MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
FEBRUARY 28, 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Board of Supervisors: Recommendations from the Parking Committee
Board of Supervisors: Website proposal from Linn/Johnson Public Leadership Group
Board of Supervisors: Vernon Research Proposal from Linn/Johnson Public Leadership Group
Board of Supervisors: Conservation Board Ballot Measure for 2008 General Election
Reports and Inquiries from the Board of Supervisors
Chairperson Sullivan called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 9:12 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Larry Meyers, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan; absent was Terrence Neuzil.
R. Sullivan said that the Parking Committee recommends charging $25 per month for employees parking in the new Health and Human Service (HHS) ramp. R. Sullivan said that there are other proposals that the Board should consider at a later time, like the possibility of a having a commuter lot or a bus pass reimbursements.
Harney asked if there would be a periodic open review for adjustments in the parking fee and said the Administration Building parking lot should be included in the fee structure. Stutsman said that both parking lots would be included in the fee structure and R. Sullivan said that Facilities Manager David Kempf intends to have the employees park in the ramp and allow the public to use the Administration Building parking lot.
Harney asked if the people with disabilities would be treated differently and R. Sullivan said that both the Administration Building and HHS would have handicapped lots that would be available for everybody. Harney asked if the employees parking in the handicapped spots would be charged a fee and R. Sullivan said the Parking Committee discussed that if a disabled employee needs to use the handicapped parking space they could use it, but they have not talked about the charge. R. Sullivan said that allowing disabled employees to use the handicapped spaces would not take away all accessible parking available.
Stutsman clarified that the recommended $25 fee would cover the maintenance costs for the parking ramps. Meyers said that there are people that pay twice the amount to park at the University and Stutsman said she has always supported having a fee structure in place because it is right and fair to the taxpayers, especially in light of what others are paying to park in Iowa City. R. Sullivan said the Committee looked at parking rates in Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, and downtown Iowa City, and most of the private parking spaces available cost around $50 per month or more and added that the County rate is less than the City of Iowa City rate for employees. R. Sullivan said that the employees who only need to use the parking ramp a few days per year would have the option of buying a short-term pass in day or week increments.
Stutsman reiterated that the Committee plans to review the fee structure periodically and make appropriate adjustments and R. Sullivan said that the Committee would have to reconvene to consider the parking situations at the Jail and the Courthouse. Stutsman said there would be a number of HHS employees that currently park without charge and added that there is concern that the parking charge would equate to pay cuts for those employees. Stutsman said that the $25 fee was a compromise and noted that no one is required to use the parking ramp and everyone is free to make their own parking arrangements. Meyers suggested that employees consider the commuter parking lot at Secondary Roads or at the farm or even the bus passes and added that this issue is something they’ll continue to evaluate. R. Sullivan said that the job descriptions of several DHS employees, Juvenile Court employees, and MH/DD employees require them to have vehicles and potentially to drive, and noted that played a large role in deciding to do a big ramp in the first place.
R. Sullivan said that the Parking Committee recommends a $25 fee to be charged when the new ramp is open for use. Harney said that there are still several things to consider before the recommendation is moved to the formal agenda and added that they need to make sure that everyone is treated equally and the fee is the same for everyone. R. Sullivan said all the employee and County vehicles would park in the ramp and the Administration Building parking spaces would be strictly for public use. Stutsman said that there would be public parking available at the HHS Building. Meyers said that if the public only uses half of the Administration Building lot the Committee could consider relocating some County vehicles back to the Administration Building for the convenience of the departments using them. R. Sullivan noted that they would need to periodically review the efficiency of the parking system.
R. Sullivan said the Board had an opportunity to review the website proposal and Harney said that the presentation has been given to several different groups and he is unsure of who would take the lead. R. Sullivan said that the Convention and Visitors Bureau might be taking the lead. Stutsman asked if the Board is asked to support the project or to contribute to the $200,000 cost of the project and R. Sullivan said the support for the project was widespread but the concern was the cost because there is no money budgeted for it.
Stutsman explained that this is a proposal that would go beyond any current website about Iowa City, Cedar Rapids and Johnson County and would have all the information on the Corridor so that an employer moving to the community could access information on arts, job opportunities, and recreation opportunities. Stutsman said she was surprised that this has not been done already; and said that the Chamber of Commerce, the Convention and Visitors Bureau and businesses should have an interest in being part of this. She noted that the project is just in conceptual stages and are trying to gather support from governmental entities, but said she was unsure whether the Board would be asked to contribute. Harney said the discussions taking place at the Technology Corps & Business Alliance imply that they wanted all entities, including Linn County and businesses to contribute, so that everyone would share the cost of the project.
Harney said the estimated cost for the county and cities was around $10,000 and noted that the whole project would cost around $200,000 to put together, post on the web, and maintain it. Harney said he supports the proposal because it gives valuable insight on what is offered in the Corridor and does not favor any community or city over another. Stutsman said it would be a sophisticated website with a lot of links to it and from it and Meyers added that it sounds like an exciting idea and an impressive website. Meyers said that the Chamber of Commerce and the Visitors Convention Bureau should take charge of the project and pay for it and added that $10,000 is too much for the County to contribute.
R. Sullivan said the timing of the project is bad because there is an upcoming budget hearing and the $10,000 is not in the budget. Harney said the project would fall under Economic Development. Claiborne said there is $500,000 in Economic Development for 2008 and 2009 and Stutsman and R. Sullivan said they thought there was only $10,000 in the Economic Development Fund. Stutsman said she is supportive of the proposal but is not sure that the County’s role in the project should be a sum that large. Meyers said there are many businesses that could be reached and that could contribute to the project. The Board agreed that they are supportive of the proposal but would need to know what they are being asked to pay, if money is available, and if that is how the Board wants to spend it.
R. Sullivan said that Vernon Research Group does market analysis and market surveys through web-based applications, phone surveys, and focus groups and made a proposal to the Public Leadership Group to do market research in Linn and Johnson Counties to determine what types of joint projects could be undertaken in which the public is interested.
Stutsman said that the proposal is expensive and added that she and Meyers had a liaison meeting with Information Services Director Jean Schultz, who mentioned that her department is working on new things with the website, including the ability to do surveys and that is something that the Board could use even if it will not be as sophisticated as what is being proposed. R. Sullivan said that if there is a chance that the project could be fully funded by someone else, the Board would support it. Stutsman asked if the quoted cost of the project was $72,000. R. Sullivan said that there was no commitment of any kind. Harney said the cost varied depending on what was being sought. Stutsman said that this would be a sizeable investment even if the cost is shared with Linn County. R. Sullivan reiterated that this is another cost not included in the budget and the budget would be approved soon. Meyers said that the Linn/Johnson Leadership Group meets only every couple of months and that neither the Leadership Group nor the Board would want to act on this within the next two weeks. Meyers said that the project could be considered in the next budget season. R. Sullivan said that he had no plans to move the item to the formal agenda but wanted the Board to have some discussion about it.
R. Sullivan said that this item was on the last informal agenda to facilitate public input, and it is on the agenda again to provide another opportunity for people to provide their input. League of Women Voters of Johnson County Board of Directors member Rebecca Reiter said that the League supports the protection and preservation of natural environment, parks and open spaces and is pleased that the Conservation Board has developed a comprehensive plan to preserve such areas. She noted that the League also supports the development of bicycle trails and that the bond is a forward-looking step toward requiring land for trails and for preservation before land in Johnson County becomes even more expensive. Reiter said that as funding for the Conservation Board has been low compared to other counties in Iowa, increasing money for land and nature trails would improve the quality of life and attract creative young workers that the area needs.
Don Johnson said that the timing of the bond proposal is wrong because the taxes have gone up due to many new issues addressed by the Board at this time. He stated that the County parks are adequate for the time being and the Board should wait and not act right away on the Conservation bond request. Meyers asked if the public would be invited to comment again. R. Sullivan said the Conservation Board requested that the proposal be placed on the formal agenda so that they can move forward with the process.
Stutsman asked if County Attorney Janet Lyness would answer questions from the Bond Counsel. R. Sullivan said that Lyness has spoken to the Bond Counsel and did not want to start a long conversation until the Board decided to move forward. Conservation Director Harry Graves said that he understood that the proposal would be on the agenda for two informal meetings and then up for vote at the formal meeting on March 6, 2008. Stutsman asked if some of the money could be used for maintenance or operating expenses. Graves said that the opportunity to acquire and leverage these properties frees up money for operation and maintenance.
Harney asked if the interest on unspent bond money would come back to the County or to the Conservation Board and if they would be used to pay for the Bond Counsel. R. Sullivan said the cost of the counsel is part of the project so, if the public passes the bond the fees would be paid with the money raised, and if the bond does not pass the County would have to pay the fees. R. Sullivan said that the interest is part of the General Fund money and added that all the interest that the County currently has goes in the General Fund unless the Board designates it otherwise. Stutsman said she understood that the Conservation Board would have total control over the money and wanted to know if that included interest. R. Sullivan said that the interpretation is that the interest is not the Conservation Board’s money. Graves said that the interest goes to the County Treasury, and although the project is levied it would not be funded until the Conservation Board came forward with a project and added that the Bond Counsel fee is included in §331442(c) of the Code. Meyers asked what would the cost of the Bond Counsel would be and Graves said around $20,000.
Harney asked when they would sell the bonds if the voters pass the proposal. Graves said that the County starts levying the following tax year and the bonds are sold as the money is apportioned to the Conservation Board and acquisitions are made. Graves added that a project could be funded within the first year and Stutsman asked who pays the interest on the borrowed dollars. Graves said the bond rates were figured at a 5% rate, and the Treasurer would look at the bond market and sell at the best time, which has to coincide with the acquisition of property. Stutsman asked if the interest would come out of the bond. Graves responded affirmatively. R. Sullivan said it works in the same way as Secondary Roads projects where taxes reimburse the bond.
Graves said it was his understanding that the Board would vote on the bond proposal at the March 6, 2008 formal meeting, subject to the clarification of the language by the bonding attorney. R. Sullivan said that the Board does not need to have specific language yet because, as County Auditor Tom Slockett pointed out, that does not have to be done until August 2008. R. Sullivan said that the Board is discussing the general intent with the understanding that it has to be wordsmithed by the Bond Counsel, who is not on board yet. Meyers added that the sooner the language can be ready, the better, because this would generate a lot of discussion over the coming months. Graves said the language should be narrowed as soon as possible so the voters know what the plan endorses. R. Sullivan said that from a legal standpoint the Board would not have that language until after the Bond Council has been employed.
Harney said that this is a request from the Conservation Board for the bond issue to be put on the November ballot and is nothing that the Board is asking to be done. He noted that if the Board allows the voters to make the decision, then the Board would have to approve putting the item on the ballot and added that he has some concerns about the timing. Graves said that everyone’s thoughts on the timing issue are well-taken and added that bonding is clearly defined in Section 350.6 of the Iowa Code, as something the Conservation Board can bring forward to the Board. Graves said that the Conservation Board is asking the Board to put the bond on the ballot so that the public opinion poll can take place during the general election.
Meyers clarified that the bond requires a 60% vote and putting it on the ballot does not necessarily mean that the levy will take place. R. Sullivan said that the proposed bond is similar to a school bond where the Board does not necessarily have to endorse the issue but just allow the people to vote. Meyers said that historically school bond issues tend to not get a lot of turnout, but this one will because it would be held during a presidential election.
R. Sullivan said that specific questions for Lyness should be directed to her before the March 6 formal meeting. Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell said that he believes Lyness will be in attendance at the March 6, 2008 meeting. R. Sullivan said the item would be on the agenda for the March 6, 2008 formal meeting. He noted that the March 6, 2008 public hearing on the budget would start at 5:30 p.m., and that the formal Board meeting would be at 9 a.m. Graves added that there would be a special Conservation Board meeting the night of March 6, 2008 where members of the public would have an opportunity to hear about the proposal.
Stutsman attended a Decat Board site visit to a shoplifter class, a liaison meeting with Social Services Coordinator Amy Correia, and attended two retirement receptions, for Urban Conservationist Wayne Petersen and Executive Director of Civic Tom Baldridge. Stutsman attended a Decat meeting, a JCCOG Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee meeting, a liaison meeting with Information Services Director Jean Schultz and a luncheon for the Women of Influence.
Meyers attended the SEATS Advisory Committee meeting, the Decat Board meeting, and a Safety Committee meeting. He will be going on a site visit to Coralville Elementary this week. Meyers sat in on the liaison meeting with Stutsman and Schultz, and attended a liaison meeting with R. Sullivan and Kempf.
Harney attended an Agribusiness-Bioscience breakfast meeting, a subcommittee meeting for the Communications Center, and the retirement reception for Wayne Petersen, the Home Builders Show, and the North Liberty RAGBRAI Committee meeting. Harney and R. Sullivan had a site visit with Planning and Zoning staff. Harney attended an E-911 Commission Board meeting, worked on staff evaluations, and attended an MH/DD meeting. Harney also attended an Emergency Management Board of Directors Meeting and had discussions with the Secondary Roads Department.
R. Sullivan commended Secondary Roads on their maintenance of the County roads and discussed public comments on gravel road conditions. R. Sullivan attended a Roads work session and a Linn-Johnson County Public Leadership Group. He also attended the Livable Communities for Successful Aging meeting, and the Soul Food Dinner fundraiser for Fast Track
Adjourned at 10:17 a.m.
______________________________________________________________________
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By:
On the _______ day of _____________________, 2008
By John Deeth, Recording Secretary
Sent to the Board of Supervisors on March 24, 2008 at 9:15 a.m.