Contract measure changes reviewed

INDIANAPOLIS — A bill that would lay out a process for county contracts is seeing some revision.

Indiana House Bill 1158, lays out procedures for county elected officials to enter into contracts, was amended Thursday by the Senate Local Government Committee and was held for likely additional amendments by author State Rep. Matt Lehman (R-Berne).

Lehman, who represents the northern third of Jay County as well as Adams and Wells counties, presented the amended version of the bill Thursday.

The original version of the bill called for proposed contracts to be submitted to the county auditor, forwarded to the president of the executive branch (county commissioners) for review within 15 days and then either approved or returned to the elected official with a written explanation regarding what needs to be changed. It also detailed that commissioners would be able to specify language that contracts must include.

The legislation stemmed from a Lake County court case in which commissioners sued the sheriff over such contracts.

Changes via the amendment call for contracts to be submitted to the county auditor, who would then date stamp them and forward a copy to the president of the county commissioners and the county attorney. A 20-day period for review would follow. If the county executive finds the contract acceptable, it can move forward. If it is not found acceptable, it can be refused and returned to the elected officeholder with a written explanation.

Once approved, all contracts would return to the auditor’s office and then posted onto Indiana Gateway, the collection platform for local units of government to submit required data to the State of Indiana.

The amended bill also requires that all contracts be entered into in the name of the county rather than the officeholder. The process applies to contracts that are necessary for officeholders to carry out their constitutional duty and for which funds are already appropriated.

“I do think this is a little cleaner bill than what came out of the House,” said Lehman. “Pretty much the same language with maybe a little more definitive definitions and some clarity …”

Representatives of Indiana County Commissioners and the Association of Indiana Counties testified in favor of the amended bill Thursday. Indiana Sheriff’s Association and Indiana Auditor’s Association representatives expressed support as well but also raised concerns about the possibility of county attorneys, who are not elected officials, being able to halt a contract.

“We’re committed to working with the partners on this … to find the right wording for an amendment for next week,” said Mike Biberstine, a lobbyist for Indiana Sheriff’s Association.

Sen. Scott Alexander (R-Muncie) questioned funding and asked if county councils would be involved in the process. Lehman noted that the process applies only to contracts for which money has already been appropriated. Any additional appropriations would still need to go through county councils.

Sen. Rodney Pol (D-Chesterton) asked about possible exemptions for emergencies and whether a minimum dollar threshold should be set. Lehman responded that he feels emergencies are already addressed in other areas of Indiana Code. He added that putting in a minimum dollar amount for the contract process would be up to each individual county. (The bill allows county commissioners to establish language that must be in each contract as well.)

The bill will return to the Senate Local Government Committee for possible additional amendments and a vote this week.

Also Thursday, a pair of bills authored by Sen. Travis Holdman (R-Markle), who represents Jay, Adams, Wells and Blackford counties and part of Allen County, cleared second reading through the House without amendment and were headed for third reading Monday afternoon.

Holdman’s Senate Bill 20 would expand the option of establishing riverfront districts. The districts, which allow communities to provide additional liquor licenses at a lower cost in order to help drive economic development, are currently only available to cities. The bill would allow towns to establish the districts as well.

Senate Bill 58, also authored by Holdman, would exempt specialty or gourmet markets with a restaurant permit from income requirements to sell carry-out alcohol. It does so by exempting such businesses from rules regarding their percentage of gross retail income that comes from the sale of alcoholic beverages. It defines a speciality or gourmet market as one that holds a beer retailer’s permit and wine retailer’s permit, sells miscellaneous specialty foods and does not sell automotive fuel.