DAUPHIN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
LEGISLATIVE MEETING
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 27, 2007 (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; Scott Burford, Deputy Chief Clerk; Marie E. Rebuck, Controller; William Tully, Esq., Solicitor; Bob Dick, Treasurer; Craig Williard, Director of Weatherization; Mike Yohe, Budget & Finance Director; Greg Schneider, Budget & Finance; Randy Baratucci, Director of Purchasing; Tom Guenther, Director of IT; Edgar Cohen, Director of Facility Maintenance; Bruce Foreman, Solicitor's Office; Mitch Baylarian, Solicitor's Office; William Struemke, Solicitor's Office; Hector Ortiz, Human Services; Stephenie Strayer, Human Services; Elke Moyer, Human Services Director's Office; Faye Fisher, Director of Personnel & Payroll; Brooke Beard, Personnel; George Connor, Community & Economic Development; Diane McNaughton, Press Secretary; Gertrude Farling, Controller's Office; Marielena Martinez Fure, Commissioners' Office; Brenda Hoffer, Commissioners' Office; Richie-Ann Martz, Assistant Chief Clerk.

GUESTS PRESENT

Jim Roxbury, Rev. Richard Dowhower, Reginald Guy, Earl Patterson, Evelyn Hunt.

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 and recited the Pledge of Allegiance.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to approve the June 6, 2007 Workshop Meeting minutes?

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to approve the June 6, 2007 Workshop Meeting minutes; motion carried.

EXECUTIVE SESSIONS HELD BETWEEN MEETINGS

Mr. Saylor: Commissioners, as you know, we met once in Executive Session on June 20, 2007 and that was to discuss litigation matters.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

Rev. Dowhower: My name is Reverend Dr. Richard Dowhower. I represent the Messiah Lutheran Church of Harrisburg, the Lutheran Harrisburg Conference, and our Bishop's Office as a member of the Coalition of Clergy Urban Affairs Task Force. I come to you this morning to respectfully state for the public record, my intentions in preparing what was to become, and as I see it, an opinion editorial piece entitled by the newspaper "Council bickers, experts sidelined," as it was published in The Sunday Patriot-News three days ago. The final version of the piece represents my initial reports to the Coalition of Clergy on the June 18th joint meeting of the City Council Committees, the Coalition's reaction, and editorial revisions of several Coalition members and our advisor colleagues, as well as those of the newspaper's editors. Our intentions, behavior, and impact have been challenged by some. As I learned the skills needed for news reporting 50 years ago as a card-carrying member of the American Newspaper Guild covering city council meetings in New Kensington, Pennsylvania, I am neither naive nor inexperienced in journalistic responsibility. My intention was to call the attention initially of Coalition of Clergy members and advisors, and later the public, to the most recent manifestation of what I have witnessed for the past 8 months as part of this coalition, the City's municipal government gridlock. My many hyphenated descriptions of City Council were intended to portray the impossible situation in which City Council has been placed by Mayor Stephen Reed, the Harrisburg Authority, and to a lesser degree by the Dauphin County Commissioners, as well as by its own actions and inactions. Our Coalition perceived that the responsibility for the near bankrupt condition of the City is shared by all the governmental units I have named, and not exclusively the Council. Public officials get beyond conflict to cooperative effort in the incinerator retrofit crisis by making use of the ZHA team of engineering, technical, financial public health experts, which the Coalition has brought to serve the City in this crisis. Personally, it was very frustrating for me to sit in the Council meeting last Monday and watch a process, which if it had even mentioned the ZHA team, might have opened great new reassuring vistas, and still may. The Clergy Coalition seeks to shed greater light for the welfare of every stakeholder in Harrisburg City in Dauphin County. Commissioners, I am here to implore you to invite ZHA's Andrew Murray and his team, which includes Dr. Saeed Gbadamosi, Donald Spigner, CH2M Hill's John Wood to come here and to give them the time to tell you what they have learned about the incinerator retrofit crisis. As one great haberdasher once said.you'll like the way you look. I guarantee it. Thank you.

Mr. Haste: If they have that, why haven't they come to a public meeting, just as you have?

Rev. Dowhower: They are under contract to the City, and it seems to me it would be procedurally proper if you were to invite them to come. Our problem has been that the City has agreed - certain aspects of City government - have agreed to our recommendations that they be hired, but other elements of the City power structure have shoveled them off into obscurity, which lead to the title of my article in The Sunday Patriot, the second half of which was "experts sidelined." We implore you to get them off the sideline, especially if you want to be fully informed as to what you are being asked to do in the guarantee of this whole new set of bonds of the retrofit of the Harrisburg incinerator.

Mr. Haste: Anyone else?

Mr. Harris: Good morning. My name is Earl Harris. I'm a local pastor and work with the Interdenominational Ministers Conference. I would like to echo what Dr. Dowhower has stated. You know more than anyone else the difficulty this incinerator poses for the public. We were initially concerned because of health reasons; and as a result, we did not want the refinancing to occur several years ago. However, once that decision was made, it was essential for it to work, not only from a health perspective but also financially. Regrettably, despite the best expectations of those who proposed it - and I believe everyone was sincere at the time - it has failed. Barlow has gone bankrupt. You have a guarantee which is second to the City's guarantee. Many of our constituents will be affected by the City's inability to pay the bonds. The cost to many in the City will increase; also the impact upon the County, and all the constituents you represent. It is in everyone's best interest for there to be maximum cooperation between the County, City Council, the Mayor's Office, and the Authority. It is an extreme hot potato. Nobody wants to catch it in their hands; for fear that the public will view them as being the ones responsible. It will take a great deal of courage for the County Commissioners, the City Council, the Mayor, and the Authority to work together to make this happen. I very frankly can't see any other choice but to go forward with a bad situation. This transaction doesn't work financially. It won't work. But if you don't go forward with it and work something out to make sense and make the best of a bad situation, it's going to bite everybody right now. As you know, there is a recent Supreme Court ruling which gives incinerators which are owned by municipalities some leeway and some license in terms of fees and how they generate fees that can structure and move trash. Perhaps that will provide some opportunity for the future; and there has to be a future. As pastors, we are very concerned by constituents. Some say it's only a couple hundred dollars per person. Well, some people don't have a couple hundred dollars per person. Regrettably, also what it does if things go belly up is that it will set up a climate of failure and malaise, both in the City as well as the County which will take years for this small town and this County to overcome. The forward movement that has been currently structured will be set back. City Council has born the brunt of accusations that they did it. Those are just not the facts. The Authority is the owner of the incinerator. The Mayor appoints the persons on the Authority; it is an executive decision. The legislative branch had a responsibility to investigate; they did so. They hired independent consultants, and made a decision to support the Barlow transaction. The County, everybody, came along with the guarantee. Everybody is responsible. As citizens, we are looking to you to make the best of a bad situation and to keep both the City and the County as fiscally responsible as possible and to keep this from falling upon the heads of our constituents. We urge you to please get all the information as possible; and we have no confidence in the plan. That's why the Coalition of Clergy thought professionals could provide an independent look. We realize the Authority does not have the expertise necessary to carry out the responsibilities that have been assigned. They don't have the personality; they don't have the competence. So therefore, we don't understand. We saw a need for a new, fresh examination of what is; and also someone who is not indebted to past transactions and hopeful future transactions. We need someone who will give us an intimate look. The ZHA team, obviously because of its contract which you are aware of, would have confidentiality issues and have a responsibility to get approval through the Authority. We would ask the County Commissioners to request the Authority to release them of their confidentiality requirements under their agreement to allow them to prepare an unbiased statement. We would ask also the same thing of City Council. We do believe there is a need for a fresh look. We also believe that it is important for cooperation on a nonpartisan County basis. We are in a serious matter, as you know, and we need all the help that we can. We need to do this together. Pointing fingers won't get it done. We all have the problem. Maybe it doesn't matter so much how it got here. Again, thank you for your time. I would appreciate very much if you would ask the Authority to allow ZHA and its team to come and provide their findings and information. We also ask, if you please, to initiate contact on a direct basis with the Mayor, the Authority, and City Council in order to address concerns so that what happens is that it is not so much at arm's length. If I were sitting in your position, I also would be reluctant to get too deeply attached to this. But, we can't run away from it. The City can't handle it. It takes courage. It's like being a little bit pregnant.

Commissioner Haste: It's like a movie I've seen of a Coast Guard rescue. Once we decide to jump into the water, we can't say the water's too cold; the water's too high. We've got to be there. The other thing you said is it takes courage. I don't think it takes courage at all. It's just common sense to do what we are doing. We have, for what seems likes years now, been a willing partner trying to help resolve this issue. We are not going to get into a fight among the different branches of government in the City. Unfortunately, that seems to be where the stalemate is. We have always been a willing partner. Just to set the record straight, the letter we sent was not a condescending letter, nor was it intended to be. It said basically, parties need to act; time is running out. If in fact, the stories we hear are that they are losing a million dollars of potential revenue a month, every month we sit here with no action.and the action doesn't start here, we are actually third in line in the finances/revenue of the Authority and the incinerator, then the City, then us. It is owned by the City Authority. They need to begin to take action; the City then needs to weigh in, then we need to be there as a partner in debt. We had been at the table trying to be that partner. The problem is they have to get it to our table. That is the way it's got to come here. And it may not be done without any one entity of the City. One of the things we've said is we are not going to partner and get into that political battle that is going on over there. Once it comes in with all parties participating, then we, too, will participate. On the investigation - the team members you referred to - there have been concerns raised. Each one of us independently and collectively has gathered information from other than those folks. I've talked to other facilities, other counties. We get our information from not just those team members. As we see this move forward, there will be different players involved. Maybe there will be some of the same, I don't know. If it is required to move forward, someone will be appointed on the team from each entity involved. I think there will be change. We have some of the same concerns that you have. I think we are on the same page.

Mr. Harris: I would like to reiterate one item. Cooperation is essential. It is like a married couple in the process of divorce destroying one another. The process will take us all down.

Mr. Haste: Agreed.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Thank you.

DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS/GUESTS

1. J. Scott Burford, Deputy Chief Clerk
   1. Update on Spring Creek

Mr. Burford: Good morning, Commissioners. I am here to provide you with a 6-month update on the operations transfer of Spring Creek. Let me first start by saying it's going very smoothly. There were several parts to the operations transfer, as you know. This morning I would like to focus on a couple of those parts. First of all, Dauphin County agreed to provide the new operators with access to accounts receivables. In return, they would repay us within 6 months. The new operators agreed to pay for shared utility services, and reimburse the County. I am pleased to report that Continuum, the operator, has satisfied both of those requirements. They have repaid the County for the accounts receivables, and also repaid the County for any shared services through May 2007. We have received total this week $2.66 million.

Some other related issues that are noteworthy would be that we have submitted our final Medicaid cost report. We have also submitted our final Medicare cost report. All of the transfer of other assets is complete - such as the vehicles, furniture, fixtures, equipment - all of that has been completed. Other issues that are outstanding are the boiler issue, which is part of a hold-back fund. That work is incomplete. Once that work is completed, we will be reconciling that account. I anticipate that we will receive some monies in return. It has been reported to me that we are within budget and when that occurs we should receive some monies back. In addition, there is some electricity separation that still needs to occur. I expect the timeframe on that is 2 weeks. Also, a couple of other issues. I expect a report from the new operators next week. It will be their 6 month report to us. It will be outlining all of the covenants that they had agreed to and giving us a status report on that as well. With that said, I'd like to open it up for any questions you may have. (There were none.)

1. Craig Williard, Director of Weatherization
   1. 2008 Work Plan

Mr. Saylor: Commissioners, I just wanted to point out that I asked Craig to be here. He is presenting his work plan for 2008. I just wanted to make sure that you guys reviewed it and had any formal questions. I didn't know if you wanted any kind of formal presentation, but I think the details of the plan should be before you.

Mr. Haste: The only thing I'd say is that I commend you for doing the outside work to get the funds in so we can service more clients. Anything we can do to keep serving the clients is a good step.

Mr. Hartwick: You and I have already reviewed this at length. The only question I have for you is where are we at with the purchase of that vehicle?

Mr. Williard: I was with Edgar this morning and he called Hoffman; and the guy was out.

Mr. Haste: We've been waiting for them to retrofit it.

Mr. Williard: It's been since the middle of February.

Mr. Saylor: How about a letter from the Solicitor to get their attention?

Mr. DiFrancesco: It is getting a little out of hand.

Mr. Hartwick: It is prohibiting our time that we actually had additional employees to be able to do some additional servicing. By the time we get the vehicle, we will be out of the part-time help and into the resources, which is really not an efficient way to do this thing. I don't understand what is taking so long. The specific issues that we are not receiving this vehicle are a real issue to me. First I heard that Ford is on back order with trying to issue vehicles. Now it's about the retrofit of the vehicle.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Aren't there responsibilities under a State contract that they have to meet certain guidelines? I'd be shocked if there aren't some sort of operating procedures.

Mr. Williard: What is at general issue, is the retrofit. The retrofit would probably be outside of the normal contract.

Mr. DiFrancesco: This is unbelievable. We are losing a season.

Mr. Haste: Talk to Edgar and see if we can't move this forward.

Mr. Williard: I'll talk to Edgar.

Mr. Saylor: Can you vote to adopt the 2008 Work Plan?

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to adopt the 2008 Work Plan for Weatherization; motion carried.

Mr. Williard: That is due back July 6, at the latest.

SALARY BOARD

(A complete set of Salary Board Minutes is on file in the Commissioners' Office.)

PERSONNEL

Ms. Beard: There is an Addendum to the Personnel Packet, and an authorization for overtime. Are there any questions on the Personnel Packet?

Mr. Haste: Item 16 in the Personnel Packet is to be pulled; and is on hold for now. Item 14 was approved last week. Are there any other questions? (There were none.) Is there a motion to approve the Personnel Packet, as amended?

It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick to approve the Personnel Packet, as amended; motion carried.

PURCHASE ORDERS

Mr. Baratucci: There are a couple of issues. First of all, in the Purchasing packet from last week, there were a number of add-ons that I listed at the bottom of your Packet. Mostly they are service agreements that need to be done prior to the end of the year. Some of them are because the fiscal year is ending, and mainly because some are a little overdue. I asked these departments to get them in and get them on this week's agenda, because I did not want to wait another three more weeks for their approval. They are all listed there: Page 14 EMA; Page 18 AAA; Pages 20-21 Children & Youth; Page 24 EMA; Page 25 Solid Waste, is a different issue which Commissioner Haste already okayed. They were to get with their oversight Commissioners. I was told they did; I didn't hear anything back officially. But I basically figured they'd want to do these, so I put them on the packet. If there are any other questions about that, I can answer them at this time.

Mr. Haste: I had requested that we get recycling containers that we could use for events here and also at Fort Hunter. I was told at Fort Hunter, they tried to recycle. Unfortunately, the individuals who use the facility ignore the recycling cans and throw trash and recycling together. It became labor-intensive to sort through the trash. We've had a number of events there and so has Economic Development. I had asked that when there are events here or there where we can control the crowd there be recycling containers available for those events.

Mr. Hartwick: I have a question related to the service agreements. Why wouldn't this be just part of our regular fiscal year service agreements that are submitted prior to the time and why would it need to be prompted by your office? This seems like it should be part of the routine work of their fiscal directors.

Mr. Baratucci: It absolutely should be. The reason it was prompted by my office is because these offices basically ignored the renewals that they received for about two months. I got a call from our vendor asking me what's up, and they sent an email describing everything and who they talked to. I followed up with the people and got various different answers, but basically the departments involved did not do what they are supposed to do to get the paperwork here in a timely fashion. We have about 50 departments that do this, because it is county-wide; 47 departments got them here on time, these three did not. I followed up for this reason, because we wanted to get them in and get them paid because they were all already past due.

Mr. Hartwick: It just seems strange, particularly from Children & Youth. I've had some issues with Aging before, but for C&Y to not take care of a requisition that was submitted to them is just a little unusual.

Mr. Baratucci: Out of the three, that would probably be the one that surprises me the most. But, by the same token, it was all laid out in an email. I know you saw it because it was forwarded for your approval, and was sent to Commissioner DiFrancesco as well. There was an explanation there from them, but you'd have to ask them why they didn't submit it, I don't know. They should have.

Mr. Hartwick: And this is above and beyond what they said they had budgeted for this particular line item in their budget?

Mr. Baratucci: I don't know. They did make a budget adjustment as well to take care of it. But all of these prices and everything was laid out to them a long time ago when we did the RFP. The leasing costs are paid for automatically in a group by the Controller's office, but the maintenance costs are once a year. It is based on the number of copies made. We have an extremely attractive rate, as noted in that RFP that we did. Basically, it's a matter of once a year the departments putting through the proper paperwork to get it done. For whatever reason, these people were not timely.

Mr. Haste: There is nothing new about this.

Mr. Baratucci: Nothing new, at all. We do this every single year. I don't have an answer as to why.

Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to approve the purchase orders.

It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick to approve the Purchase Order Packet; motion carried.

Mr. Baratucci: We do have one other item which cropped up right before the meeting. It is a purchase of a boxing ring. The Human Services Department is proposing this through one of their grants, and the issue is that it requires three quotes because it is over $4,000. We only have two, and although we talked about this prior to the meeting, the quote that we thought was possibly the lowest one has a notation on the bottom of it saying that the flooring is not included. So, that is why that quote is so much less than the other quote we have. After reading these, we have a quote for $4,045, which does not include flooring; we have a quote for $5,830 which appears to include everything; and we don't have a third quote yet but it is being worked on right now and we are hoping to have it today. Because of the nature of the grant and the money going away, the request I think before you is to approve this contingent upon first of all, and I would think at this point if you are looking for a not to exceed amount, it should be $5,830.85; therefore $5,831. Hopefully, that is complete and that will be the most that we have to pay. We'll follow-up on the one that is not complete and we are trying to get the third one some time today. We could do a separate run for purchase orders if we need to tomorrow or Friday yet, because it is before the 30th. Again, I'm just presenting this because it was literally given to me just before the meeting. Whatever action you want to take is your prerogative.

Mr. Haste: I understand that these are fiscal funds and they run out the end of the fiscal year, which is the end of this month, which is the reason they have to move forward. There are a couple disappointing things. People knew we were doing this, but waited until meeting time to finally proceed. Hopefully that is a lesson to those out there that they know that this needs to be handled a little bit differently. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to penalize what I think could be a good start in a program; and I'll let Commissioner Hartwick talk a little bit more about this with trying to get the start of something close to the Police Athletic League and that program moving forward. I wouldn't want to penalize them for the lack of our own staff not following the procedure.

Mr. Hartwick: I was made aware late last week about the opening of the fourth floor of the Big Ugly Warehouse as being the location for boxing to once again occur here in central Pennsylvania. All three of us have been advocates to try to find alternative opportunities for kids outside of what they do. This is actually a great opportunity to partner with someone who has taken his own initiative to develop this facility. I will reiterate Commissioner Haste's concerns related to purchasing. This may be new for some of you, but we need to figure out the appropriate procedures to come to Randy to make sure we are meeting all of the specifications that we have to in order to bring this in front of the Board of Commissioners. Without doing that, we'll end up being in the situation like we are in today. I also agree with the Commissioner, in saying for us not to do this, particularly in a time when we have an opportunity. I think there are 300 kids signed up already and they are ready to move forward, and the last thing that is needed in this case is the ability to try to acquire a boxing ring. The County support in this case is something that I wholeheartedly support. I want to make sure these things occur and the program is not penalized. With that, and unless there are any additional comments, I'd like to make a motion.\Mr. DiFrancesco: What was required of the bid documents? I'm just a little concerned that you're not certain if the entire purchase would be covered by the $5,831.

Mr. Baratucci: Here's the deal. Anything over $4,000, but under $10,000 just requires us to get three quotes. The quotes that I was given shortly before the meeting, the one has a note on it saying it's not complete. The other one appears to be complete. George tells me he had a phone call with the people, and he is confident that it is complete. But the quotes that I have are limited. But, if George says that he talked with the person, I think we can probably rely on this quote to be complete; and when we do the purchase order, we'll put that on there. My understanding from them is that they found out about this on Monday. Monday is tight time, but had we at least talked about it on Monday there might have been time to put something a little better together. That's all I know. I'm sorry; this is what was handed to me literally as we were walking in the door. I don't know any more about it.

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to approve the proposal to purchase a boxing ring, from a quote not to exceed $5,831.00; motion carried.

Mr. Haste: Once this is done, bring it in our next purchase order packet for ratification so we do know exactly what happened.

Mr. Baratucci: I can bring it to you for ratification. It won't be in the packet, because it has to go through this packet in order to get a purchase order date for this fiscal year.

Mr. Haste: Just bring it to the next meeting, so we know what happened.

Mr. Baratucci: Okay. It won't be in the packet, but I will provide you with the results.

REPORT FROM BUDGET & FINANCE - MIKE YOHE, BUDGET DIRECTOR

Mr. Yohe reported the following:

Report from the Office of Budget & Finance
June 27, 2007

• June 15, 2007 transferred $766,374.44 to the Payables account from the County's Concentration account for checks issued that week.
• June 22, 2007 transferred $3,996,259.97 to the Payables account and $1,656,986.62 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 $135,830.85 rate 5.180%
• Balance today in Community Banks investment account $24,902,259.05 rate 5.170% (This rate equals today's Community Banks 90-day TBill rate of 4.850% plus 32 basis points)
• Balance today in Sovereign Bank investment account $74,800,891.05 rate 5.200% (This rate equals today's 1-month LIBOR rate of 5.320% minus 12 basis points)
• Balance today in PNC Bank investment account $101,378.59 rate 5.100% (This rate equals today's Fed Funds rate of 5.250% minus 15 basis points)
• Balance today in Graystone Bank investment account $102,168.37 rate 4.920% (This rate equals last month's average 1-month LIBOR rate of 5.320% minus 40 basis points)
• Balance today in Commerce Bank investment account $102,034.69 rate 4.240% (This rate equals today's 90-day T-Bill rate of 4.490% minus 25 basis points)

No T.R.A.N. Line of Credit required for 2007.

Mr. Yohe: The last time I gave my report, I commented on the TBill rate dropping. I noticed today the TBill rate came back up somewhat. I had a phone call from our representative at Community Banks. He let me know that for July they are going to up their bid to try and get the bulk of the funds again. I was a little concerned that we may be lowering here, but Community wants the money, so the process is working. I'll let you know next report how much they bump their bid up to.

Mr. DiFrancesco: How do we make the decision when to part ways? Is the program supposed to work where one gets 50% and two get ?. I'm sitting here looking at it like today, Community is at 5.17%; PNC is at 5.10%.

Mr. Yohe: Remember, PNC requested to be out.

Mr. DiFrancesco: I thought they requested to be out when interest rates were at a certain point.

Mr. Yohe: No. They actually had a change of heart. They decided that even at 5.1% they weren't making the money they wanted to be and if it wasn't a problem with us, they took themselves out. They said if you can get more money at a better rate elsewhere, please move it.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Where are we in the process? When do we make the switch?

Mr. Yohe: RFPs go out next month. August is the last month of this one.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Also, now that the INVEST account is sort of back in the ballpark, why do we not use them?

Mr. Yohe: We had talked about that, and it was more because of they weren't written into the original RFP. I was going to make a note of that in the next one. If INVEST is actually one of the players, they'll be getting the money. I'll have to work on how to get them in.

Mr. DiFrancesco: The only reason I was asking is because now we are down to two instead of the three whether or not we can be using them this time. I understand that normally there is a commitment made by us to those banks, and those banks to us, and we don't want to go outside of that.

Mr. Yohe: Yes; and I think the way we resolved that is the lower banks were only going to have up to whatever we estimated in the RFP. If that wasn't 25%, I thought our commitment to them was at least what we estimated in the RFP. That is what I have been trying to gauge at to keep it no higher than the 25%, what I estimated in that RFP. Like I said, Community for next month already told me they are going to bump their rate back up. I don't anticipate Sovereign. They haven't changed. If I were to call them and say, hey, Community is going to be bumping their rates back up, I don't think Sovereign would change quite honestly. I will allow for some sort of use of INVEST in the next 6 months. I just never considered that when we went into this one.

Mr. DiFrancesco: They were so far behind.

Mr. Yohe: They were so far behind for a long time. In mid-July I will send out the RFPs for the next one. Any other questions? (There were none.)

Today is the day we advertised to approve Dauphin County's fiscal year budget. That is for those funds that operate on a July to June basis. The budget has been available for the 20-day inspection period since June 6, 2007. I have made no changes to it since then. I have a little summary here; it is the same as the proposed. (Mr. Yohe distributed copies). Again, I won't get into too much detail. This is exactly the same as it was three weeks ago when we proposed it. There may have been some budget transfers within these funds that the current '06/'07 budget may have one line item a little higher or a little lower, but there have been no changes to the bottom line of the budget since then. We are looking at a total of $152,878,191.00 to cover these nine funds. That is an increase of 3.12% overall; however, the second section on the first page shows the actual County funds involved in those nine funds, and there is a significant increase in the County funds that we proposed for this upcoming fiscal year. As you can see, the bulk of that is in Children & Youth and that was discussed at length. I know we are all taking steps to try to reduce that, but the more telling picture will be in a couple of months when we propose the County's year funds budget.

Mr. Haste: Again, what Nick and George have been saying, even though it looks like we're holding our own, but really the State is paying less and the County is having to pay more just for minimum services.

Mr. Yohe: Exactly. We are getting a definite shift from the State and Federal level down to the County level, at least in the Children & Youth area. And I think we'd see the same thing if MH/MR and Aging were not able to control their waiting lists and the people they serve also.

Mr. Hartwick: They continue to grow, it's just that they are not mandated to provide services directly to individuals who are at risk, who need foster care, who are being neglected or abused. The whole idea of the juvenile arrest rate going up and the lack of prevention and intervention services are the result of reduced money, increased people we are trying to serve and an increased county commitment.

Mr. Haste: Hopefully the boxing ring project will give kids a way to release energy.

Mr. Hartwick: I'd like to see us come up with more proposals to see this number shrink.

Mr. Yohe: Hopefully, we won't see a 21% increase in the transfer to Children & Youth when we look at this in November. I would like to point out that in these nine funds there is only one new position and that is in Children & Youth. Other than that, the salary and benefit lines should be stable in those areas for another year. Any questions? (There were none.)

It was moved by Mr. Hartwick and seconded by Mr. DiFrancesco to approve the 2007/2008 fiscal year budget; motion carried.

REPORT FROM CHIEF CLERK/CHIEF OF STAFF - CHAD SAYLOR

Mr. Saylor: Commissioners, I have two brief points I'd like to make. I think I put at each of your desks a graph chart. I was at an Airport Authority meeting this morning and the news is very good. Traffic at the airport continues to grow. This month it is up over 12%, almost 13% over last year. The chart I think dramatically shows that this is more than just a one-month blip. There is a definite trend that people are using the airport more and the airlines are getting more active there which I think will be very, very good news for not only the airport, but obviously for the region. I just wanted to bring that to your attention.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Is the left hand axis a percentage?

Mr. Saylor: That is a percentage.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Is that a percentage overall or seats available?

Mr. Saylor: These are numbers tracking over previous years. They showed us a chart that covers a number of years back to 2001. You can see things have definitely been in a trough; but things are starting to come out of the trough now. It looks like a lot of good news is going to be coming out of there.

My second item is elections. I had a meeting with a number of staff including Steve Chiavetta and Mary Ann Boyer from the office of Registration & Elections. Obviously there is some concern about increased activities with next year being a Presidential election year, regardless of whether or not they change the primary date. I just wanted to advise the three of you that after our conversation, Steve is working on a plan to deal with the spike in activity, increased voter registration drives, absentee ballots, etc. They are looking to hire some part-time folks through possibly temporary agencies. Steve also had the idea that perhaps some of our poll workers may have an interest in some part-time work. I advised him to look at the staffing levels he thinks he'll need, what the costs with be, and we are looking at desk space and working with Tom Guenther. I anticipate over the next few weeks we'll have a plan for you guys to consider for dealing with next year's elections.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Some other good ideas came out of that meeting as well, in terms of possibly automating some systems. For instance, if people call in for registration forms a person does not have to be tied up on that phone call if they can go through an automated phone system or on-line to make it a lot easier to process that request. Obviously, a lot of phone calls that come in and take up staff time during that intense work season is simply just putting something in the mail to somebody to make sure they can vote. A lot of good ideas came out of that meeting.

Mr. Saylor: One other item related to that. In past election years, I've noticed that on election night as Steve and his staff are scurrying about furiously trying to get results and get them accurate that a number of bystanders and interested parties tend to collect in the office, and not only in the office, but in Steve's office. For me that is very problematic for a number of reasons. I had a discussion with the Solicitor about it; and I had talked to Steve before about restricting access to that office. He was reluctant because he wants to be as accommodating as possible and avoid the possibility of being accused of doing something untoward. It seems to me that this is an issue the Board should look at and perhaps enact a policy restricting access of the public to that space, particularly when we make access, not only on the internet, but within the Administration Building, to see the returns come in. Perhaps allowing each county party chairman the ability to designate someone to observe. We'll work out the details, but I just wanted to bring this to your attention and make sure you are okay with this concept and don't have any concerns before we start working on something.

Mr. Haste: I thought that was what we had planned for this past election. That's the reason the second floor conference room was set up. I was surprised to walk into elections that night and find more folks in Steve's office than were upstairs.

Mr. DiFrancesco: It is very problematic when he is trying to load election results and people are standing back asking, put this one up, put that one up on the computer. It is very impractical, and I agree, if we could just have a process in place where we could have an appropriate watcher just to make sure everything is going appropriately. There is no reason those people should be in Steve's office or in Voter Registration at all, when the second floor is set-up with a monitor with live results and the option to receive internet results.

Mr. Saylor: The challenge is that Steve has been very accommodating. If the foot is going to be put down, there are some folks with law degrees who might resist.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Everyone who comes in to witness has a strong personality and expects their needs be met immediately.

Mr. Saylor: Exactly. That is why a very strong statement, or policy, set by the Board would be good in this case.

Mr. Haste: We can, and should do that. Have it drafted and we'll adopt it. (Board members nodded in agreement.) I suggest we send it to the Election Board.

Mr. Saylor: Yes. Unless there are any more questions of me, that is all I have.

Mr. Hartwick: And the election primary date is being considered to be moved from May, is that correct? February?

Mr. Saylor: February. What I am told is that the house passed, if I understand it correctly, that in February we would hold elections for all offices and the normal May primary would be simply for Act 1 or 8, or whatever act it is. In non-presidential years it would revert back to May for the primary.

Mr. DiFrancesco: Again, this comes down to the issue of a theory that we would all agree to is an early primary would make Pennsylvania relevant. But in practical application, it becomes a nightmare to run a primary in February on so many different levels. The requirements of people running for office would be dramatic, especially when more and more primaries occur on the same date, just getting around the country. For us, in the timetable of administering an election, it would be absolutely insane. But, of course, we will respect the will of the legislature and do whatever they mandate on us.

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

Mr. Tully: All the matters requiring Board action were reviewed and ready to go. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. (There were none.)

MATTERS REQUIRING BOARD ACTION

Mr. Haste: We have matters requiring Board action - Items A through DD. Are there any items that need to be pulled out separately? (There were none.)

It was moved by Mr. DiFrancesco and seconded by Mr. Hartwick that the Board approve the following items - A through DD - from the Agenda under Matters Requiring Board Action; motion carried.

1. Training Packet.
2. 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.
3. Intergovernmental Cooperation Grant Program Application in the amount of $12,500.00 from Millersburg Area School District and Halifax Area School District.
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.
7. Refund of 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 Real Estate Taxes in the amount of $286.01 - Elsie Scheetz, 2329 Schoolhouse Rd., Middletown, PA Parcel #34-002-027.
8. Purchase of Service Per Diem Rates for Children and Youth for FY 2006/07 with Kidspeace National Center, Inc.
9. Purchase of Service Per Diem Rates for Children and Youth for FY 2007/08 with:
   1. Community Action Commission
   2. Concern Professional Services for Children, Youth & Families
   3. Diversified Treatment Alternatives, Inc.
   4. Family Support of Central PA
   5. Halifax United Methodist Church
   6. Hempfield Behavioral Health, Inc.
   7. Program for Female Offenders, Inc. of Greater Harrisburg Area
   8. The Impact Project, Inc.
   9. There's Room in the Inn
   10. YMCA-Northern Dauphin County Branch
   11. Glen Mills School
   12. YWCA of Greater Harrisburg
   13. Bair Foundation of Pennsylvania
   14. Jewish Family Service of Greater Harrisburg, Inc.
   15. Jondu Corporation D/B/A Prescott house formerly Lancaster County Council of Churches
   16. National Mentor Health Care, Inc.
   17. Specialized Treatment Services, Inc.
   18. Pinnacle Health Hospital - Women's & Children's Services
   19. Youth Solutions Residential Services
10. Satisfaction Pieces for:
    1. Lorayne Oberhem and Michael McPoyle for property located at 2414 Boas Street, Harrisburg, PA 17104 ($5,000.00)
    2. Debra A. Brown for property located at 2332 Derry Street, Harrisburg, PA 17104. This is a mortgage from 1996 that carries a 10-year forgiveness clause.
    3. Isaac Noon III and Kimberly Noon for property located at 216 Wood Street, Middletown, PA 17057 ($2,925.000).
    4. Tuan H. Le and Tung P. Le for property located at 2151 Kensington Street, Harrisburg, PA 17104. This is a 1996 mortgage that carries a 10-year forgiveness clause.
    5. Angela D. Gumby for property located at 2786 Rumson Drive, Harrisburg, PA 17104 ($3,500.00)
    6. Rachel Kunzman for property located at 15 Ligan St., Highspire, PA 17034 ($3,480.00)
11. Letter of Engagement from Rutherford Insurance to provide Insurance Consulting and Broker services for Workers Compensation for a fee of $10,400 for 80 hours of advisory services between 6/1/07 - 6/30/08.
12. Purchase Agreement between Dauphin County and BI, Inc. for 10 additional Global Positioning System Units (GPS). Purchase Price $20,930.00.
13. Extended Warranty and Support Services Agreement (Maintenance and Service) between Dauphin County and BI, Inc. for 140 standard electronic monitors (EM) units. Annual cost of coverage: $22,299.00 w/monthly payments of $1,858.25, effective 1/1/07 - 12/31/07.
14. Service Agreement Amendment between Dauphin County Emergency Management Agency and Verizon correcting a Verizon pricing error and provides a credit to EMA for the purchase of Plant CML MagIC 4.0. The amendment does not alter terms and conditions previously set.
15. Purchase of Service Agreements for FY 2007/08 between Area Agency on Aging and:
    1. ASSISTANCE AT-Home, Inc.
    2. Star MULTICARE Services, Inc. t/d/b/a Extended Family Care
    3. Capital Area Late Start, Inc. a/k/a The Rutherford House
    4. Portraits of Life Adult Day Services, Inc.
    5. Vision Healthcare Services, Inc.
    6. Millersburg Area Senior Advisory Board, Inc.
    7. ADDUS Health Care
    8. Golden Halo, Inc.
    9. Harrisburg Housing Authority for the Jackson-Lick Towers Senior Center
    10. The Steelton Community Development Foundation, Inc.
    11. Capital Home Care of United Cerebral Palsy of Central Pennsylvania
    12. Grayson Harrisburg Limited Partnership, t/d/b/a Grayson View Harrisburg Assisted Living Community
    13. Comfort Keepers #267
    14. Good News Consulting, Inc.
    15. Neighborhood Services of Lancaster
    16. Abel Personnel, Inc.
    17. Jewish Family Service of Greater Harrisburg
    18. Physicians of Rehabilitation, Industrial and Spine Medicine, P.C.
16. Amendment #1 to a Purchase of Service Agreement between Area Agency on Aging and Capital Area Transit.
17. Grant Agreements between Area Agency on Aging and:
    1. Central Pennsylvania Food Bank
    2. RSVP of Central Pennsylvania
    3. Steelton Senior Center
    4. Friendship Senior Center
    5. Mohler Senior Center
    6. Capital Area Late Start t/d/b/a Rutherford House
    7. Millersburg Senior Center
18. Purchase of Service Agreements for FY 2007/08 (unless indicated) between Children and Youth and:
    1. Associated Marine Institutes, Inc.
    2. Common Sense Adoption Services, Inc.
    3. Community Service Foundation, Inc.
    4. Community Services Group, Inc.
    5. Summit Quest Academy, a Division of ViaQuest Behavioral health, LLC, Inc.
    6. The Glen Mills Schools, Inc.
    7. Three Rivers Adoption Council, Inc.
    8. YWCA of Greater Harrisburg, Inc.
    9. St. Michael's School, Inc.
    10. Glade Run Lutheran Services, Inc.
    11. Gaudenzia Chambers Hill Adolescent Program, Inc.
    12. Drug and Alcohol Rehabilitation Services, Inc.
    13. Children's Home of Reading, Inc.
    14. Keystone Service Systems, Inc., t/d/b/a Keystone Children and Family Services
    15. Jondu, Inc.
    16. Youth Services Agency, Inc.
    17. Visiting Nurses Association of Central Pennsylvania, Inc.
    18. Specialized Treatment Services, Inc.
    19. Presbyterian Children's Village, Inc. (FY 06/07)
    20. Jewish Family Service of Greater Harrisburg, Inc.
    21. The Children's Institute of Pittsburgh, Inc.
    22. Presbyterian Children's Village, Inc. (FY 06/07)
    23. Ramona Thompson
19. MH Purchase of Service Agreements for FY 2007/08 between MH/MR and:
    1. Lynn Cummings, M.S., CCC-SLP
    2. Ann Meckley Panchik, M.A. t/d/b/a Provad Professional Voice Advantage
    3. Capital Area Intermediate Unit
    4. Rachel Heintzleman, M.S.
    5. Northwestern Human Services of the Susquehanna Valley t/d/b/a Susquehanna Developmental Services
    6. Gayle Z. Goepfert, M.S., CCC-SLP t/d/b/a Goepfert Speech Associates
    7. United Cerebral Palsy of Central Pennsylvania, Inc.
    8. Fetterhoff & Zilli
    9. George Schultz
    10. 106 Walnut Law Office
    11. Consumer Satisfaction Services
    12. Karen K. Reale, OTR/L
    13. YWCA of Greater Harrisburg
    14. Volunteers of America of Central Pennsylvania, Inc.
    15. Visiting Nurse Association of Central Pennsylvania, Inc.
    16. Pennsylvania Counseling Services, Inc.
    17. Brethren Housing Association
    18. CONTACT Helpline, Inc.
    19. Family Service Partners
    20. Megan Lesko, M.A., CCC-SLP
    21. Lawrence Vuxta
    22. Emily Player, M.S., CCC-SLP
    23. Aurora Social Rehabilitation Services
    24. Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Harrisburg
    25. Impact Systems, Inc.
    26. NAMI Pennsylvania
20. MR Purchase of Service Agreements for FY 2007/08 between MH/MR and:
    1. Northwestern Human Services of the Susquehanna Valley t/d/b/a Susquehanna Developmental Services
    2. Byron Schreck, SLP-CCC
    3. Melmark, Inc.
    4. Impact Systems, Inc.
21. Medicaid Waiver Service Agreements between MH/MR and:
    1. Lynn Cummings, M.S., CCC-SLP
    2. Ann Meckley Panchik, M.A. t/d/b/a Provad Professional Voice Advantage
    3. Emily Player, M.S., CCC-SLP
    4. Capital Area Intermediate Unit
    5. Rachel Heintzleman, M.S.
    6. Karen K. Reale, OTR/L
    7. Megan Lesko, M.A., CCC-SLP
22. Homeless Assistance Program Fund Agreements for FY 2007/08 between MH/MR and:
    1. Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Harrisburg
    2. Delta Community, Inc.
    3. YWCA of Greater Harrisburg
23. Human Services Development Fund Agreements for FY 2007/08 between the Human Services Director's Office and:
    1. Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Harrisburg
    2. Visiting Nurse Association of Central Pennsylvania
    3. Capital Area Transit
    4. Harrisburg Area YMCA
    5. CONTACT Helpline
    6. United Cerebral Palsy of Central Pennsylvania, Inc.
    7. Children's Resource Center of Pinnaclehealth
    8. Family Service Partners
    9. Addus Healthcare, Inc.
    10. The Foundation for Enhancing Communities
    11. Jason Moffitt
    12. Harrisburg School District
24. Natural Gas Transportation Agreement "IS#2/DSO Extended Term Pricing Agreement" between Dauphin County (Dauphin County Prison) and UGI Utilities, Inc. Price is $3.40//Mcf for 6/07 to 5/08.
25. HOME Investment Partnerships Program Subrecipient Agreement by and between Dauphin County and Mohn Street Accessible Housing, Inc. County to provide funds in the amount of $112,000.00 for 12 rental units for persons with disabilities at 400 Mohn Street, Steelton, PA.
26. Gibson Blvd. Subdivision Plan (MH/MR Gaudenzia Project).
27. Application for Service between Dauphin County and Verizon Business Network Services, Inc. on behalf of Verizon Pennsylvania, Inc. to provide Centrex telephone services for 152 lines for 48 months. Monthly unit rate First 100 Lines $14.95 per line and Over 100 lines $10.65 per line.
28. Hardware Service Agreement between Dauphin County and IMR Limited for Microfilm reader. Agreement No. C000000264 for $495. (12 months)
29. Agreement between Dauphin County and Doug Lamb Construction, Inc. for the Multi-Bridge Deck Rehabilitation Project.
30. Pandemic Preparedness: Project Agreement between Dauphin County, the Centers for Disease Control and the PA Department of Health.

FORMER BUSINESS

Mr. Haste: Any other items to be brought up by the Board at this time? Old business? (There was none.)

NEW BUSINESS

Mr. Haste: Any new business? (There was none.)

COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION & ACTIONS

Mr. Haste: I think everyone is aware that the President Judge has set up a procedure by which each one of the City District Justices will be holding a day of court out at the jail in the same room that we hold Prison Board. Yesterday was a meeting with those District Justices and their staff to begin that procedure. It is my understanding that he should have that in operation by the end of July. So there will be one day a week of City District Justices holding court at the jail. That is an attempt to speed up the criminal justice process.

Mr. DiFrancesco: That will make things much easier on the Public Offenders.

Mr. Hartwick: The city DJs are thrilled.

Mr. Haste: They are not.

CORRESPONDENCE

Mr. Haste: We have correspondence listed on the Agenda - Items A through H - that have been received and will be handled by the staff appropriately.

1. Notification from ISC Design advising that CHR Corp. will be applying to DEP for a General NPDES Permit regarding the proposed Rutter's Farm Store #27 on Derry & Milroy Road, Swatara Township.
2. Notification from Kairos Design Group, LLC advising that Clearview Construction is applying to DEP for General Permits 5 and 7 for wetland crossings associated with the LenMaur Plaza Land Development Plan.
3. Notification from Fischbach Morgan & Associates, LLC advising that the Volunteers of America will be applying to DEP for a General NPDES Permit for a project located at 505 Blue Ribbon Avenue, Harrisburg.
4. Receipt of a letter from the PA Public Utility Commission advising that a hearing has been set for August 9, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. regarding the investigation of the Herr Street Bridge.
5. Notification from Urban Engineers, Inc. advising that Susquehanna Area Regional Airport Authority is applying to DEP for Act 14 and Act 67/68/127 State and Federal Permits regarding the demolition of the Crawford Generating Station Project at 508 Airport Drive, Middletown.
6. Notification from Lake Roeder Hillard & Associates advising that VISTA Foundation is applying to DEP for a Joint Application for Pennsylvania Water Obstruction and Encroachment Permit and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit for the construction of a foot bridge across an unnamed tributary to Spring Creek to provide access from existing school to a proposed playground at 1249 Cocoa Ave., Hershey.
7. Notification from ENSR advising that Fresenius Medical Care is applying to DEP for an application to install and operate a diesel emergency generator that will provide back-up power to its kidney dialysis facility located at 1300 Linglestown Road, Harrisburg.
8. Notification from Rettew advising that Seth Shafer is applying to DEP for a NPDES General Permit regarding the 8 residential apartments with parking and private roads project in Susquehanna Township.

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?

Ms. Evelyn Hunt: First of all, I'd like to know if it is possible for me to get an organizational chart of the County and functional statements because I'd like to know who's in charge of what, when I have complaints. Last year I had a problem with a contractor. I attempted to have the person served through the District Justice. It wasn't handled in a timely manner. The person disappeared. For the last year, I have been actively pursuing this person. I talked to the District Attorney, because he was also wanted for some criminal actions - DUI, bad checks, parole violations, and so forth. I gave a copy of the man's prison card to the people in the Sheriff's office. I also gave them a copy of the license plate of the car he was using and the description, which they misplaced. I finally got tired of the foolishness and I actively pursued him. I found out where he lived; I gave the information to the Sheriff's office and I was happy to say that within two hours he was being taken away in handcuffs. Then, I went back up to the District Justice's office and reactivated the claim. They accepted my money to reactivate it. The next day, I got a notice and I said did you send this out to the prison? I was told they did but I wasted my money because it was a civil action and they won't bring him from Dauphin County to the District Justice office. My question is why wasn't I told this before they accepted my additional money? I spoke to Mr. Jennings about this and he told me to come up to his office today and discuss it again. But, when I went down to the Sheriff's office and I also spoke to the Public Defender I said I'd like to know when this is coming up for trial. The Public Defender sent me to the Sheriff's office; the Sheriff's office said they don't know, the Public Defender decides. I've done a lot of work to see that this man goes to jail. I'd like for the County to not drop the ball and keep me involved. If at all possible, I'd like to testify so this man gets more time. I want him in jail because I'm tired of his dealers coming to my neighborhood looking for him because he owes money for this crack that he hasn't paid for. For all I've done, they can at least continue to keep me involved and let me know when it is coming up for trial, instead of telling me some time in the first two weeks of August is criminal court. I don't have two weeks to sit here in hope that he shows up. I'd like to put in a complaint about why it wasn't handled properly at the District Justice office and why now that I have him sitting in jail no one can tell me when he is going to be tried. I am very interested in this day in court. If District Justices are going to be out at the prison, if there is additional time, what is to prevent them from also hearing a civil case out at the prison?

Mr. Haste: If you give me your phone number after today's meeting, I'll talk to the President Judge. He has the final say on everything under the Courts. Even though the Magisterial District Judges are elected, they have some freedom to do certain things their way, but it still falls under the Courts. I may be wrong, but I think the one who knows the scheduling of the court is someone in the District Attorney's office - not the Public Defender and not the Sheriff. It is my understanding that the court calendar for the most part is directed by the prosecutor, which is the District Attorney's office. They work in cooperation with the others, but the driving force is the District Attorney. Am I correct, Bill?

Mr. Tully: That is right. In fact, most of the information is disseminated most efficiently through the Victim Witness division of the DA's office. After today's meeting, I'll be more than happy to meet with her and answer as many of the questions as I can. That might make it a little easier on her.

Mr. Haste: Afterward, get with us. We'll talk to the President Judge. He may or may not be aware of what you have been doing. I think he would be very appreciative of what you have been doing and would want to make sure you are in the loop as things continue forward. I want to thank you for being a citizen and be willing to say enough is enough. We'll do whatever we can do to help you.

Ms. Hunt: Thank you very much.

Mr. Haste: Is there anyone else who would like to address the Board? (There was none.) Just a reminder, we have Retirement Board; and we'll go into Retirement Board at 11:25 a.m.

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. Haste: Is there a motion to adjourn?

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