COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WORKSHOP MEETING
JUNE 20, 2007 10:00 A.M.

MEMBERS PRESENT

Jeff Haste, Chairman
George P. Hartwick, III, Secretary

Dominic D. DiFrancesco, II (ABSENT)

STAFF PRESENT

Chad Saylor, Chief Clerk; Marie E. Rebuck, Controller; Steve Shaver, Director of EMA; August Memmi, Economic Development; Mitch Baylarian, Solicitor's Office; William Strumeke, Solicitor's Office; Elke Moyer, Human Services Director's Office; Scott Burford, Deputy Chief Clerk; Leila McAdoo, Solicitor's Office; Steve Howe, Director of Tax Assessment; Randy Baratucci, Director of Purchasing; Tom Guenther, Director of IT; Diane McNaughton, Commissioners' Office; Kay Sinner, Personnel; Brenda Hoffer, Commissioners' Office and Richie-Ann Martz, Assistant Chief Clerk

GUESTS PRESENT

Tom Armino, Matt Woods, James Dull, Garry Lenton, Rev. Alvin Taylor and Bob Disabella

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 MINUT

Mr. Haste: We have the June 6, 2007 Workshop Meeting Minutes that will be considered at next week's meeting.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Mr. Haste: We are at the point in time for public participation. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to address the Board?

Mr. Disabella: I was at the City Council Meeting on Monday evening. Near the end of the meeting Ms. Williams read a letter from the County Commissioners. First of all the majority of City Council didn't have the letter in their possession at that time. They knew about the letter, but they didn't know what the body or the context was.

I was just wondering if you were talking with the Administration of the Harrisburg Authority. Did they breakdown how the funding is? With the RRS Financing Plan?

Mr. Haste: They sent us a packet just like they did City Council. They have not made a presentation just as they did not make a presentation to Council prior.

Mr. Disabella: Page 5, what they want to do is a capital loan swap. It will actually be $30 million. What they are going to do is put that off to the future. It is going to have to be paid by 2027. At that point, that $30 million will be over $100 million that the taxpayers of Harrisburg will have to pay. Mr. Barnes admitted this when he was asked questions by Council members that evening. The Harrisburg Authority might be trying to use smoke and mirrors. I just wanted to know if you were fully informed.

Mr. Haste: We have our own folks looking at it.

Mr. Disabella: Because it is smoke and mirrors.

DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS/GUESTS

Matt Woods & Thomas Armino of the Delta Development Group, Inc.
Continuity of Government Project

Mr. Shaver: I'm glad to sit before you this morning to let Matt and Tom Armino from Delta Development brief you with regards to a Continuity of Government Study that they are going to conduct on behalf of the County. The funding for this actually is coming from the Task Force dollars and they are actually doing it throughout the region as far as the eight counties are concerned. I'll just turn it over to them. I wanted to let you know that again this is something that I'm pleased to bring to you that is not going to cost us anything.

Mr. Woods: Thank you for the opportunity to present this to you this morning. My name is Matt Woods and I'm with Tom Armino and we represent Delta Development Group in Mechanicsburg. As Steve stated our firm has been hired to conduct a planning initiative in Dauphin County on behalf of the SouthCentral Task Force. Our firm will be conducting this project over the course of the next 12 months. It is one County involved in seven counties throughout the Task Force that this planning initiative will be conducted.

I wanted to provide you with a very brief overview of the objectives, the process that we will be following and the time table. I presented some meeting materials in front of you that you may reference and I will be referring to them throughout the course of this.

Page 2 is the introduction of our Dauphin County team members. We have a total of six members that are assigned to Dauphin County. I want to point out the last statement there that our firm does have significant bench strength, the ability to grab team members from other participating projects and bring them on to Dauphin County. We do not anticipate any staffing shortages. The next slide is the major agenda items that I will be covering here very briefly. The main point is why "continuity of government planning"? Recent events have demonstrated the need to continue essential services in the event of any unforeseen disaster situation, whether that is natural or manmade. Continuity of government planning, the points behind it is that the County's essential services are able to be quickly reconstituted in the event of a disaster situation and continue throughout the course of that disaster situation until it returns to normal operations. The process that we will be going through in the next 12 months will aid the County in identifying the policies and procedures each department will need in order to continue those services under such an austere environment. The background for this particular planning project began in 2003 with the PEMA Planning and Training Grant. That grant required that 13 counties include a Continuity of Government Annex as a part of their revised Emergency Operations Plan. Lebanon County then opted to expand that initiative to include the individual departments within their county government so that they each had a plan in case of a disaster situation which would require its activation to ensure their continued services. The SouthCentral Task Force then recognized the need to expand these services to the other counties within their jurisdiction, including Dauphin County. To cover some of the overview and highlights of our Continuity of Government, the county government must have a pre-established and pre-existing plan, which addresses the continuation of their services throughout the course of a disaster. It identifies their potential vulnerabilities to natural and manmade disasters, identifies any unique capabilities which may be brought to bear during such a situation and it must be maintained at a high level of readiness. That means that it must be able to be implemented within 12 hours and sustainable for up to 30 days. It addresses each department's essential functions; in other words those functions which are so essential to the continued operation that they must be immediately implemented once that disaster situation occurs. It addresses the succession and delegation of authority and utilizes existing infrastructure to aid in their continued operation; in other words, an emergency relocation site. The critical objectives then of this initiative would be to provide for the continued functions and essential services of the county government to their constituents during this disaster situation. It will provide a foundation for the continued survival of individual leadership within each department in the County as a whole. It will provide for the orderly response and recovery from any incident and ultimately ensure the safety of personnel and visitors and that includes both to any existing infrastructure and/or potential emergency relocation site. The consideration that we will be addressing as we move forward is that we will assume an austere environment, an environment that is under potential threat. The need for each individual department to potentially operate from a location that is under diminished capacity, ensure that the department maintains their uninterrupted communication with other departments, whether that be the EMA, the Board of Commissioners, other directors; facilitate the return of the county government to normal operating conditions as soon as practical is the ultimate goal.

The next slide presents the essential elements of viability. These are the elements that each department emergency operations plan will ultimately contain to ensure that department has an effective plan in place that they can implement immediately. It should have a basic emergency procedure, it will identify the mission essential functions, create delegations of authority and ensure orders of succession, identify that particular department's emergency relocation site and the basic procedures for occupying and sustaining operations, identify inoperable communications, vital records and data bases and equipment that would be necessary to operate from that facility for a 30-day period. It will address any personnel issues, logistical considerations and the need to update and maintain the plan through testing, training and exercising.

In summary, the ultimate goal through each department having a pre-existing and established plan is that the county is able to maintain their essential functions. They have designated orders of succession and delegation of authority. They have an assessment of some general vulnerabilities and capabilities and capabilities that they may be brought to bear during such a situation that they have the requisite training throughout this process that they understand the main principles and concepts of continuity of government. The COG plan is a living document and it should be updated continuously throughout the process.

The next step in our process - the purpose of this meeting is to respectively request your endorsement of this project. Once that endorsement is achieved, we would proceed with a department head meeting of all directors at which point we would issue a survey which is intended to generate the information that will be required for us to write the department emergency operations plan. We will then proceed with individual meetings with each director and department head and begin developing the individualized and customized department emergency operations plan for each department. This will be a continuous process which will be conducted in close coordination with EMA and the County Administration. Pending any questions that you may have this concludes our briefing.

Mr. Haste: Is Lebanon's already completed?

Mr. Woods: Yes, it is.

Mr. Haste: When you did Lebanon's, how did you take a look at the security, I don't mean security as far as building security, but I mean controlling the chaos and I will go specifically to Katrina? What I read one of the biggest problems that happened is law enforcement for the most part was non-existent. The core structure fell apart and since we know that what did you put into Lebanon or what would you do? We are a little bit different than down there, where we can't just as a county we don't do law enforcement now, but I would think that in a major disaster we are going to have to take a look at that. What did you put in Lebanon's or what was part of that planning process there?

Mr. Woods: As far as specific law enforcement procedures during times of emergency we do not specifically address that as a part of the scope of that project.

Mr. Haste: I think you need to in this one. If you don't have that then I don't consider it a plan.

Mr. Armino: Commissioner, if I may. What we did address in the process that the county sheriff was part of the planning process and was included in the departmental survey and the departmental emergency operations planning; along with Adult Probation. What we learned and what county EMA learned is that there are a lot of resources in the county that can be tapped into in the event of an emergency. So, the sheriffs did agree that in the event that the Courthouse had to be evacuated for an extended period of time that had to go to an emergency relocation site and operate out of an emergency relocation site they would be available to provide security, not only for their day-to-day functions, in other words providing security for the courts, but they could also support other law enforcement functions. Additionally, Adult Probation had half a dozen officers who can carry firearms and they can also provide security. There are other resources.

Mr. Haste: I would strongly suggest that in the planning, at least for Dauphin County, that you talk to the District Attorney and the President Judge. The District Attorney is the head of law enforcement. One of my concerns is when some of our municipal police forces are quite small and I will just take the avian flu that is out there, if they have 2 ? police officers and all 2 ? get sick they now have nothing. We have a number of small municipalities like that or let's even say that they have 12 and 8 of the 12 are for whatever reason not available, we need to have a means by which we can maintain law and order and a system set up that if chaos does occur how are we going to get those folks in front of a judge or whatever and removed from the streets so we can continue to operate. Looking back at Katrina, that was a major failure of the local government down there. We now know that so we need to plan for that.

Mr. Armino: The District Attorney and the Court Administrator are part of the planning process.

Mr. Haste: I understand that, but when you go to them just don't say how is your department going to operate? They need to be thinking about and they are aware of this because we have had some conversations with them, they need to be thinking about what leadership role do we step into when all else fails.

Mr. Armino: Understood.

Mr. Hartwick: If I'm reading it right that also expands the scope of your study because from what I've seen you talk about keeping county services up and running. Commissioner Haste is alluding to a plan that addresses the maintenance of order to the municipalities that may extend beyond what the county's initial responsibilities are.

Mr. Haste: We could just sit here and do this department plan, but when it comes to a real disaster the citizens are going to ask us to do more. I think with Katrina as a prime example, we saw where there was a failure, we saw where there was a breakdown so we have to plan for it, whatever that is, and maybe it is for the State Police. I don't know what it is. I doubt that the State Police are going to be in a position, but we need to plan for it. I feel more comfortable relying on our own folks, the DA and the PJ and our own staff than relying on PEMA and the State Police.

Mr. Hartwick: What you are hearing is that we are serious about the planning and what goes into the EMA planning and are thankful to Scott Burford about what he is doing with the Pandemic planning. We are thinking steps ahead based upon the recurrent natural disasters and the heightened threat that exists in this region to actually have those responses not only well thought out from police to delivering essential services, but also being able to be implemented as you said we don't need something that is sitting on the shelf. We need a document that actually provides practical solutions that are based upon some of the real experiences that we have seen in our recent history. This is not just an exercise. One of the other things that I want to mention is among the other things that I suggest within the scope of the study that you take a look at within the 8 county region, one of the things that this Board has always been a proponent of is figuring out ways to have some economies of scale and ways that we can cooperate even additionally as a result of this study. As you go through it and look at this, figure out ways to cooperate and work together. Continue to work on trying to more efficiently manage the operations and work together in ways that are going to provide savings as well as efficiencies. I suggest that be an essential part of the study.

Mr. Shaver: The thing to remember too is this is kind of a starting point. We are probably going to find things out that we probably might not have realized because of the fact that we have never done a study like this.

Mr. Saylor: Are you gentlemen aware that we do apparently have a Continuity of Government Plan. About a year and half ago a Continuity of Plan was done. I don't know if it is going to win any awards, but I think before you start sitting down with directors again, it would be good for you guys to take a look at it to see what we already have on paper. I think a lot of what you are talking about in terms of the basics would already be encompassed in that and that would allow you folks to focus more on what the Commissioners are talking about.

Mr. Shaver: Just so everybody is aware that first of all this is just not an EMA undertaking. The risk manager has been involved in the process from the beginning, as well as your office, because of the fact that in most cases it is a department level kind of thing. It is kind of hard for the EMA coordinator/director to tell another director what they are going to do and that is why we got. I'm actually glad you assigned that to Scott, because it sort of coordinates with him doing the pandemic stuff. The other thing too is there is also an AOPC thing that is going on with regards to the Courts so they are going to look at that too. They ran into that in Adams County. They will be looking at that also as far as when they do their study. This is kind of a starting point. I'm not going to say that what we will provide at the end of this study is the end all/catch all. We might actually learn things. What we can do is as a region look at it and possibly either contract with these folks are some other consultant or possibly do it in house with staff to look at some of those other things that you mentioned. This is a beginning. As far as the whole pandemic thing, you are both aware that we have been meeting under the radar with regard to that, the Solicitor's Office, the Chief Clerk's Office and my office. We are looking at that also.

Mr. Haste: How will we get updates from you on this as you are moving forward?

Mr. Shaver: Basically Scott, a member of my staff and I will be involved in the process. We can come in and brief you anytime you would like. If you would like it on a quarterly basis while the study is going on that would be fine.

Mr. Haste: How long are you planning to take for this study?

Mr. Woods: It is a 12-month project. There is one mid-term update to the County Commissioners.

Mr. Shaver: I would be glad and I'm pretty sure Scott would be glad to appear before you at any time to give you an update.

James Dull, Superintendent, Halifax Area School District
Intergovernmental Grant Agreement

Mr. Dull: The Intergovernmental Grant Application that has been submitted on behalf of Halifax and Millersburg was to assist in funding a feasibility study that the two districts are undertaking. We are following many of the guidelines and looking at some of the aspects that are under the agreement. Specifically, some things we were looking to address are to provide increased efficiency cost savings and delivery of services within the two districts. The feasibility study specifically is identified to address the educational programs of the two districts, looking at the facilities of the two districts and also the financial structure of the two districts, incorporating transportation as a major part of that. This will allow the districts then to look at all aspects of their programs, their formats and to determine then whether the districts would benefit on these three levels from a form of consolidation or possibly even a full merger. Originally Upper Dauphin was also involved in the initial part of this for the proposal, but has since decided not to pursue the feasibility study, but Halifax and Millersburg are proceeding with it vigorously.

Mr. Haste: I support this and I'm disappointed that Upper Dauphin chose not to at least participate. I think they put the cart before the horse. I understand why they did it. I have been told, but I believe they made a mistake.

Mr. Dull: We were sorry that they weren't participating also. Even if nothing proceeds on this on the area of consolidation, I think the districts will benefit, because it will give us a better understanding of our own structures and ways that we can at least consolidate services to probably a greater level than what all three of us do currently.

Mr. Hartwick: This is from a school district perspective something that should be replicated in a number of other school districts including Steelton-Highspire School District, taking a look at ways to partner with other area districts, whether it be through economies of scale. It is not just about building a new school. You need to figure out ways to change the internal make-up and structures, implement best practices, working along with other school districts and municipalities, the fractionalization of local government in Pennsylvania is the single most prohibited factor and most costly expense to taxpayers. We should figure out ways to continue to work together on a regional basis. It makes financial sense and it certainly makes sense for taxpayers. The results that we are seeing in a lot of the smaller districts can be dramatically improved with increased cooperation. I thank you for undertaking this effort.

Mr. Dull: I appreciate you support. I would mention that just recently you have seen the Standard & Poor's Report is now out and was presented to the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee. It does specifically mention several districts identifying 88 districts across the Commonwealth that could potentially benefit from some level of consolidation and specifically Halifax and Millersburg are mentioned in that study. If you don't have access to it yet, I would be glad to send you the link which would give you the opportunity to look at that study.

Mr. Haste & Mr. Hartwick: Yes.

Mr. Dull: I will see that you get that.

PERSONNEL

Ms. Sinner: Are there any questions on the Salary Board items? (There was none.)

Are there any questions on the items in the Personnel Packet? I am requesting a vote on New Hire #14 today.

Mr. Hartwick: I have a question on New Hire #12, could you explain that?

Ms. Sinner: He left in April and is now being rehired and his vacant position was still open.

Mr. Haste: He left and took another job. Normally there is a one year prohibition from returning. It is my understanding that he left and the new job was not what he thought it would be. He immediately decided that he didn't like it and wanted to come back. It is my understanding that everything has been worked out. One of the reasons there is a prohibition so somebody can't leave and draw down their retirement and go buy a house or whatever and come back on the payroll. It is my understanding that all of that is okay. Ed wanted to have him back. He knows what he is doing and has experience.

Mr. Hartwick: None of our Solicitors are here to ask a legal question. I just want to make sure that all of that has been resolved before we take a vote next week so we don't set any precedents that would put us in a bad position in the future as it relates to that one year probationary period. If we could have the solicitors respond.

Mr. Saylor: I'll have one of the Clerks on hand to make a note of that to take back to the solicitors.

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. Haste that the Board approve New Hire #14 as listed on the Personnel Packet; motion carried.

PURCHASE ORDERS

Mr. Baratucci: Nothing unusual in the Packet, just a few budget issues to resolve. Unless you have any questions, we'll get those fixed before next week.

TRAINING PACKET

Mr. Saylor: There is nothing that needs to be acted on today.

ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION

1. Subrecipient Agreement by and between the County of Dauphin and Londonderry Township. This Agreement was omitted from the Agenda last week. (***A VOTE IS REQUESTED 6/20/07***)
2. Family Center Grant Agreement between Dauphin County and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. (***A VOTE IS REQUESTED 6/20/07***)
3. Application for Support for Area Plan on Aging to be submitted to the PA Department of Aging to complete FY 2006/07 Budget Amendment filing process.
4. Refund of 2006 and 2007 County and Library Real Estate Taxes in the amount of $20,579.48 - Pennsylvania State University, 1010 North 7th Street, Parcel #07-102-007.
5. Refund of 2006 and 2007 County and Library Real Estate Taxes in the amount of $2,336.89 - AE Pennsylvania Place Associates, 301 Chestnut St., Parcel #03-002-012.
6. Exoneration of 2006 County and Library Interim Tax in the amount of $3,189.42 - Bright Hope Fellowship Church, Parcel #34-020-063.

Mr. Haste: I see Items A and B are requesting a vote.

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. Haste that the Board approve Items A and B on the Items for Discussion (listed above); motion carried.

SOLICITOR'S REPORT

Mr. Haste: George, would you like to give the Solicitor's Report.

Mr. Hartwick: You have the report in front of you. I have nothing to add, but would be happy to answer any questions. (There was none.)

CHIEF CLERK'S REPORT

Mr. Saylor: I have nothing unless you have any questions. (There was none.)

COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS

Mr. Haste: Any comments by the Board?

Mr. Hartwick: I would like to thank those that came out to our Fatherhood Walk on Saturday. I think we had well over 100 people who attended. It was a great show of support. Great first event! I want to thank the Harrisburg Senators for also providing free tickets and hot dogs for all of the fathers and families who attended that event.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Mr. Haste: We are again at the point in time for public participation. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to address the Board?

Mr. Disabella: With the two fellows that spoke from Delta, I would like to sit down with them or Chad to discuss ways that my Local and possibly the Building Trades can help in your program, not only manpower helping you out but even with staging areas, our union halls and different places to stage people in.

Mr. Haste: Sure, thanks for that offer.

Mr. Hartwick: Thanks.

Mr. Saylor: Introduce yourself to Scott Burford after the meeting is over.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, it was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. Haste that the Board adjourn.