[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6266667,"mediaKeyId","3086850-36ffa4f34e7b65e241fd6483b2d6cd17","parentId",3086850,"title","Votes at a glance: Delaware County commissioners, April 21, 2025","audioSeconds",4041,"startMs",184000,"endMs",4225000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3086850-36ffa4f34e7b65e241fd6483b2d6cd17&start=184&end=4225","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3086850-36ffa4f34e7b65e241fd6483b2d6cd17/thumbnail_184000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6266667/Delaware-County/Indiana/Votes-at-a-glance-Delaware-County-commissioners-April-21-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6266667-739146aeadbb0a621418a5ca1d17cc1b/orig.mp4?Expires=1770557533&Signature=P3BF534T2NQNdEGel06ikEcb6D-5nj~YtY46Aj0dQYW04~nBmTRMbMO03~tg6ni18LtopM-V04l8uRHxhLVThcwrgcQHDOfAcSzODEkE2JarYiuUTCMrXprsZ1~4TiyjXQ5VF72w4CK~07zjd2zINSyKNqnZkxa9KEupaTtMckBHEBxzzg3lnytAddcIFCRV1TeJw9c64hU61LqxHUqgHCc0xuXZ9rtMbsk3rl8N3eU9mRCy9iCaorfIOoByKrbEKHTYwe6Ud7kQsnTxFXV6qVaYGKiVWPSa9xevNWl3kfIqsZCZDBSAIJkb~NHEY5UoEunlMghWFaVqyWR2jZlLZg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Delaware County CA","date","2025-04-23T00:13:56.07Z","article","The Delaware County Board of Commissioners recorded the following formal actions during its April 21 meeting. Where a mover/second was not explicitly named in the transcript, the board’s roll call or motion text is shown as recorded.

Votes at a glance
1) Employee handbook — Approval
Motion: Approve the revised county employee handbook.
Outcome: Approved
Roll call: Commissioner Graham — Yes; Commissioner Reagan — Yes; Vice Commissioner Henry — Yes.
Notes: Commissioners stated further amendments may be forthcoming.

2) Ordinance introduction tied to handbook — Introduction/first reading
Motion: Introduce handbook‑related ordinance (Ordinance No. 20.4‑033) and remove from the table.
Outcome: Introduced (first reading) — roll call all Yes.

3) Solar ordinance — Remove from table and refer to Planning Commission
Motion: Remove solar ordinance amendments from the table, incorporate agreed edits, and submit to the Planning Commission for a public hearing (Resolution 2025‑07).
Outcome: Approved (motion to transmit to Planning Commission passed by roll call).
Vote: Commissioner Reagan — Yes; Commissioner Graham — Yes; Commissioner Henry — Yes.

4) Corson contracts (service contracts for county facilities) — Approval
Motion: Approve four contracts with Corson (one per facility) as presented; Commissioner Henry authorized to sign.
Outcome: Approved
Roll call: Vice Reagan — Yes; Commissioner Brand — Yes; Vice Henry — Yes.
Notes: Commissioners said the new contracts should reduce projected costs for the covered services.

5) Community Enhancement Project (CEP) contract — Approval
Motion: Approve renewal/amended contract with the Community Enhancement Project for front‑line duplication services (new contract value cited around $8,889 annually).
Outcome: Approved
Roll call: Commissioner Reagan — Yes; Commissioner Graham — Yes; Vice Henry — Yes.

6) Paving and road bids — Taken under advisement
Motion: Take four paving bids under advisement (First Brook Construction; E & B Paving and others) and ask county staff to vet bidders and bring recommendations back.
Outcome: Motion carried
Roll call: Commissioner Reagan — Yes; Commissioner Graham — Yes; Commissioner Henry — Yes.

7) 1315 East Main Street (letter of interest) — Direction to solicit proposals
Motion: Combine related agenda items, solicit up to three proposals for the parcel (adjacent owner, municipal/nonprofit, other) and present at next meeting.
Outcome: Approved
Roll call: Commissioner Reagan — Yes; Commissioner Graham — Yes; Vice Henry — Yes.

8) Acceptance of grant (training for dispatch staff) — Acceptance
Motion: Accept third‑year training grant for dispatch staff, $4,500.
Outcome: Approved
Roll call: Commissioner Reagan — Yes; Commissioner Graham — Yes; Commissioner Henry — Yes.

9) Justice Center mowing (temporary) and RFP
Motion: Allow current contractor (Groupies / Groupies Lawn Care) to mow under current quote until competitive bids are solicited; staff to prepare RFP to include additional ditch line mowing.
Outcome: Approved
Roll call: Commissioner Graham — Yes; Commissioner Reagan — Yes; Commissioner Henry — Yes.

10) Engineering drawings for a state‑permitted project — Approval
Motion: Approve payment of $5,800 for engineering drawings required by state permitting for a site project (funding source noted as grant/other project fund).
Outcome: Approved (commissioners agreed the state permit required the engineering work).
Roll call: Commissioner Graham — Yes; Commissioner Reagan — Yes; Commissioner Henry — Yes.

11) Unsafe/nursing‑home demolition and cleanup — Approval (up to $50,000 cap)
Motion: Approve demolition and cleanup of an unsafe building (nursing home) and authorize funding up to $50,000 including an asbestos removal cap of $10,000; direct county attorneys to pursue recovery where possible.
Outcome: Approved
Roll call: Commissioner Reagan — Yes; Commissioner Brand — Yes; Commissioner Henry — Yes.
Notes: Commissioners discussed using EDIT or ARPA funds as a temporary source and pursuing legal recovery; the property is delinquent on taxes.

12) HVAC air‑handler drip pan replacement — Approval
Motion: Approve ResolTech proposal to replace corroded drip pan under air‑handler and related work for $14,970; funds from EDIT/buildings.
Outcome: Approved
Roll call: Commissioner Graham — Yes; Commissioner Reagan — Yes; Commissioner Henry — Yes.

13) Payment of claims — Regular claims and payroll
- Claims: $803,966.95 — Approved (Roll call: Reagan Yes; Graham No; Henry Yes).
- Special claims: $408,021.05 (includes $400,000 wastewater treatment project for the Town of Eaton) — Approved (all Yes).
- Payroll: $1,040,097.74 — Approved (all Yes).

Procedure and notice
Several items were motions to take bids “under advisement” or to table pending further materials; the board used roll‑call votes for approvals. Several agenda items were informational updates (construction report, building commissioner) and did not require a vote.

If you need documentation
The official minutes and motion text will be published in the county clerk’s record for the April 21 meeting and will include the formal motion language and roll‑call tallies. This summary is a compact, staff‑oriented record of the votes and next steps recorded at the meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Delaware County Commissioners Meeting April 21st 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Summary of formal motions and roll‑call outcomes taken by the Board of Commissioners during the April 21 meeting, including handbook approval, contract awards, planning referrals and several procurement and payment approvals.","taxTitle","Delaware County, Indiana","taxId",4305,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6266672,"Adjacent residents ask commissioners to consider sale of county lot at 1315 East Main; board asks for proposals",846,1612000,2458000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3086850-36ffa4f34e7b65e241fd6483b2d6cd17&start=1612&end=2458","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3086850-36ffa4f34e7b65e241fd6483b2d6cd17/thumbnail_1612000.jpg","/articles/6266672/Delaware-County/Indiana/Adjacent-residents-ask-commissioners-to-consider-sale-of-county-lot-at-1315-East-Main-board-asks-for-proposals","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6266672-30992c7b3e52719ac32eea0a3bb3f136/orig.mp4?Expires=1770557533&Signature=PVdm2iZk6biAe07x6UOIsh1fpZ9seH-e3peWPfpQaeooLDiHpb5o0ihAZjpZsmqS~~USQfA7C3YTkHvtYnDz6zUnJVZUcqMbGfh028xKAWd7~4~-kfeorkpb9yCSJE~l4ZiVMtnsRvxXU4AgDu8UAzl1u23gqfyMcpg42f2z3s~JubsZDFky~JH6KSUVcIpOOOxUdytGF5r4GDEIPV8ceM-7RsvJAVAuXR0mtuHvR3yeQcKGxqeQf-GAXaZWlJ1x5IMz-4tdPfOHtKsR7YZuX3dgwOeaQAE5NqaYXmcvgZIMhtLmcRi6EnuWP8P841cJYNDDqCnEe2YfItwPAxv1pw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Several residents and neighborhood leaders urged the commissioners to give adjacent occupants first consideration for acquisition of a county‑owned vacant lot at 1315 East Main Street during public comment on April 21.

Arlena Thomas said she and family members have cared for and maintained the property for years and asked the county for first opportunity to purchase the parcel, saying they would pay. East Central Neighborhood Association president Brian Shaw and other neighbors supported that request and asked to be kept informed if the county considered transfer or redevelopment.

What the board did
Commissioners combined this item with the related agenda matter and asked staff to solicit and present proposals at the next meeting. The board specifically instructed staff to obtain up to three proposals — for example, from the adjacent homeowner, a nonprofit candidate (MRC referenced), or other interested parties — and to bring those proposals back for public consideration.

Context and concerns raised
Neighborhood speakers said the property had been a recurring neighborhood nuisance (vacant structure recently torn down, trash and transient activity) and urged a transparent process for transfers so neighbors could participate. Several speakers noted past practice in some cases of offering abandoned parcels to adjacent owners; others asked whether the county would pursue a redevelopment partner such as the municipal land bank. Commissioners noted the county had spent about $17,000 to clear and demolish structures on the parcel and said they would aim to recoup as much value as possible.

Next steps
Staff was directed to gather written proposals and present them at the next commission meeting. The board took no final sale or conveyance action on April 21.

","Residents adjacent to a county‑owned vacant parcel at 1315 East Main Street asked commissioners for first right to purchase; the board asked staff to solicit up to three proposals and to return with offers at the next meeting.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6266678,"Construction on county mental‑health facility remains on schedule for summer turnover, contractor says",355,981000,1336000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3086850-36ffa4f34e7b65e241fd6483b2d6cd17&start=981&end=1336","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3086850-36ffa4f34e7b65e241fd6483b2d6cd17/thumbnail_981000.jpg","/articles/6266678/Delaware-County/Indiana/Construction-on-county-mentalhealth-facility-remains-on-schedule-for-summer-turnover-contractor-says","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6266678-dadacd06b9778f81aab5184e4933a0c3/orig.mp4?Expires=1770557533&Signature=DWDoNtbtCmHIaypLcClT07whFkQjHEYU6Z-sBUDj2hdsYYcg7TX7Ci5XKh86yIxrntJq5k-PEZzWGmpWlVhibr8VoAqIM0LgZGFikxoitrnb~nxw242EfuJPKswxvdVhPPKgzG6LtK~p8YTMr-5n5TWk~aez1QxLwxtiepbRcW0u6Zt852fzxuL1uKL3J2KOxXoc0dg3~9Z6cxMUZFFyBAjxpPpdOZPIw1BiXJUNKwXrdc0Myokz8zf06L3ywdkbhLF0zAoC9h1iymUl9oLz91PPfZViQTxmWlNLaziEZ9lQQXekr2Q3kDbuoSvfNA3yCETBqnHYiUJ1knDuVowUyg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","BW Construction project manager Mark Manship gave commissioners a detailed construction progress update on the county’s mental‑health facility during the April 21 meeting.

Manship said the contract value remains $7,996,017 and that only a no‑cost time extension change order has been approved so far. He reported steady progress on exterior and interior work and said substantial completion is targeted around July 3; the project’s administrative completion date is projected Aug. 18.

Why it matters: The facility is a county capital project with a multi‑million‑dollar contract, and officials said timely completion is needed to relieve current capacity pressures and to begin moving furniture and equipment in advance of occupancy.

Work completed and outstanding
Manship listed recent progress: roofing and nearly all storefront glazing are complete; hardy (fiber‑cement) siding is installed and being painted; sanitary and hydrant taps were completed; detention pond and additional discharge were installed to satisfy updated 100‑year flood requirements; plumbing and electrical rough‑ins are substantially complete; and the generator is on site. The project team reported drywall, finishes and HVAC ductwork in progress and scheduled delivery of furniture and loose equipment to begin around June.

Schedule and risk
A March change order extended the contract time to 334 days; Manship said that yields a projected paperwork/turnover completion on Aug. 18 but that substantial construction completion should fall closer to July 3, allowing the county the statutory 30‑ to 38‑day move‑in window. He noted the team has addressed a drainage permitting delay that previously affected the schedule; no other major time‑impacting issues were reported in the update.

Costs and contingencies
Manship said only one approved change order so far (time‑only) and that the contract dollar amount remains unchanged. Commissioners asked questions but reported no additional cost approvals at the meeting.

","BW Construction reported that the 120‑bed mental‑health facility’s contract remains at roughly $7.996 million, with substantial completion expected by July 3 and final turnover paperwork by Aug. 18, barring permit delays.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6266684,"Commissioners send revised solar ordinance to planning commission after weeks of debate",5302,2693000,7995000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3086850-36ffa4f34e7b65e241fd6483b2d6cd17&start=2693&end=7995","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3086850-36ffa4f34e7b65e241fd6483b2d6cd17/thumbnail_2693000.jpg","/articles/6266684/Delaware-County/Indiana/Commissioners-send-revised-solar-ordinance-to-planning-commission-after-weeks-of-debate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6266684-b7434cf1a47ae6418efa82adad11a1a0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770557533&Signature=OlKGEufRGufapj69OfhOih3PUaJ7Il0F1E1HViuF2u9y4WhfSyXDYYMon3qgEQfdB8wB2m5tJKV57rZQ-IDUfRtEpZ7yrN0CSZJp7SebyFtyDdDw0P-B52xI-Hl~j59KzfWsR6PztBvYGm-30L31r01CP1ziUWdRcKY9QLLRuRGySvrTkAhO7c-BEvAbP~6Jd6znyH-6RT6hwGdPSMRI-UpgdPH2corODbomaA2JALgdEGJi4~jWRhA0b~8r6PLH2aS8FEXgQJdHAJJdsEdkqpizwL5LsuV2nur0Vzbdto1OWLMlP6vnllfk9jP5wNMc8d2iqUXLe6zBD4~ACnysig__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Delaware County commissioners on April 21 approved sending a set of revised solar‑farm and battery energy storage amendments to the county Planning Commission for a public hearing and further review.

The amendments — negotiated between commissioners and county staff over multiple meetings — adjust setbacks, a property‑value guarantee, and a cap on use of prime farmland. Commissioners said the changes try to balance property‑owner concerns with developers’ ability to build commercially viable projects. Commissioner Bridget Brand said meetings with four prospective developers showed “the current ordinance setbacks of 500 feet do not preclude them from building these projects,” but that other changes could ease local tensions.

Why it matters: The draft ordinance governs where utility‑scale solar arrays and battery systems can be sited in Delaware County and what conditions developers must meet. Supporters say clarified rules will enable predictable permitting and local jobs; opponents say the changes still risk lowering nearby homeowners’ and farmers’ property values and were drafted without enough transparent public process.

What the commissioners approved and why
Commissioners voted to transmit the amended ordinance language to the Planning Commission and asked the planning body to set a special public hearing. The board agreed on several points before the referral: a property‑value guarantee distance, an expanded cap on prime farmland allowed for solar, a residential setback for private ground‑mounted arrays, and a shorter setback for battery energy storage systems than one version had proposed. The board instructed staff to post the version that incorporates those agreed changes for review by Planning.

Key policy choices discussed
- Property‑value guarantee (PVG): Commissioners debated three options — a one‑mile guarantee, a half‑mile guarantee and protection limited to adjoining properties. After discussion, Brand proposed a compromise to use a half‑mile PVG in the version sent to Planning. The draft limits the guarantee to one year after project completion to allow neighbors time to observe the finished project.

- Prime farmland cap: The draft previously included a 10% cap on use of prime farmland countywide; commissioners agreed to raise that to 20% in the posted version. Commissioners said the cap aims to encourage siting on brownfields or lower‑quality agricultural land while preserving most productive acreage.

- Setbacks and private solar: Commissioners clarified the draft would treat homeowner rooftop and small private systems separately from utility projects. For ground‑mounted private systems adjacent to residences the board settled on a 50‑foot setback from an adjacent residence (and included a carve‑out for parcels with a residence on them). For battery energy storage systems the setback was set at 500 feet in the posted version.

Developer and public comment
Mara Hoff, attorney for National Grid Renewables, urged the board and Planning Commission to consider that “buildable does not mean probable or economically viable,” saying that some setback language would reduce the acreage remaining for a viable utility project. Several residents and civic groups urged stronger setbacks, greater transparency and more public engagement. Linda Hanson of the League of Women Voters said the revision process had not been sufficiently transparent and urged clearer public notice. Others, including farmers and neighborhood residents, disagreed about whether the ordinance should further restrict farmland conversion.

Process next steps
The Planning Commission will set a special public hearing; county staff said the commission planned to use the same public‑hearing rules used previously (fixed time allotments for proponents and opponents). After the Planning Commission’s public hearing and any recommended edits, the ordinance will return to the commissioners for a second reading and final vote.

Public reaction at the meeting
Public commenters split between support for the county adopting workable rules that enable projects and opposition focused on process, property values, and farmland protection. The transcript records calls for clearer definitions (for example specifying photovoltaic panels versus concentrating solar systems) and questions about the enforceability and administrative burden of a PVG bond or guarantee.

What was not decided
The Planning Commission will hold the public hearing and may recommend changes; the board’s referral was only a first‑reading step. No final adoption occurred at the April 21 meeting.

","Delaware County commissioners voted to forward a revised draft of solar farm and battery storage rules to the county Planning Commission for a public hearing after reaching compromises on property-value guarantees, setbacks and limits on prime farmland.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Delaware County commissioners, April 21, 2025

Adjacent residents ask commissioners to consider sale of county lot at 1315 East Main; board asks for proposals

Construction on county mental‑health facility remains on schedule for summer turnover, contractor says

Commissioners send revised solar ordinance to planning commission after weeks of debate