MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
MARCH 11, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
North Dubuque Street Trail Update
Jail Prisoner Transport Issues
Health and Human Services Open House
Board Office Operational Manual
Internal Processes, Expectations, and Other Operational Issues of the Board of Supervisors Office
Vice Chairperson Meyers called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 9:00 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Larry Meyers, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan; absent: Terrence Neuzil.
County Engineer Greg Parker said that the Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG) Policy Board approved $252,000 for the North Dubuque Street Trail project. Parker said that a good way to proceed with the project would involve breaking it into phases in order to keep the costs down. He stated that the Secondary Roads Department recommends an extension from West Overlook Road, which is the end of the existing trail on the east side of the road, to 275th Street for Phase I of the project. Parker noted that he has not received a firm estimate, but that a consultant has informed him that the project’s cost would be less than $300,000. Parker himself estimated that it would cost between $270,000 and $300,000 to complete the 7,000 foot section of trail. Parker said that the project’s plan involves a July letting, and that this work will happen as a result of the federal stimulus monies that the County will receive. He said Phase II would entail extending the trail from the end location at 275th Street into the south city limits of North Liberty. Sullivan asked about the location of 275th Street, and Parker identified 275th Street as a dead-end seal coat road near the neighborhood of Squire Point. Parker said it made sense to break it there from a cost point of view.
Harney asked if the government is okay with the County using stimulus funds without completing the trail. Parker said that it is in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and the JCCOG Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) as an approved phase activity. He said it is his understanding that the project will neither require modification nor another public hearing because they are just shortening the full project that was already planned. Parker stated that the plan still has to be approved by the Department of Transportation, and that the Board will need to approve an agreement to expend the federal dollars to the trail extension. Stutsman asked if the design for the trail is completed, and if public meetings about this project have been held. Parker said they are in the design process right now, and that preliminary plans have been prepared by the project’s consultant, Anderson-Bogert Engineers, Inc. He noted that check plans are due in the next thirty days. Parker also stated that, because the County is using federal funds, the County is required to use the DOT as the letting source, to take specific steps, and to meet specific timelines, that will result in a July letting. Stutsman asked if no right-of-way purchase is required, because stimulus money is being used. Parker confirmed this, noting that stimulus money must be used for shovel-ready projects with a quick letting. He said they also do not have to wait for permits through the Corps of Engineers or the Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
Stutsman asked when it is estimated that this project will be complete, if this is a July letting and approved by the DOT. Parker said this point of completion depends on how the bids come in. He noted that Secondary Roads will look at the bids in July 2009 when the project has been let through the DOT. Parker said he would then come to the Board with recommendations on how to proceed with the project. He noted that bids have been rejected in the past because of cost, and said that he hopes that the County will get favorable and a number of bids that will make the letting competitive. Parker said that the goal that typically follows the Board’s approval of a bid letting is to get the contract signed within 30-45 days. He then said that they will be looking at fall construction.
Sullivan asked if the plan for this is to be PCC (cement paved), and Parker responded by stating that this is the goal. Sullivan asked what the expected cost is for Phase I, and Parker said that the estimate for Phase I is set at under $300,000, adding that the County will receive $252,000 from the stimulus package. Sullivan said that a matching amount has already been set aside, and there will still be additional money for Phase II.
Parker said that he has spoken with the Trails Advisory Committee (TAC), to encourage them to keep submitting applications for future grant possibilities. Stutsman noted that herself and Meyers attended a JCCOG meeting that made approvals for multiple projects, and that JCCOG said that if some of the projects didn't go through or come under bid, then there may be additional monies available. She asked if there is any chance that the rest of the project will be finished if, for instance, Iowa City's bid came under the 1.8 million received for the bridge over the Interstate. Parker said there is a good possibility that this could happen, depending on the dollar amounts. He said that there was a discussion at their TAC meeting referencing this very possibility and that, according to Johnson County Council of Governments Representative John Yapp, the monies given to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) will stay with the MPO. Parker said the MPO has a limited amount of time to spend those dollars, and that if a project came in under its estimated cost, then the dollars would be redistributed to other projects. Meyers said that by the time that this redistribution might happen, the trail project would more than likely be done, and so, this would constitute a reimbursement. Parker iterated once more that the design for the full project is in the midst of being completed, and that it will be constructed in phases. The rest of the trail is shovel-ready and ready to go, or soon will be. He said that if additional monies become available, he will recommend to the TAC that those monies come back to the County. Parker said, again, that will be a consideration of the Board to expend those dollars.
Stutsman stated that those other entities are within the same kind of time frame, with regard to bid letting, and so, the Board will know by July 2009 if there are any other monies available. She said that she thinks that the County was the only one that didn't get full funding for projects. Meyers responded by saying that he thought that the University of Iowa had a project that didn’t get full funding. Stutsman stated it only seems fair that the University of Iowa or Johnson County be considered for any additional dollars left over. Harney said the Board featured a lot of conversation in 2008 about which side the trail would be on and if it would be in the right-of-way. Parker said the new section of trail is within the right-of-way, and that the alignment that was determined to be the best location was to be constructed on the east side of the road. He said that the trail will connect from West Overlook and continue on that side of the road to North Liberty. He then noted that he had spoken with the City of North Liberty, explaining where the trail would end, and that they have a development near the site that will be connected to the trail.
Sullivan stated that North Liberty is actually creating green space at that site, and that this space features a pond. He further expressed that he feels that this will work out perfectly. Parker said that it is a good location, and that it seems to be the best location based on the fact that they would not be acquiring right-of-way for the trail.
Stutsman wanted to re-emphasize that a public meeting had been held about the alignment and the trail, and said that for the most part it was very positive, with everyone on board and wanting it completed. Stutsman also expressed that she feels it is unfortunate they cannot do the whole thing. Parker said that half a dozen residents showed up for this meeting, and confirmed that everyone was positive. He said that concerns focused on trees, bushes, and issues that come up when dealing with construction. He said that residents are being met with directly to work out these issues. Meyers then asked about issues related to retaining walls that needed to be built, as the County cannot go outside of the right-of-way, and Parker said that there will more than likely be some locations that will need for retaining walls in the right-of-way.
Parker continued, stating that the requirement was that the County could not acquire right-of-way, as it is just part of the construction activities and design. Parker also said that the use of retaining walls will be minimized to the greatest degree possible. Parker said that he had met with Iowa City Planning and Community Development Director Jeff Davidson, and that it appears that the lay of the land can be used to the benefit of the County for this project. He said short sections of retaining walls will need to be placed somewhere along the trail, simply because it is within the right-of-way. Harney said that if a retaining wall is used, then residents may request something tapered. Parker responded affirmatively, and stated that this is among the subjects that will be discussed with the residents as the design is finalized.
Sullivan noted that the Board has been disappointed with the whole JCCOG process, and asked if they wanted to author a letter or take some official action. Stutsman said that the Board has already expressed their displeasure to Iowa City Mayor Regina Bailey, and that Bailey has relayed their feelings to JCCOG members. She said that, in the spirit of communication, the Board should send a letter to the Iowa City City Council and the other entities in JCCOG, and Sullivan agreed. Stutsman said that her biggest disappointment is with the resolution that shut down any kind of negotiation or compromise. Stutsman said that the resolution eliminated any collaboration and that it is wrong for an entity to wield such power. She said that, as a policy maker, she does not think that this is a good process. Sullivan said, if such a process is to be used, then they could save everyone the meeting time by giving Iowa City 45% of the money and splitting the rest among the other entities. Harney said his understanding is that resolution occurred many years ago. Stutsman said he is correct, that the resolution was in place, but that it was up to Iowa City to decide whether they would use it.
Harney said he spoke with Coralville representatives who were caught off guard and wouldn't take it upon themselves without the rest of Council’s approval to change their vote. Sullivan said that this is a serious issue with JCCOG. He stated that representatives are meant to go there to negotiate for their entity, and that if negotiation is taken away, then there is no point in meeting. Stutsman agreed, and said that the County was at a disadvantage, not having the minutes of the TAC meeting. Sullivan said if they can’t decide what is best for the region, then there is no point in having the meetings. He said that, instead, they should divide the money so that Iowa City gets 45%, the County gets 15%, Coralville gets 15%, and so on. Meyers said that it becomes about the power of the advisory committee. Stutsman said she told a representative from North Liberty that she was disappointed by his having abstained from funding the trail project, and that he responded by saying that he could not afford to use North Liberty's money to fund this project when he knew that Iowa City would not contribute money as well.
Sullivan said there is a JCCOG committee that looks at trails and that long ago determined this trail to be the number one priority. But, he said that when it came time to fund it, it did not get funding, and called this a point of disconnect. Stutsman added that Johnson County was the only entity willing to put up matching funds for the project. Parker said that the joint dispatch formula was much fair than the current trail proposal. Meyers iterated that every one got full funding except for the County and the University of Iowa. He said he made a motion, as did the University, to have cost sharing across-the-board, so that everyone would have to match 15-25%, so as to even things out. Stutsman stated that she thinks that the Board needs to write a letter, and personally deliver it. She said the Board should ask for time on the JCCOG agenda. Sullivan asked who will author the letter, and Meyers offered to complete this task. Stutsman thanked Meyers and asked him to circulate the draft in order to allow for the Board to add to the letter as necessary. Harney asked to whom they are sending the letter. Sullivan stated that he thinks that all JCCOG entities should be included as recipients. Stutsman said she would like to send it to each of the City Council members and to all the JCCOG entities.
County Sheriff Larry Pulkrabek opened by stating that he had the chance to speak with some Board members at Iowa State Association of Counties (ISAC). Pulkrabek said that he had hoped to get this issue on the agenda prior to taking action, but that, due to conflicting schedules, he was not able to. He then stated that the Sheriff’s Department has made a change in how they are housing inmates out of the county. Pulkrabek called this change drastic, but also said that they have been working on it for about a month. He stated that the Sheriff’s Office was approached by Marshall County, and that they made an offer to negotiate a lower bed day rate, and Stutsman followed this by asking if Marshall County is Marshalltown. Pulkrabek said that this is correct, and added that Marshall County is about ninety miles away. Pulkrabek stated that at the time at which Marshall County contacted him, they had about 100 open beds. He noted that Marshall County previously housed a great number of inmates for Polk County, but that Polk County had built a 1,500 bed capacity jail, which at the time of his tour of the facility a few months before, contained somewhere near 900 inmates. Pulkrabek reported that the Polk County Jail contains a few wings that have not yet been opened. He then noted that Marshall County has a lot of open space and wants to know if Johnson County would like to negotiate a rate at which to house all of the inmates housed out of the County. He stated that the Sheriff’s Department compared offered rates to those from the past, and said that in the calendar year 2008, 17,001 bed days were used. Pulkrabek said the total rental cost, with a combined consideration of all counties, was $895,455 Harney asked if this number included the cost of meals, and Pulkrabek responded, saying that it includes everything except for transportation expenses.
Pulrakbek stated that the Sheriff’s Office has come to an agreement, in negotiating with Marshall County, that when Johnson County reaches an excess of twenty-five inmates at the Marshall County location, then a rate of $42.50 per bed day will be used. When there are fewer than twenty-five inmates at Marshall County, then a rate of $45 per bed day will be used. He stated that the daily rates that Johnson County pays to other counties are as follows: in Jasper County $45, in Iowa County $50, in Cedar County $55, in Jefferson County $55, in Washington County $55, and in Linn County $60. Pulkrabek noted that in Marshall County, previously, Johnson County paid $50 as a daily rate. He said if the number of bed days for 2008 were multiplied by the $45 per bed day rate, then Johnson County would have instead paid $765,045. This amounts to a savings of $130,410. He said, hypothetically, that if the number of out of county prisoners had been more than twenty-five, then, with every bed day at a rate of $42.50, it would have cost $722,542.50 for that year. That would make for a savings of $172,913 in the year 2008.
Pulrakbek reminded the Board that Marshall County is an approximate 92 miles away, and stated that, logistically, it is much easier to have all of the inmates at one location. Pulkrabek noted that one of the advantages of housing all of the inmates in Marshall County is that the Sheriff’s Department would then not have to keep track of at which locations an inmate may be staying. He said that the Sheriff’s Department will make one transport of inmates per day each afternoon. Pulkrabek also stated that they will plan for inmates that need to come back to the County ahead of time, and transfer them accordingly as opposed to making multiple trips to multiple counties. He said that this will save money with regard to transportation costs. He said that, based on the last couple of years, the transportation costs including hours, labor, and vehicles, have been climbing by 54% a year. Pulkrabek added that transportation costs are skyrocketing, and said that the high cost of fuel has had an effect on this number, but noted that the cost of fuel has recently declined. Pulkrabek said that total transportation mileage for the calendar year 2008 was 62,640 miles, and that mileage costs were $34,452. He said the time spent in transport totaled 15,016 hours. Pulkrabek said that the labor cost for transportation was $30,320, and that the total for labor and mileage costs was $64,772.
Pulkrabek said that if one trip were made on each weekday, based on the four hours’ labor cost, then the mileage total would increase to 71,905, similarly increasing the mileage cost to $39,548. This, in turn, would reduce hours by 1,460, therefore reducing labor costs to $29,200. Sullivan asked if the driving equals a cost increase of $4,000, and Pulkrabek confirmed that this is correct. Sullivan then clarified by noting that the previously estimated $172,000 savings is closer to $168,000. Pulkrabek said that this correct, that there will be $4,000 more in transportation expenses, and called this a minor amount. Stutsman said that the Board and others should be mindful of the fact that there is someone at the County Jail who must spend time juggling schedules. Pulkrabek agreed, and added that this factors into considerations of logistics.
Pulkrabek reported that the Sheriff’s Department generated an estimate on the growth of transportation expenses based on a look at the year 2000 and a conservative 25% increase. With a 25% increase, Pulkrabek stated, if transport were made to other counties, then the cost for 2009 would be $80,965. If transport to one location occurs at one time in each day, Pulkrabek stated, then the mileage would drop to an estimated amount of about $68,748. He noted that the Sheriff’s Department, then, is showing a savings on transportation expenses, if the procedures are changed in this way. He stated that they are not fully positive on this, but that calculations suggest that they will.
Pulkrabek noted another change made by Marshall County, which ties directly to the start of football season in the fall. On Fridays, during football season, one cell block will be emptied by having inmates hauled to other locations. Each Sunday, Pulkrabek stated, the inmates will be brought back. He described the County Jail as being used at its maximum capacity. Pulkrabek then added that Marshall County has transportation drivers available on Sunday, and said that they have negotiated one Sunday trip at a cost of $50, if needed. Pulkrabek noted that it would actually be more expensive for him to make that trip, so it is a very good package deal for Johnson County.
Stutsman asked if Marshall County could accommodate Johnson County in this way on the other six days, and Sullivan also inquired as to whether Marshall County will do that every week. Pulkrabek said that the first of these items was not possible, but responded affirmatively to the second. He also noted that Marshall County will do that on Sundays if there is a need. Sullivan asked if the arrangement is this simple, and Pulkrabek said that it is. Sullivan said that this will allow for the County to have inmates available for court on Monday mornings, and that this has typically been difficult to arrange. Pulkrabek added to this, noting that the County has previously had to arrange an extra transport for these inmates. Stutsman asked Pulkrabek if Marshall County can provide video arraignments for Johnson County inmates, for a fee. He said no, and that the only act that judges in Marshall County allow to occur by video are initial appearances. Pulkrabek clarified by stating that Johnson County will send inmates to Marshall County that are long-term holds, rather than for one night occupancy.
Pulkrabek said that another issue for the Board and the Sheriff’s Department to consider is inmates with medical problems. He said that the Marshall County jail is better accommodated to handle ongoing medical issues, arguably, than Johnson County’s, because they have a full-time staff nurse. Pulkrabek noted that Johnson County has a great situation set up via their contract with the University of Iowa, as this allows for a PA to come over a couple days each week. He described having a medical person on staff full time is a benefit. Pulkrabek called this decision a tough one, one with both positive and negative repercussions. One additional positive, he noted, lies in the fact that, while the Iowa Policy Project’s Jail Subcommittee has recommended that Johnson County negotiate a rate with one jail; until recently, this has not been possible. Pulkrabek stated that none of the other County jails – including Washington County and Iowa County – have been able to house Johnson County’s inmates all at once, and called this a new opportunity.
Harney asked whether, if there is a scheduled trial, then the Sheriff’s Department will bring an inmate back to the County Jail a day early and transport another long-term inmate to Marshall County. He asked how that will work for people that need to be in Johnson County for appearances. Pulkrabek stated that the Sheriff’s Department will just have to plan ahead, as they do now, no matter what. He stated that now, if they take inmates out of county, then they have to make sure to expedite their return. He said the Sheriff’s Department tries to work closely with the attorneys, and that most of the attorneys know to contact them when a meeting with an inmate is needed. Pulkrabek said that the Sheriff’s Department wants to work cooperatively with the defense bar, and that this discussion is about addressing jail over-crowding. He called this a matter of planning, and stated that it is easier planning to get inmates from one spot rather than five or six.
Stutsman asked about the downsides. Pulkrabek explained that one downside comes from the inmates being farther away. If inmates have family in the area, then family visits become issues. Some attorneys will not like this change, Pulkrabek noted, because they will be further away from inmates as well. Attorneys that the County does not work with regularly may not yet know that that the Sheriff’s Department is willing to work with them. The Sheriff’s Department, however, will not be willing to make a special trip. Pulkrabek said that the Board also needs to consider situations in which an inmate gains the ability to bond out. He stated that the Sheriff’s Department will likely work out a methodology for allowing inmates to be bonded out of the Marshall County Jail, and that this may entail sending a teletype, saying that an individual has posted bond and that a family member may have to drive over and get the person. Stutsman asked whether it is the County's responsibility to bring back someone who has bonded out, and Pulkrabek said that this is not necessarily true. He said that this is a point that could be argued, and that the Sheriff’s Department is willing to work with people. There are a few hurdles yet to get over, he noted, and Pulkrabek said that he thinks it was a difficult thing to transition into. He called this agreement is one that makes sense.
Pulkrabek noted one complaint from an Iowa County Supervisor, centered on the fact that their facility had only been given two hours notice. Two hours is the amount of notice that generally will be given for transport, but in this instance twelve inmates were moved, and there had never been a time at which more than six inmates were relocated. Pulkrabek said that there was no way to transition into it, and stated that they do not want to make trips with only two or three inmates at a time. They instead would like to try to do it in bulk. Stutsman asked for confirmation that the Sheriff’s Department has already started this process, and Pulkrabek said yes. He stated that Johnson County may currently have two female inmates in Washington County, and a juvenile in another county that is adjudicated and can't be in the Juvenile Detention Center. Pulkrabek said that, for the most part, Johnson County has all of their inmates in Marshall County.
Stutsman noted that Johnson County has a 28E agreement with Linn County for detention beds, and asked what happens when Marshalltown gets full. She wanted to know if they are at the mercy of Washington County, which will charge $75 a day, or whether there is some kind of guarantee that Marshall County will house all the prisoners. Pulkrabek said there is no contract with any of the counties, and that this has never been done. He said that when Washington County opened their new jail, they wanted to enter into a contract, and that the Johnson County Attorney’s Office had been working on that. Pulkrabek stated that Washington County wanted to get the revenue as quickly as possible, and so inmates were housed there without a contract. He said that Marshall County has 100 open beds, and Johnson County is taking about 35-40 of them. Pulkrabek said that he checked, and was assured the Marshall County would continue to have room. With regard to the other counties, Pulkrabek stated, it is uncertain whether they will have open bed space. He called this is the best thing for Johnson County, because a contract will not have to be signed with Marshall County.
Stutsman said asked if a contract should be signed or negotiated so that there is a guarantee that the Marshall Jail will have enough beds available to meet the needs of Johnson County. Meyers iterated that there are 100 beds open already. Pulkrabek said yes, and that at some point in time Marshall County is supposedly going to take in federal prisoners, but noted that the Linn County Jail is going to be open soon and will also take federal prisoners. Sullivan asked if there will be an opportunity to chat with Linn County Sheriff Brian Gardner about Johnson County’s use of the Marshall County Jail, and to use it as a negotiation tactic. Pulkrabek said that he hasn't spoken to Gardner specifically, but that this will not be in Linn County’s best interest. He noted that Linn County can make more money and revenue by housing federal prisoners, because the federal rate is higher at $60-$65. Sullivan asked if Linn County has enough federal prisoners to be sustainable. Pulkrabek said the reason Johnson County was not able to hold all of the overflow inmates in Linn County is because the Linn County Jail was filled with numerous federal prisoners. He said he will have the opportunity to have a conversation with Gardner in the future, but that for now this agreement with Marshall County really makes sense. Stutsman agreed and is glad that Pulkrabek is actively looking for ways to lower transportation costs. She said it will also be easier for jail staff to manage the population. Pulkrabek agreed, stating that it is complicated to manage inmates.
Meyers reminded the Board that the daily rates paid other counties had been rising over the past three years. He said that, at one point, it was a bargain to house inmates in Linn County until the cost started to increase and there was the question of whether it would be cheaper to build facilities in the County or house inmates out of state. Pulkrabek stated that this will have an effect on the decision. He said that a cost study is being completed with Professor John Neff. He told the Board that the FY07 analysis has been completed, but that the FY08 is still in the process of being completed. Pulkrabek said that, as of FY07, it was about $10 more expensive to house inmates out of county than in the county. Pulkrabek stated that in the FY06, it was about seven dollars cheaper to house inmates out of the county than in. He said that as they continue doing the cost analysis, they are discovering things that were not accounted for in the past. He said that one of the things for which they previously did not account is “double dipping,” in which the County pays for the inmate twice if an inmate is moved from one facility to another. Pulkrabek said that, in order to avoid being charged twice, he negotiated with Marshall County so that inmates will not begin to count for a charge until midnight.
Stutsman asked Pulkrabek about the average number of inmates that are transported outside the County, and Pulkrabek said that this number changes daily. He said that the one time high was 67-68 out of county. In December of 2008, he stated, the number was down to 18, and added that on the day of this meeting, there were 40. Pulkrabek explained that this is why he spoke in terms of total bed days per year. Stutsman stated that she thinks that this transition will have a big impact on county budgets, and Pulkrabek agreed. He suggested that, if necessary, Board members likely take $17,001, and divide it by 365 to find the average daily cost. Sullivan noted that the Iowa County Supervisor was not happy, and Pulkrabek said that she had become more understanding once he had had an opportunity to explain. He told Iowa County Supervisor that the Johnson County Board of Supervisors will have to answer to the taxpayers of the County. Pulkrabek said a savings of $170,000 based on last year's numbers is pretty hard to overlook. Stutsman said she thinks that many forget the logistics and the time that is being spent managing the inmates, and that to simplify that will be greatly to the benefit of Pulkrabek and the Sheriff’s Department. Pulkrabek noted that this may have strained relationships with bordering counties, because they would like to keep that incoming revenue, but none of the counties have had the ability to house all of Johnson County’s overflow. He said that none of the counties have offered to lower their rate either and that it is his job as Sheriff to look out for Johnson County. Stutsman said that some attorneys will be upset by the change, but added that they are taxpayers too and the Board is considering their tax dollars. Pulkrabek said that, as Sheriff, he is in charge of managing these inmates, and has a responsibility to do what is best for everyone.
Stutsman said she would appreciate if Pulkrabek would continue to give the Board an update on how the transition is going, perhaps in six months. Pulkrabek said he is willing to come back, and stated that he would do so sooner. Sullivan said to wait at least a month, perhaps more, just to see how it is going. Pulkrabek said that it will be in the newspaper. He had received a call from the DI about this change, and representatives from the Press-Citizen and the Gazette are present. Pulkrabek said he gave reporters notice.
Stutsman said that she and Harney are working on the Open House with representatives from all of the departments at the Health and Human Services Building. She noted that the date of the open house is still scheduled for April 22, 2009, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Stutsman continued, stating that an invitation list is in the midst of being created. Johnson County Information Services Director Jean Schultz has set up a master list on the list serve and most invitations will be sent by email. She said, however, that certain City Council members will be sent invitations via postcard, too. She asked the Board to give her the names of people that they wish to add to the list serve in order to send them an invitation. Sullivan asked if she could share the date again, and stated that he thought that it was April 18, 2009. Stutsman corrected herself, and said that the date is April 18, 2009. Meyers commented, noting it had been moved from April 25, 2009.
Harney asked whether elected officials and department heads are included on the invite list. Stutsman said that the Open House Committee is working with ISAC, the Chamber list, and the League of Cities list. Stutsman added that Mental Health/Disability Services Director Kris Artley is putting all the CPCs from across the state on the list, and that they will receive and invitation via email. She said that CPCs in the surrounding counties will get a postcard invitation, and that past electives in the County will get an invitation as well. The committee would like to have a complete list. Stutsman noted that this is an event that will feature cookies, and added that Public Health Director Doug Beardsley, who is on the committee, requested that the event feature healthy snacks. She said the committee would like to keep the open house simple with focus on the building. Stutsman stated that a Local Economic Empowerment Development Strategy (LEEDS) brochure, and a flier about the building, will be available. She described the brochure as having a map on one side and a description of the departments in the building and what they do. She said that tours will be available for people, but that they will be pretty low key. People will be stationed in each department, with each office and some of the common spaces open, such as the kitchen and cooking facilities. Stutsman clarified, saying that there will not be organized tours. Harney noted that the cookies will be in the break area, and Stutsman said that cookies are still being priced. She said Budget Coordinator Rich Claiborne said that the committee will have about $1,000 for expenses, and hopefully won't exceed that amount.
Harney said that there will be a large group at the ribbon cutting, but that the committee will try to limit it to just the Supervisors. Meyers asked if that will be outside, and Stutsman replied that this will depend on the weather. She said that if the weather is good, then they will be outside in front of building, if not, the event will be held on the second floor. She noted that the committee is focused on keeping the program very short. Stutsman said that time for remarks will be added depending on who responds and mentioned Congressman Dave Loebsack, Senator Tom Harkin, and Governor Chet Culver as examples of potential additions. Harney said the Chair will do introductions and recognitions, without too many speakers.
Meyers said Kempf is on vacation this week.
Claiborne said that he thought that at the last Key Issues meeting, the Board discussed adding this to the agenda in order to have time to look at the Operations Manual. He said that he put the manual on the shared drive as a Word document for the Board to look at, and make changes to. Sullivan said that he had changes to add, but that he felt concerned about changing the manual, because the whole of the Board has not discussed these changes. Stutsman thinks that all of the Board needs to look at the manual and then discuss changes. Claiborne suggested each of the members use a different color of font, and that they initial their changes. He said he will bring a printed copy to the next Key Issues meeting, and the Board can then talk about the proposed changes.
Sullivan stated that it is hard to decide which items to put in the manual. In example, he said there is a box of keys that was never really mentioned. Stutsman said that this is an example of the kind of thing that the Board should discuss about adding to the manual. Sullivan said that a mention of the keys should be added to the manual, but that he does not know what should be written about them. Claiborne asked if the Board wanted to wait for the new Executive Assistant to tackle this project. Stutsman replied yes and no, and that it would be nice to have the manual done to hand to the Executive Assistant. It may help nicely with that individual’s orientation. Sullivan noted that the Executive Assistant can make changes as he is acclimated to the Board Office, and asked if he should take it upon himself to try to write a paragraph about the keys. Stutsman said that she thinks that the Board can write that paragraph during a key issues meeting.
Sullivan said he likes the idea of having the manual done for the new Executive Assistant to use as an orientation tool. Claiborne asked what the start date is for the new assistant, and Sullivan stated that it is somewhere near May 1, 2009. Claiborne asked the Board what deadline they wanted to give this project. He asked when he should bring in printed copies, and about whether they wanted to discuss this issue in four weeks. Stutsman said it should be discussed in two weeks. Sullivan agreed and added that it could be finalized in four weeks. Stutsman asked Claiborne to send out a reminder. Harney asked if this is going to be added to the key issues meeting on April 24, 2009, and Meyers responded affirmatively.
Sullivan said that Planning and Zoning had FEMA related issues regarding projects that M. Sullivan had been working on. Sullivan noted that Assistant Zoning Administrator R.J. Moore came down and asked him for the permission to look through files. Sullivan said it brought up a process question on whether people should have carte blanch access to the Board’s documents. He said that there is no system for checking out documents and that it is hard to monitor which ones have been taken or returned. Sullivan stated that this is an issue that the Board will struggle with until the new Executive Assistant is hired. Stutsman said that from this point on they should have people tell Board Secretary Jo Hogarty or Claiborne when a file is taken. Meyers suggested keeping a clipboard at the desk to track what people are taking and returning files. Sullivan said that there is sensitive information in some of the files and that the Board may not want for everyone to have access to all files. Harney said that the FEMA documents contain important information regarding flood reimbursements and those files need to be available. Sullivan said he wanted to bring this issue to the rest of the Board’s attention so that they might be aware of it in the future.
Sullivan asked if there are any joint meetings coming up. Meyers asked if he meant with regard to the cities or Linn County. Harney said he thinks that these joint meetings have dropped off a little. Meyers said there has not been a Linn County meeting in a long time, and Stutsman agreed with this. Stutsman inquired as to whether Meyers was talking about the public leadership, and Meyers said yes, that there used to be meetings every three months. Stutsman asked if the joint meetings regarding flood issues counted for public leadership sessions, and that they may need to check into it. Sullivan echoed this view. Stutsman asked if she should call Doug Elliott, and the Board confirmed this.
Sullivan asked if anything happened with Iowa City and the Eastern Central Iowa Council of Governments (ECICOG), and Stutsman asked if he was talking about the assessment. Sullivan confirmed this, and said that they were going to drop out. Stutsman said she that hasn't heard anything, and that she doesn't know if Elliott heard anything either. She said that Iowa City Council member Connie Champion was at the last ECICOG meeting, so obviously they are still sending a representative.
Harney said that Sand Lake had been deferred for a couple of years. The Board had said they would provide dollars, and since that has been set back, those dollars can be used for other projects. Meyers asked if their dollars were part of the CAT grant, and Harney said confirmed that it was committed for the grant. Stutsman said they didn't even turn the grant in. Meyers said they had passed on that grant apparently and withdrawn that application. Harney said Sand Lake will be looked at again in two years. Meyers asked that the Board be sure that money is not being handed over for this project.
Meyers said that Coralville is having a kick-off for their theater on the evening of March 11, 2009, for which Board had committed money. Stutsman referred to firemen that Iowa City is not going to hire, and asked if the city is hurting that bad, in financial terms. Harney said they may be putting this money toward other projects. Stutsman also inquired about a proposed bridge, asking what Iowa City will do if the estimates come in at a higher number than expected. Harney noted that in the Iowa City Council Meeting of the evening before, those attending spoke about putting a great deal of money toward different projects. Meyers said that the wind campus sounds as though it has a lot of promise.
Meyers reminded the Board that interviews for the Executive Assistant position will be held over the next few days. He added that the Board will meet 15 minutes before the first interview to discuss procedure. Meyers said that interviews will start at 9:30 a.m. Stutsman asked whether the Board has copies of job descriptions for the Executive Assistant, and Sullivan added that he had not seen questions for the interviewees yet. Harney said that Human Resources Administrator Lora Shramek wanted to keep the questions private.
Sullivan said that physical logistics will need to be discussed so as to keep the interviews confidential. Harney said he hates having it in the Board Room, and Claiborne said that they could have it at the Health Building. Stutsman said that it is too bad that the interview location has to be a part of a published agenda. Sullivan said he actually thought it is a great idea to locate the interviews in the Health Building. Meyers asked if there is space in the Health Building in which to conduct these interviews, and Stutsman noted the availability of a back conference room in which they have met for site visits. Sullivan noted that the table and chairs are still there and there is room for ten people at most to sit comfortably. Stutsman said that Shramek is thorough, and that she probably has the logistics figured out. Sullivan asked if everyone would like to have him speak to Shramek afterwards.
Adjourned at 10:15 a.m.
______________________________________________________________________
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By:
On the _______ day of _____________________, 2009
By Jess Hulen, Recording Secretary
Sent to the Board of Supervisors on August 19, 2009 at 9:00 a.m.