MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
MAY 2, 2007
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Presentation from Durrant Representative Mike Lewis............................................................. 1
Report from Alternatives and Treatment Opportunities Sub-Committee...................................... 4
Additional Comments from Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members.......................... 5
Chairperson Harney called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 4:05 p.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan; absent: Larry Meyers
Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee members present were: County Attorney Janet Lyness, Judge Doug Russell, Clerk of Court Lodema Berkley, Iowa City City Councilor Bob Elliott, University of Iowa Facilities Representative Larry Wilson, Mobile Crisis Coordinator Mindy Lamb, MECCA Executive Director Art Schut, Mental Health/Developmental Disabilities Director Elaine Sweet, John Stratton, and County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek.
Durrant Representative Mike Lewis said that they talked about the idea of putting together a timeline and wanted to see if that made sense to the Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee (CJCC). The timeline is built around a number of factors. Lewis noted that Durrant's philosophy is an operational approach. The first step in the process is to identify a series of tasks and assessments. They could take the first 150 days in this analysis to evaluate current staff and bed utilization. They would also do an economic analysis of what each one of those means. This would be done in a collaborative environment. From that analysis, once the programming is done and the scenarios are laid out, they would get to the second step of site analysis. Then, Lewis laid out the site criteria piece. They are not ready to choose the site, but these are the factors they would look at to make a recommendation. The first one on the list is one of the most important. That is, the relationship to the court facility and access to the site for law enforcement and public access to the activity. They also need to examine zoning and height restrictions as well as costs.
Lewis said that each scenario will have a life cycle cost. It is not just about looking at the upfront initial cost but the life cycle costs. He included a diagram. The decisions made early in the process are the ones where they can offer the most cost-saving help. When the decisions are made later, the more expensive it is. The more clear and careful they are early in the process of decision-making, the more likely they are to have a satisfying end product.
Iowa City City Council Member Bob Elliott asked how involved Durrant would be in the process of communication and who would be responsible for that communication. Lewis said they see Durrant as a facilitator in the communication process. There needs to be a series of forums in which they can work together. They will have forums to work directly with the Sheriff and forums with the Court. There is the internal side and then a public component. When they reach a certain point in the process, they need to work with the public. He will be finalizing a document to put a structure around that timeline. Neuzil asked when the timeline starts. Lewis said that his preferred start time is July 1, 2007. That would get them out to November 1, 2008 to wrap up the first stage. If it needs to be different from that, they should let him know. Durrant could start tomorrow if the Board wanted them to. Neuzil said they want something to give back to the community by the end of the year. Typically for a project of this magnitude it is going to take about a year and something that is between 18-20 months to construct, said Lewis. The bigger projects can do this. The smaller renovations usually take as long, just with a different type of person doing the project. Harney asked if Durrant wants to do a site selection or simply lay out the information. Durrant said that if there are five sites, they would look at the criteria and recommend sites based on those criteria.
Larry Wilson asked how they are going to help the committee with scope management. There are other things that need to be there to support this without which the jail won't be successful. There are other things like the population that will be served. They need to figure out what the basic scope of the project is. That scope can be expanded based on budget and so on. Wilson wanted to know how Durrant will help them work through that. Also, he asked how Durrant will help them work through the needs of each department. There is a limited amount of money, and they can only meet what is really needed. Finally, he asked once they do that, the Committee will probably want the company to look at sites for fatal flaws. Some can be ruled out right away. That would be good information for the general public.
Lewis responded that they are bringing their knowledge to the table to say what works and doesn't and then see how that meshes with what works and doesn't for the County. Then, they would have to look at case studies and see how those line up. So, it is a combination of case studies, research, and experience to find what works. It is about compromise, but they start with the wish list. They start with the ideal and then see what the limitations are like code requirements. They need to figure out what is appropriate for the building based on need and use, such as if it is a substance abuse issue or a mental health issue. They need to get that tailored down to fit that functionally. He continued that they need to have the space be functional with the right interaction. They need to have the proper case flow, and they need to think about how many staff it will take. This will take time to work through the demographics of what is appropriate for Johnson County. It is consensus building. Usually, it is not the code minimum or the wish list, but something in between.
Wilson asked how they would generate this initial list. Lewis said they need to sit down with each group and have a discussion of what they currently have and what they need and then document that so everyone can see it first-hand. That face-to-face time is really important. Wilson rephrased his third question regarding fatal flaws. Lewis said it would be fair to say they would have different perspectives on what is a viable site. The process he would like to suggest is that they go with a ranking system for the sites and then evaluate the sites from various perspectives including architectural and the Board's and so on. Then, they need to document those findings. Someone might say they don't like the site because of its relationship to the neighborhood. By involving many people other than the company, they can get at those fatal flaws. R. Sullivan said that they will be exchanging some problems for others because they can't have it all. He asked how o they weigh the different considerations. Lewis said that some are going to have to take weight over others. For example, the distance from center town might have to be weighed against parking or the physical connection to the Courthouse. Lewis said that he could start a process of looking at the common key elements and then ask Johnson County to prioritize those criteria based on their needs. Once Durrant gets an understanding of Johnson County's data, then the company will be able to come forward with the criteria. They would continue to check-in throughout the process as to whether they are following those. He said if it just stays with Durrant's criteria it won't work well.
Judge Doug Russell said that the decision makers need to remember that they are talking about a justice center and not only a jail. The article in the paper said that this is necessary due to the obsolescence of the old jail and nothing was mentioned about the one-hundred-year-old courthouse. There is a large constituency of people who want a new courthouse. They want to keep this in the mix. Lewis said that he heard comments about an average length of stay being 30 days. There are other communities in Iowa that are running at 23 days. For him, that is an indicator that there is some case flow analysis they need to do to see why it is at 30. It might change by 10%, and even that could have an impact on the overall system. It is fair to say that if there is a trend that might push the number to 33 days, they need to look at the impact that might have. He said they need to look at the needs of the courts and the needs of the jail, and look at it holistically.
John Stratton said that he thinks they are talking about an interactive process. That process involves Durrant providing input like criteria for a jail. Then the group would offer feedback about the weight that these criteria would carry. Then, they would evaluate the sites and then perhaps reevaluate the weights of the criteria. This sounds like it is very important to Durrant's process that there needs to be prompt feedback on the part of the County. Durrant said yes, there needs to be point people. Stratton said that the courts, law enforcement, and the public need to be strongly represented. Lewis agreed and said if they were to have this input, they could hit the ground running on June 1, 2007 because they have that framework in place.
Clerk of Court Lodema Berkley said that she is looking at what the public needs are. They lack plenty of room for public defenders, conference rooms, and places for the Sheriff. Her main concern is if there is going to be an evaluation of whether they can use the current Courthouse. She asked if the input will go into the report. Lewis asked if she is wondering about short term solutions as they go through this process. Berkley said yes. She explained that the Courthouse needs a lot of repairs, and these repairs are not being done. They have issues regarding leaks in storage areas. She asked if they are going to look at the site to see how to keep it functional while considering it or while building a new place. Lewis said that is embodied in this plan. That is what physical plant evaluations and such mean.
R. Sullivan said that there is an 800-pound gorilla in town and that is The University of Iowa. If there is land to be had, they will likely take it. R. Sullivan wondered how they could work together to co-exist. He said it would be really fatal to not meet with the University before putting something forward so that they know for sure what options exist and which ones don't. Lewis said they will certainly keep that in mind. He said he has a little sense about the cost. He might suggest that they put it in terms of 30 to 50 years. The dollars will be what the dollars are. Harney asked how many people would be working on this project. Lewis said eight to ten people. There will be people who come and go depending on their specialization. Elliot said this is also a political concern because if they can't sell it politically, then nothing they put forward will matter.
Dorothy Whiston asked if they can outline how they will get that public input. Lewis said he would be happy to put that in the timeline. Neuzil said they could definitely work with Executive Assistant Mike Sullivan. They have most of the players here today that have been part of the CJCC. Harney asked if they take into consideration the impact corrections has on parole. Lewis said he had the privilege to present to the legislature their five-year systemic plan for the community based system. They can at least look at this plan in comparison to that. Stutsman said that one of the reasons Durrant was selected to do this is their experience with working with the criminal justice system. Berkley said that she worked with this company at a facility in Nebraska and was very impressed with their work. Neuzil said that getting the public interested in the project is paramount. He would hope that they incorporate that into their presentation. They need something to get this information out of the Board room. Lewis said he likes to make the information very factual. This way people can make their decisions based on the facts. The Board thanked Durrant for their presentation.
MECCA Executive Director Art Schut provided a report regarding the jail facility and services. They need consultation spaces for deposition, legal representation, religious activities, probation, substance abuse interviews, and more. The trouble is that there is only one current space for all of these activities. The visiting space is currently limited to four prisoners at a time. There is no space for exercise or for education. Neuzil asked if there is anything else that jails around the U.S. are doing that they could be doing. Schut said that Polk County does an in-jail treatment program for substance abuse. That is currently a pilot project there. Harney said that the recommendation is a new jail and justice center. Schut said that the subcommittee recommends the changes listed on the report to make all of these activities feasible. Schut said that he didn't summarize that they continue to have evaluations of people with mental health needs and substance abuse troubles that take up jail space. Now, they are trying to keep those folks out of the jail. Neuzil asked if they need future space for some programming. Schut said that everything they can do is being done given the space they have.
R. Sullivan said that the alternatives they looked at are treatment alternatives. He has heard some rumblings from one side or another that say that if judges did this or the public defender did that, that would be helpful. Are there things like that, he asked. Schut said that there is discussion of other options in terms of expediting or looking at the flow of services. Everyone agrees there are ways to do that differently. R. Sullivan asked if their committee is the one who would review those things. Schut said that the committee has day jobs, so one of the difficulties is to organize and staff the meetings and work. They have discussed the need for staffing to do these things, who can put the time in. That is distinct from an expeditor position. County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek said that they could call it a CJCC Coordinator. They would serve on all three of the subcommittees and act as the point person. He continued to say that some new data from Tom Weber is that in a number of months, they have figured that the average length of stay for a pretrial person is 30 days. People are moving in and out fairly rapidly. That is a good sign. County Attorney Janet Lyness said that they are trying to make changes so that if one person has one open charge, they get the next charge. That way, one person does not have to come back. They can wrap everything up at once instead of going from one to the next to the next. If they have someone who can facilitate the subcommittees working together, it would really help cover the bases. Harney asked if it would be two different positions. Lyness said that is right. The expeditor would just be looking at the case processing, while the coordinator would be more about unifying their efforts. R. Sullivan said that when they are ready to go to the public, it would really help if Lyness, for example, could say that the County Attorney's Office is doing everything they can do, and that other offices are doing everything they can do.
Russell said that the Johnson County Bar Association met in April. They formed a standing committee. Senior members of the Bar would be available to make presentations to help the government lobby the public. Neuzil said that he noticed he heard Russell say a new courthouse, and he wondered if that means something different from the courthouse they are using now. Russell said that he means there is a need for court facilities and jail facilities wherever that might be. The form that takes depends. Berkley said they also need to make sure they look at what they need to make it functional. Neuzil said that is part of phase two of courthouse security. Stutsman asked if that group was from the Johnson County Bar Association. She wondered if they get into a problem with lobbying. Russell said that it is a private organization of about 180 people. Pulkrabek said that it wouldn't necessarily be lobbying. It would be a presentation of the facts. The Board will also be expected to go and present facts. Harney said most of all the Sheriff has to do that. Pulkrabek said he will do that and hopes to look over his shoulder and see them doing the same. If they aren't all on the same page when this comes to light, it will be much harder to make a case for a new justice facility. Neuzil said that ultimately the report that they give them is not necessarily the one they will go with. It is not a slam dunk in his opinion. Lewis said that if he has done his job right, he won't be making the number one choice. He hoped that the information will show what that choice is. Harney said it is the good information that they need to rely upon.
Adjourned at 5:10 p.m.
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By Casie Kadlec, Recording Secretary