Council trims elected‑official line but rejects moving surveyor’s chief deputy to Drainage Board

LaPorte County councilors voted at a Sept. 29 budget workshop to reduce an elected official department‑head line item but rejected a proposal to move the surveyor’s chief‑deputy position and its funding to the Drainage Board. The measure to strip the chief deputy from the surveyor’s budget was removed by amendment before council approval.

The discussion began during review of the surveyor’s budget, where council members raised concerns about oversight and the surveyor’s coordination with the Drainage Board. A motion by councilman Novak sought two actions: cut the elected official line from $41,006 to $29,000 and transfer the chief‑deputy post (and its funds) out of the surveyor’s account and into drainage. The motion was seconded by Mr. Yugowski and spurred an extended debate about governance and personnel authority.

Opponents of the transfer argued the county should not use budget maneuvers to manage individual personnel matters and that the surveyor, as an elected official, has discretion over hiring and firing for his staff. One council member said the proposed swap would be “meddling” in an elected official’s staffing decisions. Supporters who pushed for the transfer cited longstanding communication issues between the surveyor’s office and the Drainage Board and described missed tasks and contract delays as the context for the proposal.

Councilman Kiel moved to amend the original motion to keep the chief deputy in the surveyor’s office while proceeding only with the department‑head pay reduction. The amendment passed on a recorded voice count during the workshop; the clerk’s count recorded a numeric total referenced in the meeting as 42 in the course of the tally. The council then approved the amended motion: the elected‑official line was reduced as proposed, but the chief‑deputy position and its funding remain with the surveyor’s office.

The surveyor and multiple commissioners agreed to increase communications and to arrange supervised meetings between the surveyor’s office and the Drainage Board to resolve outstanding coordination issues. Several members requested that the surveyor copy council liaisons on meeting coordination to ensure timely follow‑up.

The council also confirmed related surveyor perpetuation accounts and clarified fuel and phone line items before moving on to other budgets. Next procedural steps include reconciliation of packet pages the surveyor said were missing from the workshop packet and follow‑up meetings between the surveyor and the Drainage Board.