Hancock Co. Budget comm
11/4/2026
Terry Bynum
Checked over fund balances–Jim Shelby observed that there might be a surplus in the county budget at year end that could be moved into the reserve fund.
Sheriff Burkhart talked about pension plan changes again. Moving toward either/both changing age to 52 or adding 5 year COLA. Would like to get a definitive answer before he leaves office at end of year.
Council heard a long presentation by Ninestar about a new water project and wastewater treatment plant on North 9 near Maxwell. They accepted a letter of intent from Ninestar about the project. It will cost a total of 22.6 million. TIF money will be used to build it. The RDC has already committed 1.6 million for design. It needs to be submitted to the state by April 27. Ninestar will work with the builders, the county will pay for it, then Ninestar will operate it.
John Jakontas kpresented the council with the two items he talked to commissioners about–a larger salary window for the Public Service program director (to be able to hire one of the highly qualified candidates they found) and a raise for the assistant 911 director, to bring his pay more in line with the director. No additional funds needed–the money is in the budget.
Tsuda submitted a property tax abatement request. They currently have a business in Greenfield–they would like to expand, adding 14 new employees and approximately 815K in new salary. They were told to revise their proposed abatement schedule and return next meeting
Interesting comments from Scott Woolridge, council president concerning abatements in light of the election. "We were demolished yesterday. The Public has said they don't want these abatements."
There was also an advisory presentation from Lauth Developers about an upcoming abatement request for a new spec warehouse to be built in the Mt. Comfort area. Council was not too warm to the idea. He will come back in Dec.
And MSQ developers from Indy also made an advisory presentation about a new spec warehouse. This one would be just north of I-70, immediately east of the county line. Developer said the abatement was critical for this project to go ahead. It would be a 500,000 sq ft. warehouse on 45 acres. The council is reluctant–they claim if this keeps up, we will soon be back in the situation where the county has too much spec warehouse space. This developer claims there are only 4 buildings available, and from what he's hearing there is a lot of activity on those existing warehouses.
A simple announcement by the Auditor caused a big blow up. There is at least $150,000 appropriated in the county budget for Hancock Sr. Services, but there is no cash available to pay incoming invoices. It seems that grant money has come in from the state, but Greenfield hasn't paid what Hancock County understood they would pay, and the county's share has been spent. Councillors were upset that Greenfield residents use a majority of the rideshares from Sr. services, but the city isn't interested in helping pay for it. Greenfield city council claims they are being taxed twice for this service. County made noises like they should have tied this to the Animal Control agreement they signed with the city. Even talked about inviting the Mayor to the next County Council meeting.
