Skip to content | Skip to navigation

December 7, 2005 Minutes

December 7, 2005 Minutes

    DAUPHIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
    COMMISSIONERS' WORKSHOP MEETING
    WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2005 10:00 A.M.

    MEMBERS PRESENT

    Jeff Haste, Chairman
    Dominic D. DiFrancesco, II, Vice Chairman
    George P. Hartwick, III, Secretary

    STAFF PRESENT

    Chad Saylor, Chief Clerk/Chief of Staff; Bill Tully, Esq., Solicitor; Marie Rebuck, Controller; Robert Dick, Treasurer; Randy Baratucci, Purchasing Director; Tom Guenther, I. T. Director; Gary Serhan, Deputy Controller; Carolyn Thompson, Court Administrator; Bob Hawley, Deputy Court Administrator; Sandy Moore, Human Services Director; Elke Moyer, Human Services; Faye Fisher, Personnel Director; Kay Sinner, Personnel; Robb Wentzel, EMA Director; Diane McNaughton, Press Secretary; Melanie McCaffrey, Solicitor's Office; Guy Beneventano, Esq., Assistant Solicitor; Deb Lisi, Controller's Office; Fred Lighty, Esq., Assistant Solicitor; Garry Esworthy, Risk Manager; Dan Robinson, Economic Development; Jena Wolgemuth, Commissioners' Office; Lena Martinez, Commissioners' Office; Charles Sheaffer, Deputy Sheriff; Julia E. Nace, Assistant Chief Clerk; Stephanie Strayer, Human Services; Mike Pries, Director of Security.

    GUESTS PRESENT

    Don Smith; Rick Malwitz; Darrin Robinson; Brad DeLancey

    MINUTES

    CALL TO ORDER

    Mr. Haste, Chairman of the Board, called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.

    MOMENT OF SILENCE

    Everyone observed a moment of silence.

    PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

    Everyone stood for the Pledge of Allegiance.

    APPROVAL OF MINUTES

    Mr. Haste: We have four sets of Meeting Minutes that we'll take up at next week's meeting.

    PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

    Mr. Haste: We are at the point in time of the meeting for public participation. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to address the Board? (There was none.)

    DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS/GUESTS

    1. Commissioners
      1. Presentation of the Craig Webb Memorial Award.
    2. Virginia Bruner; Sandy Moore, Human Services Director; & Fred Lighty, Esq.
      1. Recommendation for a new site for the Upper Dauphin Human Services Center.
    3. Garry Esworthy, Risk Manager
      1. Proposal for a prescription drug discount program.

    Mr. Haste: We're going to take things out of order on the agenda this morning. We're going to take Item B under Directors and Guests first. I ask that Sandy, Virginia and Fred come forward.

    1. Virginia Bruner; Sandy Moore, Human Services Director; & Fred Lighty, Esq.
      1. Recommendation for a new site for the Upper Dauphin Human Services Center.

    Ms. Moore: We're here to talk about a recommendation for the location for the Upper Dauphin Human Services Center. Certainly, Virginia Bruner, who has been co-chair of the group that lead the evaluation of the site and the recommendation will do most of the talking but I just wanted to thank, Virginia and all the citizens in northern Dauphin County who came together who put many, many hours into the recommendation that is coming before you and also, the staff from around the County who additionally put in an incredible amount of time on evenings and weekends to make this possible. I'll now turn it over to Virginia.

    Ms. Bruner: Thank you for the opportunity to sit before you this morning and talk a little bit about Human Services needs in the northern end of Dauphin County and the great work and the timely work that is being done by the citizens in the upper end to move forward the Human Services' goals into the future.

    The Northern Dauphin County Human Services Advisory panel was convened out of some early meetings and a discussion that occurred in July of 2004 with the Children's Services and Mental Health Services groups, there were discussions about ongoing needs in the northern end of the County and also a discussion about future needs in the northern end of the County. That was a round table discussion. We also had some historic data that we looked at from an early county community round table committee report from November of 1999. As a result of those meetings, it was decided that a full blown task force or advisory panel should be convened in the northern end of Dauphin County. The purpose was already defined for the group. The general purpose was to continue growth of Human Services in the northern end of Dauphin County in a confidential and professional setting and contribute to the improved quality of life for citizens in the northern end of the county.

    The initial meeting which occurred in September had a composition of approximately a total of 40 individuals from various parts of the County. There were community representatives, Human Service Professionals, volunteers from various segments of the northern end of the community from various communities, there were business leaders, there were school leaders, local and community officials, as well as other individuals who expressed an interest in participation on this panel.

    From the first meeting, we identified additional constituencies that were not represented and we needed to find a way for those constituencies to be represented as well. Outreach was made to the community and at current figures we have approximately 100 members who have had an active part on this task force. At this first meeting in September of 2004, we established three priorities for the community. One was community education and outreach about current resources available in the local areas. We looked at location and image to review current representation of services in the community and also look at future needs. We also looked at the public relations piece for the area to decrease barriers and increase access for services in the community. From those three priorities, three committees were established, the education/outreach committee, the image and events committee and the location/image committee. Representatives at that meeting were requested to select which of those committees they would like to participate on. Sandy and her staff worked very hard to make sure that we've had equal representation from various aspects of the community. I'm going to move into the work of the location/image subcommittee because that is why we are here today.

    The considerations that we had, we're looking at the current facilities in the area. The current site of the Upper Dauphin Human Services Center has been the site for more than twenty years. It has served this community well as a resource and a location for Human Services but there have been several retrofitting for the site and it is marginally meeting needs now. There are issues and we knew those issues were going to continue into the future. Some of them were not going to be resolvable. So we looked at access and space. We were looking for opportunities to find a space that had confidentiality and, privacy as a prime consideration. We were looking at the transportation and geographic access piece. We looked at where our consumers/constituencies are located and where population centers are in the northern end of the county. We also looked at what kind of resources, what kind of agencies might be co-located together. Obviously and important for me, as a taxpayer, we looked at cost of such a change and also incentives that might be a part of this process. What we did was we opened up an opportunity for individual and organizational providers, owners of property developers to place into consideration buildings or building opportunities for us. We visited a lot of sites. I wish to do a quick run through. They are, the Northern Dauphin County YMCA; Polk Foundation in Millersburg; Kevin Jury's, a location in Lykens; one of our most interesting field trips was to the Lykens Hotel which has been closed for a number of years in Lykens; Washington Township just off Route 209, the BarMill property; Kocher Enterprises at the Lykens Valley Plaza; the Washington Township Building; a former shooting range in Halifax on Route 225; we talked to folks at Swab Wagon Company; and the former Agway location in Elizabethville; we also received inquiries from the owner of the Muskin Shoe Company in Millersburg area; and Mr. Troutman, as in the Millersburg area. Through all those contacts, a vetting process occurred. A series of questions were developed by Fred Lighty and sent out to each of the interested parties. They had timeframes through which they needed to respond. We came up with three final candidates, the Kevin Jury property in Lykens; the Polk Foundation in Millersburg; and the BarMill property in Washington Township. With those three properties a grid was developed with your engineers and surveys and that is off to my left. We looked at the financial picture. We looked at population issues and we also looked at other related issues of concern to the community. A final call was made to interested parties in a published article in the newspaper with a deadline of October 3, 2005. The three listed on the grid are the three that were final candidates. We held public meetings in addition to the public announcements and news articles. Public meetings were held on August 17th and November 15th. There was significant public interest. There was significant public comment fielded at both of those meetings. After the final public meeting in the middle of November, the subcommittee by secret ballot voted on the three final candidates and made a determination of the best choice to put forward to the full committee. By unanimous vote on December 5th, the committee is putting forth to you for consideration the BarMill property on Route 209 for the site of the new Northern Dauphin Government Center.

    An aerial view of the property is also off to my left. For those who may know the area, it is adjacent and immediately east of the State Police Barracks in the northern Dauphin County area.

    Mr. Hartwick: Obviously Virginia it seems now, that you and I are now related because we've spent so much time together. I want to thank you for number one, an extremely competent layout of the process. I think you have covered it extremely well and to be honest there is not a whole lot of details that you left out. You didn't throughout the entire process. I want to thank you for your work as the co-chair and all of your passion and energy and enthusiasm that you brought to this particular project. I know as it went on there was a lot of cynicism about the way government does business in general. There are a lot of thoughts about decisions being made before it is voted out in a public situation and the questions are asked and answered in this process, painstakingly so for all of us. We wanted to make sure that regardless of the criticism we wanted to get it right. It was because of your passion, the passion of the group, the passion of the folks who were part of this and donated their time for free to do the right thing to insure that there is a level of services that are equal to the level of services being provided in the rest of the County at this point. This sends another clear message from this Board of Commissioners. The message is and we all heard it when we went campaigning, north of Dauphin County was, you only see the Commissioners when it comes time to ask us for a vote. The ultimate fact from this Board and I know Nick and Jeff, that I have spent a significant amount of time over Peters Mountain that the quality of life of the citizens up there are unmatched and they deserve the type of services that we're going to attempt to provide in a professional, private manner. Working and communicating with the residents in the upper end, we have been able to solve a lot of problems before they've actually started to flair up. Even as of yesterday, a brand new sub-committee sprang out to continue our work in the area of public transportation and trying to address some of the critical needs. We're changing some things in medical assistance. We have CAT representatives and we'll talk about the best and most efficient way to provide transportation to individuals seeking services to that location. So our work is only beginning here. There was a lot of controversy around the site but I want to make it clear to all of those who were involved in the process that this is about consumers, this is about trying to do what is right for the residents and ultimately provide a level of service that the taxpayers in the upper end of the County deserve. We painstakingly went through the process to answer all of those questions. Quite frankly, no one deserves credit except for those individuals who took the time out of their busy schedule who are residents in the northern end. I know Commissioner Haste and Commissioner DiFrancesco gave me charge in this process and they said you will not do anything. It is not about what we want to see happen in the northern end. It is about the residents in the northern end want and I think they have spoken out pretty clear in this process. Thank you, Virginia.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: I just want to add a thank you. This process has been a tremendous amount of work. It has been just a fabulous process because the intent of the Board was in fact to make sure that the people most impacted by this would be the people served by this facility were the ones that were making the decision on what direction we're going to go. It has been an open process and in making it an open process, the volunteers that came together devoted an exorbitant amount of time to making sure that it worked. It has been controversial at times. There has been a lot of passion. There has been a lot of promotion to this process but seriously at the end of the day, the process worked. It was open. It was open to question. It was open to criticism. It was open to constructive comments. The people had the right to speak and they did. They came out and they spoke. The public hearings were fantastic. People had the opportunity to ask questions to see what was going on, to voice their concerns. This truly is an example in my opinion of the way government is supposed to work. There is nothing that we do from a public perspective that should not be open to debate discussion. We should not be afraid to let the people speak and in this process, it has been handled extremely well. I want to commend you for your efforts and for your time. The public will be well served because of the time and effort that you put into this process. When I say you, I'm also giving credit to the entire committee, but certainly as in the leadership role, I want to thank you as well. Excellent job!

    Mr. Haste: I would like to echo my two colleague's comments. This was one of the projects where, the interesting thing was, I was avoiding meetings. I think everybody with some sort of slight vested interest in one of these sites wanted to sit down and talk. I think what made it work so well is that we've decided not to do that. To some of those folks frustration, I think, they wanted to work the system. But we made it very clear that the system would be the local committee making the determination and again, I think that worked very well. I'm pleased with the outcome and again, I thank you, Fred, Sandy, and everybody else that was involved in the process. Commissioner Hartwick, too, I know it probably was a tough time for you at times not to have more of a say in things. I know you like to direct things. But I think there is a compliment to you for the restraint you used. I think at this time, it is my understanding that we want to give tentative approval to this pending review by the Solicitor's Office.

    Mr. Tully: I think technically if you find the recommendation to be acceptable the appropriate thing would be to direct the staff to go out and negotiate a lease and see if that is then feasible from a financial point of view.

    Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to do so?

    Mr. Hartwick: I certainly would be proud and thankful that at this time we are able to make that motion.

    It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to accept the recommendation of the Human Services Advisory Committee of the BarMill property as future site of the Northern Dauphin County Government Center; motion carried.

    1. Commissioners
      1. Presentation of the Craig Webb Memorial Award.

    Mr. Haste: At this time I'll turn the microphone over to my colleague, Nick.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: This is a very great day to be paying tribute and it is also a sad day for me. Many of you know a year ago a friend of mine passed away who was a great servant in Dauphin County. He passed away at a very young age, certainly taken from us prematurely by our standard. I guess the maker had a different plan. Craig Webb was a friend. He was a fellow graduate of the Middletown High School. He was a tremendous public servant in so many ways. Craig served as a police officer, an EMS professional and firefighter. He was a good friend. He is a friend that is missed by so many people in this community. With his death, the Board thought it appropriate to institute the Craig Webb Award as a memorial to him and an every lasting memory to him. Also as a means of identifying people in our community who like Craig do public service. They go out every day, put their lives on the line to protect others. In his memory, it was a tremendous way that we could identify people within the community that are selfless volunteers and professionals who give of themselves everyday and take time from their families everyday to make sure they are serving the needs of others. We instituted the award and as you can see by the plaque the award identifies a firefighter of the year, emergency professional of the year and a police officer of the year. Those selections are not made by this Board. Those selections are made by the respective bodies, the Police Chiefs Association, the EMS Council and the Fire Chiefs Association. They make the recommendations and bring the name up through and present them to the Board and we acknowledge them. Today we have the opportunity to acknowledge three individuals who are well worth the credit that we bring to them today. If I could I'm going to take the time to read each and everyone of these because they are all different and they all pay respect to a professional in a different field.

    I'm going to begin by reading the proclamation for the "Firefighter of the Year".

    Office of County Commissioner
    Dauphin County, Pennsylvania

    Proclamation

    We, the Dauphin County Board of Commissioners, take great pride and pleasure in joining the countless friends, family members, the firefighter community and the community at large in congratulating Darrin Robinson of Swatara Township on receiving the prestigious Craig Webb Memorial Award for 2005;

    Whereas, Mr. Robinson began his distinguished service as a volunteer firefighter more than 25 years ago, starting out as a member of the Union Deposit Volunteer Fire Company in South Hanover Township;

    Whereas, since that time, he has served the Rutherford Fire Company and the Lawnton Fire Company in various positions, including President, Vice-President, Assistant Fire Chief, Captain, Lieutenant and more;

    Whereas, in January 2001, recognizing his incomparable abilities, Swatara Township hired him for the position of Fire Marshal, a position which he currently holds; as such, he oversees six volunteer fire departments within Swatara Township, including Bressler, Enhaut, Oberlin, Lawnton, Rutherford and Chambers Hill, as well as the Chambers Hill/Swatara Township EMS;

    Whereas, when he is not investigating fires, reviewing new construction plans, and enforcing fire codes, he enjoys spending time with his lovely wife Lisa and their family;

    Therefore, we join the 251,300 residents of Dauphin County in congratulating Darrin Robinson as he receives the Craig Webb Memorial Award for a lifetime of hard work and public service; we applaud his devotion to personal excellence, professional achievement and community service; we wish him continued health, happiness and success in the years to come; and in grateful recognition of his exemplary life, heroic efforts and extraordinary professionalism, we proudly declare December 7, 2005 as "Darrin Robinson Day" in Dauphin County.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: I'm going to ask for appropriate applause for each individual but I hold off in bringing them up to receive the proclamation until I go through all three of them. Congratulations!

    Next we have the "EMS Provider of the Year".

    Office of County Commissioner
    Dauphin County, Pennsylvania

    Proclamation

    We, the Dauphin County Board of Commissioners, take great pride and pleasure in joining the countless friends, family members and emergency medical service providers in congratulating Donald W. Smith, Jr. of Middle Paxton Township on receiving the prestigious Craig Webb Memorial Award for 2005;

    Whereas, after several years of "riding along" on ambulance calls under the mentorship of Bob McAfee, a neighbor, Mr. Smith officially began a distinguished career in emergency service in January of 1974 as a volunteer ambulance attendant and firefighter with the Reliance Hose Co. #1 of Rutherford;

    Whereas, in 1994, while teaching at the Dauphin County Technical School, Don instituted major changes to the school emergency response plan, an accomplishment for which he was recognized by the Dauphin County Emergency Management Agency and Board of Commissioners;

    Whereas, today, Mr. Smith serves as coordinator and instructor for EMT programs through Harrisburg Area Community College, as well as assistant chief with the Dauphin-Middle Paxton Community Ambulance service, as emergency management coordinator for the Dauphin-Middle Paxton Regional EMA, and as a volunteer with Dauphin County EMA in the emergency operations center;

    Therefore, we join the 251,300 residents of Dauphin County in congratulating Donald W. Smith, Jr. as he receives the Craig Webb Memorial Award for a lifetime of life-saving, life-sustaining work and public service to Dauphin County; we applaud his devotion to personal excellence, professional achievement and community service; we wish him continued health, happiness and success in the years to come; and in grateful recognition of his exemplary life and extraordinary professionalism, we proudly declare December 7, 2005 as "Donald W. Smith, Jr. Day" in Dauphin County.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: The last award that I'll read is for the "Police Professional of the Year".

    Office of County Commissioner
    Dauphin County, Pennsylvania

    Proclamation

    We, the Dauphin County Board of Commissioners, take great pride and pleasure in joining the countless friends, family members and fellow law enforcement professionals in congratulating Richard H. Malwitz, Jr. of Lower Paxton Township on receiving the prestigious Craig Webb Memorial Award for 2005;

    Whereas, Mr. Malwitz began his remarkable career in law enforcement in 1969 with the Denver Police Department, and went on to serve the Lower Swatara Township Police Department for more than 25 years as the highly respected Chief of Police;

    Whereas, his involvement within the community is impressive and ever-present; he currently serves as an appointed Key Leader for the Middletown Area chapter of the Community That Cares program, and is a member of the Dauphin County Critical Incident Stress Management Team, reaching out with compassion and competence to the victims of 9-11 and many other heart-wrenching tragedies;

    Whereas, reflecting his reputation as a mentor and role model, he is a past president and current member of the Dauphin County Chiefs of Police Association, a past member of the DUI Task Force and a police consultant with the Dept. of Community Affairs;

    Whereas, since retiring, Mr. Malwitz enjoys spending time with his wife, three children and three grandchildren, earning some richly deserved peace;

    Therefore, we join the 251,300 residents of Dauphin County in congratulating Richard H. Malwitz, Jr. as he receives the Craig Webb Memorial Award; we applaud his devotion to personal excellence, professional achievement and community service, in the true spirit of Craig Webb; we wish him continued health, happiness and success; and in grateful recognition of his exemplary life and extraordinary professionalism, we proudly declare December 7, 2005 as "Richard H. Malwitz, Jr. Day" in Dauphin County.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: Will the three of you come forward please with appropriate family members if they are here? (The proclamations were presented to each individual, a picture was taken and applause.)

    Mr. Malwitz: I worked around Craig Webb for many years and I do mean around him. If you went through a door with Craig you had to stand off to the side and let him go through first. He was a wonderful guy always one who would be there to help you and not just doing his job. He was so very open and a kind gentleman. He was a pleasure to work with and it makes this award so much better because it has his name on it.

    Mr. Smith: I would like to echo what Chief Malwitz had to say about Craig. It was so unfortunate that he passed away when he did. A lot of folks think of the EMS, the firefighters and police in saving lives is caring about people and that is what Craig did day in and day out wherever he was working. Craig cared about people and I think that is what he should be most remembered for.

    Mr. Hartwick: With that you notice how these public servants are, they are modest and they give credit to other people and they recognize the individual who this award was named after. Public servants are all about service to other people. I think these three individuals today exemplify that and I want to add my personal congratulations. Thank you.

    Mr. Haste: Thank you, congratulations and keep up the good work. You guys are good citizens in the community, good role models and we thank you for that.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: The award will be returned to its position at EMA where it hangs and each one of you will see it because each one of you have continued roles working with County Emergency Management. Thank you all very, very much and congratulations!

    Mr. Haste: At this time, I'm going to go off the agenda and invite Andrew Giorgione to come forward to discuss an item on the Solicitor's Report.

    Mr. Giorgione: As you recall, we recently amended the County's Waste Plan in a couple of different respects but one of the principal respects is that we now provide for the management of construction and demolition waste. We issued an RFP, had responses to the RFP, selected a bunch of facilities but we also provided a mechanism whereby if additional facilities wanted to join the plan in the future to be able to accept disposal of C&D waste, they could send in an application. We have forms and everything drafted. If they are appropriate, then we go to contract with them. We recently had a flurry of entities that stepped up and wanted to join in the plan. The first was the Milton Grove Landfill which is in Lancaster. It is owned by Onyx Lancaster LLC. Essentially the form construction and demolition waste agreement they submitted proposals for capacity reservation, pricing all of which is appropriate and the facilities permit. We would like to enter into a construction and demolition waste processing and disposal agreement with them. Then we also received correspondence from an entity by the name of Northeast Waste Services which actually owns three facilities that are permitted to accessed C&D waste; the Mosteller Landfill, Sandy Run Landfill and Cumberland County Landfills. All those landfills are generally in our areas and also in Cumberland County. We found the applications to be appropriate. They have reserve capacity at their facilities and have given appropriate pricing so we would like to enter into three separate agreements with the corporate entities that own each of those landfills all under the umbrella of the Northeast Waste Services. That is it.

    Mr. Haste: Are there any questions of Andy? (There were none.) We'll bring those contracts up at next week's meeting. This was a need that was identified in the community, the need to dispose of construction material.

    Mr. Giorgione: Really what happened were two things. First, in the past, we only provided for the management of municipal solid waste but then the DEP expanded the regulations and said that counties could plan and provide for capacity reservation for C&D waste. We thought we would permit under the umbrella. Ultimately the big plan is what we would like to do is to start tracking C&D waste where it is going and how it is being disposed because we believe there is an opportunity to get into recycling for this material. There are pilot programs in other counties where they have tracked this waste. They do a bunch of different things. You can do reverse permitting in things where a contractor will pay a certain amount of a fee to dispose of C&D waste and then if they wind up recycling it, you rebate back to them to encourage them to recycle. There are certainly a lot of materials with all the construction particularly in this county when you have a lot of public buildings particularly the state buildings. What we found is this county has an enormous amount of C&D waste. There should be opportunities for recycling which benefits everybody. That's the big picture as to why we did this.

    Mr. Haste: Any further questions?

    Mr. DiFrancesco: No.

    Mr. Haste: We will now move back to the agenda and I'll ask Garry to come forward.

    1. Garry Esworthy, Risk Manager
      1. Proposal for a prescription drug discount program.

    Mr. Esworthy: At the request of Chad, I was asked to look into a discount prescription card program. Along with that, we had a little task group of Diane McNaughton, Sandy Moore, Barry Wyrick, Bob Burns and myself.

    We had some discussions last week. This program is offered by two different groups, Comprehensive HealthCare Solutions and NACo.

    The program itself is not an insurance program. It is strictly a discount card program which is offered at no cost to whoever we would like within the county. It could be targeted groups, it could be an entire mailing to every household in the county, it could be used at the county prison for those individuals who have no coverage for discount pharmaceuticals.

    I met along with Diane and Bob Burns with Comprehensive HealthCare Solutions and spoke to them briefly about what is the difference between the two. I prepared a spread chart which I gave you.

    First of all, the cards, there are some demos as to what they would look like. The card itself is very generic. There are no registration fees. There is no cost to the county. There is no cost to the citizens who use it. It would be engraved with the county logo and the Commissioners' names on it. The average savings to those individuals using the card is about 20% for both. Pharmacies that are included are all major pharmacies. It goes from Walmarts, Rite-Aides, and the CVS. The entire county would be covered. There are no enrollment fees for either the county or the individuals. Press releases are required and there is no strict oversight of those press releases. Paid advertisement is given to us by Comprehensive HealthCare which would be a local newspaper, an ad in the local newspaper explaining the program in its entirety. That is not provided by NACo. Directly mailing costs from Comprehensive HealthCare would be at no cost. They would ask us to use our bulk mailing permit. They would reimburse us for the cost. NACo does not do that. Comprehensive HealthCare also rebate back to the County ten cents for each prescription filled by using the card. There is no rebate with NACo. There is an 800 number on the cards for individual's use so they wouldn't be directly calling the county. If there is a problem with the card itself they could call the 800 number or go to the website which could be linked through the county's website. I see there is no cost to the county with Comprehensive HealthCare at all and with NACo there are some costs to the county which would be the advertisements in the paper and/or bulk mailing as I indicated above.

    The counties in Pennsylvania that are with this program are Lehigh, Carbon, Luzerne and Schuykill with Comprehensive HealthCare Solutions and NACo has no counties currently in Pennsylvania using this program. They do have one in Maryland that I'm aware of. With NACo you have to be a member of NACo to participate in the program. The website for the consumers for the Comprehensive HealthCare Solutions is not that great. There is insufficient information on there. The NACo website is very informative for the individuals using it. Again this is not an insurance program. All it is a percentage off. There are some situations where you may not even get a percentage off. If the pharmaceutical company happened to pass down through the pharmacy a lesser amount of cost to push that particular pharmaceutical brand you probably will not see a reduction in pricing. Again, it is something that we can offer back out to the citizens at no cost to the county which may benefit them. From what I'm understanding is that there really is no oversight from the county. Once it's done, it's done. Hand out the cards, you send the mailings out, of course we'll probably get a percentage of phone calls from individuals who see the county logo on it if there is a problem. But most of the problems can go to the 800 number and/or the website and be answered. I would recommend at this time that we look more closely at it and see which way we want to go and where the benefits are with both of them. There really is no history. This has only been in effect with NACo probably about three or four months. Comprehensive HealthCare Solutions, they just signed up these four counties within the last two months. So we really don't have a lot of history on how it is perceived by the community yet although, there are more and more non-profit groups that are doing this. Just in Monday's paper, I believe United Way started offering a similar discount card to some of the individuals that they service. Are there any questions that I can answer at this time?

    Mr. DiFrancesco: You do have I'm assuming some track record and maybe these statistics were given to you by the company, you don't know what is backing them up at this point. But for instance if it says the average savings is 20%, they have to be basing that on the fact that it has been used in other places. I'm just curious, are there any issues that go along with it in terms of questions? It seems like whenever you have a health insurance plan, there are always these sort of gray areas that come up, how are we going to handle these situations? Because this would be really something that we would be providing as a service but we really wouldn't have a lot of hands on it, I'm curious as to what some of those issues might be when somebody approaches the pharmacy with expectation of getting a discount and in fact, because of the thing that you just mentioned, may be that particular medication is on some special discount already, they don't get a discount. Where does that complaint go? Where does that question go? Obviously, it goes to an 800 number but what resolution, is that person going to get frustrated? We all know even when you have something that is free to you when you walk in with expectations and it doesn't go quite the way you want it to, a lot of people won't just sit back and say, 90% of the time I make out. They will look at that 1% of the time where it didn't work and complain. I just want to have a better feel for how this system works. I think it is a great idea. I'm not sure that I quite understand the whole background as to how it came to be and everything. Obviously, if we can provide 20% savings to the consumers of Dauphin County simply by getting a free prescription card discount card, I'm a big fan of that idea. I would like to know how the procedure works and a little more so I know what exactly we're getting into.

    Mr. Haste: I saw a presentation by NACo I think last year in DC. Correct me if I'm wrong, this is only 20% or whatever the percentage is on non-insured prescriptions.

    Mr. Esworthy: That is correct.

    Mr. Haste: If you have a prescription card now through your employer, you're not getting an additional 20 on top of this?

    Mr. Esworthy: That is correct.

    Mr. Haste: But there are quite a few folks out there who, whether they be self-employed or whatever, do not have a prescription card. That is who this would help.

    Mr. Esworthy: It would even help, when I spoke to the gentleman from Comprehensive HealthCare Solutions also, that even if you have a prescription card, and maybe even if you have a prescription that is covered under your plan, you could use this for that particular pharmaceutical brand also. But there are a lot of people out there.

    Mr. Haste: Even if my card is generic and my doctor writes a prescription for the brand name and I decided I want to use the brand name instead of the generic, I could get the 20% there?

    Mr. Esworthy: If it is not covered or co-pay in any way, shape or form, yes, you could use it for that particular one.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: I could be a blanket or wrap around for extra coverage.

    Mr. Esworthy: It would but would be very rarely used for that purpose because with all prescription plans you either pay a large co-pay, like us we have a three tier formula. Chances are the 20% still would not equate out to that but there are some plans out there. I know the gentleman from Comprehensive HealthCare Solutions, in fact yesterday he was in Orlando, Florida making a presentation to Paul Rothman down there on the prescription plan. Their plan doesn't sufficiently cover enough medication so they're going to be doing this also.

    Mr. Saylor: One thing that we talked about is having folks from this company, if you guys are interested, come in and make a presentation to you and answer your questions directly. We wanted to bring this issue forward and if the interest is there we would take the next step.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: I'm very interested.

    Mr. Saylor: Lehigh in particular had been one county early on that NACo had said was looking at going with them. The next thing we knew Lehigh was no longer going with them and we come to find out that this company had approached them and clearly they saw the benefit and went that way. So we began to look harder at this company. We obviously found the reasons why Lehigh made their choice. If that is the case, Garry why don't you reach out and see if the company could come in on a Wednesday and give a presentation?

    Mr. Esworthy: I could schedule them for the next workshop probably.

    PERSONNEL

    Ms. Fisher: I'm going to be the voice for Kay, she can't really talk but may be able to answer questions that you have about the packet.

    There are several salary board requests in the packet. Spring Creek is eliminating a nursing supply aide and creating a central supply inventory specialist. Clerk of Courts is eliminating two part-time temporary department clerk I positions that were created several months ago. Facility maintenance office, actually there is a full-time department clerk II position in Solid Waste that we are eliminating and creating this position in Facility Maintenance. In Purchasing, we are eliminating a secretary II position and creating an administrative assistant I position. In the Sheriff's office we are eliminating a deputy sheriff position and creating a senior lead deputy sheriff position. In Cost and Fines, we are reclassifying two accounts clerk II positions into accounts clerk III positions.

    Mr. Haste: Is that driven by the union?

    Ms. Fisher: Yes, both of the positions are. We are also requesting eliminating a legal clerk I position in MDJ Stewart's office and created in MDJ Pelino's office as a legal clerk I. Then finally we are requesting that a legal clerk III in MDJ Smith's office be eliminated and creating a legal clerk I position.

    Mr. Haste: Is that the position that the person is transferring into another county position?

    Ms. Fisher: The last one?

    Ms. Sinner: Yes.

    Mr. Haste: Any questions of Kay?

    Mr. DiFrancesco: Actually, did we ever answer the question on the desk audit that came up with regard to the district justice staff? An email came back to us, do we still do the desk audits? Did that ultimately get resolved?

    Ms. Thompson: I've spoken with personnel and they are going to start with that at the beginning of the year. Right now they are going to be swamped doing the end of the year stuff.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: I just wanted to make sure that there is an adequate answer.

    Ms. Thompson: Yes, we have done that.

    Ms. Fisher: Moving into the personnel packet, we have several vacancies, we have new hires, there is one new hire on page 3, #18 that I would like to ask the Board to vote and approve today. This is for the Sheriff's department. There was a person hired for this position that has since declined the offer. So the Sheriff would like to hire this person effective December 12, 2005 for court week.

    Mr. Haste: Is that the only request?

    Ms. Fisher: Yes, and the rest of the packet includes the personnel changes and separations.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: The dietary position at Spring Creek, does that need to be pushed? I guess not because it is not on here. I didn't know if that was an emergency case or... Is that the one that the request for the waiver came in on?

    Ms. Sinner: Yes, they are starting January 3, 2006.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: I was under the impression that it was more pressing and they needed to get it done.

    Ms. Sinner: Although their chief dietician is resigning.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: I know there has been some transition going on there.

    Ms. Sinner: I know they are starting in January and I didn't get word of that.

    Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to approve item #18 of this week's personnel packet?

    It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Haste to approve Item #18 of the new hires in the personnel packet; motion carries.

    PURCHASE ORDERS

    Mr. Baratucci: I distributed the packet yesterday. Friday was our deadline for people to get their requests in for the end of the year. So hopefully this will be the majority of them. I suspect that there might be one or two that get added between now and next week. I'm aware of a couple that are still in the works and not sure if they are going to get done this year or not. If they do, we'll have them contact oversight as usual and request that it be added. Otherwise the packet is there for your review. There are still a couple of outstanding budget issues but we are in the process of resolving those right now. If you have any questions on the packet, I'll be happy to answer them otherwise it will be forwarded on next week.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: On page 4, the 23" monitor, what is that for?

    Mr. Baratucci: There is a program going on right now in the Public Defender's Office to upgrade their scheduling and this would be the electronic monitor that is going into the office to keep track of the schedules instead of the paper. I think Tom can probable elaborate on it. He is working with George Shultz on this.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: I'm curious about the 23", that is pretty big. What is it going to be used for?

    Mr. Guenther: It replaces the white board that they have now.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: So actually the schedule will be presented on the monitor.

    Mr. Guenther: Yes, and tied back into the software that can update their schedules.

    Mr. Haste: Which is actually smaller than what they use now, size wise.

    Mr. Guenther: Correct.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: I was just curious why we needed a screen that big but I understand.

    Mr. Guenther: They'll have that board when they walk in they can see where the attorney is.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: That's fine. It is an eye catcher.

    Mr. Baratucci: Do you have any other questions?

    Mr. Haste: What is a judicial tropical robe on page 12?

    Mr. Baratucci: May be Carolyn can explain that.

    Ms. Thompson: The tropical is a lighter weight that is a breathing material that should last longer.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: Randy, how are the gas bids handled? How do they determine what price per gallon we pay?

    Mr. Baratucci: We are a member of the Central Pennsylvania Energy Consortium and they do a joint bid for a bunch of counties, school districts, etc. In the past up until this past year, the bids would come in and we would have a choice of taking a firm price that would hold for the whole year or a fluctuating price. Most of the times, we would opt for the firm price assuming that the protection would be better. This past time none of the bidders bid a firm price which obviously, you probably know why because it is done in April of each year for an award in July. A lot of the members of this group are school districts. That is the timing of the year and last year when we did it, we just received no firm bids. OPIS stands for oral price information system or something. It is some schedule kind of like a bank thing that measures the changes in price so they bid a percentage or some many cents over cost type thing. Then it fluctuates based on the price of oil. We are members of that group and unfortunately, in this past year we suffered along with everybody else with the gas prices. But we are also getting the benefit of them coming down. That just fluctuates whenever that report comes out. I think it is on a weekly basis.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: Page 23, the imaging system, what is that for the courtroom?

    Mr. Baratucci: This is something that Domestic Relations came to me and said that Judge Turgeon requested to have a small copier in the courtroom. This is actually one of those multi-function machines. It is one of those print/scan and copy, one of those types of things. Domestic Relations I guess because of the work that Judge Turgeon does with Domestic Relations either offered or was asked to pay for it out of their funds. Obviously, it must qualify since it is a reimbursement thing. That was a request by Judge Turgeon that Domestic Relations said they would like to honor. It is going right in her courtroom.

    Mr. Haste: I want to give the courts kudos when I can, which isn't often. I guess in the last week there were three electronic arraignments from Camp Hill. That way we didn't have to bring individuals from Camp Hill into the prison. I know Judge Turgeon spent a long day out there yesterday at the prison. I know district justices are using this to some degree and the judges are using it now, also. That helps us in many ways. I would like to make sure that we keep that technology going. That saves us not only in transportation costs and the time it takes for the deputies to transport but also safety. It is a little harder for the individuals to escape during that process. I won't say they can't because if I say they couldn't some how it will happen.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: There is always a way.

    Mr. Haste: I do want to thank the courts for doing that. It is very beneficial. Is there anything else?

    Mr. Baratucci: There is one Blackberry request that you should have with the packet. It is for the Solicitor's Office for Chip and he is paying for it. It will be a personal item. There won't be any cost to the County. In fact, he'll pay the $50 to get hooked up to our system. So that will be there for your action, next week, also. I've heard that even Commissioner Hartwick will be okay with this one.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: I'll wait for the vote.

    Mr. Baratucci: Is there anything else? (There was none.)

    TRAINING PACKET

    Mr. Haste: Is there anything in the training packet that needs voted on today?

    Mr. Saylor: No.

    ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION

    Mr. Haste: We have items for discussion. Items A & B are requested for a vote today. Is there a motion to approve items A & B?

    It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Haste to approve the following items A & B; motion carried.

    1. Application for Support for Area Plan on PDA Waiver Program for the Area Agency on Aging Agency. (***REQUEST A VOTE 12/07/05)
    2. Resolution No. 37-2005 directing the Treasurer of the County of Dauphin to pay Tourist Promotion Agency (TPA) payments to the designated TPA through the Dauphin County Economic Development Corporation (DCED). (***REQUEST A VOTE 12/07/05)
    3. Professional Services Agreement between Dauphin County Emergency Management Agency and SSI Services, Inc., in connection with EMA's Emergency Communications System.
    4. Reappoint the following individuals to the Schaffner Youth Center Advisory Bd.: (Terms will expire December 31, 2009)
      1. Sheriff Jack Lotwick
      2. MDJ Joseph Lindsey
      3. Sandy Moore
    5. Reappoint Richard Hann to the Dauphin County Agricultural Land Preservation Board. (Term will expire December 31, 2008)

    Mr. DiFrancesco: Could I ask for the Board's will on item C as to whether they would prefer to pass tentatively the agreement or would they prefer to want until next week?

    Mr. Haste: Actually if it helps move the process along, I think a tentative approval pending review of Solicitors would be appropriate.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: Are you okay with that?

    Mr. Tully: That sounds fine.

    Mr. DiFrancesco: Then I would like to offer because I would like to keep the process moving. I know the initial review was done by the Solicitor's Office on Item C and there are still final reviews that need to take place but I would like make a motion that we approve Item C on the agenda on a tentative manner based on that final review. But as long as there is no concern from the Solicitor's Office present, that be in fact final approval. It was seconded by Mr. Haste; motion carries.

    1. Professional Services Agreement between Dauphin County Emergency Management Agency and SSI Services, Inc., in connection with EMA's Emergency Communications System.

    SOLICITOR'S REPORT

    Mr. Tully: I have nothing to add and happy to answer any questions. (There were none.)

    REPORT FROM CHIEF CLERK/CHIEF OF STAFF - CHAD SAYLOR

    Mr. Saylor: I have nothing to report.

    COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS

    Mr. Haste: Are there any other comments by the Board? Just a reminder, we have Prison Board Meeting this afternoon.

    PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

    Mr. Haste: We are at the point in time again for public participation. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to address the Board? (There was none.)

    ADJOURNMENT

    It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Haste to adjourn the meeting.