MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
MAY 1, 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Eastern Iowa Tourism Association Board Treasurer Fran Jensen: Request for a $500.00 Contribution from Johnson County to Become a Member of the Four Tourism Bureaus........................................... 1
Human Resources Administrator Lora Shramek: Proposed Financial Wellness Benefit for County Employees....................................................................................................................................... 2
Executive Assistant Mike Sullivan: Resolution Increasing the Court-Appointed Attorney Rate for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Commitment Cases............................................................................. 3
Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak: Road Performance Standards.................. 4
Board of Supervisors: Consideration of Exemption Permit for Garbage Hauling and Pleasant Valley Nursery on Embargoed Roads........................................................................................................... 8
Board of Supervisors: Support Services for the Proposed Joint Emergency Communication Center 19
Reports and Inquiries from the Board of Supervisors......................................................... 22
Chairperson Sullivan called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 9:21 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Larry Meyers, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
Iowa Children's Museum Director of Marketing Development and Eastern Iowa Tourism Association (EITA) Board Treasurer Fran Jensen noted that EITA provides many benefits to the community and the Children's Museum. Jensen said that all counties in Iowa are asked to become members of the Four Area Tourism Bureau and provide a $500 yearly contribution. She said Johnson County has not been a member of the Bureau for the past four years. Jensen noted that the County is the only county in Eastern Iowa and perhaps the only county in Iowa that is not EITA member. Jensen said that the policies for EITA members located in non-member counties are being changed and that will have a negative impact on eastern Iowa's tourism opportunities and on organizations in Johnson County.
Jensen said that if the county is not an EITA member, organizations within the county will be unable to host EITA meetings or the Iowa Tourism Conference. In addition, she noted that nonprofits will not be able to apply for grants or scholarships received from the Iowa Department of Economic Development Regional Grant Program. She noted that in 2007, the Iowa Children's Museum received a $12,000 grant for advertising in the Iowa City/Coralville Convention and Visitors Guide. Another negative impact is that non-member counties are be unable to apply for up to $10,000 in out-of-state marketing grants. She said non-member counties are not listed in the Visitors Guide, on the map, or on the EITA website. She added that visitors would be unable to request travel information about Johnson County. Jensen said that currently the County is on the website. Jensen noted that EITA receives many requests about the Children's Museum. Jensen formally asked the Board to support tourism in the county and contribute the $500 in membership dues to EITA as all other Iowa counties have done. She said that there are members of the community that are currently utilizing the funds and benefits available through EITA to promote the respective non-profit organizations, businesses, and the community. Jensen reiterated that the organizations would lose the benefits if the County is not in good standing.
Neuzil said that in 2002 or 2003 the Iowa Legislature had significantly reduced the funds for County Governments. He said that the Board had to find ways to reduce its spending. Neuzil said that the Board decided to cut their EITA contribution. He said that there was no communication between the Board and EITA prior to this meeting and the County has never received any updates. Stutsman added that the Convention and Visitors Bureau is doing a great job on promoting the county. She said that she agreed with dropping the membership because she did not see the benefit of joining EITA. She noted that the rules have since changed and in order for local non-profits to access some funds the County needs to be a member of EITA. Stutsman said that $500 is a good leverage for many more dollars that will come into the county.
Harney said the kids in the community love the Iowa Children's Museum. He said that he supports putting the item on the formal agenda. Stutsman said the Board would like to hear about benefits and dollars that come back to the community from EITA. Jensen said they would be in contact with the Board and provide yearly updates. EITA Executive Director Carrie Koelker said that once the County becomes a member, the Board will appoint a director and an alternate to provide updates. She said she would also come and provide updates as often as the Board wishes. Stutsman asked who appoints the director and the alternate. Koelker explained that the Board nominates the two appointees.
Human Resources Administrator Lora Shramek said that Johnson County supports employee physical and mental wellness with up to five paid hours annually for participation in the County Wellness Program. Shramek said she also believes that financial wellness is important. She said that historically when employees have participated in financial-related meetings such as deferred compensation, they have had to do so on their own time. Shramek said that in today’s economy it is more vital than ever that employees are informed about financial decisions affecting their future as well as their families. She noted that some employees do not fully understand financial-related benefits and therefore don’t take advantage of what is available. Shramek said that employees receive a full-benefit orientation when they are hired and written communication thereafter.
Shramek said that employees in Information Services recently requested that their department head arrange for speakers to come in and share information regarding Iowa Public Employees Retirement System (IPERS) and deferred compensation. Information Services Director Jean Schultz said they had representatives from both IPERS and Nationwide Compensation attending the meeting. She noted that the employees were very excited about the presentations. Shrameck said the response was very positive and that she felt it helped the employees to form a positive view of the County and the benefits provided to employees. Schultz said that by mistake the sessions were held on County time. She reiterated that the employee response was very positive and said they seemed very appreciative that the session was held.
Shramek said Johnson County has always been very progressive when it comes to employee benefits. She said Linn County offers fewer benefits. Shramek noted that Black Hawk County holds a yearly benefit fair and employees are invited to participate on their own time. She added that Scott County also holds a benefit fair and the employees use paid time to attend. Shramek said Dubuque County has yearly open enrollment and several insurance representatives come on site. She noted that Dubuque County employees participate in the fair during regular paid time.
Shramek recommended that the Board adopt a new financial wellness benefit of up to three paid hours annually for employees. She said she does not think that County employees would use the full three hours every year. Neuzil asked how long the meetings usually last. Schultz said the meetings are usually about half an hour long. Neuzil asked if the benefit would be awarded to all employees including elected officials. Shramek stated that it is her recommendation that the benefit is made part of the Employee Handbook benefits for all County employees. She said that Johnson County Treasurer Tom Kriz is in favor of the proposed benefit.
Stutsman said she was supportive of the benefit. She noted that because of the current economy it is more important than ever that people have information on how to manage their accounts. R. Sullivan said the proposed benefit might ease the workload for Human Resources. Shramek said IPERS is a very complicated benefit and there are many questions that Human Resources cannot answer. Stutsman asked if the benefit would be voluntary. Shramek confirmed. The Board agreed to put the proposed benefit on next week's formal agenda.
Executive Assistant Mike Sullivan said that recently many people have raised questions about what the correct rate is for Court-Appointed Attorneys working on mental health and substance abuse commitment cases. The County currently pays $50 per hour. M. Sullivan said he has discussed the issue with the Auditor's Office, MH/DD, and the County Attorney's Office. M. Sullivan said he has crafted a resolution that lays out the current rate and code sections pertinent for hourly rate fees for court appointed attorneys. He said that his recommendation is that the hourly rate be increased from $50 to not more than $60 effective on July 1, 2008.
R. Sullivan said it is his understanding that the State of Iowa changed the hourly rate from $50 to $60. Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell said that is not correct. Chappell said that the change was just for the State rates. He explained that the State controls the rate for court-appointed criminal cases and juvenile civil commitment cases and does not set the rates for adult civil commitment and substance abuse commitment cases. He noted that those rates are decided by the Iowa Code in sections 229.8.1 and 125.78.2. Chappell said that the State decided to do a $5 increase in rates one year and $10 the next year. He said that a lawyer working on a felony defense case can make $70 per hour. Chappell said that the increase to $60 per hour is reasonable. He noted that passing a resolution would provide more clarity. Meyers asked if the Board is reimbursed. Chappell said that he does not think that there would be any reimbursement. Stutsman asked if the increase would come out of the MH/DD budget. M. Sullivan confirmed. R. Sullivan asked if the substance abuse cases are included. M. Sullivan said that most substance abuse funds come out of the MH/DD budget and the rest comes out of the County's substance abuse budget.
R. Sullivan said that some bills have been submitted to the Auditor's Office at a $60 per hour rate. He noted that the Auditor's Office has not paid those because they do not have the authority to pay a rate of more than $50 per hour as decided by the Board. He asked if the County should request that the bills submitted at a rate of $60 per hour be resubmitted at the rate of $50 per hour. Chappell said that the Board could ask those who submitted the bill at a $60 rate to resubmit their bills at $50 per hour, or the Board can choose to approve the bills submitted at $60 per hour. Chappell said he is concerned about fairness because there are many people that billed the County at the proper rate of $50 per hour.
Stutsman said that the Board should make it clear that the claims submitted on or after July 1, 2008 will be paid at the rate of $60 per hour. She said it makes her nervous to tell people to resubmit their claims. R. Sullivan said currently the bills aren't getting paid until they are resubmitted at the lower rate. M. Sullivan said the Auditor's Office does not have the authority to adjust incoming claims because it is a ministerial process. Neuzil said that the Auditor's Office should ask individuals to resubmit the bills at the $50 per hour rate for services prior to July 1, 2008. He added that any new work beyond July 1, 2008 should be billed at $60 per hour. The Board agreed to move the item to next week's formal agenda.
Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak said that in February 2008 the Board and Planning and Zoning conducted a work session in regards to Road Performance Standards (RPS). Dvorak said that no consensus could be reached during the work session or during the Planning and Zoning Committee Meetings. Dvorak said that his recommendation is to increase the threshold to 2,000 vehicle trips per day on seal coated roads. Dvorak said they drafted an ordinance amendment that increases the number of vehicle trips per day from 1,000 to 2,000. He said the amendment does not include zoned land, which allows anyone living on one of the roads in a growth area to attempt to rezone. Dvorak said through the years, after the implementation of RPS, the County has struggled with trying to improve the roads. He said that when the RPS were adopted the County planned to make road improvements using the 5-Year Road Plan and slow development on the seal-coated roads, but were unable to do that. He noted that there is a lot of pressure to allow for more development. He said the consensus is to keep the RPS.
Harney said he does not understand the second paragraph of the drafted ordinance where it describes increasing the threshold by 50%. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator R.J. Moore said that they wanted the County Engineer to be able to analyze the roads and determine if there are any horizontal or vertical problems that would impede allowing more traffic. Moore said that County Engineer Greg Parker reviews all applications for development and if there are any issues with the road Parker can recommend that the County not allow development. Neuzil said it would be good to know which roads have horizontal and vertical issues. Neuzil said that he agrees with Harney that there is some confusion regarding how much authority is given to Parker. He said that additional clarification is needed.
Chappell noted that the provision in question is an existing provision and that to his knowledge it has never been utilized. Moore agreed. Stutsman said that the ordinance lays out very clearly when the County should upgrade or improve a road. She said it is an ordinance and therefore it is law. Stutsman said that the Board does not upgrade the roads, as set up in the ordinance, and asked why the ordinance is in place if it isn't being followed. She said that sooner or later residents will complain that the Board does not follow the ordinance.
Neuzil said that by increasing the threshold the County will be able to infill areas zoned residential. He said he has some concern about rezoning new property, but he thinks the Board will address that in the upcoming Land Use Plan. Neuzil said he has been against the RPS because there are chip seal roads with daily traffic counts of 2,800 or 2,900 and the Board does nothing about that. He said it is a good effort to try to infill areas before rezoning new properties. He noted that the amendment will be a mechanism to move the process forward. Dvorak said that is why the recommendation is to allow for growth in some areas.
Meyers said he is a believer in infill but noted that he doesn't think infill is an issue for all the roads. Recalling the February 2008 Board Meeting, he said that the Board needs to change the standards on all of the roads or none of them. R. Sullivan said that one thing the Board can do is determine growth areas. Harney said the issue is if someone has a zoned property in a non-growth location and is denied the ability to build there. He noted that infringes on the rights of property owners. Meyers said that argument came up with Stewart Road, which is practically fully developed except for a few straggler lots. He said that is a situation where infill makes sense, but it was made clear in February that the Board can not just pick Stewart Road. M. Sullivan said the Board cannot arbitrarily pick Stewart Road, but they can pick roads that have certain characteristics. He said if the criterion is defined in the ordinance, it will be uniformly applied to the roads that meet the standards.
Neuzil said the Board is talking about increasing the number of daily traffic count by an additional 1,000 vehicles. Neuzil said it is a step in the right direction because the Board hasn't figured out how to fix the chip seal surfaces. He said that for the next five to seven years the amendment would give some flexibility to those that bought property zoned residential with the plan to upgrade and develop it. Neuzil reiterated that the amendment is a step in the right direction and he will support it. Meyers said that his opinion on the matter is nearly the opposite of Neuzil’s. He said that he would entertain the idea of increasing the threshold by increments. Meyers said doubling the threshold will be compounding issues with the beat-up roads. Neuzil said some of the chip seal roads are two feet thick and adding up to 2,000 vehicles will not have a significant impact on the surface. Meyers said he is unsure how Sandy Beach Road ended up having 2,800 vehicles per day.
Stutsman said that part of the reason the Board adopted the RPS was to manage growth in unincorporated areas and to make sure the infrastructure keeps up with the growth. She said there were no zoning guidelines and putting the ordinance in place managed growth so the Board could say they would not rezone any land near the road until the road itself was upgraded. Stutsman reiterated that the RPS have served the purpose of managing growth in the county and making sure infrastructure keeps up with the growth. She said for those reasons, she is not in favor of throwing the RPS out. She said that the Board did not follow the RPS when they had the lower threshold limit in place and they might as well increase the threshold to 2,000 vehicles per day. Meyers agreed that the RPS are a managing tool, but said he feels that doubling the threshold could create an unmanageable situation.
R. Sullivan said that Sandy Beach Road is clearly an issue and the Board has to decide how to handle it. Stutsman said the previous County Engineer argued against upgrading Sandy Beach Road because it was often under water. Dvorak said the main part of Sandy Beach Road is high and dry. He said that the Board was approached by the schools years ago to make improvements to Sandy Beach Road and 140th Street. He said 140th Street is often under water. Harney said the Board receives an awful lot of requests to upgrade and raise 140th Street. He said Sandy Beach Road needs attention but there are also some people who don't want the upgrades because they think the road is in pretty good shape. Harney said that there is a good sized subdivision on Stewart Road that property owners want to develop, but cannot. He said there is room for growth, but property owners cannot finish developing their property because of the RPS. Stutsman said there is a potential for 54 maximum build-able lots on Stewart Road if the Board agrees to increase the threshold to 2,000. Meyers said there is a tendency for people to expect a higher level of services than the County can actually provide.
Moore said Dvorak felt obligated by the Board to make a recommendation to raise the threshold to 2,000 because they do not want to get rid of the RPS. He said the RPS are a great management tool that show that the County has standards and fair criteria that everybody is subject to. Moore said that if the Board decides to raise the standards they should make it clear that it applies only to the growth areas. Meyers said every Board meeting held to decide the fate of a road will erupt in controversy because there are no road design standards that people will buy into. Moore said that the Board should come to a solution that would allow for the improvement of the roads and would satisfy most residents. Meyers said he hopes the Board can reach a solution agreeable to everyone and noted that by raising the threshold they are setting themselves up for many years of confrontation.
Neuzil asked if Planning and Zoning is getting a lot of requests for growth and development off the roads that could see a change in threshold. Moore said he had received a request the previous week for two 50-acre subdivisions with large lots. He said the developer returned and wants to turn the large lots into clustered subdivisions, but can't do that because of the RPS. Moore said that Planning and Zoning used to get a lot of inquiries, but since the RPS have been in place the number of inquiries has decreased.
Chappell said the Board does not have to vote on the issue at this time, but should give some direction to Planning and Zoning if there is enough support to move the issue forward. Chappell explained that moving the issue forward doesn't mean the Board is committing to anything; but that the Board is putting the issue through the public process. He said Dvorak and Moore need to know if they should present the recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Neuzil said he is OK with moving forward with the proposal. Stutsman agreed. Harney said he is willing to move the issue forward. He said the Board can repair or improve any road provided that they use just County dollars. Harney said that if any State and Federal dollars are used the Board needs to adhere to the State or National standards. Stutsman said she agrees with Dvorak that adopting the higher standards gives the Board some breathing room. She said that according to the ordinance there are some roads that should be upgraded and the Board isn't doing that. Neuzil said that increasing the threshold would help determine which roads need to be looked at first.
Moore said Planning and Zoning could have the amendment in front of the Planning and Zoning Commission in June 2008. Moore said that they don't want to raise the threshold on gravel roads because the roads are in bad shape. He said a study done by the University of Iowa Graduate Program in Urban and Regional Planning years ago, showed that gravel roads start to break down at around 2,000 vehicle trips per day. Neuzil said he is OK with not increasing the threshold on gravel roads. Harney asked if there was any recommendation that if the threshold was raised the speed limit should be decreased. Moore and Dvorak said no. Meyers said the enforcement issue came up in the Swisher annexation proposal. He said there is an enforcement issue everywhere there is a speed limit because there are only two to four patrol deputies on roads at any time. Meyers said if a speed limit sign is placed it is the individual's choice to break the law or not. He said if they do break the law and are caught they will receive a ticket. Harney agreed.
Meyers reiterated that he is completely against raising the threshold. Parker said when the RPS were set the threshold was set as a result of a study done by the Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG). He said the roads were not designed to handle those amounts of traffic and that brought in maintenance activities, increased road traffic, and an exponentially increased risk for accidents. R. Sullivan said that a lot of the Planning and Zoning issues are directly related to the road issues. R. Sullivan reiterated that the Board is giving Dvorak direction to move the proposal forward to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Recessed at 10:22 a.m.; reconvened at 10:30 a.m.
Parker said that annually he had been bringing a resolution to the Board requesting approval to embargo specific roads throughout the County that would be destroyed by a bad spring or fall. Parker said that there are less than 60 roads in the county available for the embargo. He noted that the weight limit for embargoed roads is eight tons. Parker said that they can not embargo a road for more than 90 days at a time. He noted that the first embargo for 2008 was placed on March 10, 2008 on Sand Road. Parker said that they embargoed 50 roads and there are 10 other roads on the list. He explained that they are keeping an embargo until the roads are better.
Parker mentioned that Linn County has similar issues and have embargoed some roads as well. Harney asked what the current load level is. Parker responded that the weight limit depends on how the road was built. R. Sullivan said that in addition to the load limits, there are some other exemptions for embargoed roads. R. Sullivan stated that agricultural law is exempted by virtue of State law and the County has no option to change that. R. Sullivan said that agricultural activities can happen regardless of the weight. Parker concurred and said the Code is very specific on that. He said that anything that needed to get to market or to feed livestock is exempt. Parker said that emergency services and home heating are also exempted. Parker pointed out that carrying home heating fuel requires a permit. He said that they try to pick the route for the carriers and ask them to carry smaller loads to minimize the damage.
Harney asked if heavy agricultural equipment required a permit before using the roads. Parker stated that they issue permits at no cost to prevent any legal issues. Stutsman said that she was unclear what road damage is. Parker explained that a seal coat is not a paved road and over the years rock and oil accumulate. Parker said that allowing heavier loads to drive on seal coated roads causes flooding, rutting, and erosion. Meyers said the repair of the seal coated roads is more complicated than that of gravel roads. Parker confirmed. Meyers said that if not properly maintained a chip seal road could revert back to gravel. Parker said that in the Code there is a section that references the Board’s ability to offer exemptions for embargoed roads. Parker stated that he just wanted to let the Board know that they can do that if they choose to. Parker said that the Board had done so in 2001 and 2002. Neuzil said that they had given garbage haulers the authority to use the roads.
Parker pointed out that when the problem goes away, the issue goes away. He said that when the embargo is lifted, the other issues will go away until the next time they embargo the road. He said that the 90-day limit was set because there were some engineers throughout the State that wanted to embargo roads because they didn’t want heavy vehicles on them. M. Sullivan clarified that the roads can be embargoed for a total of 90 days per year. R. Sullivan asked what happens if people don’t follow the embargoes. Johnson County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek said that they write citations for failure to maintain the traffic control devices. He said that in the past there was another method used in which the deputies filled out a form and sent it to the County Attorney’s Office and it was handled civilly. Pulkrabek said that currently the driver receives a citation or a warning. Iowa Department of Transportation Motor Vehicle Enforcement District 1 Captain Kevin Steele said they can give a warning, write a citation for failure to obey a posted sign, or even weigh the vehicle. He said that they write citations for those over the weight limit on embargoed roads. He explained that the more the vehicle weighs over the permitted eight tons the more expensive the fine. Meyers asked if there is a tracking method to record all embargo violations for a specific person or company. Steele replied that article 321.256 of the Code refers to the posted signs.
Neuzil asked if a ticket receiver could go to jail. Steele responded that was a possibility with any ticket given. Steele said that if they continue to write citations, at some point the people/companies would choose either to comply or pay the fee. He noted that some companies are willing to break the law and pay the fine for doing so therefore, further enforcement options need to be pursued. Chappell said by signing a ticket you are promising to either pay a fine or show up in court.
Meyers asked if people can amass tickets. Steele said that three speeding convictions in a 12 month period will result in revoking the driver’s license. Pulkrabek said that the exception is the Right to Speed Law in Iowa, in which an individual could get five violations if two of those were 10 mph over or less in 35 to 55 mph zones. He added that failure to obey a posted sign three times in a 12 month period equates suspension. Stutsman wanted to know how much the citations cost. Steele said the cost for disobeying a traffic sign is $96. He said that embargo violation tickets are based on the amount of weight carried over the permitted limit and can cost up to $1,000. Stutsman asked where the citation money goes and asked if it comes back to the County for road repair. Steele said he believed that weight tickets and embargo weight tickets go to the Road Tax Fund. Pulkrabek said that general traffic citations go to the General Fund. He noted that the County has a Five-Dollar County Ordinance.
N&N Sanitation Owner Nick Yutzy said he knows that the Board had a lot of concerns because the Board has received several emails from N&N customers. He said he wants to deal with the issues and get something worked out. Yutzy said that for the last 35 to 40 years Code section 321.471 required counties to exempt various types of agricultural vehicles. In 1973, the State Legislature changed the Code section , to require counties to exempt farm tractors. In 1977, the State Legislature revisited the Code again, and at that time gave counties permission to exempt refuse trucks. Yutzy said that in the last 25 to 30 years, the County population has grown in the rural areas. He said that the right way to dispose of trash is not to burn it or throw it in ravines, but to get rid of it in an environmentally sound way, taking it to the landfill or recycling centers. Yutzy said that N&N uses automated trucks to properly dispose the trash. Yutzy asked what the reasons are that are used to determine if a road needs to be embargoed.
Parker said the embargo is not determined by the number of residents that complain that that there are problems on a certain road. He noted that the number of complaints are an indicator that the staff needs to go out and take a look at the surface to see if in fact the road is coming apart. Parker said that looking at the road condition the staff determines if they need to embargo the road and if they would continue to allow heavy loads to drive on that surface. Yutzy asked if the process was based on professional judgment or on the number of complaints received. Parker responded that the decision is based on staff recommendation. Yutzy said that there are 56 roads in the county that could get embargoed. He said that 2008 has been the worst year in 30 years and asked why the County didn't embargo all the roads. Yutzy said that Lindner Road has been embargoed every year and 2008 is the first year that it hasn’t embargoed.
Parker said they do not embargo roads that do not need to be embargoed. R. Sullivan statedd that staff looked at all 56 roads and decided that 42 of them needed to be embargoed. Parker said they don't just look at the roads one day. He said that his staff monitors the roads over a period of time. Yutzy asked if the roads in wetter areas stay embargoed longer than those in higher areas. Parker said if the surface of a road is coming apart the only available protection for the surface would be to put an embargo on it according to the resolutions passed by the Board. He continued that the County lifts the embargo on every road separately. Parker said they are monitoring the roads on a daily basis. He noted that they do not want to keep the roads embargoed longer than they have to.
Simmons Perrine Law Firm Attorney and Counsel for N&N Timothy Van Pelt added that he thought there was a distinction between the size of vehicle and the number of trips. He pointed out that coal semis loaded with 60,000 to 80,000 pounds are taking 15 to 20 trips day. He said the frequency of refuse trucks versus that of semis is quite different. Van Pelt said that Sandy Beach Road is in bad shape because it has a daily traffic of 2,800 vehicles and not simply because of heavy vehicles. Parker confirmed that there are companies that use the road just once a week but said that the County has more than one company and the trips add up. He said that not one company is doing the damage, but a multitude of different vehicles. Van Pelt said that everyone wants good roads and it is at the discretion of the Board to decide which exemptions are necessary and which are not.
Public Health Director Doug Beardsley said that keeping refuse on site becomes a public health problem. He said the alternative to picking up the refuse is burning it. He noted that he is against burning the trash because it raises air quality issues and is a public health issue. Yutzy said that he thought the Board encourages burning. R. Sullivan didn't think the Board had ever encouraged burning. Meyers said the Board is not suggesting that that everyone burn their waste. Yutzy said he encourages his customers to hold their garbage until it can be picked up. R Sullivan pointed out that residents could haul their garbage to the landfill. Stutsman added that the County pays for the landfill. Meyers said county residents are allowed 2,000 pounds of free garbage disposal at the landfill per year. R. Sullivan said he thinks it is safe to say that all five members of the Board do not encourage people to burn trash.
Yutzy said that another concern that came from the Board is that fixing bad roads costs millions of dollars. Yutzy asked if this amount was being used as a scare tactic. R. Sullivan asked for an estimated cost of replacing a mile of chip seal. Parker said that Secondary Roads bases their budget on an average year as determined by history and past expenses. Parker said that the cost of construction increases 20% to 30% annually. Parker said that they are using the same quantity of materials as six years ago, but the cost has doubled from $250,000 to $500,000. He said the winter of 2008 has been one of the worst winters in history and he is over-budgeted on overtime, fuel, snow removal activities, and many other services.
Meyers said that the Sugar Bottom Road section that was less than a mile was estimated to cost around $200,000 to $250,000. Parker agreed and said that that cost estimate included purchasing right of way, grading, and rock. He said that the cost is $10 to $15 per linear foot just for the seal coat, which doesn't include repair, patching, or readdressing areas where the road has failed. Parker said that allowing additional damage to occur increases the cost of road repair. Yutzy said that it is the determination of the Board that a truck is doing more damage on the road than one tractor pulling 30,000 gallons of sludge. Harney said that repetitious traffic and not farmers create damage to roads.
Van Pelt said that Yutzy is a rural hauler and the embargoes cause a much bigger economic hardship on him than on companies like Waste Management that could absorb the cost because they are a nation-wide company hauling in major metro areas. Van Pelt said Waste Management could buy a fleet of smaller trucks to use six weeks per year and that wouldn't cause too much economic hardship for them. He said that for a local, rural hauler buying a fleet of smaller trucks to be used only six weeks per year would cause a great economic hardship. Van Pelt said he wanted the Board to understand Yutzy's hardship.
Harney said that other businesses have provided alternate services like hauling trash by pickup to a stationary unit or allowing residents to take their garbage to a local dumpster area. Harney asked why N&N does not ask their clients to use smaller bags or haul trash with a pickup to a waiting compactor outside the embargo. Harney said Yutzy has had six years to make such adjustments. Meyers said that at the March 29, 2001 Meeting Yutzy was quoted saying "Well as a group I think we would all be willing to work with you in the future to resolve this." Meyers said that all other companies have done their part, and he doesn't see what Yutzy has done.
Yutzy said he sees himself as a supplier to the customer, like the feed and fuel companies. He said the fuel and feed companies are exempted, but he is not. Yutzy said his main garbage truck weighs 32,500 pounds when empty and the smaller 10-yard truck weighs 18,700 pounds empty. He noted that his trucks cannot pass through the embargo areas. Yutzy said his six-yard truck weighs 9,800 pounds and to comply with the embargo he will need to buy six more six-yard trucks that will cost between $404,000 and $408,000 before taxes. Yutzy said N&N used to be the largest garbage hauler company in Johnson County, but that is no longer the case. He said the Coralville Business Journal did a recent survey on local garbage haulers and showed that N&N has six employees as compared with Hawkeye Waste, Inc. with 25 employees, Johnson County Refuse with 23, and Waste Management with 19 employees. Yutzy said that if he buys six trucks he would have to double his labor force and increase his fuel cost. He said his yearly revenue is $900,000 and noted that the Board is asking him to spend half of his gross revenue on new trucks. Yutzy said his business is completely different than that of his competitors because he serves mostly rural residential areas while the competitors serve mostly commercial.
Harney said he is not advocating that Yutzy buy new trucks, but stated that he is suggesting that Yutzy strategically place some dumpsters where residents can dump their trash or use pickups to haul the trash to waiting trucks. N&N Employee Justin Yutzy asked if the other companies have permits for transfer stations. He noted that other companies are breaking State Code while N&N is breaking County law. Waste Management Employee Greg Traber said Waste Management mainly services commercial units. He said it is an extreme financial hardship to comply with the road embargoes and noted that his company is doubling the labor force to do that. He said Chapter 106 of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Code gives an exemption for incidental waste transfer on embargoed roads. Traber said there is no permit requirement to transfer the trash because it is exempt in the Iowa Code. R. Sullivan said that the issue was first brought up in 2001 and asked Yutzy how he was planning to deal with the problem then. Yutzy said he spoke with other haulers, shook hands, and said they'd figure something out. R. Sullivan asked if Yutzy had changed his business practices since 2001. Yutzy responded that he has picked up more clients since 2001.
Iowa City Resident Dave Tokuhisa said he is a retired Risk Manager formerly employed by the United States Army and the Army National Guard. He said risk management involves managing or controlling risks. Tokuhisa noted that first they need to determine the assets or the things to be protected. He added that there are threats and vulnerabilities to the assets. Tokuhisa said there are three methods to deal with the risk, avoid it, accept risk or develop controls. Tokuhisa said that currently in the area of public health there is a risk of spreading disease to animals and people. He added that animals and people are the assets, while garbage and standing water are the threat because they bring around germs, bugs, and disease. Tokuhisa said the risk cannot be avoided because people need to live in the county. He noted that it cannot be accepted because the U.S. is a civilized country, but noted that there are controls available, like draining standing water and eliminating rat pests. He said that the disagreement comes in the area of transportation and damage to roads.
He said that in transportation the asset is usable and safe roads and the threat are heavy vehicles, fast heavy vehicles, many heavy vehicles and the weather. Tokuhisa said the issue cannot be avoided or let pass. Tokuhisa said possible risk controls include restrictive exemption permits like reduced speed. He noted that the Board could impose that garbage trucks go no faster than 20 miles per hour on the worst parts of the embargoed roads (red areas). Other controls could be enforcing a special weight limit, driving down the center of embargoes roads through the red areas, or completely avoiding really bad red areas. He said that other options are to allow only two trips per day through the embargoed areas or require transfer stations. Tokuhisa said new technology such as BIMat, could be a long-term solution. He said that BIMat is a plastic mat that can be laid down on roads to lock two layers of gravel together and keep them from spreading apart. Tokuhisa said that BIMat tensor is expensive, but it stabilizes the road surface. Tokuhisa said there is a lot of information on the web about the mats and noted that they are typically used in the case of less-than-ideal sub-surface conditions.
Johnson County Resident Donna Hemingway said she was surprised by the Board's suggestion that individuals take their own trash to the landfill. She said that 550 families driving their individual vehicles to the landfill would cause a greater economic impact than large garbage trucks. Hemingway said they were also talking about transfer stations and asked where these stations would be located. Harney said they could either be located on private property or on County property. Hemingway said she feels very grateful for the services provided by the garbage haulers. She said that she likes supporting her neighbor's business. Hemingway said she has three kids including a daughter in college and said she cannot afford to spend much on trash pick-up. She said her husband farms and has an exemption for hauling grain. She noted that she is willing to get an exemption for garbage haulers to pick up trash.
Hemingway said this is a quality of life issue. Harney told Hemingway that he thinks she is making the assumption that the trash would sit there for weeks. He said garbage haulers would go once or twice a week to move the trash. Hemingway said the dump would sit every day because there are 550 families depositing their trash there. R. Sullivan said that whenever waste companies pick up garbage from clients they haul it to the landfill the same day. He said the transfer stations would function the same way. Hemingway reiterated that 550 families would make the trip to the landfill instead of just one garbage truck. R. Sullivan said if making 550 individual trips saves the roads, he personally prefers that option. Yutzy asked who would guard the trash. Stutsman said that is Yutzy's business decision and noted that the Board is just trying to brainstorm some possibilities. Stutsman explained that the Board feels that if an individual wants to service his customers then it's up to him to decide how to do so.
Meyers said that he has seen two companies managing to operate on Newport Road. Hemingway asked if they were using smaller garbage trucks. Meyers said one company was using a smaller truck to transport the trash from Sugar Bottom Road to a larger truck that was waiting nearby. He added that the other company was using a pickup and a wagon to haul the trash. Meyers said these two companies apparently found a way to deal with the embargo. Hemingway asked how many companies were being affected by the embargo. R. Sullivan said that about four or five companies are affected. Hemingway said that if only four or five companies are picking up trash once a week then there would only be four or five trips made per week on the embargoed roads. She said she doesn't understand why that is such a big problem. Meyers said that all companies, with the exemption of N&N Sanitation, have found a way to work with the embargo. Hemingway said she understands why it doesn't make sense for Yutzy to comply with the embargo.
Johnson County Refuse Owner Steve Smith said these issues were brought up in 2001 or 2002. He said that since then his company decided to continue service for rural clients and therefore bought a small garbage truck that weighs 12,840 pounds. Smith said they only haul 3,000 pounds of trash and then they dump it. He said his company services about 2,000 homes in rural Johnson County and noted that roughly 750 to 800 are on embargoed roads. Smith said his company sends two trucks out, one for recycling and one for garbage collection. He said it's important for his company to keep servicing their customers and stay under the weight limit imposed on the roads. Smith said the embargoes are a financial burden on each company. He said that his small garbage truck cost him $8,500. He said it was a used truck and added that companies do not have to buy new trucks to comply. Smith said he is unsure whether he supports the embargo or not, but said that he hopes that the extra money he has spent on extra help and equipment helps the roads. He said he plans to comply with the embargo. Yutzy asked what the average size of garbage cans used by Johnson County Refuse is. Smith said most of the cans are 35 gallons but noted that they also use 65-gallon cans.
Lake Crest Manor Homeowners Association President and Board Member Bob Huber said they support the embargo. Huber said they had subsidized Polk Avenue and had it repaired with a seal coat. He noted that the association has three miles of their own road to protect. He noted that they are disappointed that Yutzy did not contact them earlier to make some arrangements for pick-up. Huber said that just recently they made temporary arrangements. Meyers asked Huber to elaborate on the arrangements made with Yutzy. Huber said that Yutzy would drop off a roll-off on the corner of Polk Avenue, and the residents will take their trash to the roll-off to be hauled away.
Parker said there is a lot of traffic on Highway 382 out of Solon. He said that anyone who sees a dumpster there will think that is a dump location and even after the dumpster is gone people will continue to dump trash there. Parker said the problem with rolling off refuse containers is that they are very heavy and it needs to be done on a concrete pad, otherwise they will rip the surface of the road. Parker said there is a liability of people hitting the dumpster and noted that they will need to install proper signage. He added that any work in the County right-of-way needs to be approved beforehand by the Secondary Roads Office and a permit needs to be secured. Parker said that based on history and his experience he does not foresee anything positive coming out of the operation. Harney asked Parker if he had other recommendations. Parker said he doesn't have a lot of expertise with garbage hauling, but he does know a lot about roads. He said people do a lot of dumping on County roads and that impacts his budget.
Johnson County Resident Camie Marshek said she is a customer of N&N Sanitation. She asked what the Board revisited and accomplished after the 2001 or 2002 meeting. Neuzil said two meetings were held in 2001, one in the spring and one in late December. He said that at the December 2001meeting they revisited the issue. Neuzil said that in January 2002 he made a motion to exempt garbage haulers and noted that he didn't have a second to the motion, which meant that the garbage haulers had to find alternative options for carrying garbage on embargoed roads. Marshek said she is not mad at Yutzy, but is mad at the County for letting the problem go on. Marshek said the Board had the opportunity to correct the problem a long time ago and did not do that. Harney said the County does not provide garbage hauling services. Harney added that there are three other haulers that have made arrangements and accommodations to pick up the garbage, and noted that Yutzy has chosen not to do that. He reiterated that Yutzy is the one providing the service and not the County.
Marshek said Yutzy's trucks pull into her gravel driveway and damage it as much as they damage the roads. Marshek said her road is embargoed almost every year because it has not been upgraded. She said she isn't complaining about the road. Marshek said agricultural vehicles go up and down the roads and no one tickets them. Meyers said that is a State issue and the County must exempt agricultural vehicles. Marshek asked if school buses are exempted. Meyers said the State exempts school busses. Harney said a gentleman contacted him and said the garbage haulers have ruined his driveway on Sugar Bottom Road. R. Sullivan said that the Board's business is the protection and maintenance of public roads and not whom residents allow onto their driveways.
Marshek said that one of the Supervisors told her to find another hauler. She said she will burn her garbage before she goes with another hauler. Meyers said he thinks it is stubborn to only come up with that option. He said he wasn’t on the Board in 2001 or 2002 and noted that he disagrees with Marshek's assertion that nothing has been done since then. Meyers said all the other haulers have made arrangements and N&N has not. He said the County is not in the trash-collection business and it is not for the Board to back up someone else's business decision. Meyers said it is Yutzy's choice to collect tickets and pay fines as opposed to changing his business structure. He said it is not his position as a Board member to defend Yutzy's choices.
Marshek asked if all the other haulers used mechanical arms to pick up the trash. Smith said they use some manual labor. Marshek said there is a big price difference. Marshek said she feels that giving only one option to change to is pushing a small businessman out of Johnson County. She said she doesn't want that to be what Johnson County is about. Stutsman said Marshek keeps saying that the Board didn't do anything to solve the problem. Stutsman said she thinks they did by keeping the embargo in place. She said the Board did not do what Marshek or Yutzy wanted them to do, but the Board did agree that it was important to keep the trucks off the roads so they did not exempt garbage haulers.
Meyers noted that Yutzy said it would cost about $50,000 to buy a new truck. He noted that another company bought a used truck for $8,500. Marshek said the truck is not automated. Meyers agreed and said it fits the temporary situation because the embargo is not permanent. He said Yutzy has amassed a number of very expensive tickets. Meyers added that Yutzy also sent out letters to his customers advertising that anyone who came in and protested in front of the Board would receive a month of free service. Meyers said all those numbers add up to $8,500. Yutzy said he did not ask people to protest the Board, but to come in and voice their concerns. Meyers said the letter reads "We are offering one month's free service to any N&N Sanitation customer…we would like to ask your help by showing your support." Meyers said that is fine, but repeated that all the dollars used to pay the fines and hand out free services adds up to $8,500, the cost of a used garbage truck.
Meyers said he received an e-mail from someone that canceled their service with N&N. He noted that even though the customer had paid for the service through the end of May, no refund was issued. Meyers said there is money being collected for services that aren't even provided. Johnson County Resident and N&N Customer Gayle Royar said she called and was told that there would be no charge if N&N could not pick up the trash. She said that is contrary to what Meyers said. Royar said she had told them that they shouldn't do that because they have bills and staff to pay.
Neuzil said he has a hunch he is going to be in the minority again as he was in 2002 when he made the motion. He said he made the motion to exempt garbage haulers from the road embargoes for three reasons: fairness, public health, and quality of life. In terms of fairness Neuzil said his reasoning for fighting alongside the garbage haulers is because school buses, fire trucks, farm machinery, and propane trucks are all allowed on those roads. He said regarding public health, not only will people burn their trash to manage it, but also they will illegally dump it in the community. Neuzil said that not allowing garbage trucks on the embargoed roads will impact the quality of life. He said County residents spend a lot of money for quality of life in Johnson County. Neuzil said millions are spent for quality of life in every single part of the Government.
Neuzil noted that the County does much more than is mandated. Neuzil said the mandate from the State of Iowa says what can and cannot be done. He noted that in this case the Board is turning a blind eye to human services and 550 upset residents. He said it makes sense to pick up garbage in an urbanized county and to allow an exemption for the quality of life issue. Neuzil reiterated he thinks garbage haulers ought to be exempt. He added that if the Board decides not to exempt them, the companies should abide by the laws of the community. Harney said it's very easy to make a decision at campaign time. He said he was elected to make a decision in the best interest of all the residents and taxpayers of Johnson County, and not just for one small group of individuals or private business. Harney said it is not always convenient to provide a quality of life.
Yutzy said the UPS trucks weigh 15,500 pounds and are not ticketed in embargoed areas. He said that it is the perception that the trucks are small and therefore weigh less, but noted that is not always the case. R. Sullivan said that any vehicle that is over the eight ton limit should be ticketed. Yutzy said that UPS understands they are breaking the law to do their business, but since they do not get in trouble they continue to do so. Yutzy said he is providing a service that needs to be done and is being threatened with jail and license suspension. R. Sullivan said the law is to treat everybody that violates the law the same way. He noted that there is always a little bit of officer discretion that comes into play. R. Sullivan said that everyone is expected to follow the law.
Meyers said that Washington County has instituted a special tax to pay for damage to the roads. Yutzy said the tax is only for gravel roads. R. Sullivan said that this is a fundamental issue of fairness. He noted that it is unfair to Waste Management, Johnson County Refuse, Hawkeye, and all other companies that have adjusted their business practices to comply with the ordinance. He said a fundamental rule of fairness is to continue to do things that have been working for several businesses and not to reward someone that chooses not to change their business practices. R. Sullivan said this is a huge inconvenience and noted that there are huge inconveniences that sometimes come with being a rural resident. He noted that there are also inconveniences to living in urban areas. R. Sullivan said there is nothing preventing anybody from taking their trash to the landfill. He said the Board will not have money for quality of life issues if they need to fix roads. R. Sullivan said that from a fairness, quality of life, and public health perspective, the Board needs to stick to its decisions.
Stutsman said that the assets for the Board are the roads. She added that the Board is putting things in place to try and minimize the destruction of their assets. She said she thinks she was elected to be a steward of the taxpayers' dollars. Stutsman said she couldn't see how it would be responsible for her to make a decision that would destroy an asset when she has the ability to apply some risk management and put some things in place to protect the asset. Stutsman said that speed is of importance in garbage hauling because the landfill has a set schedule and companies try to get as many trucks as possible to the landfill before it closes. She noted that setting speed limits would not work because they would be ignored just like the embargo is. Stutsman said she agrees with R. Sullivan that it is a fairness issue. She said that she finds it unbelievable that N&N Sanitation is a rural business and has not put anything in place to accommodate their rural customers. She said that in rural areas, embargoes are a fact of life and noted that businesses need to be prepared for such situations. She said that there are options for people to deal with the garbage and she does not think that lifting the embargo is one of them.
Neuzil said he would like to see garbage trucks exempt from the road embargo. Stutsman asked if Neuzil would talk with the legislators to exempt garbage haulers. Neuzil said he could talk to the State, but noted that there are a lot of things that the County can do without asking the State. He said the Board has the opportunity to change the exemptions and noted that he would like them changed. Harney said that if the Board would make that exemption it would be permanent and would have to include all the haulers. Harney said he received emails from rural residents objecting to the removal of the embargo because they are trying to protect the roads. Meyers agreed.
Van Pelt said that Stutsman said it is unfair to exempt some and not others. He noted that the current situation is unfair because agricultural vehicles, fire trucks, and school busses do not have to comply with the weight limits on the embargoed roads. Van Pelt said that Yutzy is simply asking the Board to consider whether garbage haulers are a class that should be exempted from the statute.
R. Sullivan said he thinks people have alternatives and therefore he is not willing to make any changes. Neuzil said he has always been in favor of exempting garbage trucks. He said that if three other supervisors agree with him a change will be made. He noted that even if a change does not occur everyone should comply with the laws of the County. Meyers said this is not an exemption for an entire industry because they could not find a way around the problem, but an exemption for one company that decided not to do anything when other companies have. R. Sullivan said he is against making any changes. Meyers and Stutsman said they are also against changing the regulations. R. Sullivan said Neuzil is interested in an exemption. Harney said he is not interested unless some other businesses are included as well.
R. Sullivan asked Chappell if a tree farm is considered agricultural activity. He noted that Pleasant Valley Nursery Owner Rich Kroeze said he has to move trees fast so that rapid spoilage does not occur. He said Kroeze has an agricultural permit from Johnson County Attorney Janet Lyness. Chappell said he can look into that. Stutsman asked if the Board can make decisions or supersede the State decisions regarding agricultural equipment on the roads. She asked if the Board could refuse to allow agricultural vehicles the use of embargoed roads. Chappell said the Board cannot do that. Chappell said the question is whether the equipment used by Kroeze fits under the statute. Chappell said there is an exemption for implements of husbandry loaded on hauling units for transportation to locations for repair and an exemption for when farm producers show a need to move to market due to rapid spoilage or loss of value. Chappell said that if the vehicles fall under those exemptions the Board can not add any limitations. Harney said Kroeze has a short window of survival for the trees. Meyers asked if Kroeze is using a semi. Parker said the truck used by Kroeze weighs over 16,000 pounds. Stutsman asked Chappell if he could research whether Pleasant Valley Nursery is a farm or not. Chappell said he is going to do his best to determine whether the equipment used is exempted. R. Sullivan asked Chappell to inform M. Sullivan as soon as he knows and then the Board will try to contact Kroeze.
Parker said the County has exempted agricultural-related operations. He noted that the nursery is a landscaping-related business that is not agriculturally related other than the fact that the product goes in the ground and can be moved. He said he does not consider landscaping operations agricultural activity. Harney said Kroeze's business is considered agricultural. Neuzil said that is why Kroeze calls his tree farm a farm. Meyers said as the embargoes go on more questions will come up on exemptions. He said that a resident from east of the Cheese Factory called him to ask if he could haul a big wagon down the road to clean out his manure pit. Parker said a man had called him from south of Shueyville wanting to have his septic system cleaned and inspected prior to selling the house. He said the department had ruled that would not be an agricultural exemption and is something that can be done after the embargo is lifted.
R. Sullivan said the Board had received a letter from Iowa City Planning Director Jeff Davidson and the Board of the Joint Emergency Communications Center (JECC). He said the JECC is looking to see which contracting communities are interested in providing human resources, legal services, accounting and other services associated with the operation of JECC. R. Sullivan said that the Board has to decide if this is something they want to pursue. R. Sullivan noted that it makes sense to have all services provided by just one entity, one of the cities or the County.
Harney said human resources and payroll will be standing independent similar to Emergency Management, which has its own supervision and structure. He said that JECC would get the group rates if the services are provided by the County or Iowa City. He noted that otherwise everything will be more costly. Neuzil said it is more expensive if the County does it. He added that the Board needs to be thoughtful of the tax dollars. Stutsman said the County has a levy to cover the costs. Neuzil said the levy is a tax imposed by the Board. R. Sullivan said the expense would be paid using the levy whether the County, the City, or someone else provides the services. Neuzil said he isn't suggesting that the County should not provide the services, but is saying that if the County provides the services it will be an expense to all County Departments. Pulkrabek concurred and said that the 28E entity will have the expense no matter what.
Neuzil asked if the Board will get paid for providing the services. Pulkrabek said certainly and Stutsman agreed. Neuzil asked if they are going to charge the General Supplemental Budget and put the money back into the General Fund. Pulkrabek said that the Iowa City Police Department, for example, has their own individual for Information Technology. He said that if the Iowa City Police need Information Technology experience beyond their own individual they use the Iowa City Information Technology Department. Pulkrabek noted that the Iowa City Police are billed by the Iowa City Information Technology Department for the services provided. Pulkrabek said the County doesn't function like that.
R. Sullivan said the County uses a similar system for some services. Deputy Auditor Dana Aschenbrenner said that the Assessor's Office is billed for Human Resources and Information Technology services. He added that the Auditor’s Office is reimbursed for postage. R. Sullivan noted that this is not a completely foreign concept for the County. Neuzil said they are basically taxing to get taxed back. He said that the services fit better under the County than under the cities. Neuzil said the Board will have to tax higher in the General Supplemental Budget to get the money back in the General Fund. He said that residents only look at the amount of taxes paid without realizing how the Board arrives at that figure. Pulkrabek said Neuzil is overanalyzing the situation.
Stutsman asked if the County could provide the services in-house or if they would need to increase staffing to do it. Pulkrabek said they are talking about dispatchers, a director, and a staff of 25 to 30 people. He said he assumed the director would have human resources experience, but would need additional support. R. Sullivan asked if JECC would call Iowa City or Johnson County Facilities Director David Kempf for repairs. Stutsman said if the County has the contract, JECC would call Kempf. Kempf said that he does not have enough staff to do custodial services, grounds work, and snow removal. He said there is not enough work to warrant JECC having its own assigned employee. He noted that if Facilities would provide custodial services they would need to hire another custodian. Kempf said that if they would hire a new custodian, that person would clean JECC and the Secondary Roads Facility which would allow them to quit contracting for cleaning. He said snow removal will probably be contracted out regardless of whether the County or Iowa City provides the services. Kempf said the easiest way to do the bill-back would be to set up a monthly fee or bill services by the hour.
Neuzil said having the services under the County makes sense because the County is actually the one paying for the JECC. He said it would be strange to have to charge themselves. Stutsman said the County is not paying for the JECC. Neuzil said the County's separate levy is paying for the JECC. Stutsman said that all county taxpayers are paying. Harney said everyone is paying for it. Stutsman said that Neuzil just wants to justify raising the County budget by 15%. Neuzil said Stutsman is the one who voted against the JECC.
Aschenbrenner said his department is capable of providing the additional services. He said there is one full-time clerk doing payroll, and two full-time clerks to handle accounts payable on a weekly basis. He said for the most part there is not a lot of overtime, but the clerks are stretched. Aschenbrenner said he expects they will need another full-time clerk to handle the additional work load. He said a part-time clerk might work, but his department is definitely stretched as it is. Aschenbrenner said the accounting software is fully capable of handling the services and there will be no incremental cost related to that. He said his department has been trying to determine if the support services will fall under the County as an agency, or if there would be a separate government. Aschenbrenner said if it is a separate government his department would need to set up a completely separate organization within the accounting software. He said that every week they would have to run two payrolls as opposed to one, which equates to an incremental cost. Aschenbrenner said the set-up for a separate government is more time-consuming and the front end will be more involved. Aschenbrenner said if the support services are set up as a separate government and not as an agency under the County umbrella, it may require an annual financial audit.
Stutsman asked if the County could bill the costs to the entity. Aschenbrenner said they could do that although the costs will be incrementally higher if JECC is considered a separate government entity. He said if it falls under the County umbrella, JECC would be included in the annual audit and payroll would only be run once a week. Aschenbrenner said these are very important points for the Board to consider before moving forward. Harney asked if the support services would fall under the County or Iowa City. Aschenbrenner said that from his understanding if JECC is considered a separate government they would need to acquire their own Federal Tax ID. He said the Treasurer would have to be involved in the separation of duties and collection of fees. Neuzil asked how they handle the Emergency Management Commission. Aschenbrenner said they are self-governing and the board makes their operation decisions. He added that from a financial reporting standpoint, they fall under the County umbrella. Aschenbrenner said they are reported as an agency.
Shramek said the comments from Human Resources are similar to those from the Auditor's Office. She said her department had held a brainstorming session and came up with almost two pages of questions that need to be answered before they can provide a proposal. Shramek said all the questions have to do with the scope of the needed services. She said if the Emergency Management Commission would use the existing pay and benefit plans, it would be easier to add 30 people because the system is already built. Shramek said there would be a lot of time involved from the get-go. She noted that if JECC employees would be unionized a brand new contract will need to be negotiated. She said negotiating a new contract takes a lot of time, but she feels her department can take care of another 30 employees. Shramek said she wants to commend the Emergency Management Commission for going to the County and Iowa City looking for the services rather than hiring their own individuals.
R. Sullivan asked what Lyness's comments were on the issue. Chappell said Lyness has more questions than answers. He noted that they view it as two separate issues, getting the entity set up and running and providing services afterwards. Chappell said it may be best for JECC to contract out with a separate attorney instead of Iowa City or the County. Chappell said that Iowa City and the County have union representation, but he does not know if they are the same unions. Chappell said there is a conceptual idea that either Iowa City or the County will provide all services, but noted that it doesn't have to be that way. He said there are obvious synergies that should be respected, like having the attorney and the Human Resources Department coming from the same organization because they are used to working together.
R. Sullivan said he got the impression that Coralville and North Liberty are not interested in providing these services. Chappell said he thinks the entity has done a good job, but he feels there is a need for a brainstorming session. R. Sullivan said Harney and Pulkrabek are part of the group. Harney said that someone needs to keep the contact between the County and Iowa City. He said the departments would need to get involved to work through the details.
Kempf said he doesn't know where the Commission is in terms of choosing a director. Harney said the job description is out and the Commission is currently taking applications. Kempf said if he was the director of the new building, he would contract a cleaner and someone to do the lawn mowing and snow removal. He said that he doesn't think the Physical Plant side of things is tied as closely as the County Attorney and the accounting. Neuzil said the JECC would be a County building. Chappell said the building would be on County property, but the building would belong to the 28E entity. Meyers confirmed. R. Sullivan said there is a potential for shared access.
Chappell said the Board needs to let the 28E entity know they are interested, but that they also have lots of questions. Chappell said it is up to the entity on how to proceed next. He noted that the entity may have direct meetings Iowa City and County officials. He said he doesn't think it is worth the County's time to take the time to figure out the answers to all the questions without knowing how the 28E entity views things. Kempf said he thinks the 28E entity is looking for the best deal. Harney said he thinks they are looking for the service and not the best deal. Stutsman agreed. Chappell said he thinks the 28E entity is looking at who can provide the services at the lowest cost. Harney said he liked the idea of contacting Davidson and Iowa City Mayor Regenia Bailey to arrange a meeting. Neuzil said he wants to know about the associated costs. Harney said it depends on whether the 28E entity wants janitorial services.
The Board decided to discuss reports and inquiries during the following meeting.
Adjourned at 1:00 p.m.
______________________________________________________________________
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By:
On the _______ day of _____________________, 2008
By John Deeth, Recording Secretary
Sent to the Board of Supervisors on June 12, 2008 at 9:25 a.m.