MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
DECEMBER 15, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Insurance Associates County Insurance Agent of Record Bob Saunders: Short-Term Leasing of Vehicles
Insurance Associates County Insurance Agent of Record Bob Saunders: Vehicle Schedules
Human Resources Administrator Lora Shramek: Iowa Gift Law
Communications Committee: Charitable Campaign
Communications Committee: Holiday Party
Board of Supervisors: Communication with the Board
Board of Supervisors: Compensation and Classification Study and Recommendations
Board of Supervisors: Policies for Closing Buildings
Board of Supervisors: Parking Update
Board of Supervisors: Buy Local Policy
Chairperson Neuzil called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Health and Human Services Building as a Department Head Meeting at 1:30 p.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Terrence Neuzil, Janelle Rettig, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
Department heads present were: Ambulance Director Steve Spenler, County Assessor Bill Greazel, County Attorney Janet Lyness, County Auditor Tom Slockett, County Engineer Greg Parker, County Recorder Kim Painter, County Treasurer Tom Kriz, Emergency Management Coordinator Dave Wilson, Facilities Director David Kempf, Human Resources Administrator Lora Shramek, Information Technology Director Jean Schultz, Medical Examiner Administrator Michael Hensch, Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak, Public Health Director Douglas Beardsley, SEATS Director Tom Brase, and Veterans Affairs Commission Director Leo Baier. Staff present were: Chief Deputy City Assessor Brad Comer, Board of Supervisors Executive Assistant Andy Johnson, Board of Supervisors Budget Coordinator Rich Claiborne, Human Resources Coordinator Vanessa Wierman, Assistant MH/DS Director Jan Shaw, and Auditor’s Office Recording Secretary Nancy Tomkovicz.
Insurance Associates County Insurance Agent of Record Bob Saunders said Johnson County participates in an insurance program called the Iowa Communities Assurance Pool (ICAP) which is not an insurance company, but an insurance pool created exclusively for cities, counties, and other governmental entities in Iowa. As of today, 625 entities belong to ICAP including 67 of Iowa's 99 counties. At a recent ICAP informational meeting, contracts were a key issue and Saunders said he must bring that information to the County.
Saunders reported that departments enter into a multitude of contracts and almost every single contract includes an insurance provision which may be so minute it goes unnoticed. As an example, a contract leasing a fax machine or copier may contain a clause stating that the vendor be listed as an additional insured. He explained that these provisions are written by lawyers and ultimately shift any and all liability to the County. Saunders said his job is to protect the County who will not assume the vendors liability if it is extraordinary. Saunders asked all department heads and elected officials to give him the opportunity to review all contracts that have any clause mentioning the words insurance, hold harmless, or waiver of subjugations. Full time attorneys are employed by ICAP for this purpose, so no matter how small, or large, the contracts are, Saunders asked County officials to please route them to him before signing.
Saunders said several Iowa entities are currently being sued over Certificates of Insurance (Certificates). These certificates state the name and address of the agents, the County, the insurance company, and anybody who requests the document. Within the document, it lists all the insurance policies that entity holds, the dates, and the limits of liability contained in those documents. These are important in the sense that there are false beliefs about what these are. Certificates are given by the agent to somebody who wants to know that the County is insured. A typical Certificate, for example, would be issued when the Health and Human Services Building was built and the general contractor supplied the County with a Certificate, as well as one for every one of the subcontractors. The County keeps these literally forever. If the ceiling collapses 20 years from now, the County will contact the Certificate holder to file a claim.
Certificates of Insurance also have another purpose, Saunders said. Certificates state precisely what services are to be provided. Also, the only way to verify original signatures on Certificates is if the signature is in blue ink. Black ink is not accepted. Again, Saunders asked department heads and elected officials to forward Certificates of Insurance to him for review before signing. Saunders will determine the validity of the Certificate and he will be the one to contact the entity denying them access to County property if the document is not valid. Saunders said he will scan Certificates for preservation.
Saunders said that a common misperception about the County's insurance policies is that Johnson County has $12 million worth of liability insurance. The County has a unique insurance policy, not common to normal businesses. If a normal business has a $12 million policy, that represents the most money that can be paid out against that business in a policy year. That means with a $13 million claim on the first day of the policy term, a county can literally run out of coverage for the rest of the year. The Certificate of Insurance document doesn't address the fact that there could be pending actions. Saunders said when he receives Certificates from large entities, he asks for a notation if there are any open claims against this entity or any large claims paid so far this year that could reduce this coverage. In theory, they could present a Certificate of Insurance but in reality, there is no money left. Again, ICAP will verify the coverage.
Saunders said short term leasing of vehicles refers to one to three days, not a year. He cautioned that if people ever read the entire leasing contract for a rental car, they would never again lease a car. It is the single most, scary document ever to exist. The contract says that if the renter is involved in an accident with the vehicle, he/she will be charged the full value of the vehicle until the car is repaired. The renter is also responsible for repairing and returning the car. In addition, the renter will be charged for the diminished value and the daily rental fee for the number of days the car was off the lot. Furthermore, the lease stipulates that if the car is wrecked, the original person who rented the car must return the car. He said to imagine the renter is attending a conference in San Diego and rents and wrecks a car. Six weeks later, the car is repaired, but the renter has since returned to Iowa City. They would need to fly back to San Diego in order to return the car in person and that could cost a lot of money.
Saunders explained that everyone should purchase the Collision Damage Waiver, (CDW), even though it is expensive at about $25 day and $7,000 annually. This is a huge profit source for rental agencies. CDW insurance releases the renter from all liability if the car is wrecked. He said that people should always buy the CDW no matter what the cost is. The County's insurance program does not cover rental vehicles for physical damage. If a County employee wrecks a rental car without having purchased the CDW insurance, Johnson County will write a check for it out of some fund the Supervisor's will not be happy about. He said to remember to buy the Collision Damage Waiver when renting a vehicle. Saunders advised that even in ones personal life, they should do the exact same thing because personal insurance won't cover the additional rental days, the diminished value, and many the other charges. Saunders cautioned that car rental companies will try to sell liability insurance, contents coverage, etc cetera. However, all that is necessary is the CDW. The County has liability covered with $12 million.
Saunders said that vehicles are not insured until his office is made aware of them. He needs to know the year, make, model, VIN number, and the department number. They also need to know vehicle type, vehicle weight, license plate numbers, and if new, the sticker price and purchase price, if used, the purchase price plus what it would have cost when it was brand new. In addition, any additional equipment added to the car, the date it was purchased and the cost. Saunders said his office needs this information in order to retrieve the information from the database. Saunders said he keeps a separate file for every department. The ICAP does something no other program does. It insures all fire engines and ambulances for replacement costs. Saunders said when he is informed that someone just bought a 2003 model ambulance he will contact them to ask what the 2010 model sells for because they have to insure them for that value.
If any equipment is added to the vehicle, Saunders explained that that information must be provided in detail along with what it costs, because all this is added to the value of the vehicle. Anything attached to the vehicle becomes part of the car and auto accidents and is settled under collision insurance, not the County's property policy. For example, SEATS vehicles add ramps which are then covered in the event of an accident. Saunders said that if any vehicles are deleted from the department's inventory, he needs to know that information also. The simplest way to get information to him is via fax or email.
Saunders said that when he was appointed the County Insurance Agents 27 years ago, the Chairmen of the Board told Saunders to assume absolutely nothing in the current policy is right because not one of them had seen an agent in over five years. Saunders discovered that about 200 cars were on the policy, 65 of which the County no longer owned. Furthermore, 72 County owned cars were not on the policy. In addition Saunders said, insurance for County buildings was equally disorganized. It was a nightmare. Saunders said he reviews every line of every department inventory to look for anything that should be insured. He does this to protect the County from embarrassing and costly situations. He expressed appreciation to County officials for their outstanding attention to these details over the years, and he told them he really appreciates everything everyone does to make his job easier.
Harney asked if County Trails had insurance coverage, specifically the ones on North Dubuque Street. Saunders replied yes. If there is a negligent issue, like a bridge collapses on the trail and people are hurt, Saunders said he would retrieve the Certificate of Insurance on the people who built the bridge and go after them for improper construction. Saunders told the story of the collapsed skywalk at a Kansas City Hyatt Regency a few years back. There were about 150 people on the skywalk at the time it collapsed. The Vice President of Hallmark Cards, who owns the building, spent five days in depositions with 150 lawyers deposing her about all the liability aspects. Fortunately they had all the Certificates of Insurance from anybody who had worked on that building and Hallmark did not pay out one dime. This is exactly why these records are retained forever.
Saunders said that in order for the County to be negligent on its premises, there must be some activity. For example, during the ice storm the other day, the County is not required to have spotless, dry pavement, but within 24 hours after the storm ends, the County is required to clear the pavement. If someone slips and falls during the ice storm, before County officials have a chance to shovel, that person's injuries will still be covered with premises medical insurance. However, if they come to the County looking for six figures, they will not get that. That's why the County has premises medical coverage on all County buildings to deal with those types of issues. County Auditor Tom Slockett asked how this applies to trails. Saunders said that if the County has a policy that trails are maintained year round, then they must be maintained year round. But if the County policy is to not maintain them year round and someone slips and falls, the County is not liable. This is why a written policy is critical. Slockett asked if any coverage exists for a person who might be mugged on the trail. Saunders said the County has no liability in that situation.
Human Resources Administrator Lora Shramek reminded County employees that accepting any type of gratuity or favor is discouraged. Shramek said the County policy specifically states no employee, spouse, or child of an employee shall accept loans, gifts of money, or goods, services, meals, or arrangements for personal benefit under any circumstances either directly or indirectly affecting the manner in which he or she would perform work or make decisions. Even the appearance of having such an influence would not be accepted.
Shramek said what is acceptable are gifts of non-monetary value of $3.00 or less. It could be food brought in by other employees to share, or door prizes at an event or conference where everyone present has an equal chance of winning. As an example, Human Resources received a small bag of pretzels and malted milk balls and they opened them and put them on the Human Resources reception counter for everyone to enjoy. Another example is the County Attorney's Office received flowers and they took them to a nursing home to share with residents there.
Slockett said he would not accept that in his office to be distributed to anyone just because of the appearance. Shramek said the gifts to the HR office arrive via mail. Stutsman asked if the same rules apply to employees. Shramek said it depends on if a personal relationship exists with the employee outside work; but if there is no relationship other than work, gifts are discouraged.
Facilities Manager David Kempf asked if buying meals for employees would be acceptable. Shramek said not if the meal is over $3.00. Slockett asked if it depends on which way the gift goes and suggested Kempf could buy for his employees but the employees couldn't buy for Kempf. County Attorney Janet Lyness said that Kempf is not a restricted donor.
Stutsman asked if each Board member chipped in $3.00, could they then buy a $15 gift for their staff members. Lyness said no. Slockett said that over the years he has experienced it is just best not to give or accept gifts. Just yesterday, someone came in with a box of candy and swore it was less than $3.00, but, Slockett said he is skeptical of these situations. Slockett told the gift giver to give the gift twice, the thought counted for the Auditor's Office, and now he can give the gift to someone else. He said that in the past, the Office was showered with gifts and candy and he really thinks the law is a good thing.
Human Resources Coordinator Vanessa Wierman said the payroll deduction forms for United Way and Iowa Shares were due last week and they are still waiting to hear on the results of that. The same goes for Change for Change which is ongoing through the end of this week. Chow Hounds for Charity had about 100 participants and raised about $605 from the two days of lunches and $600 from the Silent Auction. Of the total, $413 went to Iowa Shares and $830 to United Way. Wierman acknowledged Human Resources Office Assistant Emily Fitzpatrick for her participation in organizing the Silent Auction and Chow Hounds for Charity.
Wierman said this year's holiday party will be held at Carl and Ernie's Good Time Pub and Grub at 161 Highway One West. Drink and food specials will be offered. A White Elephant gift exchange is also scheduled and whoever brings a gift is eligible to participate.
Executive Assistant Andy Johnson said the Board would appreciate summaries from the liaison meetings to be forwarded to all Board members. Neuzil said most people who meet with the Board usually have something written down and some of the departments pass that information on to all members of the Board. This is very helpful for those Board members who are not liaisons. Neuzil said that at times when confidential issues arise, individuals should communicate with individual Board members. Stutsman said County Engineer Greg Parker, Information Technology Director Jean Schultz, and Social Services Coordinator Amy Correia do this already so they can be referred to for an example. Harney said that SEATS Director Tom Brase also already provides written reports for the liaison meetings.
Neuzil asked Shramek to give an update of where the plans are regarding setting up the Compensation Team and adding additional employees. Shramek said she is trying to set a date for the job evaluation team training. Neuzil asked if the team is comprised already. Shramek said yes. Neuzil asked for an explanation of how employees who wish to contest their particular status should proceed. Shramek said she would like to refer this question to the job evaluation team. She said people can expect the team to assemble in February, 2010.
Neuzil asked what the status is for Administrative Deputies under elected officials and anyone else that would be eligible to be in the study. Shramek said they are now considering incorporating those people as well, but she has yet to do any work on this as she has been involved in collective bargaining meetings.
County Engineer Greg Parker asked if there ever was any consideration for those red circled positions not bench marked; will Greufe proceed with the bench markings for those positions just to make sure the research is done. Shramek said that is not the normal process. The whole purpose for picking bench marks is so that people will fill out the survey on the other end. She said the positions were selected from across the scale. There is no intention to go back and survey red or green circled positions at this time.
Information Technology Director Jean Schultz said that employees who prepare their appeal are probably going to want to do their own bench mark. She asked if the job descriptions could be collected from all the different agencies. Shramek said she does not have copies of any job descriptions and that was not part of the salary survey. They just had a job summary. She added that she would hope that each individual department is not asking for copies of job descriptions because she just doesn't have them. Schultz then said she would assume that departments would contact all the various county HR departments to get data to work from for the appeal.
Shramek said she hopes people would wait until after the job evaluation team is trained and the appeal process is established before a bunch of information is collected. Harney said the County does not have the information on job descriptions because that was contracted out to Austin Peters and Gruefe. Rettig said that two weeks ago the employees asked for the list of the 30 bench mark positions and what the brief job descriptions were for each position. The Board agreed to release that information and Rettig asked if the information has since been released. Shramek said she thought she emailed the information to everyone. Schultz asked if the current information will be accurate in June 2010 because salaries are usually adjusted on a fiscal year schedule. Shramek said it may or may not be, depending on whether salaries were frozen or otherwise impacted due to the flood.
Public Health Director Doug Beardsley said that now, after he has had a chance to review this survey, he is confused. He said if as a department head he decides to dispute the process, he doesn't have any data to reference, and he needs to be able to evaluate the information the consultants worked from. He has some real problems with the classifications that have been lumped together when in his opinion, clearly they are disparate positions and they don't all belong there. Now he is in the position where he will advocate for some positions that were lowered, and publicly advocate that some are raised too high. Beardsley said that puts him in a difficult position. He would like to know if they are ever going to get access to the compensable factors, scores, the raw data, and the COLA data. He asked how anyone could be expected to approach and dispute facts if they do not have the facts. Shramek replied that she and Greufe reviewed that information with Beardsley and provided all the raw data. She said that Beardsley had the opportunity to review the information. Beardsley maintained that he still does not have access to the information, and that Shramek did not give him a copy of any data. He added that the system is flawed because he would have never classified some of the positions as they appear now. He asked how he is expected to work through the appeals process without any data. Beardsley said he is not going to dispute his position, but he does have concerns for others in his department. As management, he is in an uncomfortable position because he has to publicly support some and not others.
Shramek said Beardsley should do what he believes is the right thing to do regardless. She would hope the evaluation team would work with management and the employee together. Sullivan asked if Beardsley feels that five positions in his department need to be reevaluated, can Beardsley request that the job evaluation team look at those five positions, or does the individual employee have to appeal. Shramek said they already reviewed the entire Public Health Department and made changes on four or five positions, so she does not think they need to go through this again. Beardsley maintained that they performed a cursory review of the matrix, and made some minor changes. There was no in-depth research of each of the positions. He said apparently the consultants did a lot more work than the cursory review and they must have more data or information somewhere. Shramek said they would have external data which is the salary survey information. Beardsley asked if they have access to that information. Shramek said no. Stutsman asked if that information should be made available. Shramek said that would be part of the appeal process. Beardsley clarified that the review team will have that information. Shramek said yes. Beardsley then stated that his understanding is that the County does have the information. Shramek said no she does not have the information. Neuzil added that Shramek does not have the information currently, but once the training is complete, that information will be reviewed by the team. Shramek said yes, all the resources that were used would be handed over to the team.
Sullivan said he still has the same question: if Beardsley feels that two positions have been classified incorrectly, do the individual employees have to come forward or can Beardsley appeal the finding. In addition, Sullivan asked what could happen if the employee won't appeal but Beardsley thinks the salary is wrong and he has to manage the position. Shramek said she would like to think it is no different than what is done now. Department heads have requested a reclassification of the job and usually it is in conjunction with the employee. She does not know how employees will feel when they are expecting an increase and Beardsley says they should be paid less. Sullivan said this is the time to address Beardsley's concerns. Beardsley said he will submit his concerns in writing and, as a department head, he would like direction on the process rather than selectively teaming up with individuals. All along it has been described as a process for the individual, the role of the department head has been unclear. Shramek said that she is confused because in their previous meeting, Beardsley said he was comfortable with the ratings. Beardsley said now that he sees the results, he must have been in error and that is why he questions the system. He said he has several positions in one classification and clearly they are not equal positions. Some need to be raised and others lowered.
Stutsman said that is what the appeals process is for and it doesn’t matter if it comes from the employee or the department head. Harney said in his opinion, the department head should be able to make a request for an appeal based upon a particular job description and not per individual. Beardsley said it has been opened up that an employee can dispute that without going through the department head. Sullivan said he thinks that would be part of the research of the evaluation team. Beardsley said the employee can still appeal despite the department heads position.
Rettig said she heard Shramek say that Beardsley previously agreed to the salaries. Therefore, she is of the opinion that a department head should be able to appeal the salary survey because they have the vested interest in guaranteeing that the job reflects its actual responsibilities and its competitive set around the country. Her opinion is that either the employee or the department head can appeal. Shramek said that is the case now, department heads can request a reclassification. Usually this has always been in conjunction with the employee and she has no examples where just the department head has appealed. Sullivan said sometimes there are open positions and so it would just be the department head who wants to reclassify before advertising. Shramek agreed.
Rettig asked if there is a prohibition in a department head appealing. Shramek said no. Rettig clarified that a department head can appeal five positions. Shramek said she would like to see that process outlined by the job evaluation team and then make that recommendation to the Board. Rettig said that Shramek is not in a position to make a decision on this but the job evaluation team can. Rettig said her opinion is that anyone who wants to appeal should be permitted to do so. Shramek said that sounds good. Sullivan said he thinks that what everyone had agreed to is that now is the time for any appeals. Slockett asked if the department head and employee can collaborate and appeal together. Board members said yes. Rettig said that there may be times when the employee doesn't want to appeal for whatever reason, and so she thinks the department head should have the power to make sure things are done right.
Schultz asked, when compensable factor scores were assigned, how the final salary ranges were affected by the job market for the positions that were bench marked. Shramek said Greufe used that information to determine that range and she is not sure of his methodology. Some people are going to benefit from this by being overpaid and others might be underpaid.
Kempf said his understanding is that longevity will be eliminated. He asked how that will be made up to employees as that is part of their income now. Neuzil said longevity will just be eliminated. County Treasurer Tom Kriz asked if that will also be bargained out of the union contracts. Shramek said that is on the table with AFSCME. Neuzil said that is to be determined and he is not sure if he agrees with it. His philosophy was to eliminate longevity and steer towards a merit based system. Sullivan said the goal is for a single merit system without longevity.
Slockett asked if the Board looked into whether the new system will cost more or less money. He said one way to view longevity is that it is forced savings for employees rather than a raise. Slockett said longevity bonuses only occur after a set period of years and the employee receives the same amount of money. Neuzil said his goal with the new system is to base salary increases on performance. He anticipates that the payouts from the merit system will increase. Slockett said those will be subject to annual increases where longevity was not, and so it will probably cost more to eliminate it. Harney and Stutsman said it will. Stutsman said longevity was originally instituted to bring County salaries into range with the market earnings. Now, County salaries are very competitive. Slockett asked who County salaries are compared to, the City of Iowa City employees or to other counties. Stutsman said she does not know those details but she does know that salaries are now pretty comparable and so the Board has decided longevity is no longer necessary.
Ambulance Director Steve Spenler said that eliminating longevity is akin to a 1% pay cut and he thinks that at least for this year, it would be more palatable if that amount was included in the COLA or some other way. Neuzil said he does not know if that will be easy to do. He said already it will be difficult to tell people that potentially some employee this year alone will receive a 3.5% raise, plus they will receive some merit increase, plus if a longevity payment is due, those employees could get a 5%, possibly 7% raise and that is not going to be an easy sell. Spenler said he does not disagree with that, but if they bargain that away from the union, they will have to pay for that somehow as the union will not give it up without pay. He asked if that shouldn't be applied across the board. Sullivan said that a problem with the market analysis is that in order to really let it work, the County will have to know if they would receive a qualified pool of candidates for a job opening. This is an important consideration and it sounds like the County does receive a lot of qualified applicants for job openings.
Shramek said the County does not have an official policy for closing buildings but it is covered under a few of the collective bargaining unit agreements. She cited for one, the Administrative Unit, and reviewed the contents of Article 16. Shramek also cited the Johnson County Employee Handbook and read the section pertaining to employee absence from work due to weather conditions. Finally in Social Services and Mental Health/Disability Services, if an employee does not report to work because the office is closed because of weather or other emergency closings, the employee shall be paid his/her salary for the entire day. If an employee comes to work on that day the office is closed at the start of the work day and if the employee is asked and consents to work, he/she will receive equal time off for this time period that is worked. If the office is closed early due to weather conditions or other emergency closings, the employee shall be paid their normal salary as if they had worked their normal work day.
Shramek said the water emergency policy employed during the flood stated that if employees were able and available to work, and they were reachable during their normal work hours, they were compensated for their time. Wierman said she contacted the counties of Linn, Iowa, and Jones, and the City of Iowa City to learn the following: Linn County did close their offices with the exceptions of their elderly transportation and even though they initiated the closing, they required employees use comp or vacation time. Linn County did the same during the flood. They did not pay their employees.
Slockett said that when former County Attorney Pat White initially started saying that the County will never close, the other union contracts kicked in double time and triple time if other county units were closed. He presumes those clauses have been removed and Shramek said she has never seen those. Slockett said that was a huge disincentive which isn't present now.
Lyness said she thinks the idea that the County does not close is based on the fact that a number of departments and offices remain operational during emergency situations including Secondary Roads, the Sheriff's Office, Ambulance, Emergency Management, and the Medical Examiner's Office. There is no good way to be fair to everyone. She said some employees do not want to use their vacation time, or they may not have vacation time to use so they would have to take an unpaid day and they will feel that is unfair. Lyness said there is no easy solution to this and someone will always be unhappy no matter what.
Slockett asked if there is a rational for why MH/DS is different from every other department. Lyness said it is bargained into their contract. Slockett asked if it would be difficult to negotiate that out of the contracts, so there would be a uniform policy throughout the county. Lyness said it probably would be. Beardsley said if the County doesn’t close that wouldn't take effect. He said he had a number of employees who did not come in and they did not complain about it; and he thinks everyone is used to it. Harney agreed with how the system works now, and said it was replicated by the Governor who said employees don't have to report to work but they have to make up the time or take vacation. It is risky with contract employees making up time because once they work more than eight hours per day, overtime pay kicks in.
Rettig said she thinks the County needs an emergency policy and whatever it is, it should be negotiated in the contracts. The lessons over the last five years lead her to believe the County should be a good leader and if emergency services, the Sheriff's Office, and Highway Patrol declare roads closed, the County should set an example to keep people off the roads. This is the time to write the policy.
Harney disagreed. He said that private businesses were open and there were a lot of clients at MH/DS on that day. Stutsman asked how to compensate Secondary Roads staff if the County closes due to an emergency; they will still be out clearing the roads and right now, they just collect regular pay. She asked if they should get overtime pay along with any employees from the Sheriff's Office and Ambulance. She doesn't think the County can afford that.
Neuzil left at 2:48 p.m.
Sullivan said he agrees that the County should have an emergency policy. There can be dangerous situations and the County should set a good example. Some people are essential personnel, such as in the Sheriff's Office. Harney said a policy cannot cover every situation. Slockett asked if Secondary Roads pulled the plows off the roads. Parker said the plows were pulled from 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. County Recorder Kim Painter said that is why they closed their office at 3:00 p.m. in order to get people home before dark because the roads were starting to freeze.
County Assessor Bill Greazel said within the County there are essential and nonessential personnel. He doesn't agree with grouping all personnel together and applying the same policy. Many private enterprises closed last week, including ACT and General Mills. If the Highway Patrol says to stay off the road ways, and the schools are closing, Greazel said he isn't sure why nonessential employees should be asked to report to work for nonessential functions. Greazel added that when the Department of Public Health advises certain action or behavior for public health measures, employees follow through and he thinks the same should apply in weather related emergency situations. Some people have to work during times of disaster. The County closed during the flood because it was a natural disaster, and if a blizzard isn't a natural disaster, Greazel said he don't know what is. Emergency preparation should occur beforehand and now is the time to plan.
Kempf asked who made the call that the Courthouse was closed. Lyness said that was a mistake, the Courthouse was not closed. There were quite a few members of the public at the Courthouse that day doing business and she was glad the office was staffed. Lyness said she will need to clarify with the Sixth Judicial District Court that they may close their operations, but they can not close the Courthouse.
Slockett said public safety is the key point and the current policy works quite well. People know that they have to take compensatory or vacation time if they are gone from work, and people know they can leave if they have concerns. He said that at the end of the day, some staff in the Auditor's Office did not want to leave but felt they had to because the office was closed.
Stutsman said this discussion should continue at a future Informal Meeting. Emergency Management Director Dave Wilson said he will be happy to give the Board examples of what other entities do during weather emergencies. The key is to have a policy defining essential and non-essential services and then give discretion to department heads regarding closings. Rettig said she still needs more information before addressing this issue at an Informal Meeting. She suggested that a committee be formed to research what others do, whether there is a policy, and whether the County is even interested in such a policy. Sullivan added that elected officials must be involved because the Board can't enforce a policy upon elected officials. Stutsman said she thought there was a committee working on this. Kempf said it is the Safety Committee and recommended they go ahead and pursue this further. Stutsman said this is now referred to the Safety Committee for further investigation. Sullivan asked for bench marks to ensure steady progress.
SEATS Director Tom Brase told the Board there is a federal mandate requiring SEATS to remain open. Brase said he does not require the support staff to report to work but he asks any vehicle operators to try to get to work if they can. Budget Coordinator Rich Claiborne said that Scott County does what Johnson County does; people use compensatory or vacation time if they don’t feel safe driving to work. Stutsman said the Safety Committee will discuss whether to close the County and other emergency procedures.
Sullivan reported a meeting is scheduled for December 21, 2009. Things have not progressed as fast as they would have liked but more information is forthcoming.
Johnson said the Board passed the Buy Local Policy which he is currently distributing. The policy encourages the County to consider buying from local vendors when the cost difference between non-local and local vendors is not significant.
The next Department Head Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, February 16, 2010 at 1:30 p.m.
Adjourned at 3:07 p.m.
By Nancy Tomkovicz, Recording Secretary