MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
JANUARY 21, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Mental Health/Disability Services (46)
General Basic Block Grants (20)
General County Budget for FY2010
Chairperson Neuzil called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 1:03 p.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Larry Meyers, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
Mental Health and Disability Services Director Kris Artley said she wanted to address the question about the Management Plan and whether another public hearing needed to be held. She said she sent in a request and as long as it is in the Management Plan the Board can decide whatever they want. Most of the issues discussed qualify. She said the Board would not be required to hold a public hearing in order to implement the discussed items. She said the waiting list, which the Board addressed as an issue, was based on two surveys. One was given a few weeks ago. The Department of Human Services wanted to know what the 1.5% reduction would do to counties. She said she pulled out the survey that was completed in February of 2008. At that time there were eight counties with a waiting list. Based on the 1.5% reduction, the current projection is that 14 counties will be developing waiting lists. She said it is important to understand that in both surveys not 100% of the counties responded. That figure could be higher.
Artley said DHS has a 1.5 ATB (Ability to Benefit) across-the-board. That was a 1.5% reduction which MH/DS was aware of going into the Planning Council meeting. She said in addition to that DHS has a .51 ACTF reduction, which will be applied to the mental health growth. She said she did take that off of the allotted growth dollars. In addition to that there is talk of a 4% reduction in Medicaid reimbursement. If they are to start that, there is the possibility that it could be applied as of March of this fiscal year. Stutsman said of this year? Artley said yes. She said MH/DS very carefully looked at this years revenues and the number of cases waiting to be started on case management. She said she is confident that MH/DS can absorb that this year. It is calculated at a $19,500 reduction. If all the cases are processed there will be enough reimbursement to cover them. She said it will leave them with a horrible fund balance. Stutsman asked how much that would amount to. Artley said $19,500 and that can be absorbed this year. She said she did not lower the current years anticipated revenues in conjunction with that. She said a 4% adjustment was made for FY10.
Artley said they took out two key positions. The Coordinator for the Jail Alternatives Mobile Crises will not be replaced. The other position was the requested third Clinical Supervisor. She said the provider's level proposal has been received and there were some suggestions. One of the suggestions is the County going down to a 175% poverty level and also down to 150%. She said the problem is in order to access what types of dollar savings you have to go through IT. There is a work order in, but have not received a response. She said she does not know exactly how much money could be saved, but that is a possibility. One of the Planning Council members has already recommended for certain to go down to the 200% poverty level.
Financial and Statistical Supervisor Deb Guard said she already had the data and had it broken down into 200% and 150%. The 150% to the 200% baseline is about $409,000 a year. That doesn’t include the people at $200,000 and up. There would be an additional 245 there. Meyers asked if it is decreased from 200% down to 150% it’s an additional $409,000. She said yes, and that is conservative. One of the problems for analyzing is there is a blanket authorization for pharmaceuticals at $500 a month. That is a tip-off to investigate why client's expenditures would be higher than that amount. The actual average cost from July to November was $70 a client. She said when she analyzes the $150% poverty level that $70 is used instead of the $500 amount. Stutsman asked what would be the cost savings if the County went to 150%. R. Sullivan said $650,000. Guard said $650,000. Neuzil said the State of Iowa is going to force the County into a waiting list because of their decision making. Johnson County has to adjust as much as possible. He said he thinks they are getting to the point of providing services of last resort, especially if the poverty level is going to 150%. Stutsman said 150% for a family of four is $31,800. She said she would like to serve current clients well, as opposed to bringing new people in and the quality of service will be poor for everyone. She said they need to send a message to the legislature. The Board has threatened waiting lists for many years and has always been able to come up with a solution. She said maybe it is time to tell the legislature the options are gone.
Artley said there are two populations this poverty level will not impact, one would be the waiver folks; anyone eligible for the Home and Community Based MR waiver. She said anyone who is eligible for that waver gets it and the County is responsible for the non-federal share. The other population not affected would be the people coming in under court commitment. She said she talked to each of the intake people today to try and find out why there is an increase in people. All four of the intakers said that since July they have seen a steady increase that continued to increase until mid-November, then it leveled off, dropped in December, and it is increasing again in January. She said she is afraid because of the ramifications of the flooding, there will be even more people in the Mental Health Center in the next few months. She said the other thing is due to the lack of beds at the University, they have had to farm people out to hospitals the County has to pay for court commitments. If people are court committed to the University, the County does not pay for the hospital. Stutsman said the Board cannot do anything about that. Artley said no you can’t.
Artley said there is a huge increase of people going into the RCFPMI level like the Abbey Center. It's the highest level for the chronically mentally ill. There has also been a huge increase in vocational service cost. One of the things the providers mentioned trying to get more of the waiver service. R. Sullivan asked if the goal was to shoot for a figure of about $1,042,000. He asked if that was the amount the Board needed to cut. Artley said that is exactly right. She said after December's information was received MH/DS went line item by line item and re-estimated. At that time there were two quarters, especially for State bills, and it will be extremely tight this year. If people can get moved into waiver services and reduce some of these costs, it would be helpful. There was a time where there were ten people at the MHI. She said they are now down to two again. She said those things they have no control over, because the court steps in. Stutsman asked if the waiver is the deduction in the Medicaid reimbursements. Artley responded Medicaid overall. She said DHS receives all the Medicaid dollars for the State of Iowa, but there are many pockets of Medicaid dollars. In this venue there were certain services that would receive the 4% reduction. Targeted case management happens to be one of them. She said that is why she lowered the anticipated revenues for next year.
Stutsman asked if the waiting list would have any impact on the third Clinical Supervisor if no more cases were added. Artley said there were things she wanted to do a better internal job and manage personnel better. Meyers asked if a waiting list was started, it meant that anyone the County is currently serving will get service and anyone else that would come would get turned away. Artley said the people who would apply for 100% County-funded services would be put on a waiting list. She said that is maybe 40% of the budget. She said if they are eligible for a waiver, MH/DS does not have a choice. It is mandated that the County pay the non-federal share. The non-federal share is approximately 37% to 38%. She said they also have to pay for the people on court commitment. Meyers asked, if people are on a waiting list, do they stay there until someone moves out of the program? Artley said yes, until there are funds to support those people. Meyers asked if there is any kind of evaluation to judge the seriousness of the condition of the people on the waiting list. Artley said that would be up to MH/DS protocol, but the State’s perspective for the waiver slots’ waiting list is first come first served. She said there was a time when people were placed on waiting lists based on need, but the State stepped in and said no, it has to be based on first come first served. All of the State waivers have significant waiting lists.
Meyers asked if there is any value in having the people on the waiting lists seen on a limited basis as opposed to no treatment at all. Artley said if the people are entered into the MH/DS service system, they will not be on the waiting list, even if there is a nominal amount. The legislature will not know that there is a waiting list. Stutsman said it seems like the people who are seriously mentally ill will come through the court committal. Artley said if their symptoms are exacerbated enough, then they will end up hospitalized. Harney asked if more money will be given based on how many slots are open. Artley said no, they allowed counties to dedicate x number of slots per six month period. Every prior quarter the MH/DS has to designate an expected need. She said going into January they had seven and now are down to one. Stutsman said even with implementing suggestions from the providers list, the money will only amount to $720,000. Artley said she can not put a dollar figure on how much a waiting list will cost, because it depends on the patients. R. Sullivan said the providers made a great point when they said the waiting list is something that can be easily controlled. If money is available they first few are taken off the waiting list. Once some of the other changes are implemented, you have to go with it for awhile. Harney said there is no control over where the patients are placed. Artley said if they are court ordered, the judge decides.
Stutsman asked what the $15,000 in Sheriff Fee's are for. Artley said that cost are the court commitment fees that are incurred for transport and serving of client papers. Stutsman said at the time when the County had a lot of money, it made more sense to have that come out of this budget. Artley said some counties have that in the Mental Health budget and some do not. Guard said Johnson County didn't used to pay for it until two years ago. R. Sullivan said that was a decision that the Board wanted mental health stuff to come out of the Mental Health budget. Stutsman said the same argument could be made for the Mobile Crisis position. It could come out of another budget. Artley said two different budgets are benefiting from the current way things are structured. Those departments are the Sheriffs Department and the County Attorney. Four to five hours a week are designated to drug court, which benefits the County Attorneys Office. Another thing in the budget is $10,000 the Mental Health Center utilizes for the Homeless Outreach Program. She said MH/DS pays the Mental Health Center the $10,000. Stutsman said she thought Homeless Outreach was taken care of by the STAR program. Artley said individually each of the intake people, except for Social Worker Steve Nachazel, indicated that the STAR program did a lot of referrals to MH/DS. She said a significant number of people between them and Vocational Rehabilitation Services are referred to MH/DS. She said there are two people that go to the University every other day to do intakes. One of the intake people said that she gets four to six applications of qualified eligible people every month. Stutsman said what these things indicate is the Johnson County is a magnet county. Artley said the people with a legal settlement are the only ones that MH/DS pays for.
Neuzil asked what Artley needed from the Board to complete her budget. Artley said she needs the guidance of where the County wishes to go. She said serious cuts need to be made and it has to be determined if the waiting list will be started and if the eligibility criteria will be lowered with the poverty level. R. Sullivan said an email was received by the Board from Community Mental Health Center Director Stephen Trefz. Page two of that email said approximately 60% - 70% of the population can get by on six sessions or less per year, but it doesn’t sound like that is what is seen. Artley said the way the management plan was written a year ago was that everyone will have an initial evaluation, which is visit number one. Carte blanche they were given 12 additional units of psychiatric care. She said it was encumbered in that plan, but all of those units were not used. It was the same for therapy; patients are given 52 units a year. R. Sullivan said Trafez in his email is saying that he doesn’t want the Board to limit service, yet 60% to 70% of the population needs six sessions or less. He asked why 60% to 70% of the clients are not actually approved for six units as opposed to 12. Artley said that is a very good question and every week she gets a list from the Mental Health Center of people who utilize their one per month and they ask for six more to complete this fiscal year.
Stutsman suggested the County just pay for a unit of service to bring the plan more in line with utilization. Guard said a utilization study was performed last year on the amounts that were authorized versus the amount that was used and it was a 17% utilization rate versus what was actually authorized. She said the minute it is authorized the County is responsible for paying that if they use all of those units. Stutsman said the Mental Health Center is a business and maybe they recommend 12 sessions to keep their operations going. Artley said she thinks the clientele has been conditioned to having a psychiatric visit once per month. She said once she got a client stabilized, she was lucky if she could get the patient in once a quarter for a medicine check. R. Sullivan said this is $400,000 that he feels like ought to be discussed. Artley said it is in the management plan that if there is a life threatening situation, an exception to policy can be made in order to preserve life. She said the other thing to remember is there is a back-up for this community. Many services are capped for private health insurance, so if the medical insurance has utilized the full amount, they either pay for it or they go to the University. Stutsman said she knows that they will get feedback from the Mental Health Center saying they cannot operate unless they get these dollars. Artley said everybody needs to protect their turf.
R. Sullivan said Guard said utilization is only at 17%, which means they are not even spending this money. Guard said only the units used are the ones paid for, what it means is the County is committing to the paying for sessions, but that’s not actual amounts. R. Sullivan said that will come back on the Board, because every year there will be more money left over and people will complain about having a waiting list. Guard said that has been part of the problem for a number of years. She said the over-inflated authorized units encumber the funds. Artley said that disparity has considerably decreased since the new management plan was implemented. If people that are authorized do not show up, then they are taken off. She said people used to be given a whole year, but now it is done on a weekly basis. She said last years 17% was because of the old system. Guard said she is waiting to see what the utilization is for the clients who received the exception. Artley said that didn’t start until September. Harney asked if there was a record of funds the have been encumbered and were not utilized for the past couple of years. Guard said she would have to go back. Stutsman said maybe that would make up the deficit. Artley said no, they have received a tremendous increase in clientele. Guard said if all of the units were used, they would be very far in debt. R. Sullivan said Artley was talking about $400,000 which is 40% of what needs to be raised. Stutsman asked if that how much would be saved from psychiatric. Guard said no that was the provider weighing the options.
Life Skills Inc. Representative Gillian Fox said when she spoke to Mental Health/Disability Services Assistant Director Jan Shaw about capping the psychiatric units and the savings, the quote Shaw gave Fox was $176,500. Fox said that would be capped at quarterly visits plus two more. She said utilization would end up being more than 60%, but 60% is the base. Fox said when the services management plan was redone and caps were placed on the use of vocational services and supported community living services in terms of the number of units that individuals could use to cut back, as opposed to having utilizations encumbered, utilization increased, because people knew they had to use their units or lose them. She said utilization increases to 73%, almost 75% from 54% or 60% because staff told individuals that their units would disappear if they did not use them. Artley said she thinks Guard found the answer. The $400,000 figure is what was re-estimated. She said it came more in line with $381,000 for outpatient psychiatry. R. Sullivan said the $175,000 is the difference. Artley said yes, the savings.
Neuzil said the four quarterly plus two will be added to the list of potential policy changes. Guard asked if that means a 15 minute visit every quarter or an hourly visit every quarter. Artley said they were trying to get a quarterly medicine check after people are stabilized. Stutsman clarified that it would be one med check per quarter plus two additional visits. Harney asked what Artley's thoughts are on the Clubhouse program. Artley said it is very beneficial in the fact that it gets people out of their environment and normalizes their activity. Otherwise people stay housebound and mentally and emotionally become negative. She said there could be some type of a limitation on it. Stutsman said when the Board did the needs assessment, it seemed like that was one of the top priorities. She said people wanted some kind of recreational activity, and unless it is structured, it doesn’t happen. Harney asked if the program is being utilized. Artley said yes, it is being utilized. She said it is a safe and structured environment. Stutsman said in the grand scheme of things, it will not save very much money to reduce that program. Artley said no, that is nominal. Stutsman said these funds have always been funds of last resort and she is in favor of the 150% of poverty, because that will have the biggest impact. Artley said, if the State does get its wish, the level will go there, because that is where a majority of the counties are.
R. Sullivan said if something was done with the Mental Health Center psych visits and got the $175,000, go to 150% of poverty and get that $650,000 and the two positions at $150,000. Artley said the two positions have already been taken out. R. Sullivan clarified another million is needed. Artley said yes. R. Sullivan said the two together total $825,000. Stutsman asked about the waiting list. R. Sullivan said if the waiting list is added then it would be $1.042 million. Stutsman asked him to clarify. R. Sullivan said he used 150% of poverty, which is a $650,000 savings, limiting the psych visits, which is $175,000, and the difference, $217,000, could be made up in waiting list.
Harney asked if Artley was talking about limiting staffing time. Artley said no. Limits can be placed on the 100% County-funded Services. Those limits can be either freezing number of hours of service per week or day or whatever. She said Goodwill is looking into aggressively pursuing prevocational training and hopefully that will realize some savings. She said according to the State prevocational training is time limited. Neuzil asked if the majority of the Board gives some direction, the 150%, the 4 quarterly visits plus 2, will they give the Board some numbers? Guard said they will go back and analyze the numbers. Neuzil said then Artley can give the Board information about what is going on at the next budget meeting. Artley asked when that meeting was. Stutsman said 9 a.m. on Monday, January 26th.
Artley said hopefully the information from IT will be available by then. Guard said what might be beneficial is to look at the groups that sit between 150% and 175% and the groups between 175% and 200% and then 200% and 250%. She said if all of those groups were added together, you would get the total to go down to the 150%. Artley asked if the Board does not want MH/DS to give the Sheriff $15,000. Neuzil said again there is a budget crunch on the other side also. R. Sullivan said the Board moved it because the Board wanted the MH/DS budget to reflect all the mental health stuff. Neuzil asked about the Voc SCL cap. Artley said when the Services Management Plan was first re-done that $1,250 figure was produced. What happened was case managers wanted flexibility to jump between services based on clients needs. After looking at the $1,250 figure, it seemed low, so the Services Management Plan bumped it up to $1,350. She said they could reduce that and realize a savings of $20,000 to $21,000 for the year. R. Sullivan said the providers came out against that fairly loudly. Artley said she understands that. Neuzil said the Board should leave that as it is right now and see where everything is with those two major changes. Neuzil said that is one of the things that will remain on the list of possible things that can be looked at to make up the difference.
Artley said again there is the $10,000 for homeless outreach. Neuzil asked her to get some more information about how that is being used. Artley said they do various things depending on which year it is. One year they handed out sleeping bags and things of that nature. She said initially, three or four years ago, the Board was paying $35,000 into that project. Stutsman said it has been reduced. Artley said yes, it just kept decreasing. Neuzil asked her if she needed anymore direction. Artley said no. Neuzil said the providers are here and asked if they had anything to add at this point.
Fox said the providers appreciate the opportunity for a period of time to think about this in a thoughtful manner. She said she knows several members of Planning Council and providers in general did not have a systematic analysis of what to recommend at the Planning Council. She said the Voc SCL is one of those things that will not generate a lot of savings. It is a lower cost service than psychiatry or a more intensive one on one therapy. Another very beneficial low cost service is people going out of their home to work. Those programs help to keep people out of the hospital and from requesting exceptions for the more expensive psychiatric treatment. When the Board is consider cuts, please keep in mind that some of those lower cost services are actually saving the community money while helping people stay healthy. Harney asked Fox to explain the following statement in her letter related to combinations of adjustments: “judicious use of prevoc Medicaid services by Goodwill for savings of $80,000.” She said Goodwill Industries of Southeast Iowa Senior Vice President Mike Townsend would be better able to answer that question. Townsend said prevocational services are a Medicaid service. The County pays 37% rather than 100%. When they first came up with this several years ago, many counties said they could move prevoc services to their sheltered employment program. Sheltered employment is what is offered at Goodwill centers and stores. When people work for Goodwill the company pays for the extra counseling and various other things. The County pays all the costs for sheltered employment. Townsend said that even though the state is paying for sheltered employment, this was not sheltered employment. Goodwill determined that it could create a slightly different program with better services that would cost a little more, but the County will only pay 37%. This is a better stewardship of County resources.
Artley asked if that would reduce the 100% County-funded work services. Thompson said maybe not. Harney asked what unintended consequences to providers would result from such a drastic drop. He asked if the County would lose some providers. Artley said she thinks the applicants will be screened very carefully to assure that the appropriate people would enter the program, so it could be successful.
Meyers asked about the how one of the block grants was titled. M. Sullivan said once an account is created in Block Grant, they can name it whatever they choose. Meyers asked what it would be used for. Neuzil said it was part of the strategic planning for rural economic development primarily for the promotion of local foods. Meyers said he asked the question because the food alliance is listed separately. Neuzil said it is because it was not necessarily just for that purpose. Meyers asked if those are two separate items. Neuzil responded they are two separate items. He said the Economic Development Committee would then have a little bit of money to do something. Neuzil asked if they keep that in. Stutsman asked if the money accumulates year after year, if it is not used, or if it goes back into the General Fund. R. Sullivan said it goes back into the General Fund, unless the Board has specified otherwise. Neuzil asked if the Board is going to keep it in at this point.
Neuzil asked about the item listed as Community Foundation of Johnson County for $30,000. Harney said he thinks it was a commitment to the Community Foundation. Stutsman asked if it was for the Coralville Center for the Performing Arts. M. Sullivan said it was not for the Performing Arts and that he will have to ask Claiborne about it. Neuzil suggested that M. Sullivan communicate with Community Foundation of Johnson County Executive Director Michael Stoffregen. Harney said he will look. R. Sullivan said the Community Foundation manages some funds for the County, but he does not remember the Board ever giving them money. Stutsman agreed. Neuzil clarified that Harney and M. Sullivan will follow up on it.
Neuzil said the Economic Development Committee probably needs to get the request for the Food Alliance. Meyers said the people from Food Alliance have not requested this again from the Board, and he would like to hear what they did with the last $3,000 the Board gave them. Stutsman said it seems like there are a lot of small funds that the Board cannot remember why they initially wanted them. She said the Rural Economic Development and the Food Alliance are examples. R. Sullivan asked if they could be combined into one. Neuzil asked if they should just not fund Food Alliance and put the money in Rural Economic Development this year. M. Sullivan clarified that Rural Economic Development would remain at $5000 and Food Alliance would have $0. Stutsman agreed. R. Sullivan said Food Alliance could still request the money. Neuzil said yes.
Neuzil asked if the Coralville Center for the Performing Arts has received a Community Attraction and Tourism grant yet. M. Sullivan said he does not think so, and the resolution stipulates that they have to receive the CAT grant in order for the Board to release the funding. Neuzil said the Board does not usually budget for the commitment until the following fiscal year. He said he thought it was a $20,000 commitment. R. Sullivan clarified it is $20,000 over four years. Harney said they do not have anything budgeted, but they are committed to it if the grant is received. Neuzil said yes, but the commitment is for the following fiscal year. Stutsman said this is the fiscal year they are discussing now and M. Sullivan agreed. Stutsman said they have to have the money when they get the grant. Neuzil said no, he thinks they just need the commitment. Harney thinks the Board said they would give that amount over a period of time, but they did not include a starting date because it was contingent on the grant.
Stutsman said she thinks the Sand Lake amount should be listed as $5,000 over four years rather than as $20,000. R. Sullivan said yes, or $4,000 over five years. Neuzil said the Board would not have to budget for that, but they can if the Board wants to. Stutsman asked if the City of Iowa City has applied for it yet. R. Sullivan said no. However, he fears if they take these two items out, they will not be in the budget next year and the Board will get a request for a check but have nothing in the budget. Neuzil asked if the Board should budget $5,000 for each of the two items knowing that it may not be used. Board members agreed. Stutsman said she just assumed that if they get the grant, the Board gives the money when they get the grant. M. Sullivan clarified that the Board made the commitment over that period of time, agreeing to $5,000 over four years. Neuzil asked M. Sullivan to confirm the budgeted amount. R. Sullivan asked for notes in the budget indicating the total commitment.
Neuzil then asked if there is interest in starting a capital campaign for the Shelter House. Stutsman confirmed that an official request has come to the Board through Social Services Coordinator Amy Correia. She said that this will put the Board in a position to fund every community capital campaign. In the past, the Board has directed individual entities to raise their own capital funds because that is how the community will give. The Board, she said, will focus on the operating budget. R. Sullivan said he agrees with Stutsman and he is not opposed to increasing Shelter House operating budget by $5,000 as opposed to the capital commitment. Meyers asked if Shelter House would become dependent on those funds annually. R. Sullivan said he thinks they are dependent on the County for operating expenses. Neuzil confirmed that they are still increasing Shelter House's budget by $2,500 but removing the capital campaign.
Harney asked if the Board wants to fund the operating budget each year, or if they would rather help out a capital project. Stutsman said Shelter House will ask for both. Harney said he is aware of that. R. Sullivan said historically, the County provides operating expenses for all social service block grant agencies. M. Sullivan said the Shelter House operating budget is $45,000 this year and Correia asked for an additional $2,500. R. Sullivan said over the last 15 years, Elder Services, the Free Medical Clinic, the Crisis Center, and United Action for Youth, have all had some kind of capital campaign for a new facility. Neuzil added that with this year's budget, departments have been asked to freeze operating budgets.
Meyers asked what would happen if someone requests funds halfway through the fiscal year and the Board determines they would like to support the request. R. Sullivan said that under Social Service's budget, there is $2,000 in Social Services Flex Account. Neuzil said the Rural Economic Development will have $5,000. M. Sullivan said that money can be allocated through budget amendments.
Harney said, not wanting to be too critical, he wanted to make a point that if Shelter House is having budget problems, they should accept donations. He recently attempted to donate food to the Shelter House and he was turned down. He said he was told that Table to Table was on its way with a food donation. Stutsman and R. Sullivan suggested Shelter House has limited food storage space.
M. Sullivan said Budget Coordinator Richard Claiborne would like direction from the Board whether to budget approximately $500,000 for the houses on Capitol Street in a spring amendment and paid for during this fiscal year. Stutsman and R. Sullivan said they thought the Board had previously decided to do just that and M. Sullivan agreed. He said that Jail reconstruction, and the demolition of the National Guard Armory Building and the Fisher Building can be paid for from the existing capital expenditures budget. For Fiscal Year 2011, the County can reimburse itself through bonding. Two bonds will retire next year. Stutsman asked why the Board would choose to do this, if it is already paid. Harney said he spoke with Claiborne about this and his concern is whether to bond for them now to access the TIF area valuations, since the money is available up front. In the past, any public purpose projects have been bonded for. However, this year, Claiborne is suggesting that this be paid directly from the budget this year, and then reimburse next year's budget. M. Sullivan said the money is available in the capital expenditures budget. Harney said his concern is that the reimbursements may get overlooked. M. Sullivan said that is why they want an answer now, so he can begin the process with the bond counsel.
Stutsman said if this is done, then the County is committed to paying off the bonds. Board members agreed. R. Sullivan asked if Stutsman meant the bank loan. Stutsman said that Claiborne had proposal, that if the Board agrees to pay off those bonds, the remaining balance can be applied to the reserve fund. M. Sullivan clarified that rather than use general obligation notes through the General Fund, they can fund these two projects, the reconstruction and the demolition of the Fisher and National Guard Armory buildings, from the current capital expenditures budget. The County would reimburse itself in 2011, for the exact cost, out of the Debt Service Levy. Stutsman asked what the total dollar amount is and R. Sullivan said he thinks it is a couple hundred thousand each. M. Sullivan said to date there is no bid on the National Guard Armory building. Harney said the range however, is $250,000 to $500,000 and since then, they have completed the mitigation of hazardous material.
Stutsman said there are costs to bonding and if the entire cost is only $500,000, she asked if it is really worth it to bond. Neuzil said it is more about the eligibility of bonding and R. Sullivan said they will need to rely on the expertise of the bond counsel to advise the Board whether bonding will be cost-effective. Harney stated that no matter what the Board decides to do, the money is available this year, and M. Sullivan said absolutely.
M. Sullivan said the third item on the list is the capital projects budget. Neuzil explained the Board must decide if they agree with County Treasurer Tom Kriz's recommendation to make the final payments on the Health and Human Services Building (HHS) project. M. Sullivan said the dollar amount is a little over $5 million. Harney clarified that this is for the building, not the ramp.
Harney said that in talking with Facilities Manager David Kempf, they discovered an unanticipated overrun on the HHS that was due to inspection requirements. Stutsman said if revenue comes in from Secondary Roads that may offset this overrun. Harney said he thinks the overrun is almost $400,000. M. Sullivan said that Claiborne said the County has the cash to pay for the overrun, and overall, it amounts to about 4% overages on a project of this size.
M. Sullivan said he would present the decision packages submitted by each department. Of the ten submitted, nine involve personnel. Johnson County's Emergency Management Department has requested setting aside about $65,000, which amounts to one half of the cost of replacing Rescue 52. This would be an increase of capital expenditures. Harney said he prefers to add it now, and remove it later, if needed. Stutsman and Neuzil agreed.
Harney said the one thing of concern to him is the needs of the Medical Examiner's Department, because it is well known that the University of Iowa will no longer carry the support staff personnel. He would like to consider this request seriously. Stutsman agreed. Stutsman added she would like to add the Township Clerks and Trustees at $2,000. R. Sullivan said he is in favor of the Clerks and Trustees also, but added that he thinks there is someone on staff who can help Medical Examiner Michael Hensch with his work. Though he knows this person is not Hensch's first choice for the position, he would like him to try to see if it will work. Stutsman added the Board has discussed cross-training County employees and if that is a possibility, it should be pursued. Meyers asked R. Sullivan if he has someone specific in mind, and R. Sullivan said yes. M. Sullivan said he thinks one of Hensch's main concerns is the confidentiality of the position, and that the person in mind is not a confidential secretary. Harney suggested including the Medical Examiner's request now, and if something else is worked out, then use the alternative.
R. Sullivan said, in light of the economy, he would like to deny every personnel request this year, except the Township Clerks and Trustees. Neuzil said the Board should convey to Hensch that at the least, if they do not fund the position and if the transition occurs at the University of Iowa, the Board will help address the department needs, which may then include a budget amendment or re-allocating staff. M. Sullivan told the Board that for today, he just needs to know if the Board wants to fund it or not, as he is up against deadlines. Neuzil polled the Board. A majority agreed to keep this budget request.
R. Sullivan said he wants to go on record expressing that he thinks every single request is legitimate, but if he was not so concerned about next year's fiscal situation, he would accept every request. Stutsman and Meyers said agreed with R. Sullivan. Neuzil clarified that items number six, nine, and ten have made the cut, and the rest not. Meyers asked if Human Resources Administrator Lora Shramek would be able to offer suggestions of employees in other departments who could staff this position in the Medical Examiner's Department. Neuzil replied that this position may require more advanced skills and requested they should get some feedback on this. Stutsman reminded others that Hensch has been coming in on the weekends to take care of the workload. She added that a job description should be crafted for this position also. Harney said that what happened at the University is that the employee was giving more than half of her time to County work, and he does not think the County was compensating enough.
R. Sullivan asked if Board members addressed the shooting range topic in item number five. They had not discussed this. R. Sullivan said that Claiborne said they could fund the remodeling of the dispatch center out of capital project's budget. Neuzil clarified that the Sheriff's Office budgets money for a shooting range that they pay rent for, and wondered if that wouldn't offset those costs. Stutsman said she recalls County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek saying he doesn't pay anything for that. M. Sullivan said he thinks that what has driven this request is some people were asked to pay and others not, and Johnson County was never asked to pay. M. Sullivan said the request was for $25,000 for 4 years. Stutsman said there is money available in capital projects. R. Sullivan said he thought that money was going to the Health and Human Services Building. Neuzil said the Board should at least commit to $25,000 for the shooting range. M. Sullivan asked it the remodeling of the dispatch will be covered and Harney said it would be under capital improvements.
Neuzil said the next budget meeting is scheduled for January 28, 2009, at 1:00 p.m. The deadline to submit the budget to the State is February 11, 2009. Stutsman said she wants a printed summary showing the impact of any changes. Board members scheduled two subsequent budget meetings, one on February 6, 2009, at 9:00 a.m. and another, if needed, February 9, 2009, at 1:00 p.m.
Adjourned at 2:49 p.m.
______________________________________________________________________
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By:
On the _______ day of _____________________, 2009
By Kaitlyn Dodds, Recording Secretary
Sent to the Board of Supervisors on September 1, 2009.