MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
FEBRUARY 1, 2007
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
County Engineer Greg Parker: Review of the Bids Received for the Purchase of one (1) Chevy T Series Spray/Brine Truck for $114,300.28....................................................................................................... 1
County Treasurer Tom Kriz: Dai To Request for Tax Suspension at 2312 Nevada Avenue, Iowa City, Iowa 1
Farmers National Company Farm Management and Sales Representative John Yeomans: Lease Agreement; Rental County Farm Ground; and County Farm Management......................................................... 2
Jail Administrator Captain Dave Wagner and County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek: Jail Inspection Report 5
Senior Center Representative Jay Honohan: FY 2008 Senior Center Block Grant Funding........... 8
City of Coralville: Consultation Between Coralville, Penn Township Trustees and the Board of Supervisors Regarding a Proposed 80/20 Voluntary Annexation into the City of Coralville.......................................... 9
Discussion: Planning for a Better Region Meeting................................................................... 19
Executive Session: Houser v. Johnson County Board of Review, et al., Case Nos. EQCV064879, EQCV064880, CVCV066011................................................................................................................. 21
Chairperson Harney called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 9:10 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Larry Meyers, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
County Engineer Greg Parker explained that they received two bids for a spray/brine truck. The lower bid was for $114,328. This was an item that was approved for the Secondary Roads budget for this year. Parker said that from a safety standpoint this is going to enhance usability in the field. It is equipped with a GPS unit that will allow Secondary Roads to track where exactly they are putting the chemicals down. They will also be able to utilize this vehicle in the winter for salt applications, and for prescribed burnings. Parker noted that this is not a vehicle that they would normally purchase, but for this type of use, it will give the driver and the operator on the right side better visibility for operations out in the field. Secondary Roads is recommending proceeding with the low bid for a Chevy truck cabover. The Board thanked Parker for the report on the purchase.
County Treasurer Tom Kriz stated that the Board of Supervisors should have received some material about the request for a tax suspension on the property owned by Dai To who lives at 2312 Nevada Avenue in Iowa City. Kriz explained that the qualification documents are there from the Department of Human Services (DHS). The taxes on the house during the past year were $1,758, of which the first half has been paid. The suspension would start with the second half of $879 and would continue as long as the person resides there or until the house changes hands. All of the documentation is in place at this time.
Stutsman asked if this application meets eligibility requirements. Kriz replied that this does meet the eligibility requirement through DHS. Once an applicant qualifies through DHS, the taxes are suspended on the property. Taxes continue to accrue on the property on a yearly basis but no interest is charged. The house cannot go to tax sale each June because it is on suspension, which protects the homeowner from that issue. At the time that the house changes ownership, or if someone moves in who has income, or at the time that the person no longer qualifies for DHS assistance, then the suspension would come off and the taxes would be due and payable at that time. Over a period of years it can amount to quite a sum of dollars, therefore it is tax revenue for the City, school district, County, and all taxing bodies, that is deferred until the time the property changes hands. While the taxes will still be there they will not be collected during the normal fiscal year.
Meyers asked if the person was able to resume payment, would that come through in one lump sum. Kriz said that is exactly right. Kriz noted that people qualify for a tax suspension but choose not to take it because they don’t want that continuing liability against them. Some individuals have mortgages and the mortgage holder will not let them have the taxes suspended because the taxes are a prior lien to their mortgage. Kriz said that tax suspensions are something that they have not had a lot of in the past but they seem to be getting more and more requests for them as the taxes continue to increase and the income remains unchanged. The Board agreed to put the suspension on a future formal agenda for approval.
Farmers National Company Farm and Sales Representative John Yeomans explained that this is a follow up to the bid process that ended over the weekend on the Johnson County Farm. Due to the strong optimism in agriculture right now there where a number of submitted written bides on the farm, which varied from $16,000 all the way up to $26,500. This more than doubles the rent on the farm that the County received last year. There are a couple pieces of land that are not currently in production. All of the operators have expressed interest in cropping this ground. The top bidder has the equipment that would be required to move some minor trees to put this ground into production next year. His high bid is submitted based on farming that additional ground.
Stutsman asked how many additional acres are in this area. Yeomans replied that it is about 40 acres. Some of it is old CRP ground that the County stopped receiving revenue on in 1996 due to the change in the Farm Bill. The County had planned on maintaining that through prescribed burns and other means that have not happened, therefore, some small trees have started to grow. The operator will go in with his own equipment and remove these trees at his own expense. The operator will not directly be charged for this new ground coming into production. However, his overall bid is submitted based on putting some more ground on the farm into production. Neuzil stated that the old CRP ground doesn’t have a lot of major trees, but the old pasture has grown up a little more. He asked if Yeomans would elaborate on the impact that this could have on the southern area. Yeomans stated that there are a few scattered trees anywhere from four to five inches in diameter. Those trees would be pushed down, put into piles, and then the operator would put the ground into production. Based on the long-term plan of the farm this ground would have to be cleared and improved to meet the plan that the County has laid out for this land, which would come with a high expense. With this proposed lease agreement the new operator would be donating his time and services to do that. Therefore, it is a win-win for both the County and the operator. The operator is also looking for more ground. Neuzil added that the overall plan that the Board of Supervisors has for this area combines both prairie and significant trees which surround the old cemetery, which is the area that the Board would like to protect. Neuzil asked if this operator is going to know these boundaries. Yeomans replied that he will be out there making sure that the farmer is not going where he is not supposed to go.
Next, Yeomans gave a PowerPoint presentation on the County Farm, including pictures of the areas that are currently being farmed, areas that will be farmed in the future, and areas that will be taken out of production next year. To stay with the long-term plans of the farm the CRP land would have to be re-seeded because it hasn’t been maintained and the native plantings are not very strong. At the time that the farm does go out of production, the native seeding should be replanted into soybeans because that works best. This will require a considerable amount of work and resources to reestablish this field with its native seeding. If this field were still in CRP, all of these trees would have to meet FSA compliance requirements. Because the land is not on CRP they do not have to remove the trees, however, if they would ever want to stay with native plantings the trees would have to be removed. Yeomans stated that who has been looking and bidding at the firm understands that the drive lane back to the cemetery has to stay where it is at and maintained. They also know that the area near the cemetery is not to be cropped at all. Based on the long-term plan of the farm, the pasture area would have to be cleaned up. Therefore, given the current situation of negations that they are in, it is a win-win for everyone.
Harney asked to verify that Farm Services still has this area listed as crop ground. Yeomans replied that Farm Services does still have all fields that are included on the handout as fields listed as crop ground, therefore they would not be in violation of any rules about putting new ground into production. Yeomans recommended the Board accept the high bid from Clint Rarick, with the understanding that fields eight and seven can have some land clearing and be put back into production for next year. Harney asked if that comes out to be about $230 an acre. Yeomans replied that if it is based on the 115 acres that is currently tillable it is about $230, but when the other ground is factored in it is about $170 an acre. Yeomans added that land clearing can run anywhere from $125 to $150 an hour and Rarick has all of the equipment necessary to put the land back into production. Meyers asked if this is for a one-year lease. Yeomans answered yes. Meyers asked if the County would be able to receive more money after the additional acres go into production. Yeomans replied that next year Johnson County could be getting even more revenue off the farm. Harney asked if all the bidders are willing to undertake clearing out the pasture just for a one-year lease. Yeomans replied that Rarick is. He added that most of the time their tenants are multi-year tenants, therefore, given the current relation with Rarick, they would likely propose to lease with him next year as well.
Yeomans said that in the past their management agreement with the County has been based more on negotiating leases on behalf of the County. There is going to be considerably more work in the coming year and in the years going forward, therefore, Yeomans has submitted a new management agreement to the Board of Supervisors for them to consider. Harney asked to verify that the agreement increases from $600 to $1,200. Yeomans replied that there is a $1,200 minimum fee based 8% on the gross. There is also the possibility of having a logger come in and remove the trees in the pasture for firewood. A firewood outfit in Washington County will pay about $500 a semi load for trees to package and sell for firewood at convenience stores. Yeomans added that he has talked with Rarick about this and this would save Rarick some time as long as the trees are cut two feet above the ground. Therefore, Rarick would not have to push as many trees and he is strongly in favor of having the firewood outfit come in and do this. This could also be some extra income for the County also.
Neuzil asked if they have considered putting in a buffer area between the busy road and the cropped land. Yeomans replied that he and the FSA office redrew the maps and allocated for space to be taken out of permanent crop production. Basically the 115 acres represents the existing land that can be cropped right now. R. Sullivan asked if Yeomans knew the Corn Suitability Rating (CSR) for this tract. Yeomans replied that he really doesn’t. He went on to add that 50 acres is not highly erodable, so that is going to be a little higher CSR than the rest of the farm. But some calculation would have to be done to figure the actual CSR on the farm. R. Sullivan said it would go down when this pasture is added. The overall CSR for this farm will drop when you add in this 50 acres, though it will be still average for the County. All of the bidders should understand this and know exactly what they are biding on, however, Yeomans was not sure if the bidders pulled soil samples or not. Rarick has said that he does have experience in clearing land for production, therefore he was pretty aggressive in the biding process whereas other bidders where not as interested in putting that pasture into production, said Yeomans. Harney added that this business should be added to formal meeting agenda for next week.
Airport Commission member Janelle Rettig said that commission has a similar agreement to this farm agreement. She noted that the attachment on page five it is actually an Illinois agreement and reflects the Illinois Human Rights ordinances. Rettig indicated that when the City of Iowa City does agree to any contract, there is a nondiscrimination statement that reflects their Human Rights Ordinance, and she encouraged the County to do the same. Rettig believed the County should use the language in their own Human Rights Ordinance on any additional contracts. Harney thought they could do that. Yeomans added that Rarick has given him a check for the full amount and it is a good check.
County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek stated that as everyone knows the State jail inspector comes and does an annual inspection on the jail and gives a report on that inspection. Captain Dave Wagner began by giving a briefing on the inspection report. At the inspection last Friday, some of the comments and recommendations that Jail Inspector Mike Richardson made are as follows: Under admission and classification, the required separation in classification of prisoners is difficult due to the design of the jail. The second item is the closed circuit TV in the control center. Richardson noted that the pictures are not clear and distinct, said Wagner. Richardson thought they should get people in there to improve the clarity of the cameras and if that can’t be done they may be looking at replacing cameras down the road. Regarding in-house food services, the Johnson County Public Health Department came in and did their yearly inspection and also made some comments and recommendations. Richardson echoed these.
Richardson noted improvements since the last jail inspection. The County repainted the cell day rooms in the facility and maintenance people are in the process of changing some control valves and plumbing type lavatory combination units in the facility. Also, regarding the intake booking area, they completed work to make it ADA compliant for persons with handicaps. They also updated the whole policy and procedures manual this year. The inspector had asked that they take a close look at their policies on incidents that threaten the security of the facility itself. Richardson also suggested they add two items regarding inmate discipline hearings in the facility. Wagner said the inspector noted that the exercise area is still inadequate, which he notes every year. They are concerned about the size of the actual exercise area. Neuzil asked how big the actual exercise area is. Pulkrabek replied that it used to be a very small library. The bottom line is that it is an issue that they continue to get dinged on by the jail inspection, but they just don’t have another space that they can create to make the large exercise area in the current facility. Until there is some type of remodeling or another facility, they are going to continue to be criticized by the State for the lack of exercise space.
Wagner went on to the issue that they deal with everyday, the classification of prisoners. On a daily basis they have to look at people who come in over night and decide those that can bond, those that can’t bond, and then find a place with in the facility to integrate those people in. If there isn't bed space available, which often happens, they then have to ship prisoners out-of-county. Overall it was a good inspection. Neuzil added that it sounds very similar to what they've have had in the past. Obviously they are lucky they are allowed to stay open considering the inadequate facility the amount of people in that facility. He asked if, in the long term, the inspectors are getting tired of writing the same thing down every year. Stutsman added that the report is better than it has been in the previous years. Neuzil said yes, but they are still inadequate on about six different things continually every single year.
Stutsman added that they are fortunate to have an administrator like Wagner running the jail who really knows his stuff and puts a great program into place. Pulkrabek added that there are a couple of things that he would like to point out on the comments. Even though the jail is over crowded and designed poorly, they have been able to maintain it very well, so things in the jail look good. This is something that Pulkrabek hears over and over again. There were a couple things that Pulkrabek had asked the inspector. Regarding the configuration of the cell blocks, which are dormitory-style blocks where there is one bathroom and one shower for 16 inmates, Pulkrabek asked if they could add two bunks on the wall in the day area just to give some extra room. The inspector re-measured everything and took the rules into consideration and said no, they cannot add any more bunks into that block. They even tried the idea of removing the dormitory door. The other thing that has been considered is if The University were to suddenly change course and allow the County some property for adding to the jail, the new or the established rules for the addition would apply. So they wouldn’t lose their grandfathering clause for the current rules for the current facility. Anything new would have to be built under the new jail standards. The jail standards were accepted in 1984 and since the County jail was constructed prior to that, it falls under those standards. If they are able to add on, for example, if they move the control center or if they move the booking room and covert it into a meeting room, they could still do that without losing current standards grandfathered in. Neuzil added that this is fairly big news. As they check off all the questions in regards to a new facility, this is one that has been hovering over them. At least now remodeling is an option.
Pulkrabek said that if they can convince The University to give the County some property this would be beneficial to the County. Stutsman added that they certainly are not asking for a large amount of property. R. Sullivan added that even if they would let them park cars on their property they could go in the parking lot area. Pulkrabek added that the parking area to the south would give about 5,000 square foot per level if they built up, so that is something that can be considered. But then again 5,000 square foot per floor really is not a lot of space. Harney said that by doing this they really would not be addressing the over crowding issue because they really won’t be getting that much more cell space. Pulkrabek added that it would solve the problem if they went 10 stories up. R. Sullivan said that would at least temporarily fix the booking problems. Pulkrabek said it would only be a quick fix for six to ten years, and they all say they want to do a good job of planning for the future. Therefore, they don’t want to design a facility that they are going to have to go back to in 20 years. This would therefore be a very short-term answer, but if The University were to give a larger portion of property then they could expand this facility and add on to it and have a long-term solution.
Stutsman added that they have not done anything recently about approaching The University and maybe that is something that they should consider trying. Pulkrabek said that he has actually tried approaching The University about this issue. Pulkrabek added that on a more personal note, he met with the Vice President Doug True along with some other University facility, and they have their long-term plans that have been put into motion for a long time. He said they explained their committee process and there is virtually no method of going back and asking them to re-do their plan. Harney added that he too has had discussions with The University on this issue. With the new recreational center building going in there, they need that parking space. They have plans for a ramp. Neuzil said that the other option is to go in front of the building.
Stutsman asked if they have had a chance to look at the cameras and if they need to replace them. Wagner replied that he has not had a chance to look at them. Facilities Director Dave Kempf asked who does the work on there. Wagner said he has already contacted the right person about that. Stutsman asked if they would be able to absorb the cost since it is too late to add this to the budget. Pulkrabek replied that it is something that is going to have to be evaluated. Pulkrabek said that when the National Institute of Corrections was here giving their preliminary report, one of the things that they had identified was the cameras and the lack of clarity and coverage area (i.e. the ability to move). As long as they continue to use the facility, the cameras are an issue that is going to need to be addressed. If they have an incident happen that they don’t have on video, it could potentially cost the County a lot of money. Stutsman asked how much it would cost to replace the cameras. Kempf replied that he couldn’t even venture to guess how much it would cost to replace the cameras. A standard fixed focal color camera will run under $1,000; however, this is not the type of camera that they will need. Therefore, there is a lot more involved than just switching out a camera. They would have to do an upgrade of the control center itself in order to be able to have all the tools on board to be able to manipulate the cameras in a way that they are suggesting be done. Harney added that this is another issue in itself because there really isn’t a lot of good room to put the monitors so that the person working the monitor can adequately monitor the cells. Pulkrabek added it is obviously too small for a huge monitor with about 14 different pictures. Neuzil stated that this is just another long list of issues that corrections is facing. They are in one of those catches where they don’t want to spend a whole lot of money on something if they are just going to need something that is much bigger in the near term. This is what has happened in the past six years since the jail bond issue failed. They have basically just been getting by, but now they are coming to the point where this is all coming to a head. Do they take the Band-Aid approach by fixing little things at a time or do they just go and say that it is time to go and get this thing fixed for the next 30 years, which hopefully will be decided this year. R. Sullivan noted that it is worth complimenting the jail staff on their ability to handle the stuff that can be controlled on the human side and the policy stuff. He said they are doing a great job.
Senior Center Representative Jay Honohan began by inviting everyone to see the drill team from the Senior Center perform Napoleon Dynamite. He added that on Saturday the Senior Center is going to spur on the Dance Marathon. Honohan then reported on the Senior Center statistics in Fiscal Year 2006. The Senior Center had 85,620 visits, which consisted of people who were participants. They had 922 people who paid the participation fees and the scholarship people, which includes about 11% of the participants. The Senior Center is current at about 970 to 980 people who are participants. The Senior Center has a curtain attrition rate, which Honohan can’t control.
Honohan said the dining program is down for the Senior Center. The actual number of meals that are served both County-wide and in Washington County that are prepared at the Senior Center are up, but the attendance in the dining program within the Senior Center is down. The Senior Center currently has a committee working on this issue in an attempt to identify what the Senior Center can do to bring the dining program back up. The Senior Center’s programs and classes are at about $57,208 in the FY 06, which was a 3% increase. The Center is expecting a 3% to 5% increase in program and classes this fiscal year. Honohan explained that just as the jail has space problems the Senior Center also is facing this issue. The Senior Center has been successful at identifying space this year to add a new oil painting classroom to increase the programs and classes that are available. Again the Senior Center has a committee that works on this issue of space to see if they can consolidate some of the space requirements.
The Senior Center has the Johnson County Board of Supervisors down for $75,000 in their budget for this coming fiscal year. Honohan said the Senior Center is not altogether dependent on the City and the County. The Senior Center founded the Iowa City Senior Center Funding and the Senior Center is a part of the Community Foundation of Johnson County. In FY 07 and FY 08, they have put $2,000 toward a memory-training course in coalition with The University of Iowa. The Senior Center also has purchased $6,000 of fitness equipment. They are planning on spending $15,184 to upgrade the Senior Center TV. The Iowa City Senior Center is the only Senior Center in the United States that has its own functioning TV programming station. In cooperation with the University of Iowa, the Iowa City Senior Center is on the Internet with the Senior Center cable TV program.
Honohan explained that the Senior Center also has a committee working on $50,000 for new furniture and furnishings for the assembly room to get away from the current institutionalized furniture that is currently in the room. The Senior Center believes that by doing this it will indirectly help the declining dining program and of course it will help the assembly room in general. Honohan went on to add that if the Board of Supervisors is going to have a formal meeting about the Senior Center $75,000 grant, he would like to attend the meeting. Stutsman replied that the grant is already in the budget. Honohan thanked the Board.
Recessed at 9:55 a.m.; reconvened at 10:00 a.m.
Harney explained that this is a discussion the will be among Coralville, the trustees, and the Board of Supervisors. Following this, there will be time for public input. He asked that the audience keep individual comments to three to five minutes. Harney added that the Board is following the procedures of the new State Code where the consultation is required and once the consultation is completed, the Board of Supervisors is required to reply to the communities about their requested annexation, that is both North Liberty and Coralville. Coralville City Attorney Kevin Olson stated that this consultation is being held per Chapter 368.7 of the Code of Iowa for an 80-20 annexation which is a new provision that was enacted in 2005 or 2006. Olson said he has had a brief discussion with the members of the Penn Ship Township Trustees, and one of the members would like to make a statement. Olson asked that the statement be allowed since this is a part of their consultation.
Coralville City Administrator Kelly Hayworth added that the Coralville Mayor and several council members are attending the Board meeting. Stutsman asked if they could begin by stating what the annexation actually is. Hayworth said the map reflects the proposed 80-20 annexation to the City of Coralville. The green area in the map is the area of voluntary annexation and the pink areas are the areas that would be taken in by the 20% provision in the Iowa Code. Hayworth added that he has taken into account the right-of-ways as well. Hayworth stated that he will be notifying the people to the west of North Liberty Road even though they won’t be taking any of their property. It is actually the right-of-way they are taking, but because of the contention in the courts, they are planning on notifying these individuals. He said it is not the council’s intent to take into account Coralville people involuntary. The council did in this particular case bring the people in on the east side of North Liberty Road which was a result of the lawsuit that was filed against the City in relationship to whether it met the provisions of the courts. This is why the Council has decided to go through with the annexation that the Board of Supervisors currently has in front of them. Hayworth handed out to the Board a copy of the northeast area sewer study, which shows how this property would be served with the gravity line through this particular area. The properties would be set up based on the sewer service. Stutsman asked if they are planning on annexing the whole road or just to the middle of the road. Olson replied that they are proposing to annex the blue section of the map which includes the entire right-of-way of Rustic Ridge and North Liberty Road all the way up to where it connects. The reason why they are proposing this is because in the previous annexation Coralville has negotiated an agreement with Secondary Roads which isn’t in front of the Board yet due to the fact that the annexations have not yet gone through. The City of Coralville is planning on maintaining all of Rustic Ridge, North Liberty Road where it connects with Rustic Ridge, and North Liberty Road where it connects to Dubuque Street and Johnson County right-of-way. Therefore, the City of Coralville is not proposing annexing the entire right-of-way around the Scanlon Farm’s property, but the City is working with the Johnson County Engineer to make sure that both entities take a fair share of the maintenance of the roads. Coralville is also planning on installing a water line on North Liberty Road to serve this area.
Neuzil asked if Olson could explain to the Board of Supervisors the difference between this particular annexation request and the previous request. Olson replied if one were to look at the map, the north 40 acres which are up to Oak Lane represent the Penn Township cemetery which was added to the annexation. Also added was the triangle-shaped parcel where Dubuque Street headed northwesterly. On the west side of the Scanlon Farm piece is the property that was actually transferred to the Iowa City School District in December 2006. This was already included in the original annexation, but due to the transfer of ownership of this area, the City of Coralville would handle them as a non-consenting owner. Olson explained that the Loops property is included in the Scanlon Farm and the three subdivisions Buechler, Godfrey, and Sunaura are on the east side of North Liberty Road. The property owners in these three filed a lawsuit saying Coralville shouldn’t be taking only the road. Therefore, the City of Coralville is taking these three subdivisions in full as part of the City’s desire to avoid the issues that the citizens had brought up in their lawsuit. A member of the public noted that they cannot understand what Olson is talking about because he is not using the graphic that is available. Harney said they do have some handouts. Olson said he had made 15 copies of the map. Neuzil said that they will make some copies of the map and distribute them. Neuzil added that the Board is also seeing this map for the first time.
Stutsman asked if they could go through what the plans are for sewering this area. Hayworth said that on the large map there is a valley where there would be the gravity sewer line that would go up and serve the Scanlon property. This currently resides directly to the west of Forest Gate Drive. So, then they would put a sewer all the way up the valley, which would serve all of the Scanlon property. Where the handout says sewer by others it refers to sewers by the developer, said Hayworth. The City would as part of our policy bring the sewer line to the property line and then the developers will spread it out throughout the area. Olson added that the map shows everything that can be gravity sewered to the City of Coralville. Neuzil asked if at this point the application includes north of North Dubuque Street. Hayworth replied that yes, this application does include the area north of North Dubuque Street.
Penn Township Trustee Jim Tallman stated that the trustees object to this annexation. The Trustees feel that this is land that should not be in Coralville. It is land that for the time being should remain in Penn Township and eventually become part of North Liberty. There are many reasons that the Penn Township Trustees feel this way. One of the main reasons is that this area and these people are going to still rely on North Liberty for services like fire protection. The Penn Township Trustees have an agreement with the City of North Liberty. The Trustees pay the City of North Liberty for fire protection. It is the taxes from this land and this area that go to support the fire protection. The Trustees would no longer have that available, but Tallman assured the Board of Supervisors that the City of North Liberty will still be the first ones called if there was a need for service in this area. For this and many other reasons, the Penn Township Trustees object to this proposal. Tallman asked if the plans are calling to take the cemetery. Olson replied yes. Tallman added that he is assuming then that if the City of Coralville is going to take this land then they are going to maintain and provide access to this area. Olson added that yes, they already have a city cemetery in town, so they are equipped to handle that. Olson added that there is an access issue that they plan to work out, so that access is always available to that cemetery. Tallman added that the Penn Township Trustees would also object to this because this area is a part of North Liberty history. The people that are buried at the cemetery have been there since 1830 to the 1850, and were the original settlers of North Liberty. The Penn Township Trustees feel that this cemetery is a part of the North Liberty heritage and that it should remain under the control of North Liberty.
Neuzil asked if Hayworth or Olson could address the issue of how emergency response will be taken care of as far as the area that they are proposing annex. Hayworth stated it Coralville’s full intent to provide all emergency services to this area. The City of Coralville is equipped to do this right now and will continue to do that. They will provide fire service and, in fact, are currently doing that right now, responding quite frequently to North Liberty to provide fire service. The City also provides police protection and will continue to do that as well. The City and the Council have a capital improvement plan (CIP) to add another fire station in the north part of Coralville, so they can continue to provide additional services. This will also include an outstation for police services and ambulances. The new fire station would be by the 965 and Oakdale area. This new fire station is in the City of Coralville’s CIP and the Council is right now determining which year the City would do this.
Neuzil added that it should be well noted as far as process that the Board can forward a letter to the State’s City Development Board, but the Board of Supervisors does not have a say in who will be annexing what. That is determined by the State’s City Development Board. All the Board can do as Supervisors is listen to the comments and forward a resolution or letter to the State Board. Harney added that the new regulations require the Board do this by resolution to the cities and then the cities then have to forward the resolution. The Board of Supervisors no longer sends the resolution directly to the State City Development Board. R. Sullivan asked if the Penn Township Trustees actually meet on this topic. Tallman replied that yes they had, and he is speaking for the Penn Township Trustees not just for himself.
North Liberty City Council Member Gerry Kuhl said he had been asked by Mayor Franker to clarify some matters relating to the pending annexations. Kuhl went on to say that more than 90% of several hundred landowners, acres, and citizens have voluntary requested annexation to North Liberty. North Liberty has not solicited this request. The citizens are using their right of self-determination. Many of the citizens realize that they must be a part of a city and have chosen to be a part of North Liberty. Indeed, they are already a part of the North Liberty community. They have North Liberty addresses; they receive their fire protection from North Liberty, and the citizens benefit from the North Liberty Community Library and the North Liberty Community Center. It is logical that these citizens become a part of North Liberty. Most importantly the people want to decide to which city they belong. As citizens they want to be heard by all parties. Some individuals have raised the concerns that North Liberty doesn’t have a plan to provide a full complement of city services. According to North Liberty Engineer Kevin Trom, a plan for water and sewer is ongoing with trigger points. The trigger points were a part of the consultant study last spring when the City of North Liberty discussed improvement upgrades to the water treatment plant and wastewater treatment plants. The projection of plans takes the City of North Liberty to 2025. The expansions of these plans are currently underway and they will be operational in 2007 and 2008. The MBR reactor system for the wastewater treatment plant is a state of the art technology. The output will be of the highest quality. According to Trom the current wastewater treatment plant has sufficient capacity and with the 2007 to 2008 additions North Liberty will add even more capacity. They will also add a lift station as the need arises. The streets with curb and gutter will be installed as the total area develops, and he anticipates this will take several years. During 2008 North Liberty plans to add four police officers and to expand the North Liberty library. The proposed gym expansion at the Clear Creek Amana Elementary School will add recreation space. North Liberty’s plans clearly include providing adequate city services to these residents who have requested to become a part of North Liberty.
Philip Dorothy added that under the freedom of information act, he had requested files and memos. In December Dorothy had called when he had not received the requested information after the allotted 14 days and was told that he would get a call. He asked what the status is of this request. County Attorney Janet Lyness said that this meeting is for the Board to deal with the annexation request. If there are questions that go to Coralville or to North Liberty, this is probably not the right time for that. She said he should feel free to ask questions about the annexation and address issues to the Board. Comments should be directed to the Board because the agenda item is the Board of Supervisors getting information about Coralville annexation request. Therefore, if anyone has questions about that please proceed, but if people have questions about what Coralville has done, this is not the time for it. Dorothy said okay.
Doug Paul stated that the Board of Supervisors and staff have questioned the validity of some of the public's comments and positions partly on the basis that this area is full of NIMBY’s (Not in My Back Yard). There is a very clear definition of NIMBYs to the Board of Supervisors because none of them or the staff lives in the area under discussion. Neither Coralville residents nor the Scanlon family live in the area under discussion. From that point of view this is a NIMBY issue. The Board of Supervisors is making decisions about an area that is not in their backyard. For the people who live in this area, they do not want a negotiated division of this land that denies the right to the people who currently live in this area. They do not want traffic and safety issues deferred or ignored. They do not want the comprehensive planning to be a matter of lip service followed by no funding and no action. In their back yard, they do not want public input to be considered a synonym with public nuisance. They do not want to be governed by representatives who won't listen to what the citizens are saying, and who would instead consider only the desires of one absentee landowner of equal weight to the desires of 300 residents. Paul said that representatives who would allow staff to misrepresent the issues and concerns of constituents are not acceptable. The residents in this area don’t want government by the developer, of the developer, and for the developer. So, it is okay for the Board of Supervisors to consider the opponents to be NIMBYs as long as the Board of Supervisors keeps in mind what it is that they don’t want in their back yard. Paul added that this is a very difficult challenge for the County Board of Supervisors to decide because this a controversial annexation with conflicting requests for the same territory. While the Board does not directly make the decision, they will have more influence than they normally might with the City Development Board. Paul added that the residents of this area would like to thank the Board of Supervisors for taking this issue into account. Meyers added that there is at least one Board member who has also been painted with this NIMBY brush also. Paul added that he is aware of that.
Ken Hubel stated that his chief concerns have to do with the problems that he would have with traffic as a result of the proposed annexation and the images that they have seen of the projected future development in the area called Scanlon Farms. Hubel is concerned that in the town of North Liberty there is a growing development called Arlington Ridge, a quite significant development. There is going to be traffic coming down Dubuque Street, and he would assume that area will be developed north of North Dubuque Street up to the antebellum farm that lies on the knoll. He noted the level of development in River Heights and the area to the south of Scanlon Farms and may turn into Scanlon City. He said he is worried about traffic in the morning. There will be an immense number of cars that could potentially be exiting this area on two roads, North Dubuque Street and North Liberty Road. The Board heard complaints at the Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG) meeting last August in Coralville about the problems that already exist along North Dubuque Street and North Liberty Road in the morning due to the high density of traffic with the school buses stopping at the various exits along the various roads on River Heights and along North Liberty Road. This problem will only get worse. Hubel said that he hasn’t heard this issue mentioned as a significant consideration in this discussion of potential annexation. As much as any sewer issues, traffic will have an immediate effect on anyone who is living in this area anywhere along these two, two lane roads which are the catchment roads for North Liberty. Hubel showed images of the land as it currently is and one of what Scanlon City would look like. This is a most serious issue that needs to be confronted. It was his understanding that at the end of the JCCOG meeting, these problems would be confronted before there was a further consideration of annexation. There are major safety issues that are involved here and they must turn to the Board of Supervisors to be responsible for the safety of these roads. Hubble asks that the Board consider these immensely important issues when the Board of Supervisors formulates an opinion of what should be done by way of annexation.
Neuzil added that on of the things that the Board had addressed in the original request, which included this, had to do with roads and road studies. When the Board of Supervisors had put the letter together the first time, the roads issue was addressed. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator R.J. Moore went on to explain that the letter sent by the Board of Supervisors on the original application mentioned that the Board wanted a road study preformed before any development occurred on the site. Neuzil went on to add that Coralville is aware that JCCOG is working on a unified road infrastructure plan and the arterial road plan in general. The Board has been trying to keep an eye on this issue. R. Sullivan said Coralville would like to have a road go straight west out of there, which would be the Forevergreen Road extension. This carries with it a similar set of issues.
Bruce Haupert wanted to speak about the notion of voluntary and involuntary annexations regarding cities and the people. The individuals who have petitioned to become a part of North Liberty are at a ratio of 152 to 168 voluntary. The difference between these to numbers is involuntary, which means that 90% are voluntary. In the Scanlon Southgate development, there are one voluntary and 19 involuntary citizens. That is a 5% voluntary rate. Haupert stated that they need to look at Iowa law and what the legislature intended. One of the problems that the group is having is trying to overcome the notion that this is merely a squabble between two cities. This is not the case. The group Citizens for Sensible Development petitioned the City of North Liberty to become a part of North Liberty, but the City is now acting pursuant to the Iowa law in response to the application that they become a part of North Liberty. The cities should work together with other cities to determine where they want to grow. This was once said by a Johnson County Supervisor. This is only evidence that to the fact that this is being characterized as a city matter when it is really a people matter. The first sentence of the primary provision in the annexation code section 368.7 provides all of the owners of land in a territory adjoining a city may apply in writing to the council of an adjoining city requesting annexation of a territory, which is what this group did. The Code states that it is the legislative intent to provide an annexation approval procedure, which gives due consideration to the wishes of the residents of the territory to be annexed and to the interests of the residents of all territories affected by the annexation. The General Assembly presumes that a voluntary annexation of territory most closely reflects the wishes of the residents of the territory to be annexed. Haupert added that all he was trying to do was clarify this one point and he hopes he has done so.
Penn Township Clerk Joan Belknap stated that she has a specific interest in the old cemetery. She explained that the cemetery sits on a knoll of land surrounded on three sides by steep slopes. If development were to occur, it would compromise the cemetery itself. They know this for a fact because the road going to Ridge Wood cemetery was re-graded at one time and now there are graves right on the edge of the road.
Herb Loops stated that 90 days ago he had received a letter from the Coralville stating that the City of Coralville doesn’t have an interest in annexing land involuntarily. The fringe area agreement with Johnson County signed April 22, 1999 states that annexation will be voluntary in the northeast planning area. Loops said he received no explanation of why Coralville is annexing his property. Hayworth responded that when the City of Coralville went to the Development Board for the first time, that Board felt the areas and the boundaries should be cleaned up. They specifically suggested Loops’s property as one that should have been taken in by an 80-20 annexation. Loops asked if the Development Board has already decided the boundary. The City Development Board suggested to the City that they look at having their boundaries clear, said Hayworth.
Loops asked Neuzil about secret meetings going on between the cities that could not be discussed with the public. Neuzil stated that he is not sure who had told him that because the County does not hold secret meetings. Neuzil explained that some members of the Board have been trying to bring together North Liberty, Coralville, and Johnson County. They want this to be an issue they can resolve locally rather than having a State City Development Board make the decision. Loops asked about trying to resolve this issue locally with the citizens that live in the area. He said they were not privy to these meetings. Neuzil said that those particular meetings with staff were combined with other meetings that they have had with other citizens. Loops said they are making decisions or working toward an agreement with North Liberty and Coralville. Neuzil said there has been a movement to resolve this issue locally. This is a message that the Board of Supervisors has gotten loud and clear from every community. Trying to have an opportunity to meet with a few individuals is not something that is negative, but rather it is a positive thing. Moreover, the conversation is not done, Neuzil noted. It is important to understand that some of the reasons that they continue to have these kinds of meetings are because the Board would like to resolve this issue locally. One of the key issues that the Board of Supervisors has been trying to resolve is how cities decide where they are going to grow if there are no growth boundaries. These are the issues that the Board has been working to resolve.
Loops said that in this instance, the citizens got together and in 30 days decided that they wanted to be part of North Liberty. For any government body not to recognize that as democracy in self-determination is not right. He said the Board of Supervisors stated in the last meeting that they didn’t like what they saw and what is behind all of this. But, what is behind this is the people trying to determine how they want to live and what happens in the area in which they live. The way it is going there is no voice from all of these people that is being regarded. Neuzil added that there is still an incredible number of opportunities for everyone to continue working together. Ultimately what the Board of Supervisors wants is for the City of North Liberty, the City of Coralville, and Johnson County to determine where growth boundaries are so that the citizens know where the growth should acquire.
Neuzil said that a second message that the Board of Supervisors wants to communicate is that they want the people in Johnson County to remain in Johnson County. Loops said that particular message falls right into the trap of Coralville and the annexation they want. Neuzil said they don’t necessarily know where Coralville is going to go or where North Liberty will go, but it would be nice to know an actual direction before they move forward. This kind of question is what was addressed in those earlier conversations. Coralville said they want to put together annexation agreements with residents, so that if it is determined that this is an area that is going to be in Coralville, these residents would be protected. These are the kinds of things the Board of Supervisors has been trying to put together. Neuzil noted that this conversation is not over by any means. The Board of Supervisors has been trying to work towards a responsible local reaction to this. Loops said that Coralville has found some North Corridor Johnson County residents who will not resist their annexation.
Scott Hochstrasser said he is a city planner by training and by practice and he has been watching this process mainly on the Internet due to the fact that he practices on the West Coast. He had watched about three years ago when the Board did the North Corridor plan and is surprised to see that Coralville is making this exercise. He said the narrow neck of properties that are being annexed, it seems, to be able to take in the surrounding areas on the map. He said maybe that is fair and consistent with the law, but he would like the Board to think carefully about the North Corridor and what had been planned for the future land use of this area. In the North Corridor plan, the Board of Supervisors didn’t suggest changing the name of North Liberty Road to Coralville Highway; it is still North Liberty Road. Therefore, it seems logical that the properties that want to annex to North Liberty properly should be due to the fact that they live on North Liberty Road.
Paul wanted to correct a statement that Olson had made. In the lawsuit regarding the first annexation attempt of Coralville, the residents were not saying that the City of Coralville shouldn’t just take the road. They were saying that they were entitled to notification but had not received such notification. Most of the citizens have stated that they would like to stay in the county, but by that they mean that they would like to stay within the country. When the Board of Supervisors uses the word county they are referring to jurisdiction. None of the residents moved out to this area to be in county jurisdiction; they moved out there for the character of the landscape and neighborhood. The residents feel that these characters will be protected better by joining the City of North Liberty because the City will allow the Scanlon Farm to be developed just as Coralville will, and the character of the development will take into account the surrounding neighborhood. Paul explained that he personally doesn’t want the protection of Coralville. He said that Loops had received a letter 90 days ago receiving such protection and that protection has been thrown out because it is expedient to forget about that promise. Paul explained that the residents' position addresses the Board of Supervisors questions about knowing where North Liberty is going to continue to grow because it is stated right in the annexation. North Liberty’s annexation shows where North Liberty plans to grow. It doesn’t constitute urban sprawl because the homes are already developed, but it would be the will of the people to have this happen.
Pam Wurster said she lives adjacent to the Scanlon Farm property and explained that her desire to be a part of North Liberty has nothing to do with reacting to the annexation request by Coralville. Wurster built her house 24 years ago. Every year she receives a letter from the North Liberty Fire Department requesting funds to support them, and every year she sends in her funds. When the North Liberty Library began being developed she was one of the first to assist with that funding. Wurster also purchased bonds to support the North Liberty Community Center while it was being built. Wurster has considered herself to be a part of North Liberty. Although not geographically within the City limits the Wurster’s had assumed when they build their home 24 years ago that they would eventually become a part of North Liberty. And they have worked as a County resident to assist North Liberty in developing infrastructure that the Wurster’s wanted to have in place when they became residents of North Liberty. She said she shops and banks in North Liberty and her dry cleaner is there as well. Her children attended the Girls and Boy Scouts and the 4-H club in North Liberty. She has also only been to the North Liberty fireworks. Wurster’s desire to be a part of North Liberty is because that is where she feels she belongs and has been working to be a community member all of these years.
Olson stated that he would like to make one clarification on Paul’s comments. The lawsuit raised two questions. The number one question was that of the notice question. The second question concerned the shoestring annexation that they had claimed to try to get this annexation thrown out.
Mike McCue explained that ever since this became a public issue back in June he has been able to attend a lot of meetings about the annexation. There has been a great amount of concern about the annexation, but McCue has seen very little support for it. Other than the officials from the City of Coralville and the developer, McCue has yet to hear anyone get up during a public meeting and support any type of annexation for the City of Coralville. McCue stated that he is not sure if the citizens of Coralville had voted and stated that they wanted to take this land in. The Board of Supervisors has heard from citizens supporting the annexation; they have only heard support from paid City officials. McCue disagreed with the fact that the Board of Supervisors does not have much power because they do have a great deal of power. The Board may not have a particular vote, but the Johnson County Board of Supervisors carry a lot of weight. McCue stated that the Board of Supervisors does have an impact with the City Development Board.
Neuzil responded that he wished this were the case. Precedence has shown, however, with an incredibly large 600-acre annexation by the City of Tiffin, that the State's City Development Board could not have cared less about the Board of Supervisors's letter. McCue added that he doesn’t want the Board to give up on the residents. Neuzil stated that he doesn’t plan on giving up. The Board is planning to resolve this issue and they want the residents to stay within the Johnson County. McCue asked if the Board of Supervisors needs to write a strong letter for the residents.
Harney asked how McCue addresses a situation where the property owners want to go into a community and request to be annexed in. McCue stated that he doesn’t know if it is a given that the residents should be accepted into either of the communities due to the fact that it doesn’t makes sense. They would be taking a piece of land from the middle of the County that is not contiguous to either City. One Coralville City Council member at one point has stated that the Scanlons have asked and asked and so the City needs to do something for them. McCue said they might need to say no for now so that they can first plan and then develop, as opposed to developing and then planning the new road. McCue suggested putting the issue on hold and figuring it out before ram-roading through something that could possible not be beneficial to anyone.
Meyers asked Dvorak if the Scanlon family had ever approached Johnson County. Dvorak said no, Johnson County had thought the area to be non-developable due to the trust issue. Neuzil asked if the Scanlon family would have come to address Johnson County, which they still have the opportunity to do, what kind of response would the County give. Dvorak replied that the land is in the County growth area. If the Scanlon family were to come to the Board of Supervisors, the County would encourage the opportunity to move to a high-density cluster subdivision. They would have to provide their own waters, wastewater, and would have to maintain their own streets. This is what the agreement states with Coralville. A member of the public asked why this would be higher density. Dvorak replied that this is what is encouraged between the two cities incase at some point in time after the fact the City of North Liberty or Coralville would try to annex those areas, the infrastructure would already be in place. For example, with the older subdivisions that are already in place, it is almost impossible to put in a collection system or water system and a treatment system. Therefore, the County now designs these basically as if the land were going to be annexed by the City, the only difference being that the density would be higher, but not as high as the City would have. Historically, they have looked at 1/3 to 1/2-acre lots instead of five to eight lots per acre. The intent of a clustered subdivision is equal density. If it is 100 acres then there would be 100 houses on half acre lots, and the remainder stays as an outlot, common ground owned by the developer or by the development itself. Upon annexation, the City would review that to see if that area could be developed or left as is. This would be left up to the city that is annexing the land. This kind of development is stated in both agreements. So, the cities upon annexation in a specific growth area could meet and conform to the City design standards at a later date.
Dorothy asked if the density would be substantially in the suggested County would be a house per 1/2 acre as opposed to 550 housed per 200 acres. Dvorak responded that they would encourage the developer to look at this concept, but they don’t have a provision to require that. They would encourage higher density than what is there currently, but a lower density than what the city would do. This is why the fringe area agreements are so important. The city would review the plat and the zoning and would then comment on what type of development they would encourage in that area. By not having fringe area agreements there is no direct input from the cities because it is not in writing. Dorothy asked if they would allow 40-foot front lot lines. Dvorak said current zoning would require a minimum 8-foot fronting, but zoning could change and then change the rule.
Denise Bushnell said they are dealing with an absentee landowner. It is one family versus 300 families who travel on those roads everyday. These people don’t live here; they have no idea of the impact of this development. The homeowners have spoken and want to stay within the County or be with North Liberty. Bushnell doesn’t know of any group of people who have asked to be annexed into Coralville. The residents of this area feel that this just keeps coming at them time and time again without notification. For example, they found out less than a week ago that this meeting was even being held. Bushnell said that it seems as though this is all being drawn up under the table to benefit this one landowner when the consequences are going to be felt by many residents. She said they would appreciate the Board of Supervisors taking this effect into consideration.
Olson added that the law states that the Board of Supervisors or the Penn Township Trustees can write the City of Coralville within seven business days to request modifications or objections to the annexation. Those letters will be passed along to the State City Development Board with the Coralville packet.
Kuhl said that the Scanlon family has never contacted the City of North Liberty and the City would certainly be open to that if the family would come forward. To be consistent with the landowners in that area, the City will not go out and solicit the Scanlon family.
Harney explained that the Board had the consultations with Coralville and North Liberty. Next week, the Board will review the annexations. The Board of Supervisors will then decide what type of letter they will provide to the communities to be forwarded to the City Development Board. Hayworth said that Coralville didn't receive a notice of the consultation with North Liberty. They were very open about coming to the Board, so that everyone would know about the consultation. Olson said that Coralville's consultation was in public and is not required to be in public.
Penn Township Trustee Sarah Helt asked if it would be possible for the Board to provide the Penn Township Trustees with a copy of the letter they are submitting to the State City Development Board. Harney stated that this is a consultation with the trustees and with Coralville, therefore, the Board will forward a copy of the letter. R. Sullivan said there will be two different copies of the letter and both copies will be forwarded. Helt said she lives on Dubuque Street and getting out onto that street at 7:30 a.m. is nearly impossible. She said that she may have to move if they have 350 more houses in the area.
Neuzil said there have been two public meetings for input, and the whole Board is available to have conversations on this issue. He asked that people feel free to invite them to neighborhood and organizational meetings on the topic. Next week's Board of Supervisors meeting is a night meeting, and the Planning and Zoning Department will then give a presentation on where they think the cities should grow. They will start the process of trying to create growth boundaries for both communities. Their staff will give the County's perspective on that. This would be after 5:30 p.m., he said.
Harney said the Board of Supervisors received a request to attend a planning session at the University of Iowa by Professor Throgmorton. If more than two Supervisors go they would have to have the Auditor’s office take minutes on the meeting. He asked what the Board wants to do. Stutsman was under the impression that Professor Throgmorton preferred not to have an official meeting of the Board of Supervisors, therefore, they should only send two members. Neuzil agreed. Meyers said that County Attorney Janet Lyness is concerned about the session becoming a meeting that was not announced. Since most of the meeting is a panel discussion with no public input until the last session, he wondered if the Board could leave before that point and avoid it being an official meeting. Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell said that he wasn't privy to the earlier conversation, so it is difficult for him to comment. Given what the Board has said, his advice is to set up an agenda if more than two members will attend. This is the only way for them to protect themselves from someone coming back later and saying that the Board had an illegal meeting. Chappell said that even if the Board goes to listen, they might want to ask a question, and that might be construed as deliberation.
R. Sullivan stated that he would like to make a motion to send a letter to the Urban and Regional Planning Department explaining the Board of Supervisors concerns and expressing their interest in having all members attend. Stutsman stated that they are making a bigger deal out of this than it needs to be. She said Dr. Throgmorton had stated that he does not want this to be a Board meeting, therefore they should send two members who will report back to the whole Board. Hopefully there will be a video tape that they can watch later. Neuzil said that whoever is able to go should inform the others that they all would have liked to attend the meeting. R. Sullivan stated that it is important for all of the Board to be there because there will be people that will be asking where Johnson County is. R. Sullivan restated that it is important for them to explain in writing why they cannot all attend so that people know they are interested. He said that others need to know that the Board is legally prohibited from doing it.
Harney explained that he has spoken with Throgmorton who has a very specific target audience. Throgmorton has representatives from Linn County, Iowa City, North Liberty, Johnson County, and the meeting is all about planning and growing, and policy makers for the future. Throgmorton preferred not to have a County Board Meeting at his seminar. Harney thought Throgmorton would allow it, but he doesn’t want to attract a lot of individuals beyond his target audience. Meyers added that if he is inviting officials from other jurisdiction he is going to have the same problem. R. Sullivan stated that he would like to make it clear to them that while they are inviting the whole Board, the whole Board cannot attend due to legal limitations. R. Sullivan wants people to know that the Board wants to attend but cannot. Stutsman added that the Board of Supervisors has been very consistent about not violating the open meetings law by being very careful about only having two Board members present at any particular time. Therefore, the community is pretty much in tune with that, but if a letter needs to be drafted then it shouldn’t be a problem. Meyers agreed.
Stutsman stated that she would like to attend the meeting. Meyers stated that he would like to attend the meeting also. Harney said that he is also interested in going. R. Sullivan suggested that Stutsman and Meyers go. The Board agreed. Harney said he would call Dr. Throgmorton. R. Sullivan added that he would privately write a letter to the department from himself expressing his concerns. Harney said he doesn't want to move the County's agendas and TV cameras in on Throgmorton's meeting. Neuzil added that a Board Meeting would involve the Auditors Office needing to attend the meeting also which is something they normally don't do. R. Sullivan said that this makes him mad because he wants to do this kind of thing. He said that they often host something like this and no one from urban and regional planning comes. Stutsman said that she thinks they can all learn from the discussion. R. Sullivan said that they try to get this arranged and then it is arranged, but the Board can't go. Meyers said that the discussion that they had this morning about the annexation should have been heard by more parties. Harney said that there will be discussion at the Throgmorton meeting.
Motion by R. Sullivan, second by Stutsman, to enter into Executive Session at 11:20 a.m. to discuss “Houser vs. Johnson County” under section 21.5(1.c), Code of Iowa, “to discuss strategy with counsel in matters that are presently in litigation or where litigation is imminent where its disclosure would be likely to prejudice or disadvantage the position of the governmental body in that litigation.” Roll call: aye: Sullivan, Stutsman, Harney, Neuzil, Meyers.
Recessed at 11:20 a.m.; reconvened at 11:29 a.m.
Motion by R. Sullivan, second by Neuzil, to leave Executive Session at 12:05 p.m. Roll call: aye: Sullivan, Stutsman, Harney, Neuzil, Meyers.
Adjourned at 12:05 p.m.
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By Casie Kadlec, Recording Secretary