for Redevelopment of Ingham County Land Bank Fast Track Authority Properties in Accordance with the Brownfield Redevelopment Financing Act

5. Health Department

a. Resolution to Accept an Additional Ryan White Part B Grant Award from the Michigan Department of Community Health to Expand HIV Care Services

b. Recommendation to Start a Dentist at Step 5

6. Ingham County MSU Extension – Resolution to Establish Two Part-Time, Temporary Recycling Workers in Partnership with the Mason High School Community-Based Instruction and MSU Extension 4-H Youth Development Programs

7. County Services Committee – Resolution Recognizing “Black History/Cultural Diversity

Month” in Ingham

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Absent: Comm. Grebner

MOVED BY COMM. SOULE, SUPPORTED BY COMM. SEVERINO, TO APPROVE THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Absent: Comm. Grebner

2. Agricultural Preservation Board – Presentation of 2007 Annual Report

Mr. Kindel highlighted a few items in the Report. He stated the application cycle is running well. The County ranked 9^th out 11 counties that submitted applications in 2006. Ingham County’s top farm ranked third out of at least 18 farms. The State and Federal scores were combined and the top six programs were selected. Mr. Kindel explained that Ingham County was not selected for funding. He then reviewed the scoring system associated with the State cycle.

(Comm. Grebner arrived at 7:08 p.m. )

Mr. Kindel stated the Agricultural Preservation Board has developed a draft priority map that should meet the State requirements in the next funding cycle. The Board believes that if improvements are made in this area, as well as other areas, it will garner a significant increase in points for its application in the next State application cycle.

The Committee held a general discussion regarding this matter. Comm. Copedge asked if Mr. Kindel’s and Ms. Byer’s time was qualified for this process. Ms. Byers explained that points are awarded to qualified township programs that place a priority on sending local officials, especially planning commission members, to participate with the MSU Citizen Planner Program. Points are also awarded for employees who are committed to the program. Comm. Severino stated he hopes that if changes are not made, Ms. Byers will make sure that people do their part in this process.

Comm. Copedge asked if the Board had the point criteria prior to submitting their funding application. Ms. Byers explained that she had to meet with the director to obtain and to understand the criteria. Mr. Kindel stated the point criteria should have been provided with the application information.

Mr. Kindel stated he believes the Board needs dedicated funding from the County in order for the preservation program to be successful. He further stated the Board is aware of this Committee’s position on the outlying farms issue. This matter will be discussed by the Board.

Comm. Soule explained that the outlying farms who receive the funding will benefit those outlying counties, not Ingham County. Comm. Grebner stated the center of the County’s population is Aurelius and Cavanaugh Streets. He then stated if the Board needs a dedicated source of funding to attribute to us, the funds should come from some other source.

3. Ingham County Economic Development Corporation

b. Resolution Approving an Amendment to the Ingham County Brownfield Redevelopment Authority Brownfield Plan for Shaw’s on Newton LLC and Ingham County Land Bank Fast Track Authority

MOVED BY COMM. SEVERINO, SUPPORTED BY COMM. DELEON, TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE INGHAM COUNTY BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BROWNFIELD PLAN FOR SHAW’S ON NEWTON LLC AND INGHAM COUNTY LAND BANK FAST TRACK AUTHORITY.

Chairperson Nolan stated she understands that Mr. Gilbert White will develop this property and that he will receive a $7 million tax break over 20 years. Ms. Pigg stated it’s not a tax break, per se. She then explained that the developer will be paid to clean up the site and to provide public water and sewer hook ups. Some of the financing will come back to the County to pay for the EPA assessment of the site.

Comm. Grebner stated the developer will have to pay for the extension of the utilities. The developer is being absolved of this cost. Cleaning up the site does not include the extension of utilities. Ms. Pigg explained that she does not represent the developer. The term “repair” means to bring the site up to developable standard. This term is used statewide in Brownfield discussions. Comm. Copedge suggested the Brownfield use the term “remediate” instead of “repair.”

Comm. Grebner asked if it’s possible for the County to approve specific costs. Ms. Pigg explained that Brownfield Authorities are TIFA’s. The reimbursements must meet federal and state requirements.

Comm. Copedge asked if the developer has funding security with the County. Ms. Pigg stated the developer is not responsible to the County in this matter.

Comm. Soule stated there are large homes going up in that area. The Brownfield Development Authority’s (Authority) role is to fill in these types of areas. Only eligible expenditures will be refunded to the developer. The dollar amount in the material is a ceiling. It’s in the County’s best interest to fill in the unoccupied areas.

This discussion continued. Comm. Copedge asked if the Township is satisfied with the number. Ms. Pigg stated the Township is comfortable with the number. Comm. Grebner stated the developer is being reimbursed for his costs that are not related to the project. Comm. Soule stated the developer is not being reimbursed above and beyond his expenses. The Authority gives developers incentives to develop properties that would otherwise not be developed. Comm. Grebner stated he is not concerned with the remediation costs. Comm. Soule stated he understands Comm. Grebner’s position.

Comm. Severino asked Ms. Pigg about the increase in the taxable value of the property after it’s developed. Ms. Pigg stated the initial cost of the property is $267,536. The final taxable value is projected to be $20,908,722. Comm. Severino stated the County will benefit from the additional revenue.

MOTION CARRIED with Comm. Grebner voting NO.

Comm. Copedge stated he wants to ensure that the County uses the correct terminology in its writings and documents. Comm. Grebner stated the Authority should use neutral terms. Ms. Pigg stated she is using the Authority’s terminology.

Chairperson Nolan thanked Ms. Pigg for addressing this Committee’s concerns.

4. Equal Opportunity Committee – Resolution Recommending Establishment of an Employment of Relatives Policy

MOVED BY COMM. DELEON, SUPPORTED BY COMM. COPEDGE, TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING ESTABLISHMENT OF AN EMPLOYMENT OF RELATIVES POLICY.

Comm. Severino asked if the County’s Policy could be modeled after the State’s policy. Mr. Wallick stated the State does have a nepotism policy but it differs from the County’s proposed policy. The EOC received samples of policies from 14 counties. These policies were consulted in the drafting of our policy.

Mr. Myers stated he spoke with Ms. Toskey, County Attorney, regarding this matter and some of the language was tweaked. Comm. Grebner asked if this Committee is being asked to approve the establishment of the policy or to approve the policy. Mr. Myers stated the request is to approve the policy. He then explained the policy will pertain to future employees.

Comm. Grebner asked if the policy requires a reorganization of a department so that an employee would not have to be let go. Mr. Myers stated an employee would be transferred to another department. Comm. Grebner stated the County should have an affirmative responsibility to remediate this matter.

Board Chairperson Thomas stated the termination of an employee per this policy is addressed in the County’s collective bargaining agreements. Mr. Myers stated that is the reason the policy calls for a transfer versus a termination. He then stated if an employee is on probationary status and is not a part of a union; the new employee would probably be terminated.

Board Chairperson Thomas stated it appears that if two employees get married, it would be a violation of the policy. Chairperson Nolan stated the County will try to find an alternative placement for the affected employee. The policy should not be broadened.

Comm. Severino stated he would be comfortable if this policy is reviewed by the department heads.

Comm. Grebner suggested the title of the Resolution be amended to:

RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING EMPLOYMENT OF RELATIVES POLICY

This was accepted as a Friendly Amendment to the Resolution.

The following amendment was accepted as a Friendly Amendment to the THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED paragraph:

TBIR: that the Ingham County Board of Commissioners adopts the Employment of Relatives Policy, which is attached,

Comm. Grebner asked if the policy applies to current employees who marry other employees. Mr. Myers stated the policy would apply to such situations. The policy does not apply to current married employees.

Board Chairperson Thomas stated he worries that regulating whether current or future employees will marry will cause headaches for staff. It makes sense that a supervisor should not hire a relative.

The Committee suggested the following changes to the Policy:

Definitions: include cousins

Remedial Actions: In the event no relative volunteers to transfer or resign, the County may consider modifying reporting responsibilities, then the employee(s) . . .

MOVED BY COMM. GREBNER, SUPPORTED BY COMM. COPEDGE, TO TABLE THE RESOLUTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Board Chairperson Thomas stated staff should speak with the unions regarding this policy.

(Comm. DeLeon left the meeting at 8:45 p.m.)

8. Controller’s Office

a. Resolution to Reorganize Central Services

MOVED BY COMM. GREBNER, SUPPORTED BY COMM. SEVERINO, TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION TO REORGANIZE CENTRAL SERVICES.

Comm. Severino asked Mr. Myers if he is comfortable with the proposed changes. Mr. Myers stated ideally the changes would happen when the Financial Services Director retires.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Absent: Comm. DeLeon

b. Informational Item – Ingham Conservation Accomplishments Report

The Report was received and placed on file.

Announcements: None

Public Comment: None

The meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Debra Neff