MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
AUGUST 21, 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Social Services Coordinator Amy Correia: Recommendation of an Update and Renewal to the 28E Agreement Between the Johnson County Board of Supervisors and the Iowa Department of Human Services....... 1
Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell: Provisions of Proposed Lease Between Johnson County and Joint Emergency Communications Services Association of Johnson County................................................... 3
Reports and Inquiries from the Board of Supervisors................................................................. 8
Chairperson Sullivan called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 9:18 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Larry Meyers, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
Social Services Coordinator Amy Correia said there was an executive summary submitted on Tuesday about the background of the 28E Agreement between Johnson County and the Department of Human Services (DHS). She said it is not a new item and has been before the Board before. Correia said there was a work session about it 18 months ago or so. She said what they have before them is the new proposed agreement that has gone through all the legal channels. Correia said it has gone to the Attorney General’s Office at the State and the County Attorney’s office. Everything they have has been legally reviewed. She said one of the main impetuses for renewing the agreement is changes and operation of certain programs through the Department of Human Services. For many years they have had the agreement in place and have what they call 28E staff, staff that are County employees supervised by the Department of Human Services Supervisors who do work that extends services to Johnson County populations. Correia said they have staff that are doing child care systems applications locally as well as foster care and placement. Correia said that about 18 months ago the State changed how they are providing those services by doing subcontracts with non-profit organizations. Correia said those services are now being provided in other ways and they are not able to provide those services in the same way. She said they have tried to negotiate and continue with services as they have been provided locally in the County office. Correia said because they can’t do the old 28E agreement containing those services, they have begun to meet with department representatives to find out what their services are that are being done in the County that can be provided through the Department of Human Services and add extra value to the community. She says she feels the department has been able to so.
Correia said the main service that is being provided is in-home child care visits to newly registered homes. She said it is not a requirement in Iowa but it is a requirement in other states like Illinois. Correia said they feel it is an important service to increase the quality of child care, as well as the safety of children. She said the daycare registration rules is a pretty thick book. Correia explained a lot of times it provides accountability and education to providers that are wanting to do in-home child care and maybe don’t read through the whole book before providing care. She said they go in and provide the visit, spending a couple of hours going through everything they need to have in place. Correia said what they are hoping for over time is, one, getting homes initially registered and working with the four pieces to work on quality. She said quality of performance standards is a State initiative to increase quality of childcare and decrease abuse or other things because the child care provider didn’t follow those registrations from the beginning. Correia said that is an important piece. She said they can see from the last six months of the year that Social Worker II An Fevold did over 182 visits with childcare homes in the County.
Neuzil said that is what it comes down to, as far as the investment. He said, ultimately, as long as they know that these employees the County is stepping up and providing, are providing additional services and not doing the services that the State normally provides. Department of Human Services Employee Karen Evans saidFevold has been around for a long time, and people definitely miss her not doing what she used to do. She said that with Fevold taking the time to go into the homes, taking the time to work with the day care people, they have seen a reduction in the number of calls in terms of what things mean and that they don’t understand certain things. Evans said it has definitely reduced calls for clarification on the thick daycare book. She said Fevold is also going in there as a very easy-going person. Evans said she thinks people, when they have a department coming in, get a little nervous, and Fevold lets them know the department is there to help. Evans said she has received calls complimentary of Fevold, with her coming in and helping clarify. She said it has been helpful to the providers of the County. R. Sullivan asked Evans if she actually supervises those two people. Evans said that is correct. R. Sullivan said so that although the County hires them, the department directs their work. Evans said yes.
Correia said the second staff person primarily conducts family team meetings. She said it is an initiative within the child welfare field to conduct family team meetings. Correia said she has also been able to go above and beyond writing those family team meetings. Correia said the staff person has also been identified to specialize in family team meetings for African American families. She said they have disproportionate minority representation and child welfare in the State as well as nationally. Correia said it is an effort to address the needs of families at the very beginning of involvement to try to reduce the time involved in child welfare. She said she is also able to do the relative home study reports. Correia said it is something that is not part of any DHS contract, and research shows that if you can get a child into a relative placement when they need to not be in the care of their parents for the time, that is better for the child, and the relative placement has to have a study done. She said that is something that Social Worker II Margo Magee-Swim continues to study and keep kids with their families. Evans said, unfortunately, the County has a very high number as compared to other areas in the State of minority children in out-of-home placement. She said what Correia was saying about what Magee-Swim can do involves focusing on working with families and identifying what their needs are. Evans said many of the families are not originally from around here, and to help them to identify some services, what they might consider a relative of a family, with Magee-Swim working with the families, they can identify the proper placement which the Court will approve for the children to be at until they can return home. She said Magee-Swim does a lot of direct work with families. Evans said Magee-Swim’s work with the families is able to get the children into safe places, otherwise they may get split up and put in homes a couple of counties away. She said Magee-Swim’s work is definitely beneficial.
Correia said a new item, besides having the revision of job use, is having the department and quarterly reports on work produced, and then the outcome measures. She said that is something new in the agreement that lets everyone know the benefits to the community of having those agreements and the services in place. Correia said that is something she will report to the Board yearly during her progress reports. She said she has attached the reporting form as well. R. Sullivan said, as Correia had mentioned, it is a 28E and they will need to approve the agreement going forward, and he asked if there is any interest in moving things forward for the week of August 25, 2008 and if there are any questions for Evans or Correia.
Neuzil said it looks pretty close to where they have been in 2003. He said they need to move forward, and it is good to have things cleaned up. Neuzil said, particularly with the relationship with everyone under the same roof, that will be very helpful. He said he knows they have had some issues with confidentiality things because of County and State, but he is assuming that has been worked out. Stutsman said she knows Correia has put a lot of work into getting the details ironed out and coordinating with any number of people who are very busy. Stutsman said it has been a big job and asked if the 28E Agreement is the only one in the state. Correia said as far as they know.
Stutsman left at 9:45 a.m.
Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell said he wants to touch base with the Board before he gets all the drafting done on the proposed lease between Johnson County and the Joint Emergency Communications Services Association. He said the Board has agreed to allow the new 28E entity, which they keep forgetting the name for, but to put it in the lease documents and the agenda, so that is technically what the entity is called. Chappell said the County is going to lease the entity space out on the County Farm property immediately south of the Chatham Oaks facility. He said he suspects that it is a lease that does not necessarily have as much negotiation as they may normally think because, frankly, it is going to be a nominal fee and the County is doing so just to keep the cost down. Chappell said it will be reviewed by the other side, and hopefully they will get helpful suggestions, but to the extent that there are items that the Board wants covered in the lease, now is the time to talk about those things and let Chappell know to include them. He said the process afterward will be a draft that ideally gets the Board’s initial okay at an informal meeting. Chappell said he will get the same from the legal counsel for the 28E entity, and then they will go through a public hearing process. He said that is why they are here today.
Chappell asked the Board if there are things they have thought they need to make sure he has in the lease. He said it is going to be a pretty standard document in a lot of ways. Chappell said he can talk about things they need to cover, such as access to the area as it doesn’t front Melrose Avenue. He said they have already granted an easement to the facility of the apartments nearby. Chappell said if they have to do an easement, which may be the case, they may be able to get by with that one, but he will defer it to the Bond Counsel as an issue for them. He said if they have to do an easement, that will be a separate process, but the legal description is pretty much already there as they have followed the existing driveway that was put in for the apartments. Chappell said the term is something they may want input on. He said they have considered a long term lease, as the Board recalls the 28E agreement is actually a perpetual agreement to the extent that it will exist to take care of emergency communications in the County until and unless the entity is terminated and shut down. Chappell said, obviously, they are going to want a long term on the lease. He said, as a practical matter, he really only sees it terminating if 1) everyone agrees they are going to move somewhere else, and the building has outlived its useful life or 2) if the 28E breaks up which they have some pretty strong language in the agreement to make sure that doesn’t happen.
Chappell when talking about the term of the lease for the apartments, they started talking at 99 years because of legal parlance, when talking about the long term lease, 99 years seems to be the general discussion topic. He said, as the Board will recall, they have reduced it down to something that will more closely match the usable life of the building and was long enough to ensure the applicant/developer for those apartments to get the tax credit. Chappell said there have been a few hoops for them. He said they went with a 56 year lease at that point. Chappell said he spoke briefly with the bonding counsel for the 28E entity, and his immediate thought was that they can be flexible, but as far as the bonding they can’t go any less than 30 years because that can raise issues with the bonding companies, and who they will get the bonds from.
R. Sullivan said the only issue that he has been able to come up with where he has had concern, involves 10-20 years from 2008. R. Sullivan said if one of the entities decides to pull out essentially the agreement will fall apart. He said the building then would be abandoned. R. Sullivan asked if there is anything the County can do to make sure another building isn’t sitting empty for another 100 years and if the County can somehow reclaim it. Chappell said his thought on that is that they will try to have a reversionary interest in there for the County, to the extent that if the lease and building is abandoned, then title to the building will go to the County so they can then do what they need to with the building. He said to the extent that there is anything that will cause some additional thought on the other side, it can be that maybe from the bonding perspective. Chappell said the concern is if they are going to be spending a lot of money, not just on the building but all the equipment that is going to be in it and attached to it, they need to make sure the money is well spent and the money continues to be used for emergency communication purposes. He said there will be some language in the lease indicating that upon termination the building will revert to the County. Chappell said that will be a little tricky if it happens before they are paid off, but the idea is that the County will presumably have the option to continue where the entity left off and continue providing the Joint Emergency Communications services at least with the equipment. R. Sullivan said that is what he was getting at, if the County can use it if the entity falls apart.
Harney asked if they will be able to remove the tower if they need to. He said there may be something 50 years from now where the County does something completely different and they won’t need that. He asked if it would all fall back on the County. Chappell asked if Harney was talking about the lease being terminated. Harney replied yes, if they try to go another route with the Joint Emergency Communications Building. Chappell said one of the things is that the terms aren’t going to be friendly if, to some extent, because they are part of the 28E entity, and anything they do to increase the cost of the lease or the cost on the facility ultimately increases the cost for an entity they are not only part of, but funneling the entire cost of through their budget. Chappell said they obviously have an interest in keeping the cost down while protecting the County’s interest. He said he will try to find some way to address removing the towers if they are no longer needed.
Stutsman asked Chappell when the Board can expect to see the agreement. Chappell said he can probably have a draft to the Board by the week of August 25, 2008. Stutsman said if she thinks of anything else she will get it to Chappell fairly quickly. Chappell said the lease won’t be finalized until they go through the public hearing process. R. Sullivan asked if Chappell is looking, assuming the Board can do that, to be in contact with Executive Assistant Mike Sullivan if they need to have something on the formal meeting the week of August 25, 2008. Chappell replied they don’t need anything on the formal at the current point for the lease. He said they will have another draft to the Board on the informal so they can have all the discussion they want and give them a preliminary yes, so they can start the public hearing process.
Harney asked Chappell if they will build something that will take care of driveway cleaning and maintenance towards the driveway. Chappell said his thought on that is that the 28E entity will be responsible for all maintenance of the grounds and, obviously, any repairs or maintenance of the building. He said he wants to have a provision in there that allows the 28E entity to enter in to other agreements with the County, Chatham Oaks, the maintenance companies that are managing the apartments, etc. to allow them to be flexible, and if they can come up with a good agreement for sharing maintenance for the driveway. Chappell said it doesn’t make sense, as he assumes Chatham Oaks is contracting out their driveway for snow removal. He said he assumes the 28E will have to, and he assumes that the apartments are. Chappell said he would like to allow for cost savings there, to allow them to all work together. He said it doesn’t make sense to have the three of them out there. Chappell said, as far as the access road, the Board may recall they have an access agreement with the developer of the departments. He said that agreement, as it exists today, pushes the entire cost of maintaining that road including snow removal, on the apartment owners. Chappell said that can be something, in all fairness, they might want to rediscuss. He said it can not only be over control over snow removal, but there will also be a lot more traffic using the road than they initially planned. Chappell said he has spoken to the City who said the existing driveway is built sufficiently. Chappell said it won’t need to be widened, and if it needs to be, it will be the responsibility of the 28E entity. He said that is his plan on covering that.
Chappell said obviously they are going to want to have the building insured for loss. Chappell said they are going to want some general liability on there. He said his plan is to treat that the same way as he treats the maintenance to some extent. Chappell explained that is to push the responsibility for that on the 28E entity, but to allow for the County to be able to add them onto the County’s insurance and then bill the 28E entity back, assuming that works out and it provides the necessary coverage everyone needs. He said obviously it is a bit of a unique building, with some details needing to be worked out. Chappell said, however, he has had some preliminary discussions with County Insurance Agent of Record Bob Saunders, and he has indicated the rates they get with ICAPA are much lower than what they get if going with a private company. He said it may behoove the County to just add it to the County’s policy, and then they can go back to the 28E and work it into the lease. Chappell said they don’t have to decide it now, but his thought is making it a provisional possibility, because obviously if they save that cost for the 28E, they are saving themselves and the County money as well.
Chappell said that indemnification is something he also wishes to discuss. Chappell said usually, when they have 28E agreements with other governmental agencies, they try to avoid indemnification language as most governmental bodies have plenty of statutory immunity and there is no need to be necessarily pointing fingers. He said the more he has thought of the particular circumstances, however, he has decided to make sure there is an indemnification provision in there for that reason. Chappell said if there is any lawsuit involving the property, his concern is that the County will get hit twice, once as the landlord and once as part of the 28E. He said the 28E is going to be involved anyway, and they are going to have their own counsel. Chappell said those expenses are going to be set, so he doesn’t see any harm in seeing the indemnification clause in there, and he sees it as providing a little protection to make sure the County isn’t liable for more than its fair share. He said they will be liable obviously as part of the 28E but they won’t have that extra liability as the landlord as well.
Stutsman said Chappell has thought of everything. She appreciates the fact that he has taken into consideration cost and any way that costs can be saved by working together with all the groups. Stutsman said people are concerned about cost, and any way to save some money is the right direction. Chappell asked if anyone has any thoughts on term length. He said he has been thinking as between 30-99 as 50 years, which puts it closer to when the term would end for the apartments. He said that presumably a public building that is well built should last 50 years and definitely be paid for within that time period. Harney asked if there will be a renewable clause. Chappell said they will have the opportunity to renew as well, so yes. He said especially as they plan to have the 28E in existence in perpetuity. R. Sullivan said that is exactly what he is thinking, that it will make sense if it comes due the same time as the apartments do so a Board in 55 years has the option to review those things at the same time.
Chappell said, finally, he has a little provision they discussed some time ago. He said, if they remember correctly, they had a conversation of where exactly on the property the site will go. Chappell said, initially, they were looking further east on the property, and they ended up agreeing to a site that is directly south of Chatham Oaks. He said they talked about design approval and if they wanted to get into all that. Chappell said his recommendation at the time was that they have plenty of representation on the 28E Policy Board, and to let those folks make the decision about the design and trust their representatives. He said they did, however, talk about site plan review. Chappell said he suspects that even though, as a public zone, it will be exempt from some of the City’s site plan requirements, he suspects there will be some that will require some level of review anyway. He asked the Board if they would be interested in having him build into the lease some kind of review and approval of the site plan, as far as looking at landscaping plans and that type of thing.
Neuzil said he thinks that site plan review is worthwhile. He said perhaps there can be a presentation just to show the Board what is occurring. Harney said he would think they follow the same standard with Planning and Zoning. R. Sullivan said it is within the City. Chappell said it will follow the City’s standards as far as site plan review, with some site development standards that do not apply because it is a public zone. He said it is just like with the new Health and Human Services Building, there are some site development standards that do not apply to it, but there are some processes he suspects they will have to go through anyway.
Neuzil said the big issue that has been coming up from the Chatham Oaks perspective is the buffer system that is a screening. Neuzil said as long as that is being addressed, that is the main thing in terms of being the landlord. R. Sullivan said there have obviously been disagreements as to where the building ought to be located, but now that that has been done, he doesn’t feel the need to get into what the fence looks like or anything. Harney said it is the good neighbor in the screening in what it is going to look like in the end. He said whether that fits City’s standards or theirs. Neuzil said they have enough representation from the County, but, if anything, it would be nice to see some of the plans on a projector so everyone can see it. Meyers said he thinks so too, particularly in light of some of the conversations they have had in the past few months. He said he feels more comfortable currently if he saw one, even though he feels he has a pretty good idea of what is going on now. Chappell said he would feel more comfortable if he saw it before it actually got started. Harney said, if Chappell would like, the Board can have a few of the architects come in and do a presentation as to what it is going to look like, and if they have any comments at that point it will be appropriate.
Chappell asked if at the current time the consensus is that the Board is not worried about having a site plan review paragraph in the lease, but they want to make sure someone has the lease design and plan so they can see it prior to its approval by the City. Harney said they have a meeting tomorrow where he can bring it up. Chappell said if there is anything that comes to the Board’s mind or that a member of the public says to make sure is covered, the Board should let him know.
Neuzil attended a SEATS Advisory Committee meeting, the Chamber of Commerce Legislative Affairs meeting, the Joint Cities meeting, and the Finance Committee meeting. He noted the upcoming Taste of Iowa City event on August 27, 2008. He will have a Listening Post in Shueyville on August 22, 2008.
Meyers attended site visits at the Crisis Center and Shelter House, the River Bend Elementary School pen house, met with a member of the public about a farmstead split and driveway requirements, and a liaison meeting with Information Services Director Jean Schultz.
Harney attended the Joint Emergency Communications Center Financial and Policy Board meetings, a liaison meeting with County Engineer Greg Parker, the Ambulance staff meeting, a Planning and Zoning meeting with JCCOG and FEMA staff, the National Guard Readiness Center groundbreaking, the Iowa City and Coralville Chamber roundtables, a liaison meeting with Human Resources Director Lora Shramek, and met with residents about dust treatment on 340th Street. Harney also attended the River Bend Elementary School open house.
R. Sullivan met with Mike Lewis of Durrant, attended the Joint Cities meeting, the University of Iowa’s flood recovery event, a liaison meeting with Correia, and the Lone Tree Fall Festival. R. Sullivan noted the Landlocked Film Festival scheduled for the weekend of August 23, 2008.
Adjourned at 10:13 a.m.
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By John Deeth, Recording Secretary