MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
MARCH 18, 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Facilities Director David Kempf: Project Updates................................................................. 1
Washington D.C. Trip Debriefing......................................................................................... 5
Buy Here Policy................................................................................................................... 8
Animal Ordinance................................................................................................................ 8
Meeting Agenda Items........................................................................................................ 13
Board of Supervisors: Internal Processes, Expectations, and Other Operational Issues....... 13
FY10 Budget Process.......................................................................................................... 14
Chairperson Sullivan called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 8:30 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Larry Meyers, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
Facilities Director David Kempf discussed updates for the Health and Human Services Building. Kempf said that all of the auger cast pilings are in and that the crew is now working on the piling caps and grade beams from the east to the west. He said that they have made pretty good progress since the contractor that has that portion of the bid has began working. He said the first shipment of steel is expected to be delivered by the end of this week. He said that by the middle of next week, steel will start going up. He said that there were some questions about cure time for the piling caps and grade beams and said that the specifications called for a mix that had a cure rate of seven days. He said they had discussed having the mix altered to shorten the cure time for anything the contractors didn't get poured last week. Kempf said that he would find out later that day at the construction meeting what kind of time frame they were going to work in. He also stated that they are using a very hot mix for the seven day cure rate for the size of the piling caps with some of the concrete being six by six by four feet deep.
Kempf said all the excavation work of the site had been completed and they were waiting to get a final tally on it. He said that they ran into some contaminated soils and other things that they hadn’t expected. He said that the previous day they had been roughing in all the electrical conduits that would come in from the main feedbank and run along the east side of the building. He said that they were making good progress. Neuzil said that he would like the Board to observe a meeting. Kempf replied that meetings are every Tuesday at 10:00 a.m. in the construction trailer. He said he also thought it important that the Board to come to a couple of meetings. He said that if any of the Board members wanted to walk around the site they should contact him personally. Meyers wanted to know about the LEED Certification process (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) across the street. Kempf replied that Norbeck was doing the paperwork and initial documentation based on the specifications of the project. Kempf said that they made a couple of small changes such as changing low flush urinals to one pint flush urinals. There was no change in price, but it gave the County an extra point for LEED Certification.
Kempf said they would be meeting on March 25, 2008 before the construction meeting with Novak Design Group Representative Jim Novak, Engineer Gary Landhouser, and C-Wise Design and Consulting President Martha Norbeck. Kempf said the group would talk about the proprosals for the commissioning process from different firms that would like to do the process. He said they would make sure that everyone was quoting the same amount of work and make a recommendation from there. He believed they were down to two or three candidates. Kempf said that they had one quote that came in at a quarter of the price of everyone else’s, but stated that the firm had since withdrawn their quote. Stutsman asked if they would review the proposals. Kempf replied that they would make a recommendation from the firms that they have received quotes from. He stated that they need to figure out which firm will be best to partner with and what duties the firm will do versus what duties Norbeck will perform. Kempf stated that they weren't generating any construction waste yet. He said that the steel specifications had met their recycle content specifications. He said that they have not generated much construction waste and recycling material yet, but said that they soon would.
Harney asked about placing a no parking sign on the corner as the road turns off Benton Street onto Dubuque Street. Kempf replied that he would contact Iowa City and see if they could do that. Harney said that it is hard to see around the corner as the construction company pulls up with the trailers. Stutsman asked who has been parking in the area. Kempf replied that construction workers and students have been parking in the area. He stated that he would ask Tricon to put up a temporary sign or ask Iowa City to put one up.
R. Sullivan asked about the SEATS and Secondary Roads Facility. Kempf replied that they had a lot of the site work for the office building completed, brought in, and compacted. They were waiting to get the transformer pad done in order to move the electrical pole and transformers that are there. Once they get the pad done they will bring the transformer in and set it. He said that on an upcoming weekend in the next few months they would disconnect the power and run the service line to the transformer.
Kempf said they have had the fiber line temporarily relocated. He said that S and G had been constructing a lot of the steel frame walls in their shop while the weather was bad. He also mentioned that there were some issues that prevented them from doing site work outside, but said that they worked inside constructing walls. He said once the footing and pads are in for the building, they will see a lot of progress very quickly. He said that they haven't started the site work for the pond area or the bus barn yet, but it will start soon. He said the main thing is getting the transformer pad and the transformer taken care of. He said that he hoped they would be able to change the camera for the Secondary Roads Facility to be able to go online to check on the progress.
Harney asked about relocating the weight in the Clerk of Court’s Office. Kempf said they gave the Clerk of Court additional shelving space and shelves down at the Fisher Building where they have a lot of juvenile records. He said they needed to reevaluate the situation and get more out of there still.
Stutsman asked if Kempf will have any involvement with the Conservation Building. Kempf responded that no one had asked him yet. Stutsman suggested that the Board have a discussion with Conservation Director Harry Graves about the issue to determine the Board’s role and Kempf's role as well. Kempf stated that no one had asked him about the prospect and he hadn't actively pursued it. Stutsman said that the Board should make a decision. She stated that Kempf has enough to do and that he didn't need to be appointed.
Kempf said that the Secondary Roads Oxford Maintenance Shed is coming along great and they are close to having it up in the next week and a half. He mentioned it was a slow start but they have a professional crew that knows what they are doing. He also mentioned that this isn't the first steel building they crew has put together. Stutsman wanted to know how the budget is going with snow removal and things of that nature. Kempf said that the cost of snow removal for the month of February 2008 at the Administration Building, including the CarQuest lot and the lot rented from City Carton, was about $7,000. Kempf said that his entire budget for snow removal is about $11,000. He said he is waiting until the final set of bills came in to see what they could absorb within his budget and if they needed to buy new equipment. Kempf said he would be getting between $6,000 and $7,000 back from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). He said that he received the last set of paperwork from the State, saying that they received all the work from Federal people. He said he expected a check fairly soon. Kempf said that after they receive the check they can take the check and amend it into that line item so they can see where they are for the budget. Harney stated that FEMA has reimbursed a lot of small projects and now they are looking at larger projects. Stutsman asked if they would have a report in the Boardroom about the budgeting. Kempf said yes. He commented that his budget is smaller than Secondary Roads’ budget, but said that he will give a full report of what he had budgeted and what they spent in April 2008. Kempf said that Human Services Accountant Kathy Lynch is getting the summary reimbursement for snow removal at MH/DD.
Stutsman said that taxpayers need to know that the County is getting money from FEMA and other places to come up with the costs. Kempf pointed out that he was not sure under what line item the money would come into. He said it came in under the general MH/DD reimbursement that they got. He said that it was his expenditure, but their gain. He said they paid the rent and it comes back as their reimbursement for their expenses. He said that he doesn't bill them for snow removal, but stated that he wouldn't mind doing it. He said that their goal was to have the snow cleared by 7:00 a.m. Stutsman said that she wants to publicly recognize those working through the snowstorms in front of the Department Heads at their next meeting in May. Kempf said they didn't accept praise well, but would like the recognition.
Kempf said that more training is needed on the computers. Kempf said that the deputies were able to view the cameras through their computers and it was a user-friendly system. R. Sullivan stated that he wanted to figure out the best time during a Board meeting to show the surveillance systems on the big screen so that the public could see how well the Courthouse is covered He said that County Attorney Janet Lyness was working on an effective time. Kempf added that from the feedback he had received, the judges wanted to know when it would be aired so they could see it as well. R. Sullivan commented that a 5:30 p.m. meeting would be less crowded than a 9:00 a.m. meeting. Kempf agreed that it would be a good time as there would be very few people in the building. He stated that he was very pleased with the coverage they had. He said that the new cameras were better than the ones they had before. They now have views of all of the courtrooms along with the lobbies and back highways. He said that Freeman Lock and Alarm is finishing some of the wiring to turn the locks on for the first and second floors. He said they would eventually move up to the third floor.
Kempf said there was some concern with the hearing coming up at the end of March and a trial beginning on April 1, 2008. He said that he thought the most important thing to do was to have the camera system ready to deal with any protesters. He said they have it up and running. He said they wanted to have it loaded onto a couple of computers at the Sheriff's Office so someone can look in when the deputies weren't there. He stated that if there was an event taking place at the Courthouse they could watch it in Real-Time. He said they had had some connection issues between the Jail, Courthouse, and the Administration Building in getting to the right IP addresses. He said they have it all resolved with Network Administrator Bill Horning and they just need to go in and change some things in the software. He said they were going to allow minimal access to the cameras. He stated that he and Stutsman had had conversations about employee concerns that people would be watching over their shoulders. Kempf said that isn't the purpose of the cameras and they are limiting access to those who use them for security reasons. He said he will have camera access on his computer to make sure that the cameras are monitoring and functioning the way they should. He said that the deputies know they need log off when they leave their stations.
Harney asked if there is key card access to the Courthouse. Kempf replied that Courthouse employees received their keycards and have been using them for the past six to eight months on the back doors. Harney asked if there would be photos on the keycards. Kempf replied that they didn't have photos on the cards, but commented that that had been discussed for the implementation of the key card system to be used at the Health and Human Services Building. He said if the Board and Elected Officials wanted to go to a badge-style system with employee names and pictures, now would be the time to implement them. He said that there weren't many keycards for the Courthouse. He said that only people that are key personnel have cards. These include Board members, Attorney's Office members, the Clerk of Court, the Assistant Clerk of Court, and Judges. He said it was a discussion they had started and were looking into. He said they just needed to figure out programming once the locks were turned on. He said that he would do everything online as far as who had electronic access to the Courthouse.
R. Sullivan said that they needed to do a follow-up on the Washington, D.C. trip. Stutsman asked if they were talking about the Chamber trip. R. Sullivan said yes. He said they took trails and rail work as the two issues they had identified as a Board. He said it was frustrating that their issues didn't rank very high among the different groups that were present on the Chamber trip. Harney said that the Board did not have a lot of say in the selection process of priorities. He said he was disappointed that after they gave their presentation, Congressman Dave Loebsack's Office requested that they fill out a different form and later found out they had filled out the wrong form. He said that they had to redo everything and send it in again. He said that they wanted letters from the various communities that the issues would affect. R. Sullivan said it was a prioritization by the legislature, but stated that he thought it should have all been in place before they went. He said they were still waiting for all the letters to get back to them. He said that one request is actually in for funding while the others are falling away because they don't have the appropriate letters and paperwork. He said that it is a disappointing process.
Stutsman said that they should have Iowa City Chamber of Commerce Vice President and Public Policy Director Rebecca Neades come in to discuss the Board's role in regards to the selection process. She said Neades should have clarified that the form changed. Harney said that he didn’t think Neades knew it was the wrong form because Loebsack's Office didn't even know about it and the paperwork they sent was a year out of date. Neuzil said Neades should come in early in the process to make sure that they are filling out the correct forms. He stated that the Board needs to figure out what their priorities are. He said that there are two roles they needed to figure out. The first role is what Johnson County wants to advocate. He said he thinks that trails will be one of the activities once they get Federal property. He said the other role is the buy-in that Johnson County is working with Coralville and Iowa City on. He said that having some private meetings with congressional staff might be helpful.
Harney said that they have to work with the State as well because funds from the Department of Transportation (DOT) are involved. He said that it is his understanding that it is earmarked money they are asking for. He stated there was some confusion in the D.C. offices and possibly Cedar Rapids compared to what they were asking for and what challenge they should be following. Stutsman said that it would be good to have a County presence out there because the County priorities ranked so low. Harney stated that the Board should send at least two individuals. He stated that they should be better prepared for future trips. He said that other communities such as Iowa City and Coralville stayed an extra day to make contact at the D.C. trip. Neuzil said they needed to do some additional work and take advantage of the fact that they were out there. Harney said that he took the opportunity to talk to several Congressmen individually, but none in their offices.
R. Sullivan stated that they needed to hold meetings with representatives from their peer communities before next year's trip. He stated that one thing he found frustrating this year was that representatives from Iowa City stayed an extra day to discuss separately Joint Communications Center funding, which is something the County should have been involved with as the County is levying the tax. Harney said that he was asked to attend that meeting earlier, but it was later scheduled for the day after the Board members had left. R. Sullivan said that better communication is needed between the groups that attend the D.C. trip. Stutsman wanted to know what the purpose of the trip is. She said they need to determine if the communities should go as a group or if the Board of Supervisors should go separately. Harney said that the letter from Senator Tom Harkin stated that joint presentations and representation are important, but that they want more information. R. Sullivan said that Senator Harkin and Senator Grassley's staffs appreciate receiving all of the information in one summary.
R. Sullivan said that it would be good to try and schedule a work session with congressional staff that are in the Johnson County area. He stated that it wouldn't be difficult to schedule a meeting with Senator Grassley’s Cedar Rapids Regional Director Mary Day, Senator Harkin's Iowa City Representative Beth Freeman, Congressman Dave Loebsack's Aides Dave Lesch and Rob Sueppel, and others. He said it would be good for the Board to have their own audience with the congressional representatives. Harney said it would be helpful if the Board could receive some inside strategy or knowledge on what they are asking for. R. Sullivan said that it may be helpful to build relationships six months or so before they go on the next Washington, D.C. trip. Stutsman said that the congressional representatives could inform the Board of the exact forms and processes that need to be taken so that the County is better prepared for future trips. Neuzil said that they could possibly send a message to the Johnson County Chamber about extending the trip by a day since their schedule is very tight. Harney said the schedule for the previous trip provided very little flexibility.
Stutsman said that meeting with congressional staff was a good idea and would provide the Board with more information. R. Sullivan said they could try to get all of the representatives at one meeting, but if that would not work, they could try to have a representative come to a Key Issues Meeting as an agenda item to speak briefly. Neuzil said they need to talk to Neades first. Stutsman asked if they should have Neades at the meeting with congressional staffers. R. Sullivan said after speaking with Neades the Board should discuss the possibility of getting congressional staffers to meet with them.
Harney said that the Rail Transportation Presentation wasn't received well and that others focused more on tourism rather than moving passengers. Neuzil said in regards to the presentation, that it is important to meet with Congressman Bruce Braley's staff in regards to transportation because he is important in that area. Harney stated that there were positive things about the trip as well.
Neuzil stated that they need to communicate with Neades about the possibility of staying an extra day. R. Sullivan said that even though they will be going as a group they need to schedule individual time with Congressmen. Stutsman said that the Board’s feedback is important for deciding which topics are important for future trips. Harney commented that Cedar Rapids had many projects for which they had separate meetings for during the trip. Neuzil stated that they needed a discussion about which projects they should be adding to discuss at the Chamber trip. He said that they should ask Department Heads for ideas as well. Neuzil stated that he has kept in contact with Congressman Loebsack's staff to discuss Justice Assistant Grant (JAG) funding.
Neuzil said that Loebsack sponsored a bill for Emergency Supplemental Funding to restore money that has been left out of the President's budget and added that Loebsack has a good amount of signatures from both sides of the aisle. He said that the bill had a better chance of being passed in legislation for 2008 and receiving appropriation through the War Bill. He commented that it sounded as though they had enough votes to attach the bill to the next funding stream for paying off Iraq. He said that if that is the case, then the funding will be secured as a deal with the President. He said that available funding will go to the State of Iowa and the State will then pass it through. He stated that the Sheriff's Lobby in Iowa is good at informing congressional staff of the issues and added that he thought Congressman Steve King and Congressman Tom Lathem are the only two that haven't signed the bill yet. Harney stated that all of the Military for Iowa requests were approved except for the entrance to Camp Dodge, which is nearly a million dollar project.
Neuzil said that it looks like the State of Iowa is going to fund a large part of the cost for the election voting machines. Neuzil stated that the Board had taken over $325,000 out of Debt Services for the new voting machines that Johnson County Auditor Tom Slockett purchased. He said that it sounded as though the State may reimburse the County for about half of the cost. Harney said it might be more than that. Neuzil stated they are hoping that the Federal Government and Congressman from New Jersey might provide additional reimbursement for the new voting machines. He said that they are hoping to have the Federal Government pay for half of the cost and the State pay for the other half of the cost to pay for improvements to the election machines so that a paper trail is available. Neuzil said that they currently have a paper trail, but it is hard to read and if they are audited, it would take days. Harney said that the touch screens are the problem.
Stutsman asked if it is possible that the County will not receive JAG funding because they have already funded a Drug Transport Officer. R. Sullivan replied that the Sheriff stated that the State is good about that. If the State receives JAG funding, the State will give it to them. Stutsman asked what they would do with the $325,000. Neuzil stated that they would tax for it and if they get a reimbursement they will put it into the General Fund. He said that when the State of Iowa reimburses them for the election machines it will go back into the General Fund because it is the only place it can go.
R. Sullivan said he had hasn't received much feedback from Department Heads about the seed contract. He said that he discussed the issues with Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell. He said they are now back to where they have been every year. He said that Chappell isn't comfortable with the Board doing things arbitrarily. He said that Chappell said that the Board needs a policy to do something and justify it. He said that although the Board decided to partake in the Chamber’s Buy Here Program they have yet to adopt an official policy. Stutsman asked if they were going to adopt Coralville's policy. R. Sullivan replied that they had discussed it, but haven't done anything with it. Stutsman suggested they start it. R. Sullivan said Coralville's policy is simple. He said that if a business is located here then they are considered local and get preference. He said that they spend up to 5% of a certain dollar amount and after that they go to the Coralville City Manager. He said they would need to alter the language because it refers to the Coralville City Manager. Stutsman asked if they could change the wording and replace City Manager with the Johnson County Finance Committee. R. Sullivan agreed. He said that the Board should ask Chappell to use Coralville’s Buy Here Policy as a template and alter it accordingly. Stutsman asked if they could put a timeline on it. Neuzil asked if there were Board members that could work with Chappell to keep it on track. R. Sullivan and Neuzil volunteered to do that. R. Sullivan said that he would contact Chappell as it would be a policy that would need to go through an informal and formal meeting. Harney agreed and said that would make it fair and equitable. R. Sullivan stated he would put new copies of the proposal in everyone's mailbox when it is completed.
Executive Assistant Mike Sullivan said he had completed a draft of an animal control ordinance. Stutsman asked if it was a vicious or exotic animal ordinance. M. Sullivan replied that it was an overall Johnson County Rural Animal Ordinance for animal protection and control. He stated that rather than having a separate ordinance, it is incorporated into one document. M. Sullivan said that he gathered input during the past six months to a year and is confident that he covered everything the Board discussed within that time period. He stated that included the Solon incident, and the area surrounding the town. M. Sullivan said that it didn't go into the aspect of the Animal Control Agreement because that's a 28E Agreement. He stated that if they wanted to continue doing that they could either incorporate it into the ordinance or leave it out because the ordinance itself is an enforcement tool.
M. Sullivan said that he had put together a work team, but they haven't met yet because he is still waiting for information from Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak. Dvorak was solicited to get some information from Swisher about their animal control ordinance. He said that he has the ordinance now. He stated that Swisher is going to provide their fee schedule to Dvorak. He said that when Swisher utilizes their animal control and their impoundment facilities, it is through the Cedar Valley Humane Society so it is a different structure. He said that Swisher is unique in the fact that they use another municipality's Animal Control and Adoption Center, which is expensive. He said that the extent of the Swisher's ordinance is two pages. He said that Swisher’s ordinance covered the elements that are included in the County’s draft ordinance.
M. Sullivan commented that the Iowa Supreme Court recently ruled that animal control ordinances must be as succinct as possible. He said that the definitions used in the ordinance are crucial so that they don't get caught in the gray zones of animal enforcement.
M. Sullivan said there are processes in the ordinance for when animals are impounded and euthanized. He said there is also a process for when an animal is taken from someone who has violated the ordinance. He said in that case, a public hearing with the Board is held to discuss reclaim and/or costs. Stutsman asked if the ordinance dealt with exotic animals. M. Sullivan said that it does. He stated the proposal addresses dangerous animals that are prohibited and allowed. In connection with federally or state licensed animal facilities, the ordinance will not tell the State or the Federal Government to remove animals because they are in facilities. He said that he cited the Iowa Code wherever applicable.
Harney asked about dangerous animals. He specifically asked if a dog that has already bitten someone or animals that are hereditarily dangerous could be considered dangerous. M. Sullivan read the definition of dangerous animals and said that dangerous animals are “any species of animal that is capable of killing, inflicting serious injury upon, or causing illness or disease among human beings or domestic animals and having a known tendency either in their natural state or in the wild to do so.” He explained that alligators or snakes, which are not held in federally licensed facilities within the County, would be deemed dangerous by virtue of their nature. M. Sullivan commented that the animal does not need to have attacked anyone, it just needs to have the capability of harming someone. Stutsman asked if People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) could read the ordinance to say that every cow in Johnson County has the potential for getting Mad Cow Disease in order to force them from the County. M. Sullivan said there is a section of the ordinance that addresses livestock neglect. The State and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulate livestock in Iowa thus, the County would not have to deal with that situation. He said that the definition of an animal is “any live vertebrate creature, domestic or wild, except human beings and other species, etc., that is kept within the unincorporated area of Johnson County by an owner.” He said that the definition does not include livestock. He said that the big problem for the County is dogs and companion cats. M. Sullivan went on to list many animal species that are considered wild and should not be domesticated. He said he wanted the work team he assembled to address whether the specific identifications of dangerous animals is realistic for Johnson County. He stated that Public Health Director Doug Beardsley and Dvorak, who used to be with Cedar County's Animal Control, are members of his work team.
Harney asked who would be responsible for enforcing the animal control ordinance. M. Sullivan replied that there are two ways that State law allows counties and cities to have their own enforcement. The State language is very broad, but indicates that either local law enforcement or the Department of Public Health can enforce such ordinances. He said that every animal control ordinance that he reviewed put animal control issues under one of the two enforcement types. M. Sullivan said that the Board will need to make a policy decision about how to enforce and monitor compliance with the ordinance and which staff will do so. Stutsman asked if Dvorak could do it through the Planning and Zoning Department. M. Sullivan said yes. He said that the County is not restricted by Iowa law to enforce the ordinance through a specific department. He said they currently contract with Iowa City for all of these circumstances. R. Sullivan said that animal control responsibilities for Iowa City technically belong to the Iowa City Police Department. He said that it makes sense that in an emergency an individual will call 911 if faced with a dangerous animal. He said that the police might immediately have to destroy an animal in these situations. Harney said that often the Iowa City Police Department will show up at the scene and then call Animal Control to handle it, but either way Animal Control has always followed up on it. Stutsman said she was unsure if the County could tell the Sheriff's Department to enforce the ordinance. Harney said if there is an ordinance it gives the Sheriff something to fall back on when they receive a call. If it is a health issue they should call in the Department of Public Health. M. Sullivan said it is important to have a connection with Public Health for the ordinance. State law will supercede the County's ordinance on the health and rabies issues. He said that law enforcement is still covered under the arm of the State. He said that they are able to respond to a call in the County and destroy an animal immediately if needed.
Stutsman said she attended a Spay and Neuter Summit and they discussed an incident in North Liberty. The group said the situation could have been avoided if someone had training on how to deal with sick animals. M. Sullivan agreed and said ideally someone that was trained could have trapped the raccoon and euthanized it in private. Harney said that after the ordinance is drafted he wants to have a work session with the Department of Public Health, Planning and Zoning, and the Sheriff's Department to work out the details. He said the County Attorney's Office could draw up a procedure for the Board to follow. M. Sullivan agreed. He said he'd like to have the work team meet and narrow down a list of things for the Board to consider. He said they will need to decide whether they want to do the licensing themselves or contract with a company that does licensing and get charged a flat fee. He said it will still be a revenue generator for the County. R. Sullivan asked if licensing would be part of the ordinance. M. Sullivan said yes.
Harney said Shueyville wants to adopt an ordinance to fall in line with the County's ordinance. He felt some other communities might do the same. M. Sullivan said the Board has a lot of policy decisions to make before they adopt an animal control or rural animal ordinance. He said that it is a lengthy process that will include several hearings. He stated that Shueyville could adopt Swisher's ordinance in the interim. He said ordinances in counties and cities have the same elements, but stated that City Attorneys prefer ordinance language less specific. They feel that as representatives of their respective cities, they can defend the ordinances’ language in court. M. Sullivan wanted to make it more succinct for the Board to pass, so that if and when it is challenged, they would have the document in front of them that portrayed the intent of the ordinance.
Stutsman asked what the time frame is. M. Sullivan said they could potentially have it passed in August or September of 2008. He said that the County anticipates spending a different amount of time than what cities might because they have different issues to address. He said it will budgeted for and will need to be enforced by a department that will be also be budgeted. Stutsman asked who was on the work team. M. Sullivan replied that Johnson County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek, Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak, Public Health Director Doug Beardsley, and Assistant Attorney II Robert Finlayson are on the work team. Harney asked M. Sullivan if the ordinance would address the dog issues on the Muscatine-Johnson County Line and animal factories. M. Sullivan said yes. He stated that he included releasing, abandonment, sale or disposition of animals on public property, and nuisances. Harney asked about the number of animals that are running wild. M. Sullivan said there is no number, but if they are released the owner may be cited or the animal will be taken. Harney asked what the definition of released is. M. Sullivan said the definition is “no person except the owner of an animal or authorized agent, shall willfully or without permission or authority open any door or gate on any private or public property resulting in the releasing or enticing or enabling such animal to leave such private or public premises.” Harney said that the definition sounded like it was addressing PETA. He asked if the ordinance would controll what a person does on his or her own property, for example if someone has ten or twelve dogs. M. Sullivan said it would not control what a resident does on his or her property as far as the release goes, but it would if the dogs leave the property. M. Sullivan said that cities and counties address those issues through animal neglect. He said that there is a section in the Code of Iowa that deals specifically with animal neglect and states “if an individual impounds or confines any animals excluding any livestock, fails to supply them during their confinement with adequate water, food, exercise, sanitation, space, indoor and outdoor shelter and veterinary care, or if someone tortures, mutilates or kills any animal by any means which causes unjustified pain, distress, or suffering, those individuals are in violation of the law.” M. Sullivan added that there are criminal and civil penalties for violations of this Code section.
Harney said he is still not sure the ordinance would cover issues such as dogs running in packs around the countryside. M. Sullivan said if they wanted to specifically contain that within an ordinance they could. He mentioned that he had not come across any language in any animal control ordinance that covered that specific circumstance. Stutsman asked if there was a provision in the Iowa Code that allowed reimbursement from a dog owner if the dog entered someone else’s property and killed their sheep. M. Sullivan replied that would be remedied as a civil tort. He said that the individual could take the dog owner to court and sue them for damages. R. Sullivan said the issue Harney is referring to is what happens if the owners claim that they are not in fact the owners of the animals. He commented that this policy needs to address that. Harney said it might not be that they aren't claiming ownership, but the dogs are simply on a vacant farm for security. Stutsman said on the other hand, if the animals are not being fed, they could get in trouble for neglect. M. Sullivan said animal neglect in rural areas is an issue.
M. Sullivan said the County could also develop a spading and neutering program with licensing. He said that would not be part of the ordinance, but said that the Board could do that administratively or formally by resolution. That would give the Board the ability to change it because once it is put into an ordinance it is tough to pull back out. R. Sullivan asked how the County would go about supporting a program like that. Stutsman said that the City of Iowa City had a one-day clinic where people made appointments and brought their animals in for a free-will offering. They did need to pay if their animals got shots. The second year was more successful than the first, but it was strictly just for domestic animals. Stutsman commented that Regency has an issue with feral cats running around. She asked if the County would want to put in the money to have someone go down and trap the cats and neuter them. Harney said that was private property with rentals and the tenants needed to be the ones to take care of that. Stutsman agreed, but stated that they are paying taxes too. M. Sullivan said if it was in a rural area of the County an animal control ordinance would regulate that and other types of situations. Stutsman said they could perform the service and then bill the tenants. M. Sullivan said if they did that, they would need the staff with the ability to enforce it, a vehicle, and equipment. R. Sullivan said that no one claims ownership of those types of animals because they don’t want to pay for them. Harney said at what point does the large number of animals become a kennel and how do you put restrictions on them. Stutsman said she felt the County needed to do something with spaying and neutering. M. Sullivan said they could support and maybe expand the one-day service in the City of Iowa City. Stutsman said the problem will be finding vets to donate their time. If they are willing to do this service, they should be paid, she said. R. Sullivan asked if they should have guidelines outlining who might receive these services for free. Harney said that Iowa City makes pet owners pay for neutering when they adopt a pet from the shelter.
R. Sullivan asked how much the contract that they have with Iowa City amounts to. M. Sullivan said the last bill was for six months and it was $107,000 for which they had $110,000 budgeted. Harney asked if that was paid yet because they said it could be negotiable. M. Sullivan replied that the bill had not been paid and said that he had contacted them about that. He said that he did not want to negotiate anything since they have a valid 28E Agreement indicating that it is a per diem contract. He did not want to put the County in the position of negotiating anything down when the contract specifically says something else thus making the County in breech of the contract. M. Sullivan said that Iowa City only charges for the rural animals, not ones found in any towns. He noted that the last bill stated that a significant number of animals there have not been adopted for over 300+ days. The County is charged per day for shelter services. He said that they only euthanize an animal if it's very sick. Harney said Coralville has a side contract with a licensed facility that after a certain number of days, the animals are euthanized. R. Sullivan said the Board needs to follow up on that. Stutsman agreed and felt that is reasonable after a certain amount of time. Harney thought that they held the animals for 60-90 days before euthanizing them. R. Sullivan said that made a lot more sense than holding them for a year. M. Sullivan said that Iowa City has difficulty adopting their animals out with the pet stores in town. He said that people may believe pet stores have healthier animals that have had all of their shots, but that is not necessarily true. R. Sullivan asked M. Sullivan to call Coralville and find out what facility they utilize because the County cannot continue to maintain $250,000 a year for this service. Neuzil said that this amount is high even after they dropped the small towns from the service. M. Sullivan said that had started that on July 1, 2007.
Stutsman asked M. Sullivan if a committee is reviewing the drafted ordinance. M. Sullivan replied yes. He said if they are going to scale back on the recommendation he could bring the ordinance in draft form to the Board and they could have a work session with the work team. R. Sullivan agreed. M. Sullivan said he could work with Budget Coordinator Rich Claiborne to put some costs together if they take it on with a certain staff configuration, vehicles, wages and benefits versus what they currently pay in the 28E Contract with Iowa City. M. Sullivan said that he did not think there would be any other interested parties in Johnson County that would take something like this on. It would be quite a task for a vet to take on a Rural Animal Control Program for the entire County. Neuzil said they might not understand how much they would be paid. R. Sullivan said that maybe they could network with a number of vets to spread the workload or split it up regionally. M. Sullivan said he could be contacted any time about this. He thought that he would have something worked out by August 2008 for the Board and shoot for January 1, 2009 for enactment. They would have plenty of time for the required three public hearings on this topic.
M. Sullivan said they have the Department Head Meeting this afternoon and there is a Board meeting Thursday March 20, 2008. R. Sullivan said that the Joint Cities Meeting was cancelled and asked if it was rescheduled. The Johnson-Linn Leadership Group Meeting is rescheduled for 5:00 p.m. on May 22, 2008. April 2, 2008 is the regularly scheduled joint meeting between the Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee and the Board. The Township Trustees meeting has been looked into, but Neuzil has not been able to make the appropriate contact to find when it is scheduled. A future Key Issues Meeting will need to have an agenda item that includes what was found at the Springsted Meeting with Johnson County Auditor Tom Slockett and County Treasurer Tom Kriz. This is in regards to the issue of funding the Joint Communications Center out of Debt Services.
Stutsman asked if the Board would be interested in having an action plan, which would include a time set aside during meetings so that the Board can discuss what needs to be done. Neuzil pointed out that item five under strategic planning, the objective "how to keep on top of things," is similar. R. Sullivan stated that M. Sullivan could fill out a form during the meetings and then read it back at the end of the meeting. Neuzil stated it would be good if they could get a general idea of how strategically they could keep up with things. Stutsman said that they could do things such as clarifying the role of the Board with the Conservation Building. R. Sullivan said it would be a good way to make sure people were doing what they said they would. M. Sullivan said that he would create a form. M. Sullivan thanked the Board for handling everything well while he was absent. Neuzil responded that they should take advantage of the item on the agenda and list off the items for that particular week.
R. Sullivan said they needed to discuss the upcoming Johnson County Strategic Plan. He said one thing that is a sub issue involved the FY10 Budget Process. He said there are a number of different ways to approach any given budget year. He said one issue is figuring out how to get the numerous projects finished. He said that there is a potential for more downturn in the economy. He stated that next year they should consider starting with an increase of 4% and build the budget on that. Stutsman said she discussed the budget process with other supervisors at the meeting for the Iowa State Association of Counties (ISAC). She said that one supervisor from another county stated that they meet during early fall with their Assessors, Auditor, Board members, budget individuals, and Treasurer. That way they pull in everyone's knowledge of the County at that time. She said that based on the meeting, they then report to the Department Heads. She said there is a Finance Committee that could probably recommend where the Budget would be. Stutsman said that doing that would better communication with the Auditor and assist in figuring out which information would be needed before getting started. R. Sullivan asked if the Finance Committee would make recommendations to the Board. Stutsman replied that they would. M. Sullivan stated that they would need to figure out a way to get the rollback factors and numbers back sooner. Stutsman said that the residential rollbacks came out last year in the Iowa Colleague Magazine in August 2007. R. Sullivan said that they could use these figures if they pay close enough attention to them because they come from the State. M. Sullivan said that they could plug in the figures to have earlier meetings and then make early decisions based on the State's figures.
Neuzil said that there has only been one year in which the budget was really tight. M. Sullivan stated that one year the unions seceded to the back at half percent or one percent. Stutsman said that the supervisors she spoke with said that they did that where they could handle a three point five increase and then give that information to the Collective Bargaining Unit before they even start their bargaining. M. Sullivan said that Claiborne had all the information to do the same thing as soon as they would want it done. R. Sullivan said that the Board had had some healthy debates about getting the projects done and figuring out the bottom line. He said that since they had already gone down that path it'll make things easier for the next year. Claiborne said that Johnson County uses a strategic budgeting method. He said that when people use a line item budgeting method, it is like saying they can handle 5%. He said doing this allows Department Heads to know what percentages they're working with. He said that a good example is the Ambulance having a strategic budgeting process based on goals. Certain items were wiped out like tires and oil to trim the "fat" away based on goals for the year. Neuzil said that they would also get into 5% for the Sheriff's budget. Stutsman said Human Resources would be involved. Neuzil said he was thinking more along the line of total tax increases. Stutsman said that they would not want more than a 5% increase next year. R. Sullivan said that if anyone showed up and theirs was 7.5% they would have to figure out why. Stutsman said all the departments budgeted what they needed.
M. Sullivan said the Board has made it very clear to the Department Heads to use their strategic goals. When they put their budgets together it justifies to the Board why they are asking for an increase in any expenditures. He said in reviewing the budget over the last few years, the Board's direction to give them strategic goals has also enhanced the County's revenues that have fee structures because Department Heads know that there is incentive to enhance their revenues by sticking to their strategic plan. Claiborne said in 2008 they were trying to get as much out of the General Basic Levy as they could for the down payment on the Health and Human Services Building. He said that he called all of the Department Heads after an initial budget Board meeting and told them that he noticed some that were x amount under and asked if they would feel comfortable adjusting their revenues to relieve the subsidy. Claiborne said that about six Department Heads came back not over budgeted, but came in on the heavy side where revenues were beyond what they spent. R. Sullivan said that the Treasurer's Office and the Ambulance Department were both very conservative with their budgeting. M. Sullivan said that was a lesson for Department Heads to show that it is important to target revenues as well as expenditures. This allows the Board to be more comfortable with decisions they make about taxes and knowing that they are not just squeezing things on the expenditure side and letting the revenue side go. When they put their budget together, they need to put the whole budget together for the Board. M. Sullivan said obviously they want departments to budget in a way to protect themselves with a little cushion, but some were giving too much cushion.
Neuzil asked if this is going to be something the Finance Group would want to meet to discuss. Harney said they need to consider what's out there, but there are many unknowns since they do not know what the rollbacks or the inflation rate will be. He said with line items they can always add in and it is never questioned, but they don't know what the legislature is going to do with MH/DD or what money amounts they'll have. Harney said he didn’t want to give the Department Heads a percentage amount yet. Meyers said the Board needs to discuss it amongst themselves, but they cannot put out the numbers before they know them. M. Sullivan said they could say that the Board will not go over a certain percentage no matter what the situation looks like. R. Sullivan said the County has the advantage of having two-year contracts in five out of six departments. They do know what those amounts would be for FY10. Stutsman said that would be a valuable piece of information that they could plug in early on. Neuzil said Des Moines County has five-year contracts. M. Sullivan said when things were smooth with the consumer price index and the rate of inflation, it was not uncommon to have unions come in and say 6% was the minimum. Harney said there have been big changes in health care costs. M. Sullivan said that has been particularly true here in the past three years. Stutsman said the Assessor's Office has never been on the Finance Committee. M. Sullivan said next year in FY09 they are going to do their assessments and they need to get a pretty good handle on what the Board can expect. R. Sullivan said the Finance Committee should meet by September or earlier and after their meeting the Board could have a discussion. Stutsman said that in the past, the Board sent out a letter to the Department Heads when they were just starting to put their budgets together to give them an idea if they could expect any increases or not. M. Sullivan said his predecessor was able to put money into things like oil, liquids, fluids, and tires. He said that he could then live with no increase because he could dig in to that part of it to make things come together. Stutsman stated that she believed that was where a budget coordinator should be following those things. Stutsman said that a fraction was used and it wouldn't fly two years in a row.
R. Sullivan stated that they did not have anything else specifically listed on the agenda, but they should have had an "other." R. Sullivan thought that other strategic planning could be held off until the next meeting. Neuzil thought it would be good to get an update from the five issues they teamed up with in April. Stutsman asked if they could set out a notice a week or two ahead to be sure they will remember it. Neuzil stated that April 16, 2008 is the next Strategic Planning Meeting. R. Sullivan asked if they are back on Wednesdays. Neuzil stated that April 9, 2008, was the next Key Issues Meeting and April 16, 2008 was the next Strategic Planning Meeting. Neuzil said that the second Wednesdays of the month are Key Issues at 8:30 a.m. and the third Wednesdays of the month are Strategic Planning at 9:00 a.m.
Adjourned at 10:22 a.m.
______________________________________________________________________
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By:
On the _______ day of _____________________, 2008
By John Deeth, Recording Secretary
Sent to the Board of Supervisors on May 28, 2008 at 12:10 p.m.