MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
MAY 14, 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Social Services Coordinator Amy Correia: Scheduling Department 20 Site Visits................. 1
Facilities manager David Kempf: Menards as a Justice Center Location............................... 2
Facilities manager David Kempf: Project Updates................................................................ 4
Board of Supervisors: Contract with Durrant and Future Expectations................................. 5
Board of Supervisors: Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Meeting Schedule and Agendas 10
Board of Supervisors: Contracting with Vernon Research re: Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Issues..................................................................................................................................... 12
Board of Supervisors: Procedures for Entering into Business Relationships....................... 13
Board of Supervisors: Personnel Files................................................................................ 14
Board of Supervisors: June 19th ISAC District Meeting in Coralville................................. 15
Board of Supervisors: NACo Voting.................................................................................. 15
Board of Supervisors: Johnson County Local Food Initiative Funding Request.................. 16
Board of Supervisors: Language Line................................................................................. 16
Board of Supervisors: Bike Racks at County Buildings...................................................... 18
Board of Supervisors: Internal Processes, Expectations, and Other Operational Issues of the Board of Supervisors Office........................................................................................................................... 18
Board of Supervisors: Meeting Agenda Items..................................................................... 20
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.
Social Services Coordinator Amy Correia said the Board had directed her to set up site visits with the department’s 14 Block Grant programs. Correia asked the Supervisors to sign-up for six site visits. She said she would assign two Supervisors to each site visit. She asked the Board what they would like to see and hear from HR staff at each location.
Stutsman said she wants to take a brief tour and find out how County dollars are spent. Neuzil said he would like to keep the site visits under an hour. R. Sullivan said the Board could mail the sign-up sheet. Harney said that he also wants to take a tour and hear an explanation of how the County dollars are used. Stutsman said she wants to know about outreach to unincorporated areas and what challenges are foreseen for the future. Correia said she would get back to the Board with the solid assignments.
Facilities Manager David Kempf said that the old Menards building is just a big box. He said the interior floor space is 99,000 square feet with an additional 40,000 square feet of covered space that was used as a lumberyard, which equates to almost 140,000 square feet of covered space. Kempf noted the height of the ceiling might allow for a second floor to be installed. Kempf said that there are 480 parking spaces around the facility. Stutsman said the parking space could be used as a commuter lot. Kempf agreed. He said the total acreage was just over 10 acres. He added that a 2.5-acre side parcel is attached to the facility. Stutsman asked what the feasibility of buying a big empty space is. Kempf said they didn't have an architect look at the site to determine its feasibility, but that he thinks it is absolutely feasible.
Kempf said Scott County bought a warehouse space and turned it into a jail annex. He said the result is a building within a building that meets their requirements. Kempf said Scott County uses the open pod and dormitory-style arrangement for the minimum and medium security prisoners. Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek asked if the prisoners were all sentenced. Kempf confirmed. Pulkrabek said the annex is just one big open room with a whole bunch of double-bunked cots. Kempf said the annex is broken into four large quadrants with a control center in the center. Harney said Scott County built their annex from the outside in, and added walkways and reinforced walls. He said the building is very unappealing. Kempf said it is very institutional. He said the Menards facility is large enough to create cell blocks. Kempf said the facility is large enough to accommodate the County’s needs, is close to downtown, and is empty. Stutsman said the Menards facility is accessible and is not located in a residential area.
Harney said the Board had looked at a 3.2-acre site for the Joint Communications Center, but the problem was that a tower could not be built because of the airport. He said the Menards facility will have the same problem. Meyers asked if a tower would be needed. Harney said a tower will be needed. He said if a tower needs to be constructed the building will have to be demolished and the floor will have to be tore up for sewer and water connections. Harney said the County would be retrofitting a building that will cost more than new construction. Kempf said he asked Durrant Representative Mike Lewis to evaluate the Menards facility as a possible site.
Neuzil said the Menards facility could host both court services and the jail. Kempf concurred. R. Sullivan said that KCJJ Owner and Program Director Steve Soboroff told him that because of technological advances, a microwave dish can be installed in the place of a tower. R. Sullivan said that a microwave dish could work if it has a tower to shoot to. He added that Soboroff said that a tower should not be a stumbling block. Kempf said the County uses microwaves for computer connections from Secondary Roads to Kent Park. Kempf said the facility is large, close to downtown, and has suitable parking. Meyers said the facility is 1.9 miles from the courthouse.
Executive Assistant Mike Sullivan said that a gentleman from Piper Jaffrey told him that according to the Iowa Administrative Code, General County Purpose, the County can refinance the money spent on a project. M. Sullivan said the total amount that can be refinanced for the Health and Human Services (HHS) Building is a little over $13 million, with $5.5 million in cash, $5 million in banknote, and other additional monies. He said the process is similar to the reverse referendum for the HHS Building that included public hearings and time for the public to comment or sign a petition. M. Sullivan said the levy effect would be about 21 cents for a 15 year payback and 17 cents for a 20 year payback. He said the County can refinance the money and use the cash in a scenario where there is an acquisition price in the range of the amount of cash on hand. M. Sullivan said this has been done before, but not very often because counties typically pay as they go, or issue debt.
Harney asked what the asking price is for the Menards facility. Kempf said the window price is around $17 million, but the property can be purchased for a fair amount less. Meyers asked if the cost includes the outlot. Kempf confirmed. Stutsman asked if the County could sell part of the facility. Harney said he thinks it would be foolish to sell considering the future use of the area. M. Sullivan said the catch to this type of financing is time. He explained that the Board would need to make the decision before spending the money dedicated to the new HHS Building. Meyers asked if there is a party interested in the current Jail site. Kempf said yes.
Stutsman asked how many acres of the County’s Poor Farm were included in the bond referendum for the former jail site. Kempf said it was around 25 acres. Neuzil asked how much land is needed if the County uses the pod style for the jail. Kempf said the Menards site needs to be further evaluated. Pulkrabek asked if they would need to tear up the whole floor to install plumbing. Kempf said that would not be necessary because they could cut channels. Meyers said the empty space is big enough to drive equipment in. Kempf said a cement truck can operate in the Menards facility.
Pulkrabek said he is not opposed to evaluating the Menards site further. He noted that it is hard to make a decision without more information. Pulkrabek asked how much it would cost to turn the Menards facility into a jail versus building a jail from scratch. R. Sullivan said that Lewis is aware that the Board needs that information. Kempf said he is just saying that Menards is another place to consider. Pulkrabek asked if Durrant has done such an evaluation before. Stutsman said she wants to compare the Menards facility to the other sites before making a decision. Pulkrabek said Lewis predicts that the cost to build a jail is approximately $120,000 per cell, while the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) estimates a cost of $200,000 per cell. He noted that Scott County built their new jail at $80,000 per cell. Pulkrabek said that the price can range anywhere from $80,000 to $200,000.
Harney said the Menards facility is worth looking at. Stutsman concurred. Harney said he wants the engineers to provide input on the towers needed. Neuzil said the biggest problem with Menards is timing. He added that in his mind the process and the project are paid for separately out of the current budget. He said the Board cannot leverage $17 million in the next month. Neuzil said that the Board needs to figure out how to acquire property without having the means to pay for it. Stutsman said a big part of the decision making process is what the community can accept. Neuzil agreed. Stutsman said she has some concerns about sites located in residential areas. Harney concurred. He said he spoke with residents and noted that they are concerned that the public doesn’t have any input in the project. Harney said the Board needs to have foresight in picking a location. Meyers said the County needs to have two or three site options on the ballot. Neuzil said he does not want to be in a situation where the County buys the Menards facility and the residents vote against the jail. Harney said he isn’t willing to refinance to secure a site. Neuzil concurred.
Kempf said that construction on the HHS Building is going fairly well and they are only two to three weeks behind schedule. He said that half the steel is set and they are working on the decking. He said they should start pouring slab on the first and second floors by the end of the following week. Kempf said the majority of the underground electrical is in place. He noted that the elevator base shaft has to be finished before the steel can go around it. Kempf said he encourages the Board to attend the construction meetings. Kempf said R. Sullivan, Stutsman, and Neuzil have each attended a meeting. Meyers said he plans on attending a meeting. Kempf said the meetings give a flavor of how the coordination process works. Neuzil asked when all the steel will be erected. Kempf said they are about two to three weeks away barring any rainy days and assuming workers complete one square a day. Kempf said the ductwork contractor has two semi loads of fabricated ductwork waiting to be hung after the floors are poured. He reiterated that the project is moving along.
Kempf said that the footings and foundation walls are in place for the SEATS and Secondary Roads Building. He said they are currently working on the under slab plumbing for the Office Building. Kempf noted that all the structural steel is on site. He said that the workers constructed the steel walls in a warehouse. He said the first course of blocks needs to be laid around the foundation of the Office Building before workers can pour the slab. Kempf said the workers have created a 4x5 foot demo wall to show what the exterior of the building will look like. He said the webcam is up and running.
Harney asked for updates on the Secondary Roads site by Tiffin. Kempf said some of the insulation got wet because the workers did not get it completely closed up. He said that he requested that the walls be taken down so that the wet insulation can be removed. Kempf said the workers have closed up all the building, built the roof, and taped up the insulation. He said Assistant County Engineer Ed Bartels is keeping a close eye on the project. Meyers asked what the estimated completion date is for the SEATS Building. Kempf said the estimated date is between August 30, 2008 and September 1, 2008.
Neuzil said it would be helpful to post a picture or a process list of the projects being built. Stutsman said they had such a display. Kempf confirmed and noted that the display was up for a short period of time. Neuzil said he was thinking of a more permanent display in the foyer of the Administration Building to show information about the HHS Building. Kempf said he will try to put something together to go on display. Neuzil said there are a lot of people who come into the Administration Building that have no idea what is happening across the street.
Neuzil asked if Kempf had communicated with Conservation Director Harry Graves. Kempf said no. Neuzil said the Board needs to find out where Graves is with his project. Kempf asked if the Board would like him to contact Graves. Stutsman said there is no communication established with Graves and that needs to be clarified. County Attorney Janet Lyness said that due to funding issues the Conservation Board is looking at two separate buildings. She added that they are also trying to determine if a firewall would be sufficient to separate the two buildings. She said the Conservation Board wants to do a geothermal field, but the cost is too high. Lyness said there might be a way for the Conservation Board to fund the geothermal differently and use the bond money for just the buildings.
Stutsman asked if anyone besides the Conservation Board is overseeing the project. Neuzil said that Kempf should have some oversight. R. Sullivan said that the Board needs to inform the Conservation Board that Kempf should be involved in the process. Stutsman said that it might be time to have a joint meeting with the Conservation Board. Kempf said he is happy to assist the Conservation Board. Lyness said there is a legal question about the funding. She said the bonds have to be for a building, and they are talking about two separate bonds. Harney asked if there are two separate projects. Lyness said there will have to be a referendum. She said the two projects are separate and cannot be seen as one $2.4 million project, even if both projects cost $1.2 million. Stutsman said Kempf has a lot of expertise and knowledge in the area and it would be good to have him working with the Conservation Board to keep the projects from going over the budget. R. Sullivan asked M. Sullivan to contact Graves and determine if the Conservation Board can attend the next informal meeting. M. Sullivan said he will follow up on that.
Lyness said she looked over the contract with Durrant Group that was signed in July, of 2007. She noted that the evaluations were supposed to be completed by December 31, 2007. She said that Lewis was supposed to look at only four sites. Lyness said the Justice Center site feasibility evaluations were supposed to take into account location, size, flexibility, access to services, suitability, availability, parking evaluations and site development cost projections. Lyness said the presentation given by Lewis did not include anything about costs, parking, and suitability and does not meet the contract requirements. Lyness said space needs assessments, infrastructure visioning evaluations, programmatic and operational systems evaluations, inmate population projections verification, and operational and security assessments were supposed to be completed on the four sites. She said Lewis has done some of it, but in her assessment he has not been very thorough. Lyness said the Board has received some population projections, operational security assessments, and to some extent, programmatic and operational systematic evaluations.
Lyness said the third part of the site evaluations is to include master planning recommendations, a collaborate visioning to determine adaptive planning directions for a new jail scenario, existing jail scenarios, County Courthouse, space program with functional relationship diagram, and preliminary stacking projections. She said she doesn't think the Board has received any of that information. Lyness said the Board hasn't received any information on sustainability initiative recommendations including long and short-term economic strategies or life cycle operational costs projections. Lyness added that they received minimal capital construction costs projections.
R. Sullivan asked what the County has paid Lewis and how much they agreed to pay him. M. Sullivan said the agreement is for $70,000. He noted that Lewis has been billing and paid by the month. Stutsman said she is outraged. Stutsman asked if the County has been paying Lewis even though he has not done most of the stuff in the contract. She said the County has a big problem. Lyness agreed. She said the fee for Phase I Needs Assessments Services was set at $70,000, and outside consultant fees if authorized are billed as a separate line item. Stutsman said she did not think the County was supposed to pay anything until the evaluations were completed.
Harney asked if the County would violate the contract by adding more sites. Harney said the Board recommended that Lewis take a look at five sites. R. Sullivan said that part of the problem is that Lewis didn't do what he was asked to do, for example, he evaluated the National Guard Armory site even though he wasn't asked to do so. Stutsman said Lewis evaluated sites like Forest View that the Board didn't have on the radar screen. Neuzil said he interpreted the last meeting as an opportunity for Lewis to meet with the Board and gather data not as a report. He said the Board has not received the report yet. Neuzil said his expectations are even higher for Lewis to meet the requirements of the contract. Stutsman asked if Lewis promised that he would meet with the Board that week and bring a report. M. Sullivan said Lewis is on the May 15, 2008 agenda.
Neuzil asked if M. Sullivan could forward Lewis another copy of the contract. He said that somehow the contract terms need to be relayed to Lewis. R. Sullivan said that as far as he is concerned he is done with Lewis. Stutsman said she feels the same way and almost wants to file a lawsuit to get the County's money back. She said Lewis has produced nothing and she could have come up with the stuff he presented at the last meeting. R. Sullivan said the Jail Committee could have done that a year ago without Lewis's help. Neuzil said the space analyses have been pretty valuable. R. Sullivan said he doesn't know if he trusts Lewis because he has done such poor work in one area and it is hard to believe that he will do better in another area.
Pulkrabek said Lewis admitted fault because during the first two to three months of this year, his attention was elsewhere. Stutsman said that Lewis didn't inform the Board that he could not comply with the December completion date. She said the Board had to make contact with him to ask where the site evaluations were, and only then did he inform them that he had other projects going on. Stutsman said Lewis signed the contract and she expects someone who signs a contract to fulfill it. She said she doesn't think the Board would have even heard anything from Lewis if they hadn't contacted him. R. Sullivan said he thinks the Board ought to discuss whether they want to continue working with the Durrant Group. Stutsman asked if anyone knows for sure that Lewis is coming to the May 15, 2008 meeting. M. Sullivan said no one has heard from him. R. Sullivan repeated that Lewis is on the agenda.
Pulkrabek asked how much the County has already paid Lewis. R. Sullivan said he doesn't have a lot of faith in Lewis' recommendations. Stutsman said he hasn't complied with the contract. Pulkrabek said the Durrant Group is well known and well thought of and maybe Lewis can resurrect himself and the company out of the mess. Lyness said she wasn't surprised that Lewis didn't complete the evaluations by December because there was a lot more information he needed to obtain. She said she is concerned about the quality of materials presented so far. Lyness said Lewis' last presentation was very similar to what he presented in the fall of 2007. She said the information he presented didn't make sense to her, and she is worried that he doesn't understand the whole judicial system. Lyness said she met with Lewis several times and each time she was concerned that he did not understand the needs of the County.
Lyness said that Lewis has fulfilled part of the contract. Lyness said that like R. Sullivan she is not sure that she can trust Lewis' recommendations. Lyness said she isn't sure how much the County would get back out of a lawsuit because Lewis has partially fulfilled the contract. Pulkrabek said the County should stop paying Lewis. Lyness and Stutsman agreed. Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Member Dorothy Whiston said the County has probably paid him for work that should have been completed in December 2007. Whiston said she had a conversation with Iowa State Senator Robert Dvorsky who has hired Lewis before. She said Dvorsky told her Lewis didn't do squat on any of his projects. Whiston said that if the County continues to work with Lewis, they should give him a very clear completion date. Whiston said she feels like the County has been taken advantage of.
Harney asked Pulkrabek if he could contact Polk County Sheriff Dennis Anderson to find out his thoughts on Lewis and his work. Harney added that in case Polk County has not been satisfied with Lewis' work in the past, he also wants to know who Polk County hired to do a better job and finish any of Lewis' projects. Whiston said she feels she could have done what Lewis presented at the meeting the previous week. R. Sullivan said he thinks that Kempf could have come up with a lot of what Durrant did. He said operational costs are a huge issue with the project and Durrant did not present any information on that. Stutsman asked if the County had asked for that information. Lyness said yes and noted that it is part of the contract.
Pulkrabek said that he is doing something internally with John Neff to determine some fiscal costs. He noted that they are coming up with new variants all the time. For example, he said that a prisoner could be brought in at 3 p.m. and housed in Iowa County. Pulkrabek noted that if the prisoner had a 7 a.m. court hearing the next day, the County would pay $55 for the prisoner to be housed in Iowa County for part of the day. He said the County would need to feed and house the prisoner overnight, take the prisoner to the court hearing in the morning, and then take the prisoner back to Iowa County. Pulkrabek said that in this example, the County would pay Iowa County for two days in addition to the cost of housing the prisoner over night.
Pulkrabek said he and Neff are trying to come up with a template and are asking other counties to fill in information on pod-style expenses based on information from their local Auditor's Offices. Pulkrabek said he knows that other counties are able to make a profit from housing prisoners from other counties, but he is unsure how big that profit is. He said that he believes that other counties can manage inmates more cheaply because they have a different wage scale than Johnson County. Pulkrabek said that is true of Washington County, Cedar County, and Iowa County, but not necessarily of Linn County.
Lyness said that operational costs are part of what Lewis should present to the Board. Harney that until the Board knows what kind of jail they want to have Lewis can't come up with operational costs. R. Sullivan said he looked at the situation the exact opposite way. For example, he said that staffing in a tall building on the federal lot would be different and more intense than in a linear building. R. Sullivan said they cannot build a linear building and therefore they need to weigh in the cost of transportation. Stutsman said she doesn't want to hear that from R. Sullivan, she wants to hear that from the Durrant Group. R. Sullivan and Lyness agreed. Stutsman said the Board is not getting that kind of information from the Durrant Group.
R. Sullivan said that knowing the operational costs would help the Board make the decision of what type of building to build. Harney said Lewis hasn't provided numbers, but has told the Board that the costs depend on what type of building is built. R. Sullivan said he wants to choose a site based on projected operational costs. Harney said that's a different question. Stutsman said she also wants to know the cost of operation for each building alternative. R. Sullivan said that differences in operational costs must be taken into consideration. Harney agreed and said that needs to be part of the site analysis. Lyness said that according to the contract, Lewis should provide sustainability initiative recommendations, long and short term economic strategies, and lifecycle operational cost projections.
M. Sullivan said Lewis has submitted four claims, one in September 2007 for $14,000, one in November 2007 for $7,000, one in February 2008 for $1,750, and another one in August 2007 for $21,155. M. Sullivan said the total amount paid is $44,705. Stutsman said that over half of the agreed amount has been paid and the Board has received basically nothing.
R. Sullivan asked how the Board wanted to proceed in terms of the relationship with Durrant. Stutsman said that the Board should wait until the meeting on May 15, 2008. Harney agreed and said the Board should first wait for Lewis to make his presentation and if still unsatisfied, the Board could sit down with Lyness and decide what to do next. Neuzil said the Board needs to decide how to handle the meeting for May 15, 2008 and whether they will air their expectations. Stutsman said the Board made it clear to Lewis what the expectations are. Neuzil concurred and added that Lewis will only give an update and not the full report. He explained that it might take a team of people such as Pulkrabek, Lyness, a Supervisor, and M. Sullivan to sit down with Lewis and go tHRough the contract. Neuzil said he thinks the Board needs to get together with Lewis after the meeting on May 15, 2008 to show him the contract and ask where the project is.
Pulkrabek said he thinks the Board should listen to what Lewis has to say and schedule another Key Issues meeting to discuss and develop a strategy. R. Sullivan said the Board has monthly Key Issues meetings. Harney said that if needed the Board can have a special Key Issues meeting. R. Sullivan said they could discuss their concerns during an informal meeting. Stutsman agreed. Harney said the Board should do that or follow Neuzil's suggestion of going over the contract and expectations again with Lewis. Neuzil said he wants to make sure the expectations are completed.
M. Sullivan clarified that he received revised information from the Auditor's Office that shows that Durrant has received a total of seven payments totaling $68,438.45 from July 1, 2004 to May 14, 2008. R. Sullivan said he does not want to pay Durrant anything else until the project is done. R. Sullivan said that Lewis is under the impression that he can just keep billing the County. Stutsman asked Lyness if the Board can go pass the $70,000. Lyness read from the contract that the consultant's compensation is a lump-sum fee. She continued that for Phase I the fee is $70,000 and additional services for changes and scope require prior approval by the client. She added that reimbursable expenses are billed at 1.15 times the cost to Durrant including expenses for transportation, reproduction including CDs, and expenses for models rendering computer generation.
Stutsman said Lewis hasn't done anything for the County taxpayers and has been paid $68,000 despite being behind schedule. She said she can't believe that the Board is now talking about negotiating with Lewis. Neuzil said he isn't suggesting negotiating, but that someone needs to go through the contract and expectations with Lewis. He said the question is whether they do that in front of a TV camera and the public. R. Sullivan said he wants to make sure the Board gets in contact with the Auditor's Office to assure the County does not pay Durrant anything else. Harney said they should first talk to Lewis because he is afraid of ending up in a stalemate where Lewis says he won't do any more work until he is paid more. He said he thinks there needs to be a sit-down discussion between Lewis, Lyness, M. Sullivan, Pulkrabek and some of the Supervisors.
Stutsman said Lewis has not fulfilled the contract. Harney said that needs to be addressed with Lewis and if he cannot fulfill it, the contract needs to be broken. Meyers said for now the Board can stop payments and have a discussion with Lewis, and then if he doesn't produce what he has already been paid to produce the decision is in the Board's hands. Pulkrabek said the Board can ask Lewis after the May 15, 2008 Informal Meeting to schedule a meeting. R. Sullivan said the Board should ask him during the meeting. Pulkrabek said he isn't sure if the Board should do that in front of the cameras.
Harney said that his concern is that the Board has asked for many additional things that were left wide open on the contract. Lyness said she recommends hearing from Lewis and then setting up an appointment by the end of the week to go over the contract. She said that if the Board decides to go forward with Lewis they should set a date, no more than six weeks out, to get things done. She added that if the work is not finished by the end of the set date, Lewis would need to pay the County back. Neuzil said that the Facilities Committee needs to talk with Lewis and determine what is going on. Stutsman said she and Harney serve on the Facilities Committee.
Harney said that if the Board announces the date of the meeting with Lewis that would give an open invitation to the press to attend. He said that will raise a flag and he is not sure if the Board is ready to do that. Stutsman said the Board is spending taxpayer dollars and asked why the public shouldn't know what's going on. R. Sullivan said he's afraid not to raise the flag. Harney said people tend to not be open and talkative when the press is present. He said he thinks it's going to be a big headline. Stutsman said she was on the Selections Committee and Lewis was by far the most capable person for the project. Stutsman said she thinks Lewis underbid the project, and now he's found out that the project is a lot bigger than he originally thought. She said she bets he will come back and say he'll finish the job, but only after he gets $500,000.
R. Sullivan reiterated that at the meeting on May 15, 2008, they will ask Lewis to meet with Lyness, Pulkrabek, Stutsman, Harney, and M. Sullivan in the next seven days and discuss what has been done and what needs to be done. Neuzil said the Board's expectations also need to be discussed. R. Sullivan said that after the meeting everyone will report back to the rest of the Board at the meeting on May 22, 2008. Neuzil said giving Lewis six weeks to have a report seems reasonable considering that the project has already gone half a year over the deadline. Lyness agreed and said if Lewis wants to conduct public meetings they should be able to schedule those within the six week timeframe.
R. Sullivan said some members of the Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee (CJCC) are expressing concerns about how fast or slow the Board is moving through things. He asked if the Board wants to have monthly joint meetings with CJCC or continue with the current bimonthly setup. Neuzil said that there is a scheduled joint meeting between the Board and CJCC in June 2008. Harney said the Board has received a report from the Jail Alternatives Committee and they are as far as they can go at this point. He said the Board has cancelled several joint meetings because there is nothing to talk about other than alternatives. Harney said that after the Board receives the report they would need to reevaluate the progress. He said that it is important to hire a coordinator to help organize the process. Harney noted that when the coordinator position is filled there should be a joint meeting between the Board and the CJCC.
R. Sullivan said he would like to see a large blown-up picture of four to five possible locations for the jail or Justice Center. He added that they should discuss each option for about 15 minutes and create a list of pros and cons for each one. R. Sullivan said he thought Durrant was going to do that. Stutsman concurred. R. Sullivan said he'd like to see the Board do something whether Lewis is part of it or not. He said he doesn't think Lewis knows the pros and cons of the locations since he can't even find the Melrose spot. R. Sullivan said he doesn't have a whole lot of faith that Lewis can tell what's good or bad about a particular site. He said the Board can at least start the process.
Stutsman said that the Board needs to hire a coordinator for the CJCC. She said the process needs to be established. She said she is wondering why the Board would want to think about sites before Mike Lewis presents the report with his assessments. Harney said Lyness is currently drawing up a job description for a Committee Coordinator. Lyness said met with Pulkrabek, M. Sullivan, Assistant County Attorney Scott Finlayson, and MECCA Executive Director Art Schut to go over what they want in the position.
R. Sullivan said he doesn't see why the Board shouldn't start the process so they have something to hand off to the new coordinator. Harney said the question is whether the coordinator is going to be a contracted individual or a County employee. Pulkrabek said Lewis will not tell the Board which site is best, but will offer his opinion on the four sites. He said he agrees with R. Sullivan that getting the Board to agree on one location is the best option currently available. Stutsman said it seems like the Board would be making a decision without having all the information they need.
R. Sullivan said that if the Board starts the process it will get the community talking about the project, which will give the Board feedback and it would let the Board members know what questions they have to ask. He said the process is needed so the Board can start doing something. Pulkrabek said it will not hurt to get started. Meyers said the Board will have to think about all that anyway when making the decision. Pulkrabek agreed.
Whiston said the coordinator position is the paramount thing. She said she thinks the meetings were not cancelled because there was nothing to talk about, but because there was no one to organize what the committee should talk about. Whiston said for the project to go forward the CJCC needs to do site evaluations and continue to have a very visionary and proactive concept of what criminal justice is about in the county. She said they need to be selling more than just a building. Whiston said she thinks there is plenty to be done, but it can't be done without a coordinator.
R. Sullivan said that he wants to start the process of discussing possible sites. He said they can at least do some preliminary work at the meetings. Harney asked if they are looking to select some sites and then discuss their feasibility. R. Sullivan said he wants to discuss pros and cons for each site. Neuzil said that probably by August 2008 a report will be done and the coordinator position will be defined and a coordinator will possibly be hired. R. Sullivan reiterated that he doesn't have any faith in Lewis's report. Stutsman said that maybe the Board should just fire Lewis and start doing the work themselves. Neuzil said the Board has invested $68,000 and he wants to see a report.
R. Sullivan said they could start brainstorming in June 2008 and be three months ahead by August. Pulkrabek said that in June 2008 there is a joint meeting between the Board and the CJCC and by July there should be some idea of the kind of project they are looking to achieve. He noted that at that point the Board and the CJCC could start working together on a monthly basis. Stutsman said the Board should wait until after the meeting on May 15, 2008 with Durrant to see what has been done. Meyers said there are a lot of questions to be answered. Stutsman agreed.
Lyness said she would like to see the Board move ahead as quickly as possible on the coordinator position and then make a commitment to be very involved once the coordinator is on board. Neuzil said he thinks that the Board will get a report in six weeks and the coordinator position can be defined and filled by August 1, 2008. R. Sullivan asked if the Board will do any work, in terms of pros and cons on sites, before August 1, 2008. Harney asked Lyness how long it would take for a job description to be put together. M. Sullivan said it is taking awhile. Harney asked if the job description would be ready for the next CJCC meeting. M. Sullivan and Lyness said yes. Stutsman said she would like to hear from the Durrant Group before deciding to do anything.
Stutsman said she doesn't think the County should contract with anyone else until the situation with Durrant is settled. Harney said he thinks it is good conversation. R. Sullivan said the Vernon Research Group can test locations and added that the public might disagree with the sites the Board has chosen. Meyers said that is a good point because the Board can choose a site that is rejected by the public. R. Sullivan said the Board doesn't know what the public support numbers are and that the Vernon Research Group could help them with that. R. Sullivan said the Vernon Research Group would get feedback from the registered voters. He added that the Board receives a lot of feedback from attorneys and others who are intricately involved, but does not get feedback from the average voter. R. Sullivan said that the Vernon Research Group will reach out to the voters. R. Sullivan said that if 70% of voters are in favor of the jail the Board should hold the vote during a high turnout election. He noted that if only 40% of people are in favor the Board should hold the vote sometime in June and target the people that are most likely to vote.
Stutsman said she still feels they should wait to hear from Durrant because the things they are discussing are things that Durrant is supposed to do. She said the Board is either duplicating work or going off on a different project. She noted that she doesn't deny the information from Vernon would be valuable but she thinks it is premature to make a decision on that. Neuzil said there is no funding designated for Vernon Research. He added that no decision can be made until a coordinator is hired and a report is presented. He said that should happen by the end of 2008. Stutsman said in her mind it seemed like the Board will target some locations and then Vernon will come in. Neuzil said that can still be done. R. Sullivan said it seems like the Board has narrowed it down to three or four sites. Neuzil said the question continues to be whether the new building will be a Justice Center or a jail annexation. R. Sullivan said the Vernon Research Group can help answer that question.
Recessed at 9:54 a.m.; reconvened at 9:59 a.m.
R. Sullivan said that Maximus Financial Services felt it was unfair that a vendor solicited the Board's business and the Board agreed. Stutsman said the decision was based on recommendations and said that she didn't feel the Supervisors were lobbied at all. Harney said that sometimes the Board doesn't have full information before taking on projects. Neuzil said there should be more filtering. He added that the requests or proposals should go through the committee process before getting to the Board. Neuzil added that no one should come to the Board with dollar requests before getting through the committee process. He noted that would avoid any political implications.
R. Sullivan said there are a lot of long-term business relationships that are not reviewed by the Board. Stutsman said that other companies have showed interest in working with the County, but were not reliable. R. Sullivan said the process is not equal for everyone. Harney stated that several people have wanted to place a bid in the past, but the Board was not interested because of history and services provided. R. Sullivan said that the Board should have an annual discussion to determine if the relationships are adequate or not. Stutsman said that there are costs involved in doing Request for Proposals (RFP) and is unsure if that is a good use of tax dollars, resources, and time. She noted that she does not want to go through unnecessary processes. Harney asked if County Auditor Tom Slockett wanted to do something different. R. Sullivan said that Slockett wanted to switch from Maximus.
Stutsman said the reason she wanted to do RFPs is because the Board has never done them before. R. Sullivan explained that it was also new territory for Bond Attorney Bob Josten; however, he didn't get an RFP. Lyness said it is unusual to do an RFP for trained services. R. Sullivan said there are inconsistencies within the same project. R. Sullivan said he doesn't want to get into a situation in which the Board has to choose the cheapest bidder. He said that does not ensure the best results. Stutsman said the Board should think more about Neuzil's idea to have the Finance Committee review the items and make a recommendation to the Board if RFPs are warranted. R. Sullivan said that there are certain areas with no oversight. M. Sullivan suggested that the Board set up a threshold for RFPs. M. Sullivan said that the Board should try and work with the same company for a certain period of time to determine if the relationship works.
R. Sullivan said that it sounded like the Board wants the Finance Committee to meet and come up with the threshold and the things that fall outside of that. M. Sullivan asked who the members of the Finance Committee are. Stutsman replied that she, Neuzil, R. Sullivan, County Treasurer Tom Kriz, and a representative from the Auditor's Office are on the committee. Stutsman said that they should set up a meeting. R. Sullivan said this will be a process that is not currently in place. M. Sullivan said that having a group look through RFPs and provide recommendations would take away a big time burden for the Supervisors. R. Sullivan said that the Finance Committee should provide updates to Elected Officials. M. Sullivan said that the Committee should provide updates at all the Elected Officials meetings.
Harney said they had come across some issues in regard to where the personnel files should be kept, as well as what office they should be kept in. Harney said that Human Resources has files in different locations. He said it is unclear who should be managing what. He said that Human Resources should keep grievances. M. Sullivan explained that each department keeps their own personnel records. He noted that departments need to separate the medical from the personnel records and explained that Human Resources has talked with each department about that.
M. Sullivan said that when he was gone in January 2008 and part of February 2008 the Board needed access to the Department Head personnel files locked in his office. He noted that the documents that he keeps are evaluations and the material that goes with that, such as executive session forms, notes, pre-evaluation notes and comments, matrix spreadsheets for the assessments, merit numbers, and the rest of the information from the Department Heads. M. Sullivan said that Human Resources Administrator Lora Shramek keeps track of grievances, medical information, and benefits documentation. He said he only keeps the evaluations for Department Heads. R. Sullivan asked if M. Sullivan kept files on Board Secretary Jo Hogarty and Budget Coordinator Rich Claiborne. M. Sullivan replied that he didn't keep files on Hogarty, but did on Claiborne. He noted that he also keeps his files that he came in with from the Ambulance Department. He said he uses a secure drive and scans the documents in there. He said that if he is not at work he could give the Supervisors his password and they could digitally access the information.
Stutsman asked if M. Sullivan keeps the disciplinary actions for Department Heads. M. Sullivan replied that Shramek has those materials. He said that all he has is evaluations. Stutsman said that Shramek also keeps grievances. M. Sullivan said the question is whether the personnel documents that are located in each respective department should be moved to the Human Resources Office. He said that Shramek recommends that each department continue to keep their own personnel records and follow the procedure of separating the medical records from the personnel files.
R. Sullivan said the Iowa State Association of Counties (ISAC) District Meeting will be held on June 19, 2008, which is the same time as the regular Board meeting. Stutsman said it is an all day legislative meeting. R. Sullivan said that since the ISAC Meeting is being held in the county they should try to attend it. He asked if the Board should reschedule the regular meeting for June 19, 2008. Stutsman said they could choose to have a short Board meeting that day and only discuss claims. M. Sullivan said the Board has a Strategic Planning Session on June 18, 2008. He noted that they could combine the two meetings. Neuzil suggested they change the June 19, 2008 meeting to June 18, 2008 at 9 a.m. The Board agreed to change the meeting to June 18, 2008. Stutsman suggested having a press release to inform the public about the change.
R. Sullivan said that the County gets a set number of votes at the National Association of Counties (NACo) Conference. He said that last year was a fiasco in terms of the election for officers. Neuzil said the next election will be fairly contested. R. Sullivan said the Board needs to designate a voting delegate and an alternate. He added that they also need to indicate who would pick up the ballot in the event that the delegate and the alternate can't do so. He said the Board has the option to vote, hand their vote to another county in the state, or hand their vote to ISAC. Stutsman said that last year they handed their vote to ISAC. R. Sullivan said that they had differences with ISAC on some issues and it might be better to have Linn County as a proxy. County Recorder Kim Painter said that sometimes resolutions that pertain to foresight issues come up. Stutsman asked when the voting would take place. Painter said it would be on the last day of the conference. Neuzil said he would be there on the last day.
R. Sullivan said the Board needs to come up with a designee. He said that if the designee is not available another county in the State or the State Association President could cast the vote. He noted that another option would be to not allow their vote to be cast. Neuzil said the Board should cast their own vote. Neuzil said that either he or Painter could cast the vote. Harney said that they would rather have Linn County take a vote than have the ISAC President do it. Stutsman said she would be fine with ISAC casting the vote because they would certainly be there. She said she would hate to have their vote thrown away because Linn County is not represented on the day of the vote. The Board agreed to designate Neuzil and Painter to cast the vote. In case Neuzil and Painter are not present, ISAC will cast the Board's vote. R. Sullivan said that he will fill out the forms.
R. Sullivan said that Johnson County Local Food Alliance President James Nisly called him asking for the money allocated by the Board for their brochure. R Sullivan said that Claiborne told him that the money was not included in the budget. R. Sullivan said that surprised him because he thought the Board decided to allocate money for the brochure. Stutsman said that looking at the minutes from that meeting she thought there was a pretty clear direction from the Board for funding. Neuzil said that they could find the extra dollars. R. Sullivan said they are talking about the minutes from the December 20, 2007 Informal Meeting. R. Sullivan said the Board could amend the $500 in discussion. Stutsman asked if the Board put money aside for economic development. M. Sullivan said he can find the money, but wants to make sure the Board still wants to proceed with the funding.
Harney said this is the item where Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell advised the Board to make sure the County isn't buying advertising and just giving a donation. R. Sullivan said that Harney made that point during the December 2007 meeting. Neuzil said it is a sponsorship. M. Sullivan said the Local Food Initiative needs the funding before July 1, 2008. Stutsman said she thought the amount requested was $3,000. Meyers said he also remembers the amount being $3,000. Harney asked if the County is matching Linn County’s contribution. Stutsman said no and noted that they are doing that for a different project.
Stutsman repeated she thought the amount was $3,000. R. Sullivan asked M. Sullivan if he could find the exact amount. R. Sullivan said he would tell Nisly that the Board has approved the funding and that he should get in touch with M. Sullivan. Harney said he doesn't remember the amount being $3,000. R. Sullivan said that it is stated in the minutes that the amount is $3,000. Stutsman said the Board wanted to take a more firm commitment to local food and this was one way to do it. Stutsman said Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak told her he is returning $70,000 from his budget.
Stutsman said there has always been an issue with language barriers within the County. She said Spanish in the workplace has been tried, but hasn't been used as much as was hoped. Stutsman noted that when there is a language issue at the Recorder's Office someone tries to find Senior Building Inspector Ruben Arsate. Stutsman said that Information Services Director Jean Schultz and Correia found a Language Line Service and wanted to know if the Board would like to take a closer look at the service. She said it sounds almost too good to be true. Stutsman said that anyone having a language problem can call the phone line and ask for an interpreter in the language needed. Stutsman said at one time there was a system that was more literal and did not always work, but Language Line Services has interpreters for a very large number of languages. She said the problem is that the service is pretty expensive. Stutsman said she thinks Spanish is the most common language to deal with.
Neuzil said Ambulance Director Steve Spenler continues to come to the Board with the proposal of hiring a trainer for his department. He said that one of the job requirements for the trainer position would be that they are fluent in Spanish. R. Sullivan said there are an awful lot of people in the community whose first language is Chinese or something other than Spanish. He said that Language Line would work for everyone. Stutsman said there is a signup fee and the charge rate is $2 per minute depending on whether the calls are made during peak or non-peak hours. She said it is a great service for short conversations, but not for depositions that run over an hour. Stutsman said that if the County decides to use the service the Board should put limits on it. She noted that for longer, more involved conversations, it might be cheaper to hire an interpreter from the University of Iowa. Neuzil said the University might be interested in creating a Translations Program with the students. Harney said they had a program like that at one time. Stutsman said there would be availability issues when students are in class, but Language Line interpreters are always available when called. Neuzil asked what the initiation cost is. Stutsman read that there is a one-time setup fee for each client identification number. She noted that Schultz said the County would use just one number. Stutsman said the setup fee is $275, a detailed electronic statement is $125, subsequent identification numbers are $125 each, and a custom greeting is $50. She said she thinks the County could get by with the $275 setup fee and the $1.95 per minute.
Neuzil asked how often the Recorder's Office needs a translator. County Recorder Kim Painter said there are some cycles where people need birth records for Social Services. She said her department uses Arsate for substantial conversations about two to four times a week. Painter noted that four times per week is usually the maximum. She said there are a whole set of issues that come up with birth records. Painter said that if the father is not named on the birth record the family has to go through the paternity affidavit process, which takes a long time to explain. Painter said Arsate has been very kind about translating, but she feels bad taking him away from his work. Neuzil said that having Spanish in the workplace for emergency responders is different than for other services.
Painter said that typically people receive help. R. Sullivan said he knows Correia works with parents that bring in their children and use them to communicate because the kids are the only ones that speak English. He said that is an inappropriate use of children which makes DHS and Social Services really uncomfortable. Painter said her department has seen that happen a few times. Stutsman said that someone should ask Kriz if he has similar problems. R. Sullivan said there is a Spanish-speaking employee in the Treasurer's Office.
Painter said there is a very specialized type of vocabulary that needs to be used that involves an extraordinary level of fluency to translate. Harney said the service could get pretty expensive. Neuzil asked Painter what she would decide to do if placed in the position of a Supervisor. Painter said she would decide in favor of the service. R. Sullivan said the Board could pay the setup fee $350 and the departments could charge the minutes used on their own credit cards.
Neuzil said 20-minute conversations are a hard thing to learn and wonders if it is the responsibility of the government to provide that service. Stutsman said the County is here to provide services. She added that the services can't be provided if the employees can't communicate. Neuzil said it is a two-way street because non-English speakers ought to be able to communicate with County employees or bring in their own interpreter. Neuzil said maybe a list can be created of people who have interpretation skills so that their expertise can be used when needed.
Meyers asked if there are any other languages that come up consistently. Painter said Spanish is the regular recurring language barrier her department runs into. R. Sullivan asked Painter if workers sometimes worry about answering questions because of the language barrier. Painter said yes, and noted that sometimes people just take the forms and go, which implies to her that they will locate someone in the community to help them with the forms. R. Sullivan asked Painter if any staff walked away from the counter wondering if they had served a person. Painter said that is probably true. Meyers asked if there are any printed instructions in Spanish. Painter said the State Department of Public Health has provided some Spanish instructions. Painter said when Arsate is used, conversations are at least doubled and possibly tripled in length because the staff has to tell Arsate what to say and then he must translate it. The item will be put on the Department Head meeting agenda for more discussion.
R. Sullivan said Kempf told him he is not worried about things like Secondary Roads Sheds. He said he is also not going to put in bike racks at any of the County buildings that will soon be moved into the new facility because the cost to move them is high. R. Sullivan said there will be a lot of bike racks at the new building. R. Sullivan said that Kempf told him that the bike racks at the Courthouse and the Sheriff's Office need to be replaced.
R. Sullivan asked M. Sullivan if he will get the action plans filled out after the meeting. M. Sullivan said yes. M. Sullivan said he would continue to do action plans for Key Issues meetings. R. Sullivan asked if there are any updates in terms of action plans. M. Sullivan said no. Neuzil said getting some oversight on the Conservation Project would be nice.
Stutsman said she is concerned because there have now been three incidents when people have shown up to meetings when their item was not on the agenda. She said two of those times people had driven a considerable distance to get to the meeting. She noted that last week representatives from the Eastern Iowa Tourism Association were present at 9 a.m. because they were unaware that the Board meeting was at 5:30 p.m. Stutsman asked if it is the Board's responsibility to announce when something isn't on the agenda. She said there was one time when Soil and Water Conservation Commission Member Chris Taliga came when there wasn't an agenda item and another time Iowa City Senior Center Commission Member Bob Engel did the same. Stutsman said she feels bad when people make a special effort or travel a distance to attend a meeting and because of some miscommunication their item didn't get on the agenda.
R. Sullivan said Engel never contacted M. Sullivan and that's why his item was not on the agenda. He said that the Board should remind the Senior Center that if someone is coming to a meeting they need to talk to a member of the Board or M. Sullivan first. R. Sullivan asked if the action plans might help with the problem a little bit. Neuzil said that if he goes to a meeting he makes sure he was on the agenda before going over. Stutsman said she thinks people do not know the routine. She said maybe all it would take is for someone to tell people to look on the website and make sure their item is on the agenda. Stutsman asked if Hogarty could call and remind those on the agenda of upcoming meetings. Neuzil said it is similar to when the dentist office calls two days prior to an appointment to remind him. R. Sullivan said that isn't a bad idea.
Neuzil said one of the things that is lacking in the room is really good artwork. Neuzil said a unique possibility is if each Supervisor brought a piece of artwork to display. Stutsman said she has a whole basement full of stuff to hang. Neuzil said it doesn't have to match. M. Sullivan said that maybe the Board should take the discussion to the Communications Committee. He said he has a wife and a daughter that are very artistically talented and he thinks there are a lot of artistically talented people working for the County. M. Sullivan said the Board could ask County employees to bring in their artwork for display. R. Sullivan said they could also encourage submissions from students attending area high schools. Meyers said the Communications Committee had discussed art for the new building and how to secure funding for that. Stutsman said she thought there is money for public art in the budget for public buildings. M. Sullivan said there are some funds in there.
R. Sullivan said there is no requirement that the County does anything for the new building and whatever the Board does is at their discretion. Neuzil said that they don't need to spend a lot of money. He said he was talking about giving high school kids an opportunity to display their artwork. Neuzil said the Grant Wood picture is great, but it needs other artwork with it. R. Sullivan suggested M. Sullivan put the artwork discussion on the agenda. R. Sullivan said that occasionally the Board receives recognition and thought those should be displayed where people can see them. R. Sullivan said they don't need to have them hanging permanently, but should be displayed when the County receives them.
R. Sullivan asked if there is a joint meeting coming up that Coralville is hosting. M. Sullivan said there will be a joint meeting. He added that the deadline for submitting discussion items is May 14, 2008. Stutsman asked if the Board has submitted any items. Stutsman asked M. Sullivan if he could forward the agenda. M. Sullivan said he would. Neuzil said that at the last meeting the Board assigned a Supervisor to each of the items. R. Sullivan said that he hadn't submitted any discussion items for the upcoming meeting. He remembered that Stutsman submitted three discussion items for the previous meeting and then didn't show up. He said that any of them could talk about most things if they know they would have to do so. Neuzil said that sending out assignments is helpful.
Neuzil said the meeting is on May 22, 2008. R. Sullivan said the discussion items submitted are a proposal for volunteer action, initiatives for Strategic Planning, a jail update, building construction updates, the Joint Emergency Communications Center, and trails for the Conservation Bond. M. Sullivan said there is a total of seven items. Stutsman said she could do the Volunteer Center discussion. She asked what the initiatives for Strategic Planning are. Neuzil said he put the rest of the items on the agenda and they are all quick updates. M. Sullivan said he would email the list to everyone. Stutsman said she is frustrated that the Board shies away from really meaty things to talk about. She thought they should talk about joint planning because there are some things that should be done in collaboration with other communities. She said that one of the things discussed at ISAC was TIF districts. She said they could discuss how TIF districts impact the community.
Neuzil said he is not putting his name on any of the items because he may not be able to stay the whole time. R. Sullivan said that the question is if the Board wanted updates. M. Sullivan said that had never been clear. He noted that the last two or three meetings were cancelled because of a lack of agenda items. He said that Coralville's response was that the County has enough in terms of getting the meeting going. Neuzil asked if there are things Coralville is doing that the Board should be aware of. Stutsman asked if it is a good use of everyone's time to talk about things that can be found in the newspaper. She said that the League of Woman Voters and others would like to see the meetings used for collaboration and pertinent issues. Harney agreed and said there was a discussion at one point to stop the meetings due to lack of material.
R. Sullivan said that Neuzil mentioned talking about taxes and what is on the radar in regards to taxing entities. Neuzil asked if Coralville's next big project coincides with the Board's next big project. Stutsman pointed out that schools are a concern because the school board is not sure where they would locate the next school. Stutsman said that when the Board worked on the budget she proposed to bring all entities in and explain that the County has to fund the Joint Communications Center, which means a big jump in taxes. Neuzil said if another community in the county has a $40 to $50 million project being built in the same time frame, that is a pretty big swallow for taxpayers. R. Sullivan said that the school board might say they need a third high school. Neuzil said that the school board is saving money, but they are years away from a new high school. He said they don't have enough numbers for a new high school.
R. Sullivan said he doesn't want the Board to be the only one to report at the meeting. Stutsman said that Coralville has a different way of running the meetings to avoid addressing meaty issues. R. Sullivan said he doesn't have any problem with the Board reporting if everyone else does the same. Neuzil asked if Coralville has any updates. He said that if there are no updates they should not have the meeting.
Stutsman said they should have a discussion to decide whether the meetings are necessary. She said it is difficult to have everyone at the table and feel comfortable enough to talk about the issues. Stutsman said there are many things to overcome for it to really work. She said, like City of Cedar Rapids Planner Dean Wheatley said, it came down to what everyone was willing to give up to have a collaborative discussion. R. Sullivan said that over the last couple years Stutsman and himself were two of maybe five or six people pushing the Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG) to look at something bigger, which they have. Stutsman said that the only problem with JCCOG is limited representation.
Neuzil said that the Joint Communications Center is a great collaboration. He said that the entities identified an issue and jointly came up with ideas to do something. Neuzil said the jail is another big issue, but he isn't sure how to get all entities involved. Neuzil pointed out that the League of Women Voters, JCCOG, Coralville, Iowa City, North Liberty, and University Heights were all in support of the Communications Center. Stutsman said that maybe Elected Officials were behind it, but the community wasn't. R. Sullivan said he believed the community was behind it until they got the price tag and then got buyer's remorse. Stutsman said that a lot of people went to the ballot box and voted either for the library or the jail.
R. Sullivan said that it sounds like the Board is still in favor of meeting, but only if there is something substantive to discuss. M. Sullivan said he emailed Coralville to let them know that six of seven items submitted by the Board are updates and to ask what other discussion items have been submitted.
Adjourned at 11:15 a.m.
______________________________________________________________________
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By:
On the _______ day of _____________________, 2008
By John Deeth, Recording Secretary
Sent to the Board of Supervisors on June 25, 2008 at 11:28 a.m.