We hope that today’s “READERS FORUM” will provoke honest and open dialogue concerning issues that we, as responsible citizens of this community, need to address in a rational and responsible way? WHATS ON YOUR MIND TODAY? 

WHATS ON YOUR MIND TODAY?

Todays“Readers Poll” question is:  Do you feel that the City of Evansville is having serious cash flow problems?

If you would like to advertise on the CCO please contact us City-CountyObserver@live.com

AGENDA

Agenda Attachment:

Memo Attachment:

A.

ORDINANCE F-2018-21 An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Evansville Authorizing Repeals and Re-Appropriations within the Department of Metropolitan Development Sponsor(s): Weaver Discussion Led By: Finance Chair Weaver 10/8/2018 Notify: Kelley Coures, Department of Metropolitan Development

F-2018-21 Attachment:

B.

ORDINANCE F-2018-22 An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Evansville Authorizing Repeals and Re-Appropriations within the Department of Metropolitan Development Sponsor(s): Weaver Discussion Led By: Finance Chair Weaver 10/8/2018 Notify: Kelley Coures, Department of Metropolitan Development

F-2018-22 Attachment:

A.	ORDINANCE G-2018-24 An Ordinance Vacating the 12’ Alleys Lying Within Block Three (3) of the McInnerny Enlargement to the City of Evansville, Indiana Sponsor(s): Robinson Discussion Led By: Public Works Chair Mosby 10/8/2018 Notify: Krista Lockyear, Lockyear Law, LLC

G-2018-24 Attachment:

B.

ORDINANCE G-2018-25 An Ordinance to Vacate Certain Public Ways Within the City of Evansville, Indiana Part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 28, Township 6 South, Range 10 West of the 2nd PM lying in Knight Township, Vanderburgh County, Indiana, Part of Lot 1 in Schreeder Place and Part of a 15 Foot Wide Alley Lying South of Lots 1 through 4 and North of Lot 62 in Schreeder Place Sponsor(s): Mosby Discussion Led By: Public Works Chair Mosby 10/8/2018 Notify: Craig Miller, Levere Building Corporation of Evansville, Indiana

G-2018-25 Attachment:

C.

ORDINANCE F-2018-19 An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Evansville Authorizing Transfers of Appropriations, Additional Appropriations and Repeal and Re-Appropriation of Funds for Various City Funds Sponsor(s): Weaver Discussion Led By: Finance Chair Weaver 10/8/2018 Notify: Russ Lloyd, Jr., City Controller

F-2018-19 Attachment:

F-2018-19 Amended Attachment:

D.	ORDINANCE F-2018-20 An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Evansville, Indiana, Approving Bonds of the Vanderburgh County Redevelopment District Sponsor(s): Weaver Discussion Led By: Finance Chair Weaver 10/8/2018 Notify: Joshua Claybourn, City Council Attorney

F-2018-20 Attachment:

E.

ORDINANCE G-2018-23 An Ordinance Fixing the Salaries of Every Appointive Officer, Employee, Deputy, Assistant, Departmental and Institutional Head of the City of Evansville and the Evansville-Vanderburgh County Levee Authority for the Year 2019 and Establishing Salary Administration Procedures Sponsor(s): Weaver Discussion Led By: Finance Chair Weaver                          10/8/2018 Notify: Russ Lloyd, Jr., City Controller

G-2018-23 Attachment:

F.	ORDINANCE F-2018-18 An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Evansville, Indiana Fixing the Salaries of Elected Officials for the City of Evansville, Indiana for the Year 2019 Sponsor(s): Weaver Discussion Led By: Finance Chair Weaver 10/8/2018 Notify: Russ Lloyd, Jr., City Controller

F-2018-18 Attachment:

G.

ORDINANCE F-2018-16 An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Evansville, Indiana Appropriating Monies for the Purpose of Defraying the Expenditures of Evansville-Vanderburgh Levee Authority District for the Fiscal Year Beginning January 1, 2019 Sponsor(s): Weaver Discussion Led By: Finance Chair Weaver 10/8/2018 Notify: Russ Lloyd, Jr., City Controller

F-2018-16 Attachment:

H.	ORDINANCE F-2018-17 An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Evansville Approving and Adopting the 2019 Budget for the Port Authority of Evansville Sponsor(s): Weaver Discussion Led By: Finance Chair Weaver 10/8/2018 Notify: Russ Lloyd, Jr., City Controller

F-2018-17 Attachment:

I.

ORDINANCE F-2018-15 An Ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Evansville, Indiana Appropriating Monies for the Purpose of Defraying the Expenditures of Departments of the City Government for the Fiscal Year Beginning January 1, 2019 Sponsor(s): Weaver Discussion Led By: Finance Chair Weaver 10/8/2018 Notify: Russ Lloyd, Jr., City Controller

F-2018-15 Attachment:

A.

RESOLUTION C-2018-31 A Confirming Resolution of the Common Council of the City of Evansville Declaring an Economic Revitalization Area for Property Tax Phase-in for the Construction of Real Property at 6818 Interchange North Road Sponsor(s): Weaver Discussion Led By: Finance Chair Weaver 10/8/2018 Notify: Andrea Lendy, Growth Alliance

C-2018-31 Attachment:

A.	THE NEXT MEETING of the Common Council will be Monday, October 22, 2018 at 5:30 p.m.

B.	ADDITIONAL MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS

Over a hundred Life Chain attendees lined Green River Road with signs in support of life. Many pro-life supporters say Kavanaugh could be the voice for change.

“We of course support Brett Kavanaugh, but we want to be able to have this, the voice of the nation approve that,” says Sean Boiles, Life Chain attendee. “I think that was stated loud and clear. There’s also opposition to that, but on our side we’re here to support life and if we have a voice out there to be able to speak up for life, then we are supporting that.”

Meanwhile others say they are more optimistic now, but change doesn’t always happen quickly.

“As both sayings go, it takes more than one voice,” says Raymond Schaefer, Life Chain attendee. “I mean I’m afraid, it would be great if Kavanaugh could be the voice to do it, but you know it don’t happen that quick. You know it’s gonna be a long process.”

It has been 45 years since the decision of Roe versus Wade. When asked if their battle with the decision will finally pay off,

“We don’t know when and we don’t know how and we don’t know how long,” says Van Dyke. “But we do know we will win in the end because the killing of anyone is wrong. No matter the place, the size, or the age of the person.”

According to Indiana law, abortions are only allowed to be performed by a doctor in the first trimester of a pregnancy based on the woman doctor. After viability, an abortion is only permitted in Indiana to protect the health of the mother and must be performed in a hospital.

Katie Stancombe for www.theindianalawyer.com

The Indiana Supreme Court reinstated a woman’s conviction that the Indiana Court of Appeals had vacated because she did not receive an advisement of her rights before police administered a drug recognition exam after a traffic stop.

In January 2016, Monica Dycus was stopped by police after allegedly following her ex-boyfriend by car. During the stop, officers noticed the smell of marijuana on Dycus’ breath and she admitted that she had smoked marijuana “about an hour” earlier.

Dycus consented to a drug recognition exam and cooperated with a variety of measurements and observations that were assessed in a seven-category evaluation matrix, known as a “drug symptom matrix.” After entering all observations and results of Dycus’s DRE into the matrix, officers determined that Dycus was under the influence of marijuana.

Her blood was drawn by consent and sent for testing out-of-state. Results found her blood tested positive for Delta-9 THC, an active metabolite of marijuana with psychoactive effects. Dycus was charged with Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

At trial, Dycus objected to the admission of evidence regarding the DRE and that the admission of the chain of custody forms and shipping documents for her blood samples violated her constitutional right to confrontation. The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed Dycus’s conviction when it held that without an advisement of rights, evidence obtained through a DRE is inadmissible. But the Indiana Supreme Court vacated that decision in Monica Dycus v. State of Indiana, 18S-CR-488.

The high court found that under Pirtle v. State, (1975) 263 Ind. 16, 323 N.E.2d 634, such advisements are not required to obtain valid consent to a DRE from a person in custody, and that evidence obtained from the exam was admissible.

“Although our holding in Pirtle is the foundation for requiring that persons in custody be advised of their right to consult with counsel prior to consent, Pirtle, on its own, does not resolve our inquiry,” Justice Steven David wrote. “After all, Pirtle involved only the search of an apartment; searches can range widely in breadth and scope.”

Justices noted that thus far, the Pirtle requirement has been understood to only apply to searches of homes and vehicles. Field sobriety tests, chemical breath tests, blood draws, and cheek swabs have all been found to be searches not requiring an additional advisement of rights prior to consent. Now, neither is are DREs.

“None of the components of a DRE, either individually or cumulatively, have a strong likelihood of uncovering inculpatory evidence of something other than what caused officers to conduct the DRE in the first place. Each component of the exam — the use of the oral thermometer, the examination of the mouth and nasal cavity, the check for the person’s blood pressure — is narrow in scope,” David concluded. “By conducting the DRE, officers were only going to find evidence of Dycus’s intoxication — nothing more. We find that a DRE is specific enough to eliminate the risk of involuntary consent. No additional advisement is needed before a person in custody consents to a DRE.”