DAUPHIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Legislative Meeting
Wednesday, March 8, 2006 (10:00am)

MEMBERS PRESENT

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

STAFF PRESENT

Bill Tully, Solicitor; Chad Saylor, Chief Clerk/Chief of Staff; Marie Rebuck, Controller; Bob Dick, Treasurer; Melanie McCaffrey, Solicitor's Office; Carolyn Thompson, Court Administrator; Randy Baratucci, Director of Purchasing; Mike Yohe, Budget and Finance Director; Dave Schreiber, Personnel; Kay Sinner, Personnel; Faye Fisher, Personnel Director; Elke Moyer, Human Services; Julia Nace, Assistant Chief Clerk; Lena Martinez, Commissioners' Office; Diane McNaughton, Press Secretary; Edgar Cohen, Facilities Maintenance Director; Richie Martz, Commissioners' Office; Mike Pries, Safety and Security Director; Scott Burford, Spring Creek Administrator; Bob Hawley, District Court Administrator and Jena Wolgemuth, Commissioners' Office.

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 the February 8, 2006 Legislative Meeting, the February 15, 2006 Workshop Meeting and the February 22, 2006 Legislative Meeting minutes for approval. Is there a motion to approve?

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to approve the February 8, 2006 Legislative Meeting, the February 15, 2006 Workshop Meeting and the February 22, 2006 Legislative Meeting minutes. All were in favor. Motion carries.

Mr. Haste: Now we have the February 8, 2006 Salary Board and February 22, 2006 Salary Board Meeting minutes. The Salary Board consists of the three Commissioners and the Controller. Is there a motion to approve?

It was moved by Ms. Rebuck and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to approve the February 8, 2006 Salary Board and February 22, 2006 Salary Board Meeting minutes. All were in favor. Motion carries.

Mr. DiFrancesco: We have the February 8, 2006 Election Board minutes to approve. Do I have a motion to approve?

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. Haste to approve the February 8, 2006 meeting minutes. All were in favor. Motion carries.

EXECUTIVE SESSIONS HELD BETWEEN MEETINGS

Mr. Saylor: Commissioners, as you know we met twice in Executive Session on March 1, 2006, once in the morning to discuss real estate and labor issues and then again after the meeting for some personnel and legal issues.

Mr. Haste: Any questions of Chad? (There were none.)

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

There was none.

DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS/GUESTS

There were no updates today.

SALARY BOARD

A complete set of Salary Board Meeting minutes is on file in the Chief Clerk's office.

PERSONNEL

Ms. Sinner: I do have an addendum to the packet. It is just additional duty pay for an employee from Facilities Maintenance to pick up voting machines in North Carolina. When we get the list of hours we will know the amount of hours. Right now it is an additional $3 per hour.

Mr. Haste: Is this hazardous duty pay because he has to ride with Steve?

Ms. Sinner: I don't know the details of it.

Mr. Haste: Why are we paying someone an additional amount?

Ms. Sinner: I'm not sure.

Mr. Cohen: I can speak on this account. Normally the gentleman who works for Voter Registration, Mr. Johnson, gets paid $10 per hour. His normal base salary is $6.91. So he is getting $3 per hour as compensation. We are getting close to the $10 mark but we aren't there yet.

Mr. Haste: Okay, so when he works for Steve twice a year he gets the $10 pay. Is that what you are saying?

Mr. Cohen: That is correct. Actually the money that he is accumulating now is coming out of Mr. Chiavetta's budget.

Mr. DiFrancesco: How exactly are they going to work this? This is a two day venture, so exactly what hours are we paying?

Mr. Cohen: My understanding is that Mr. Chiavetta is keeping track of all the hours that they are accumulating and he will submit the hours to me and I will adjust my payroll accordingly. Then I will give it to Mike Yohe to do a budget transfer.

Mr. Haste: I think Nick's question was how many hours a day are they working?

Mr. DiFrancesco: Right.

Mr. Haste: Are we paying them while they are driving down? Are we paying them while they are picking up machines? Are we paying them.?

Ms. Sinner: I was wondering those questions too.

Mr. Cohen: I am hoping Mr. Chiavetta can provide those answers for the Commissioners, because this is his area. My office is just supplying the guy to assist in the pick-up. As to how many hours they are putting in a day, how many hours of driving, I really can't say.

Mr. Haste: I guess what we should do then when you know those hours, or whoever knows them first make sure that Nick is aware of it.

Mr. DiFrancesco: I would like to go one step further and ask how far out of line are the duties that this gentleman will be performing as opposed to his normal job?

Mr. Saylor: Commissioners, may I suggest I find Steve or someone to answer these questions and go over this for the time being so we can get some of these questions answered. Steve has been very successful in getting overtime reimbursed through HAVA, at least he was last year.

Mr. DiFrancesco: It doesn't make it right to pay overtime if it is not justified. Right now, I don't think it is.

Mr. Cohen: This gentleman, the only time he works is during the election. He doesn't work any other time throughout the county.

Mr. DiFrancesco: So how does he have a current hourly rate that is not the rate he gets paid while working for Registration and Elections if that is all he does?

Mr. Cohen: Because according to Kay they couldn't create a position, which Steve never had. It is confusing to me. So this is how we work his position, he is a part-time Facility Maintenance employee and when he works for Voter Registration his hours would be submitted on a justification form to get his increase during the time when he was delivering the voting machines and setting them up and doing all the work for Steve Chiavetta.

Mr. Haste: Steve pays all the machine workers $10 per hour?

Ms. Sinner: I'm not sure what they are paid but he does have Voter Registration workers, I forget what the position is, Voter Maintenance workers or something.

Mr. Hartwick: When is he going down to pick up the machines?

Ms. Sinner: Are they on their way now?

Mr. Cohen: They left.

Ms. Sinner: Farley is a maintenance worker.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Could someone please make a phone call to Mr. Chiavetta's cell phone and get the answers to these questions so we can catch up to what is actually happening?

Ms. Sinner: Does Farley work in Maintenance the rest of the year?

Mr. Hartwick: He is saying that the only time he comes is during elections.

Ms. Sinner: I wasn't aware of that. I kind of remember him doing some extra work, I would have to look at his records that he was doing some work in Voter Registration, but he could be put in that department.

Mr. Hartwick: He should be put in that department if he is not doing any maintenance work.

Mr. Cohen: I don't know if you remember Kay but you told us that we couldn't and we had to leave it the way it was.

Ms. Sinner: No.

Mr. Haste: Is Farley retired right now?

Mr. Cohen: Yes. Correct.

Mr. Haste: Then I don't know why he isn't just on Steve's and if it is $10, it should be $10.

Mr. DiFrancesco: We wouldn't even be having this discussion if it wasn't for all these confusing issues. This would have blown past all of us and wouldn't have been a big deal.

Ms. Sinner: I also checked with payroll and I found out that it isn't a problem to key in hours under Steve's appropriation code if we proceed as this is outlined. We don't have to do a journal entry through Mike Yohe. I thought perhaps we would have to do that.

Mr. DiFrancesco: I want to know how many hours we are paying for this trip.

Ms. Sinner: Right, sure.

Mr. Haste: Again, if he just works for Steve we should probably just put him under Steve. Whatever the hourly rate is then you don't have to make it special.

Ms. Sinner: Yes, make it a part-time temporary position.

Mr. Hartwick: We should pull this addendum from the Personnel Packet.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Well, if they come back.we can't pull it because he is already on the road so we'll just need to deal with it when they come back.

Mr. Haste: The problem is too we don't know what commitments have been made to him.

Mr. DiFrancesco: This will be a topic of further conversation but we probably need to vote on it today.

Mr. Haste: Why don't we just hold the whole personnel packet?

Mr. Hartwick: We should have a discussion about these last minute items as they come up as well so we have a plan of action.

Mr. Haste: Anything else from Personnel right now? We will hold the packet until we hear from Steve.

Ms. Sinner: I would like to change new hire number 8's start date from March 27th to March 13th.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Could you say that again?

Ms. Sinner: New hire number 8 on the original packet, the start date is changing from March 27th to the 13th.

This is the end of the pay period and they would be getting back by the end of the week, so he probably was expecting his pay to be included. Otherwise we could try to include it in the following weeks pay and.

Mr. Haste: Any other changes to this?

Ms. Sinner: No.

Mr. Haste: We will hold the Personnel packet until we hear back from Steve.

Ms. Sinner: Okay.

(A vote to approve the Personnel Packet was taken later in the meeting, please see page 9.)

PURCHASE ORDERS

Mr. Baratucci: Since last week we have pulled the old page 1 on which was the upgrade to the voting machines because of the entire issue with the contract. We are not going to have a purchase order until the contract issue is resolved. So page 1 is gone from last week's packet. In addition we added one item that IT requested and that is on page 5. It was approved by the oversight. It is the item to Morefield Communication and it is for maintenance and support of our connectivity system from Nortel. That item was added. In addition on page 29 I understand there is a question about this and you may possibly want to pull this one. That one is still showing an over budget because it hadn't been resolved as of yesterday when I printed the report.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Consider it pulled.

Mr. Baratucci: They did tell me they were going to fix it today, but if you want any other explanations on it all I had was that they were promotional items for things like government day and things like that. I will just pull that one out. That's it the rest of the packet is as presented last week.

Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to approve the Purchase Order packet as amended by Mr. Baratucci?

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to approve the Purchase Order packet as presented. Mr. DiFrancesco clarified that he seconded the motion excluding page 29 of the Purchase Order packet. All were in favor. Motion carries.

REPORT FROM BUDGET & FINANCE - MIKE YOHE, BUDGET DIRECTOR

• February 24, 2006 transferred $411,472.60 to the Payables account from the County's Concentration account for checks issued that week.
• March 3, 2006 transferred $9,191,711.27 to the Payables account and $1,913,461.55 to the Payroll account from the County's Concentration account for checks issued that week.
• Total Term Investments - N/A
• Balance today in INVEST account $127,040.96 rate 4.430%
• Balance today in Community Banks investment account $118,416.19 rate 4.770% (This rate equals today's Community Banks 91-day TBill rate of 4.620% plus 15 basis points)
• Balance today in Graystone Bank investment account $10,101,738.08 rate 4.830% (This rate equals last month's average 1-month LIBOR rate of 4.580% plus 25 basis points)

Mr. Yohe: You will notice that this is actually the highest rate at the moment, but this rate is locked for the month. Commerce Bank still floats and will for the month. They were real close at the beginning of the month and I'm figuring that Commerce is going to grow. It has been growing and will probably be a little bit higher until the end of the month. That is why we stuck with Commerce as being the 50% winner for this month.

• Balance today in Commerce Bank investment account $20,220,132.22 rate 4.810% (This rate equals today's 91-day T-Bill rate of 4.510% plus 30 basis points)

Mr. Yohe: Again, I anticipate that is going to grow throughout the month.

• Balance today in Sovereign Bank investment account $10,105,406.85 rate 4.691% (This rate equals today's 1-month LIBOR rate of 4.691% plus 0 basis points)

No T.R.A.N. Line of Credit required for 2006.

Mr. Hartwick: I have a question, did Sovereign's rate change with the additional basis points? In their initial quote they gave us the one month LIBOR rate plus, did they give us in their initial quote any basis points?

Mr. Yohe: No. Throughout the last round they did add some points to some of their bids. If you remember from last year we started with a lock, a fixed in rate, for Sovereign and then they switched to a floating rate and then they added basis points at one point in time. This whole year so far has been no basis points for Sovereign.

Mr. Hartwick: We need to factor that in next time we do the bids. Community Banks has been consistently higher than Sovereign throughout the process.

Mr. Yohe: Yes, but when I did this analysis the LIBOR rate for some reason isn't keeping pace. LIBOR rate over the past three years was the best performer, that's why we went with Sovereign in this mix. I'm not sure why it's not especially with the increase in the Fed Funds rate a month ago why this isn't rising a little quicker than it is. I think they were close to offering us 10 points this month through some conversations I had with them, but then they settled on zero again for whatever reason. I would anticipate that they will add an additional ten points in the near future.

Mr. Haste: Any other questions of Mike? (There were none.)

REPORT FROM CHIEF CLERK/CHIEF OF STAFF - CHAD SAYLOR

Mr. Saylor: Commissioners I had the opportunity to speak to Mr. Chiavetta. He sends his greetings from the Commonwealth of Virginia. He does anticipate that they will be spending the night tonight and depending on how long they need, they want to test every machine of course before they buy it, and depending on how much time that takes they may end up spending the night again on Thursday and returning on Friday. What he told me was they are expecting to put in an 8 hour day at regular time and any hour they work over that is what he would expect to spend in overtime. Obviously it would not be for the hours that they are sleeping or getting dinner down there. He does not consider that to be time on the clock. If the day ends at 4:30 and they test the machines until 6:30 that is two hours of overtime.

Mr. Haste: Are we paying them today as they drive down?

Mr. Saylor: I would believe so, yes.

Mr. Haste: Is it a ten hour drive?

Mr. Hartwick: It takes nine hours to get to Myrtle Beach, SC from here and that is below North Carolina.

Mr. Haste: It took me ten.

Mr. Cohen: It will take about ten hours if you have two drivers.

Mr. Saylor: The other item I have is a resolution I have put before you on the issue of HAVA. It would be resolution number 10-2006.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Could you please hold up a second because we haven't voted on the Personnel Packet yet?

Mr. Haste: Has Kay left?

Mr. Schreiber: I think she went to check on something.

Mr. Saylor: Faye, can you please track her down?

Mr. Haste: I don't know that we need her.

Mr. Hartwick: I would prefer to see this under Steve Chiavetta's office.

Mr. Saylor: As far as he is concerned he said they were on his payroll. He did make that point.

Mr. Hartwick: I just don't know why he is listed as a part-time custodian.

Mr. Haste: I think we just need to clean that up and move him over there. Is there a motion to approve the Personnel Packet with the explanation we got, being that they will put normal hours of 8am to 4:30pm and anything over that Steve is anticipating overtime? Farley's hourly rate would be $9.91.

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to approve the Personnel Packet, noting that Registration and Elections workers that are picking up the voting machines in North Carolina will be paid their regular pay for the normal work hours and anything exceeding those hours will be overtime. All were in favor. Motion carries.

Mr. Saylor: What you have before you is a draft resolution that would be number 10 for 2006. Basically it is a formality to set up a paper trail to ensure that we are taking every step possible to be in compliance with HAVA. What the resolution does is authorizes staff to move forward formally and engage Danaher in a contract. That is what this resolution seeks to do.

Mr. Haste: Basically it says that we drafted the contract and gave it to them since they can't produce one, right?

Mr. Saylor: Correct. It formalizes everything that has happened to this point so there is a record of it.

Mr. DiFrancesco: I think it is very important that we keep an accurate paper trail. One of the sessions that I went to down in Washington last week discussed this very thing. The people from the Justice Department and I don't recall what other department the man was from, but they are not making any signs that they are going to give anyone a break. What they did say was that if counties run into particular problems, as long as they are open, they disclose, they have a plan and they work with the Justice Department they are less likely to get sued for not being in compliance. Clearly, over the last several months we have been working very hard to try to work out issues that we never even imagined would be problems. For instance getting a contract put together. I think it is very important that we move forward and keep a good paper trail to let the public record reflect exactly what is going on in the process. The other piece of the resolution speaks to the Solicitor's office at this point keeping us very much informed as to what is going on, because this is a very touchy area and if it appears that we are not going to be in compliance we need to make sure we take steps to work with whomever so that they understand what is going on in Dauphin County.

It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick that they approve Resolution 10-2006. All were in favor. Motion carries. (The entire Resolution #10-2006 is on file in the Commissioners' Office.)

Mr. Haste: Anything else Chad?

Mr. Saylor: That is all I had.

SOLICITOR'S REPORT-BILL TULLY, ESQ., SOLICITOR

Mr. Tully: I have nothing to add, but would be happy to answer any questions.

Mr. Haste: Thank you.

Mr. Tully: I would also like to make a point on the HAVA issue. At this point we are clearly going to be 95% compliant. It is just that 5% that we are battling hard because the goal is to be 100%. I think that clarification is important as well. We are way ahead of the curve compared to other counties and many of the other states.

MATTERS REQUIRING BOARD ACTION

Mr. Haste: We have Matters Requiring Board Action.

Mr. Saylor: Commissioners, before you vote I would like to add one other thing to my report.

Mr. Haste: Okay.

Mr. Saylor: I appreciate your indulgence. Last week we approved a contract for Catering by Maria to take over the restaurant business in the Courthouse. I have also been out of town at the NACo conference so I have not been over there myself, but all the reports I have heard have been favorable in terms of being open on time, the selection, the quality and the pricing. It seems like things are going very well. I just thought we should have that added to the record.

Mr. Haste: You haven't tried the food yet?

Mr. Saylor: That is on my list of things to do.

Mr. Haste: We have Matters Requiring Board Action items A through T. Are there comments on any of the items?

Mr. Hartwick: Yes, I would like to pull item T and vote on that separately.

Mr. DiFrancesco: I would like to pull item Q and vote on that separately.

Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to vote on items A through S, minus Q?

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to approve items A through S, minus Q. All were in favor. Motion carries.

Mr. Haste: Item Q.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Item Q is the agreement between the City of Harrisburg, the County of Cumberland and the County of Dauphin in regards to the Lemoyne Connector.

Mr. Haste: And CAT.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Sorry, and CAT. The concern I have in looking over the agreement and not knowing the discussions that have taken place and not knowing exactly what was agreed to gives me a little cause for concern. Is this document all there is to the agreement or is there something more? When I ask that the question becomes when Cumberland County worked with CREDC there was a very explicit document that they laid down. When comments are made like, all parties agree that there will be a separate mode of accounting for bus and rail service; did they define what their expectations are? Was that clearly defined.

Mr. Haste: It is what it is now.

Mr. DiFrancesco: This is it? This basically defines.

Mr. Haste: Right. There is separate accounting now. Cumberland actually proposed a ten page document filled with "legal-ese" and it caused a war. That document was a compromise that was primarily drafted by PennDOT and CAT, the Mayor and I. Cumberland still wanted all of their "legal-ese" in there and it didn't go that way. They agreed to go with this. CAT is doing that now. They have separate accounting for it, which they are required by Federal legislation. In fact there was discussion and that part didn't even need to be in there, but they do it now and Cumberland insisted that they put it in. It got to the point where how much are we going to put down that is required by law to do now that has to go into this agreement? For the most part that is the agreement. There are all kinds of "what if's" in there, where things are contingent upon federal legislation moving forward with the funding, it is contingent upon HATS putting it on and making it a priority on the TIP. There are all kinds of other things outside of what these entities could agree to. There are things out of PennDOT, CAT, Cumberland and our control. Those were basically the items that we can control.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Okay. In the first one it says there is a segment from Harrisburg to East Mechanicsburg that would be removed. Is it agreed to that City Island is still included in the minimum segment?

Mr. Haste: It is agreed to that we can put it anywhere to our border. Meaning the high water mark of the Susquehanna on the West Shore.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Okay, so we can have service to City Island.

Mr. Haste: Cumberland, in the original agreement, wanted to stop it at the train station for whatever reason that was the language. We pointed out just as they don't want us dictating what happens in Cumberland they had no say in what happens here. We can stop it wherever we want to up to the high water mark of the Susquehanna River on the West Shore.

Mr. DiFrancesco: The other concern that I have and again not completely understanding the authority of all the players in this, but in particular with regard to Norfolk Southern's rights to that Lemoyne Connector. I think I have said this before, I know that this agreement needs to take place in order to get this project moving forward. I shouldn't say that; let me put it this way. I understand this agreement is probably the simplest way to keep this project moving forward though I don't agree that this is the necessary step. What I don't understand because I'd most likely have to be an attorney to understand it is the authority that Norfolk Southern has to push this through in terms of forcing this issue. It was always my understanding when I was on the CAT Board and even after that in fact Norfolk Southern had no legal claim to the Lemoyne Connector. The connection piece was controlled by entities other than Norfolk Southern, in fact I think PennDOT holds it now, but I am not 100% certain of that either.

Mr. Haste: The bridge is Norfolk Southerns.

Mr. DiFrancesco: What bridge?

Mr. Haste: The bridge that is going to be replaced, the crossing.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Right, but right now they have no means of getting a connection through that segment.

Mr. Haste: But they can replace the crossing. They own the crossing.

Mr. DiFrancesco: That is news to me. First of all, we are forcing a public debate that is being caused by a private company that right now has access to their rail yards; they just have to go the long way around to get to it. Secondly, on an issue that benefits a private corporation we now have to scramble and try to find public dollars to pay for the separation.

Mr. Haste: To pay for the upgrade.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Right. Even that, since it is being pushed by a private company. Truly the only person that benefits from that crossing is Norfolk Southern. Their costs go down because now they have a quicker way to get to the yard.

Mr. Haste: We raised that issue and it was clear that Norfolk Southern could move forward and thumb their nose at all of us and we would be stuck.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Well from one Commissioner's perspective that is something I would like to fight legally because I would really like to use every power that I have, even using eminent domain to fight.

Mr. Haste: We can't use eminent domain over in Cumberland.

Mr. DiFrancesco: I know, I was just saying. Part of my concern goes back to the fact that when we tried to do some innovative things, even when 322 was being rebuilt and wanted to run a test rail line up and down the corridor to take some of the pressure off, Norfolk Southern shut us down cold. They had no desire to even look at it.

Mr. Haste: It was probably Conrail then, was it?

Mr. DiFrancesco: No, it was Norfolk Southern at the time.

Mr. Haste: The rails, there is no doubt about it, the rails are the least cooperative of the entities. When we try to do bridges I remember the Wilson St. Bridge with Amtrak was a royal pain when it came to replacing it.

Mr. DiFrancesco: They are not good neighbors.

Mr. Hartwick: Put them along with the steel industry.

Mr. DiFrancesco: The real shame of it is that the U.S. has allowed extraordinary rail network across this country to virtually be dismantled and turned over to private hands and have not retained the right to control them. Granted if an emergency situation came up the federal government could step in and do whatever they wanted to. It is a shame that such an extensive extraordinary rail network has been dismantled and right-of-ways have had private lines centered, so that where before you were able to get three or four tracks laid down you are only getting half of that now, so capacity has been diminished. This has been done on purpose and now these freight haulers don't have to worry about mixing rail on their lines or sharing capacity within the right-of-way. This issue and this agreement are sort of symbolic of some real concerns that I have in this region. I know that this is everybody's best effort to try and move this forward. I will be supporting the agreement. My concern is that once this is signed how much nitpicking is there going to be, that each entity expected this or that. Quite frankly, that is not something this region should have to put up with, but I am very concerned based upon other examples in other areas that it may be exactly what we have to put up with.

Mr. Haste: There is no guarantee that won't continue. On whether we needed this agreement or not, the Secretary in his research felt that this in fact was needed and without it any one of the entities would have veto power over the project. The real gist of this was to have an agreement that they can go to the Feds to show that we are moving forward so that we can draw down the dollars that have already been earmarked. Without that there was real fear that one entity could veto the whole project.

Mr. DiFrancesco: I know that in my mind and what I would have liked to have seen happen is for PennDOT to come down in very certain and strong language and say, this right-of-way and this project is going to be preserved. Unfortunately.

Mr. Haste: The Secretary didn't feel that they were in that position. Norfolk Southern could, if they wanted to, move forward without us and then end this project. He was somewhat happy that they were willing to at least work this out.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Okay.

Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to approve item Q?

It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick to approve item Q. All were in favor. Motion carries.

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to deny the appointments of Yvonne Matthews and Lionel Gonzalez to the Executive Commission on Drugs & Alcohol, Inc. All were in favor. Motion carries.

1. Training Packet
2. Real estate tax refunds/exonerations:
   1. Approval to exonerate current and outstanding taxes on the following parcels located at the Oak Knoll Estates Mobile Home development:
      1. Parcel #22-013-026-013-0360, $65.36 for 2004; & $28.90 for 2006
      2. Parcel #22-013-026-106-0298, $64.97 for 2005, & $31.79 for 2006 (Total amount: $191.02)
3. Appoint Audrey L. Utley to the Children & Youth Advisory Board. (Term expires March 8, 2009)
4. Appoint Christopher A. Wonders to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund Board. (Term expires December 31, 2007)
5. Food Service Agreements between Spring Creek and the following providers to provide services at the State Hospital:
   1. NHS Human Services
   2. Community Services Group
   3. New Visions, Inc.
6. Authorize County Engineer, Herbert, Rowland & Grubic, Inc., to prepare a Subdivision Plan for Spring Creek.
7. Hold Harmless Agreement with the Harrisburg Area Roadrunners for a Marathon on Sunday, November 12, 2006 at Wildwood Lake Sanctuary. (Parks & Recreation)
8. Renewal Maintenance Agreement between Dauphin County and G. R. Sponaugle Service Company, LLC for facility electrical distribution systems at Schaffner Youth Center.
9. Adopt Resolution No. 9-2006 authorizing an Application for a Small Business Loan from the Tuscano Italian Restaurant. (Eco. Development)
10. Purchase of Service Agreement for FY 05/06 between Area Agency on Aging and Community Action Commission.
11. Adoption Assistance Agreement 2006-3.
12. Purchase of Service Agreement for FY05/06 between the Children & Youth Agency and:
    1. George Junior Republic in Pennsylvania, Inc.
    2. Pennsylvania Clinical School, Inc.
13. Amendment #1 to the Renewal Agreement between Mental Health/Mental Retardation Agency and the counties of Cumberland, Dauphin, Lancaster, Lebanon and Perry and HealthAssurance Pennsylvania, Inc.
14. Purchase of Service Agreement for FY05/06 between Mental Health/Mental Retardation Agency and T. W. Ponessa & Associates Counseling Services, Inc.
15. Amendment #1 to FY04/05 Purchase of Service Agreement between Mental Health/Mental Retardation Agency and Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dept. of Public Welfare d/b/a Work Advancement Center.
16. Pennsylvania Council on the Arts 2005-2006 Grant Award Agreement for Jump Street through the Dauphin County Human Services Director's Office.
17. GIS Agreement between Information Technology and the Borough of Hummelstown.
18. Lemoyne Connection Agreement between City of Harrisburg, County of Dauphin, County of Cumberland, and the Cumberland-Dauphin-Harrisburg Transit Authority.
19. Authorization to encumber $100,000 from the Liquid Fuels Fund for the 2006 Bridge Maintenance Program.
20. Approval to submit a Revised Proposal Summary, Budget Summary and Budget Justification for additional LIHEAP funds increasing funds for the program year of 2005-06 in the amt. of $100,000 for Dauphin County's Weatherization Program.
21. Appoint the following individuals to the Dauphin County Executive Commission on Drugs & Alcohol, Inc. Board of Directors:
    1. Yvonne Matthews
    2. Lionel Gonzalez

FORMER BUSINESS

There was none.

NEW BUSINESS

There was none.

CORRESPONDENCE

Mr. Haste: We have correspondence in front of us items A through H, which will be handled by the staff accordingly.

1. Notification from Herbert, Rowland & Grubic, Inc., indicating they intend to apply to DEP for a general permit for maintenance, testing, repair, rehabilitation or replacement of a Sandy Hollow Road culvert, West Hanover Township.
2. Notification from The Hershey Company indicating they intend to apply to DEP for a Plan Approval application for the installation of a dust settling chamber to control the emissions from the Hershey Plant's existing nine cocoa bean hulling systems.
3. Notification from Herbert, Rowland & Grubic, Inc., indicating they intend to submit a joint application to DEP and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers for a water obstruction and encroachment permit for a proposed stream restoration in Derry Township.
4. Notification from Dawood Associates, Inc., on behalf of the AAA Central Penn Auto Club, Susquehanna Township, indicating the intend to apply to the Dauphin County Conservation District for an NPDES permit for a project that includes 11,600 ft of office space and 5254 ft of basement storage to an existing 2 story building on approximately 2.98 acres.
5. Notification from H. Edward Black & Associates indicating that Schaedler Yesco Electric is applying to DEP for a general NPDES permit for stormwater discharges associated with construction activities located at the intersection of 13th Street and Sycamore Street, City of Harrisburg.
6. Notification from RGS Associates indicating they intend to apply to the Dauphin County Conservation District for a general NPDES permit for discharges of stormwater from construction activities for Deer Run Commons (former Degrange Property), Derry Township, Dauphin County.
7. Notification from Dawood Associates, Inc., on behalf of Wildwood Drive Hotel, indicating the intend to apply to the Dauphin County Conservation District for an NPDES permit for a project that includes the construction on a 111 room hotel with all related parking facilities and utilities, and a future restaurant located on the southern quadrant of the intersection of Wildwood Drive and Industrial Drive in the City of Harrisburg.
8. Notification from Pennsy Supply indicating they intend to apply to DEP for a permit to construct, modify or reactivate an air contamination source and/or install an air cleaning device at the Hummelstown Quarry, South Hanover Township, Dauphin County.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

There was none.

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick to adjourn the meeting. All were in favor. Meeting adjourns.