MINUTES OF THE JOINT INFORMAL MEETING OF JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATING COMMITTEE:
OCTOBER 7, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Report on Activities of Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Coordinator.................... 1
Report from Alternatives and Treatments Subcommittee...................................................... 1
Report from Public Information/Outreach Subcommittee..................................................... 3
Report from Funding/Grants Subcommittee.......................................................................... 3
Report from Facilities Subcommittee.................................................................................... 4
Recommendation to Authorize a Cost Comparison Study........................................ 4
Recommendation to Send a Letter to the U.S. General Services Administration Offering 150 Parking Spaces in Return for GSA Property.................................................................................. 11
Additional Comments from Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Members............... 11
December Meeting Schedule Due to Conflict with Johnson County Council Of Governments Board Meeting..................................................................................................................................... 11
Chairperson Neuzil called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Health and Human Services Building at 4:30 p.m. Members present were: Supervisors Pat Harney, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan; County Attorney Janet Lyness; County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek; Iowa City Representative Connie Champion; Department of Corrections Supervisor Jerri Allen; MECCA Executive Director Steve Estes; Bar Association Representative Jim McCarragher; Judge Douglas Russell; and Citizen Representatives: Professor Emeritus John Stratton, Iowa City Public Library Adult Service Coordinator Kara Logsden, and Consultation of Religious Communities Representative Dorothy Whiston; absent: Public Defender John Robertson. Also present: Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Coordinator Bob Elliott.
The group decided that Harney would be the Chair of this committee and would run the meeting.
Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee Coordinator Bob Elliott said the subcommittees have met and will be giving a report today so he doesn’t have much to report.
County Attorney Janet Lyness said they met and reviewed the report that was updated in March 2009. They continue to have many of the alternatives in effect. She said the electronic home arrest work release is still in effect but it is not being used a lot because of the cost. The mental health screening and diversion is still going strong and they are regularly seeing people. Lyness said they switched the substance abuse evaluations from five days a week to seven days a week. It has been successful and the number of people that are having that done at the Jail has increased considerably. She said those screened are indigent at their initial appearance and are required by the Court to have a substance abuse evaluation as part of the charge against them. Lyness said this has helped because people who don’t receive their evaluations cannot receive sentencing. She said a lot of people were coming in for contempt of court because they were not getting the required evaluations.
Lyness said they met for a year to expedite cases on probation revocations. They have decided not to continue meeting. They were reviewing everyone that was in jail on a probation revocation and they found that people who were in jail and stayed in jail were people who needed to be in jail because of the type of violation or the level of offense they were in for. The ones who didn’t need to be in pending their probation revocation were getting out quickly without them having to meet.
Lyness said reduction of sentencing ratio for time and electronic monitoring has been discussed but there are not enough people on electronic monitoring. She said Drug Court is running and they have 14 individuals now. They are hoping go receive more referrals to Drug Court. Lyness said the DOT Court is going very well. That is for people who were driving under suspension or cases where people didn’t pay their fines. She said in this court there is a representative from the DOT, a defense attorney, and a prosecutor from the County Attorney’s Office so they are able know immediately from DOT what the person needs to do to pay their fees or get their license back. The DOT Court prevents people from getting future consequences that will amount to a lot of time in jail.
Lyness said discretionary reward and incentive programs for inmates has to do with good time and is being used some at the Jail. Iowa City Representative Connie Champion asked what good time means. Captain David Wagner replied that anyone who is sentenced to 30 days or more in jail can apply for good time sentence reduction. He said provided they don’t have any major rules of jail policy violations he approves it and sends it to the judge. If the judge agrees, the inmate can earn up to 20% off of their sentence and be released early. That is roughly six days off of a 30 day sentence. County Sherriff Lonny Pulkrabek said the sentenced people are not plugging up the Jail. The pre-trial detainees are the population that is difficult to manage and are housed out-of-county
Lyness said they are evaluating other strategies to expedite cases and get people out of jail quicker if warranted. She will be meeting with the Public Defender’s Office soon because they have someone assigned to work on pre-trial cases. Lyness said a low level Drug Court was suggested for informal deferred prosecution. They are considering that for alcohol offenses. Considering alternatives to incarceration, Lyness said they will continue to investigate utilizing more community services where appropriate.
Lyness reported on ongoing activities. She said there is a high risk unit at the Department of Correctional Services who will be monitoring the high-risk jail population. She said this going well and is enabling more people to get out of jail more quickly. Lyness said is a greater use of summons. She said the Jail is already using this for certain offenses and they have talked about increasing the number of the kinds of charges where once someone is booked on certain offenses, they are released from jail and told to return at 8:00 the following morning for their initial appearance. Lyness said some of the other options they are considering will involve more money and time.
Elliott asked if electronic monitoring is something not done because of the expense, and could a private citizen who is incarcerated pay to do that. Pulkrabek said electronic monitoring has been in place for a long time. They have seen a huge decrease in the number of people that have applied for work release and electronic monitoring. He said they have lowered the fee. Originally the goal of this program was to get more people out on work release. Some people have been denied because they would be deemed a high risk. Pulkrabek said they had to raise the fee to cover the expense of the program. With the company they use now, the charge is $10 a day for either electronic monitoring or the GPS. Elliott asked if it is available at the discretion of the authorities and for a charge. Pulkrabek said yes.
Champion asked how electronic monitoring changes the length of the sentence or jail time. Pulkrabek said two days of electronic monitoring accounts for one day in jail. Lyness said they feel that if they are getting out of jail there should be some additional consequence so that is does not just favor people who can afford it. Pulkrabek said the electronic monitoring to jail time ratio can be set by the judge.
County Bar Association Representative Jim McCarragher said the Public Information/Outreach Subcommittee decided they would need to add more members. They also decided to document the pros and cons of a joint facility for both the Jail and Courthouse. They started to discuss what public information dissemination resources they want to develop which included civic groups, political groups, and neighborhood groups. Neuzil said he wants to make sure the subcommittees are balanced. The members of the Public Information/Outreach Subcommittee looked at possibly adding some individuals from the City of North Liberty, the City of Coralville, the School District, the Public Defender’s Office, or the Chamber of Commerce. There should be representation from a number of groups because these individuals will eventually be responsible for getting the message out. Neuzil said members of the subcommittee talked about restarting a discussion with the Vernon Research Group. After the cost comparison study is completed, he thinks they are back on message as far as their direction.
Sullivan said the Funding/Grants Subcommittee has met one time. The members don’t believe there is a need to meet again until there is more direction on the project. He said the subcommittee includes County Auditor Tom Slockett, County Treasurer Tom Kriz, and Budget Coordinator Rich Claiborne. Those three people are probably most imminent with the County budget, and each of them expressed concern that money isn’t set aside in the County's budget for anything related to a justice center. Sullivan said he was assured by Kriz that they could come up with $1.5 to $2 million if necessary, but he would prefer to have something budgeted. Sullivan said the subcommittee wants to recommend to the Board to set aside $1 to $2 million in the upcoming budget to have available if needed. If that money is not spent, they can add it to the reserve.
County Auditor Tom Slockett said the amount in the reserve affects bond ratings so it would be to the County's advantage to have more in the reserve to get a higher bond rating. Elliott asked if the County will possibly be able to get a grant to help with the funding of the justice center. Sullivan said Emergency Management Director Dave Wilson is on the subcommittee, and he said there were grants from the stimulus package for similar projects. However, those people already had plans, and the County is not in that position. Elliott said he wondered if there is anyone involved who is comprehensively knowledgeable about potential grants. Sullivan said Wilson is knowledgeable regarding grant sources. However, Wilson told them they aren't yet in the position to be looking for grants because they need to be more set in terms of plans. Slockett said it may be advisable for the County to identify shovel-ready projects and have them ready to go in the event money becomes available.
Harney said members of the Facilities Subcommittee met with Hodge Construction Owner Mike Hodge and Project Coordinator Kevin Digmann to discuss their thoughts regarding the Press-Citizen facility. Currently, the Press-Citizen has 7,000 to 10,000 square feet that they need. They have agreed to allow the Press-Citizen to use that space until developers decide they need the space or they rent it to other entities. Harney said Hodge and Digmann have a six month commitment during which they can determine whether or not the facility will meet their needs. If it doesn’t they can get out of their contract with the Press-Citizen. Harney said Hodge and Digmann told them they would be willing to hold the facility for the County for approximately 7% of the purchase price while the County decides whether or not they want the facility. Harney said he would not recommend that, and the Subcommittee did not discuss it.
Harney said that Hodge and Digmann also offered to build the facility to meet the County's needs and sell it back to them. Harney thinks that type of decision should be put before the public rather than being made solely by the County. Harney said the Subcommittee is recommending the authorization of a cost comparison study by Novak Design Group regarding the cost of building the facility at the Press-Citizen site versus a downtown site. The downtown site could involve either the General Services Administration (GSA) lot or a wrap-around of the Courthouse. The members of the subcommittee are also recommending that the Board of Supervisors send a letter to the GSA to initiate a process by offering them 150 parking spaces within a one block area of the present GSA facility. GSA would then have an opportunity to respond.
Pulkrabek said University of Iowa Associate Director of Campus Planning Larry Wilson made a document that goes through the different steps they are looking for from this study from Novak. It does not just include the Press- Citizen. There were several things they all agreed were necessary to provide some additional information. The document is well-prepared and fairly comprehensive. Elliott asked if Pulkrabek is saying that the exploratory study would need to be done whether or not the Press-Citizen property was involved. Pulkrabek said yes, and they have been told that it will cost $15,000 to look at both the Press-Citizen and the existing Courthouse. It would look at the additional needs of the Courthouse and fill in some gaps from the Durrant Study.
Champion said they should all keep in mind that Hodge and Digmann are not going to hold the Press-Citizen property until the County decides to put a jail in it. If they get renters, that possibility will be eliminated. She said most of the members of the Subcommittee agree that there should be a justice center in one location. However, they thought the study was not a bad idea but should be kept as reasonable as possible. The study will be important in the future because the citizens might ask why they didn’t use the Press-Citizen building. They should also keep in mind that use of the Press-Citizen property will require rezoning from the Iowa City City Council, public hearings, and compliance with State rules. She said she is not so sure that is going to happen.
Iowa City Library and Community Representative Kara Logsden said they are hoping the cost of operating a split facility versus the cost of operating one facility will be addressed in the study. The last time the bond referendum came up, there were a lot of questions regarding the operational costs. Sullivan said he agrees that was something they said was needed, but they also said it will come primarily from the Sheriff and not from the architects. Logsden said the information should come from the Sheriff and be incorporated into the study. Elliott said that the options mentioned at the last meeting were a combined facility downtown, a split facility at the Press-Citizen and downtown, or a combined facility at the Press-Citizen. He said the recommendation that came from the CJCC was to at least look at a split site. Elliott said that recommendation did not include mention of a combined site but only that the CJCC prefers the Courthouse operation always be in the downtown area. Neuzil asked if the study would be focusing on either a justice center downtown or a jail at the Press-Citizen and an enhanced Courthouse downtown. Elliott said that is their recommendation, but the Board can do what it deems appropriate.
District Judge Douglas Russell said the Board of Supervisors voted last November that it would be a joint facility and it would be downtown. This study is to explore an alternative as a cost benefit analysis and to show voters that all possible cost saving alternatives have been explored. Neuzil asked if the Subcommittee discussion went beyond the idea of money when they talked about cost. He said that in the past it has been discussed that it may be cheaper to build a jail at one location and to enhance the Courthouse, but there also may be inefficiencies and security issues associated with split facilities. Harney said they did, and they also discussed that the Sheriff would provide information regarding the cost difference. Elliott said there are many things to consider other than cost. If it is determined that there is a cost savings of $5 million to $10 million, the Board will need that cost figure to determine what other considerations there are regarding security, safety, efficiency, or operational costs. Logsden said they also talked about amortizing that cost over the life of the facility.
Champion said when they decided it would be a joint facility downtown, it seemed final to her. She wonders if factors such as the Iowa City sales tax and the flood have given them more time to prolong making a definite decision. She thinks they should make a decision and start working on what they are proposing. She said that it wouldn’t be bad to make a decision now and start promoting it, particularly in the rural areas. Neuzil said they did make a decision after the Durrant Study and that is why he has been very frustrated with this process. They agreed upon the justice center being downtown, and when the option of the Press-Citizen became available, they lost six to nine months because of the split in opinion. He said that in terms of this cost comparison study, they need to decide if they are going to continue to move forward to allow the split and use up more time. Neuzil said there is also a process to determine whether or not they officially authorized the study. He said that there are some issues that need to be solved very quickly.
Harney said he doesn’t think they have set it back six to nine months. A facility came up, and it looked like they could convert it cost effectively. He thinks they need to determine whether or not it will work for the County over time. If the Press-Citizen doesn’t work out, he thinks they should look at a wrap around of the current Courthouse and work with the GSA for parking space in their lot and possibly a future expansion. Sullivan said that is not what the Board voted on after the Durrant Study. They voted on trying to pursue the GSA lot. If they are desperate and have to go that route, they can. He thinks they need make a decision because another property might become available in two months. He asked if they would then stop and study that property. Harney said if there is a setback, the Board can take responsibility for it because they haven’t pushed along to get it done, and they need to do that. He said it is going to take a minimum of two years to get the GSA lot.
Harney said with the wrap around, they could get things done and utilize the lot in other ways or as an addition in the future. He doesn’t think they need it to start working. Sullivan said they should not have wasted the past six months if they are that concerned about two years. Stutsman asked if the Subcommittee recommended going ahead with the study. Harney said yes. Stutsman said she is taking the recommendation of the Subcommittee to move ahead with the study.
McCarragher said if they haven’t explored whether or not the City is willing to make a change in the ordinance, why are they spending $15,000 to look at a site they don’t even know they can have. He said that they have talked to GSA and have determined they might be about to get it. He asked if there has been any discussion with the City regarding whether or not they will rezone the Press-Citizen property. Harney said they can not legally do that. Champion said it would have to be a City Council decision. Neuzil said McCarragher has a good point. Neuzil would also like some assurance that the new owner of the Press-Citizen would wait until the study is done before renting the space if the County is going to spend money to study the location. He doesn’t think the owner would be willing to do that.
Pulkrabek said Hodge and Digmann told them they will be out of the contract if they can't get a number of renters in the next six months, so it may become available. He thinks part of the initial attractiveness of the Press-Citizen property was that they thought the County could buy it below the asking price, which would help on the other end. He thinks regardless of that, it has been enough of an issue that they need to forget about it. The study may help them put it to bed or ask the developer what it would take. Elliott said he doesn’t think there is anyone who would prefer to have a split site, but he thinks the bottom line for the Subcommittee's recommendation was that an experienced and knowledgeable person from the justice system in the County indicated that there was a possibility of a $13 million savings. As a taxpayer and a voter in Johnson County, his first question is why they did not even investigate it if there was a reasonable estimate of savings up to $13 million. Sullivan asked where that estimate came from. Pulkrabek said it came from him.
Sullivan asked if the group can at least agree not to investigate other sites after this one. Harney said it won't be a total loss even if they don’t take the Press-Citizen. He said that part of it has to be done so they know what they are going to build compared to what they were told in the past. Sullivan agreed but said they need to decide not to go through the process of looking at more sites. Lyness said one way to do that would be to get in touch with the GSA and pursue an agreement. The Committee members have not contacted them since the GSA said they wanted a plan, and they haven't used their Congressional or Senatorial staff to try to push to get the GSA to make this agreement. She said the Committee members need to be doing that at the same time they are doing a study. If they don’t do that, they won’t know, and they won’t have started the two year time frame. Lyness said that needs to be a priority. Champion said she agrees that needs to be done, and they are going to want the City to work with them on that.
Pulkrabek said he would like to work with the GSA to get some time shaved off of the two year time frame. Harney said he talked to them about doing that. It may help to get legislators involved, but they were involved with the Cedar Rapids issue and it took over two years. Champion asked who he talked to and if he remembers who worked with the Federal Government in Iowa City when they did the Tower Place Parking Ramp. Harney said those individuals are no longer working there. Sullivan asked if they need to vote on the two issues. Harney asked if there is consensus to follow the recommendation to authorize the cost comparison study. Neuzil said he is not interested. He said that although there is value in doing a cost comparison study, he thinks adding the element of the Press-Citizen property complicates the process rather than moving it along. He asked if the Subcommittee is making the recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. Harney said the Subcommittee is making the recommendation to the CJCC. The recommendation has to come from the CJCC to the Board.
Elliott said the CJCC made a formal recommendation to the Board to explore the possibility of a split site. Neuzil said when the CJCC made the recommendation, there were three options. The options included a justice center downtown, a justice center at the Press-Citizen, and a split facility. Harney said those are still the options. Neuzil said that was the discussion in front of the Board from the CJCC, and he knows that has changed now. Elliott said the Board obviously has the authority to do that. Neuzil said he is not interested in that, but he is just saying that is what was discussed at the last meeting and is documented. Elliott said the CJCC formally recommended to the Board that they spend the money to explore the possibility of a split site where the Courthouse operation would remain downtown and the jail would be somewhere else. Harney said they are discussing two different things. Harney said he is talking about what the Subcommittee decided at the last meeting when they made these recommendations. Elliott said he is just saying that the CJCC made a recommendation, and they received it this summer.
Pulkrabek said they were able to get a quick look at the Press-Citizen as a jail and courthouse. When Novak looked at that location, they said a 350 bed jail would fit and provided the cost estimates. Novak determined it would be approximately $1 million cheaper than the downtown site. Neuzil said if it is officially down to two options, then that is what they have in front of them to consider. Pulkrabek said there are still three options. The options include a jail at the Press-Citizen with an annex on the current Courthouse, a center downtown that includes the GSA lot, or a center downtown that involves a wrap around.
Neuzil said he thinks one reason the issue was brought back to the CJCC is that they now have a full committee. Neuzil said at the time of the last meeting, the Board didn’t move forward because the Press-Citizen had just been sold so there was a need for further discussion and for the subcommittee to talk to the developer. Neuzil said the CJCC would now need to make an official recommendation to the Board. Sullivan said they can put it on an agenda. Stutsman said nothing will get done because it will be a two to two vote right now. Russell said the purpose of this meeting is for the CJCC to make a recommendation to the Board. He said that the fact that the Board may be deadlocked at the next meeting is not the issue today. He said that the recommendation should be part of the public record, and the Board should be forced to decide, and if there is a stalemate, so be it. Sullivan said he doesn’t think assumptions should be made regarding how individuals will vote, and he agrees with Judge Russell.
Consultation of Religious Communities Representative Dorothy Whiston said she is confused because the information they have includes an option for a courthouse and a jail at the Press-Citizen. Harney understood that was included in it. Neuzil said that was on the list. Facilities Manager Dave Kempf said when they made their recommendation to the Board of Supervisors, they talked about coming up with a list of questions they would like to have answered if they do this study. At that time it was said they needed to look at having everything at the Press-Citizen. He said the Board asked the Subcommittee to determine if their recommendation had changed in any way after learning of the potential sale of the Press-Citizen property. They determined that their overall concept of their recommendation had not changed. Kempf said it is up to the CJCC to decide if it moves on to the Board. That is how the option of moving everything out to the Press-Citizen property got on the list. Kempf said he doesn’t think Elliott was there.
Elliott said since the CJCC has been reconfigured since that time, he thinks the Board would want a recommendation from this Committee. Neuzil asked if they can do that and to let everyone know what they would be voting for. He asked if there are four things on the list. Champion said she in not in favor of it. Neuzil said the four things are a justice center downtown, a justice center at the Press-Citizen, a split facility with a jail at the Press-Citizen and the Courthouse in its current location, and a justice center downtown using only the current Courthouse property.
Wilson said when he did the outline, he thought there was a possibility of three sites and that is why three sites were listed. He was not recommending three sites. He said what he is suggesting is that the process would be the same. He thinks the wrap around is going to cost a lot more because of the proximity to the Courthouse. If they want to find that out, they could add it to the cost comparison. Wilson said the outline was concerned with location and the comparison of locations. Whiston said if they are going to consider the wrap around at some point, they should get the estimate included in this study, if they are going to go ahead with it. Sociology Professor Emeritus John Stratton said the Supervisors have the right to add things or take things out of the study to satisfy their concerns. Harney asked if the cost of the study included everything in it. Kempf said the estimate was at a discounted price, and Novak is okay with having the price in that area.
Lyness asked what the recommendation is from the Facilities Subcommittee to the CJCC. Harney said it is what Kempf said. Elliott said it was his understanding that no one was interested in moving the Courthouse away from downtown at the last meeting. Champion agreed. Kempf said that was the general consensus. Champion said she doesn’t think they will get support for moving the Courthouse. Harney asked if they are changing what the Subcommittee is recommending. Champion said they did not discuss all of these things. Russell said the committee recommended exploring the cost of splitting the facility or having everything downtown.
Lyness moved that the Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee recommend to the Board of Supervisors that they do a study to determine the difference in cost between having one facility downtown utilizing the current Courthouse versus have a jail at the Press-Citizen lot and doing something to expand the Courthouse at its current location. Stratton seconded the motion.
Whiston asked if they want to know the different in cost between the wrap around and the GSA property at this point. Harney said he thinks they should. Neuzil said that would be a part of Lyness’s recommendation of exploring one location downtown. Harney said the reason for the study was to compare apples to apples, either a joint facility at the Press-Citizen or downtown. Stutsman said she thought there were three options. Harney asked why they would even do a study if they are not comparing anything. Sullivan said they should not do one then and should just vote. Logsden said there were two meetings. She feels like they stepped away from the option of having one facility at the Press-Citizen property at one of the meetings. Champion said she doesn’t think the community ever supported moving everything out to the Press-Citizen. Kempf agreed and said he thinks that direction came from the Board of Supervisors during an informal meeting.
Whiston said she is fine with the recommendation other than wanting to study both alternatives for a joint facility downtown. Her concern is that they are going to get one study done and have to do another study because they haven’t looked at both options. Lyness said she thinks the study is going to be looking at space. Kempf said they would be looking at square footage rather than configuration. They will be ensuring that they would have adequate space for the Courthouse and the jail and also studying whether or not having a split facility would result in cost savings. Whiston said she understood they would want a cost comparison between using the GSA property and doing a wrap around before actually moving forward. If so, she thinks that should be done at the same time. Champion asked if they have some rough estimates for that already. Kempf said yes, they just need to compile it in a format that compares apples to apples. One of the reasons the cost of the study will be low is that Novak has already done a lot of the work and would just need to change the format of the information. Logsden said for this phase they are going to say there is X amount of square feet to be built, and they are going to estimate X number of dollars per square foot whether it is a wrap around or they use the GSA. If it goes to the GSA, they will add the cost of acquiring the property. Harney and Kempf agreed. Whiston said she thought she heard someone say that the cost per square foot would be greater with the wrap around option. Harney said he thinks there may be an additional cost involved in excavating behind the Courthouse. Sullivan said there would be a number of details and variables to be worked out within the option of a downtown site. Kempf said there would be a cost per square foot for renovating the existing Courthouse.
Harney said there is a motion on the floor and asked all Committee members in favor to say aye. Stutsman, Sullivan, Lyness, Pulkrabek, Champion, Allen, Estes, Stratton, Logsden, and Whiston voted aye. He asked for the nay vote. Russell, McCarragher, Neuzil, and Harney voted nay. Harney said the majority of the vote was aye. Neuzil asked if it seems reasonable to put it on next week’s Formal Meeting agenda for a vote. Stutsman asked if they should wait until they have another Supervisor. Sullivan said they should put it on and vote. Champion agreed.
Sullivan moved to send a letter to the U.S. General Services Administration offering 150 parking spaces in return for the GSA property. Lyness seconded the motion.
Neuzil asked who is sending the letter. Harney said it will be sent from the Board of Supervisors, and they will have the Chair sign it. Neuzil said if the CJCC is comfortable moving it forward, they will put it on a Board of Supervisor’s agenda. Stutsman asked where the 150 parking spaces are. Harney said they don’t know and that is the issue. It could be in a City parking ramp or if they build a facility next to the justice center, it would be within a block of the GSA lot. Lyness said they talked about doing it within two blocks. Harney asked for the aye votes in favor of sending a letter. The motion was approved unanimously to send a letter to the GSA.
Whiston asked why the CJCC isn’t on the website for the public to view agendas and minutes. Harney said there has been reorganization and asked Johnson if they could do that with the Board’s approval. Whiston said she is representing the Consultation of Religious Communities. Harney said they will change that.
Harney said the JCCOG Board meeting conflicts with the December meeting of the CJCC. Neuzil said the next meeting is November 4, 2009 at 4:30 p.m., and the conflict is with the following meeting. Stutsman said she wonders if they will need another meeting. Harney said if they are waiting for the study, they might not need it. Harney said they can tentatively schedule it for December 9, 2009 at 4:30 p.m., and they can cancel it if they don’t need it. Whiston asked if there is a timeframe for getting the study done. Kempf said the timeframe is 30 to 45 days.
Adjourned at 5:48 p.m.
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By Nancy Tomkovicz, Recording Secretary