MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
JANUARY 14, 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Trails Advisory Committee Chair Terry Dahms and County Engineer Greg Parker: FY 2011 Budget Request for Trails....................................................................................................................................... 1
County Engineer Greg Parker: Amendment to 28E Project Agreement with the City of Coralville for Engineering Design and Construction Management for Improvements on Oakdale Boulevard Extension.............. 8
Executive Assistant Andy Johnson: Reports and Inquiries........................................................ 14
Reports and Inquiries from the Board of Supervisors............................................................... 14
Chairperson Stutsman called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Health and Human Services Building at 5:58 p.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Terrence Neuzil, Janelle Rettig, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
Trails Advisory Committee Chair Terry Dahms said that besides the budget request they could discuss winter trails maintenance, and installing destination signs in the county, and the cost and the installation of those signs. He said that there has been some discussion about that, and they could clear that up if the Board would like to do that. He said he sent a budget request letter to the Board. Dahms asked on behalf of the Trails Committee, assuming that there is a 2% cut, the Board gave the Committee $175,000 for FY10, so a 2% cut for FY11 would be $171,500. He said, just to review, in FY08 the Board budgeted $200,000, in FY09 it was the same amount of $200,000. He stated that one of the primary goals of the Trails Committee is to apply for all grants for which they think that they are eligible, and they have done that. Dahms said that the Committee hasn’t been successful, and that’s a big disappointment because he thinks the North Dubuque Street Project is a worthwhile project since it completes a loop through North Liberty back to Coralville. He said that the trail would be multi-modal , so that it’s not only for bicyclists, but it’s also for people who wish to hike, walk, roller-blade, use in-line skates, or anything like that.
Dahms said that the Committee has not been successful, and they have talked about it at the Committee meetings. It is the clear consensus of the Committee that if they are not successful they should go ahead and complete Phase 2 of North Dubuque Street Trail, making the connection to North Liberty. He said that recently at a Transportation Technical Advisory Committee meeting of Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG) that was on November 10, 2009, he learned about Transportation Enhancement Money, which typically goes towards things like trails, but it doesn’t have to, but there’s a tendency to do that. North Liberty at that meeting was awarded $342,000 to do a trail from where North Dubuque Street Trail would end in the county through North Liberty to Mehaffey Bridge Road. The estimated cost of the project was $572,000, so North Liberty will come up with the balance of approximately $240,000 to complete the project. Dahms said that this would create a gap in the trail. The Committee doesn't know if they have been successful with the applications that are still out there, but he is not optimistic. He said that the Committee has not been successful in the past. He said that the Committee may get lucky this time, and maybe they won’t. Dahms explained that if they don’t, the Committee would like to proceed and complete that.
Dahms said that there is a real advantage to being successful with a grant because the money is leveraged 4:1 or 5:1, depending on what the match is, so applying for grants is a good strategy. Dahms said that if the Committee is not successful in receiving the grant then they would still like to go forward and complete the trail. He said that originally, the estimates to do the whole segment were about $1 million. He stated that Phase 1 was completed through a process, the American Recovery and Reinvention Act, or the stimulus plan. Dahms said that North Dubuque Street was awarded $252,000 during that process and the County came up with an additional $150,000 or so, to complete Phase 1. The Committee believes that Phase 1 was the most difficult to complete because of some retaining walls that had to be built and some culverts. Phase 2 is basically over flat ground. Dahms said that there is no reason to expect it to be more expensive than Phase 1, in other words about $350,000.
Sullivan asked County Engineer Greg Parker if a portion of that is the cost of the Johnson County Engineers' work that was put in as a match. Parker said no, actually the ARRA or RF funds that Dahms is referencing are also classified as the stimulus dollars. Those were 100% and the County didn't need a match for any of those dollars. Parker said that unfortunately the project construction costs was pushing around $370,000 and they were only awarded $252,000, so the difference would be coming out of the Trails Fund source. He explained how the Federal Fund expenditures work is that the County would have to pay the full construction costs up front, and then the Feds would reimburse that $250,000 after they approve it and it’s all completed. Parker said that the fund source that they have and the dollars that are being expended are coming out of that fund source, and then the $252,000 will come back once the Feds approve that, which they are hopeful would be received this calendar year.
Rettig said over the years the money that has been set aside in the Trails Fund, would have been $575,000 minus the $16,000 that was diverted into gravel. Parker said that he understands that there was some dollars that were taken out of that for gravel, and that he didn’t get the full dollar amount on that, but that was something that he thinks the Board had approved as far as an expenditure. Rettig said that she thinks that meant that there would have been approximately $555,000 in Trails. Rettig said that $120,000 went to what she would actually call Phase 2 of Dubuque Street, because Phase 1 has been built for a decade. Rettig said that would mean that there is around $430,000 in the Trails budget before a new fiscal year. Parker said he talked to Budget Coordinator Rich Claiborne, and he thought that what Claiborne told him was that there was around $250,000 to $260,000 in the account. Parker said that he remembers that the construction costs and fees would get reimbursed later. He said that the consulting fees for design, which covered the whole section from the end of the north end of the trail from the river north to where the trail ends, and they're connecting there and heading north to 210th street and then the design into North Liberty, that consulting design also came out of that fund source. Rettig asked if the design is already finished. Parker said that the design is complete.
Rettig said that the Transportation Commission met recently and announced Safe Routes to School money. Rettig asked if the Committee was aware of the other trails money coming out or the trails money coming out at all. Dahms said that he is not aware of that grant. Rettig said that she wouldn’t be optimistic. Rettig said that this trail will have more users in a month than some trails have in a year, but it’s just not cool enough for trails grants, she guessed.
Parker said there is some good news that he picked up from the East Central Iowa Council of Governments (ECICOG) Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Meeting, and is that the House of Representatives passed a stimulus two or R2 package, and it is potentially going to the Senate. Parker said there is a very high possibility the County may be having additional monies that are available through the same function that was available last year, the R2 or stimulus two, however the Board wants to tag it or name it. Parker said that it was also explained to the Committee on January 13, 2010 that the same fund amounts that they received last year will be coming back to the states so the $120 million that they received last year would be coming back, and half of that would go to the cities and counties. Parker said that would be something that he would be actively seeking fund expenditures for out of the JCCOG fund source, because the County previously received $252,000 out of that for Section 1 of the Dubuque Street Trail that is currently being constructed. Parker said he would actively seek funding to help out the second section. Rettig said that she talked to a resident in that area that’s under construction now, and all he could say is, he’s sorry they had so much rain and it didn’t get finished this year, but he can’t wait until next year. Rettig said that the resident is not a bicyclist; he just wants to be able to walk on the trail. Rettig said that she thought that was good feedback
Neuzil asked Dahms if the request from the Johnson County Trails Advisory Committee (JCTAC), at this point, was to just go ahead and try to fund the same as what the Board had in previous years. Dahms said less whatever the Board is cutting budgets by. Neuzil said that was a budget exercise of if the Board needed to, but at this point there has not been a recommendation from the Board to implement that, as far as any particular cuts. Neuzil asked Dahms if the Committee is comfortable with $175,000. Dahms said that’s correct. Neuzil said as far as the Board’s ability to come up with those dollars, in the Board's last budget meeting, the Board discussed where $75,000 would come out of the Rural Fund side of the budget and $100,000 comes out of the General Fund side. Neuzil said that as the Board gets a little closer, and as far as the details of the budget are concerned about, some of the rural funding, particularly as far as money going to roads might be something, just so the Committee is aware of, that the Board may explore. Neuzil said that it is not necessarily cutting any of the Trails funding, but the potential is that the Board could leverage more money out of the General Fund and less out of the Rural, so Neuzil wanted the Committee to be aware that that is something that was of conversation.
Harney said that Dahms asked for $5,200 for maintenance. Harney asked if the money would be used to clear snow off of the trail, or if it would be used to keep debris off of the trail through the year. Dahms said that the money would be used for winter maintenance for FY11. He said that when they first talked about it, he didn’t know what it was going to cost. The estimates were rather high, around $14,000 or so. He said that he checked with City of Iowa City Parks and Recreation Director Mike Moran, and one of the things that they wanted to determine was the threshold that Iowa City uses before they clear an urban trail. Dahms said that they found the threshold is one inch of snow. He said that’s the information they gave to Conservation Director Harry Graves and the estimate came in for only $5,200, and that is a worst case scenario. He said that it could be a lot less than that, so the cost of winter maintenance is becoming, he thinks, pretty reasonable. Dahms said that there have been a lot of complaints, from not only the residents along that trail, but other people that would like to use it, that can’t use it during the winter. He said that is the current estimate for FY11. He said, in other words, nothing will be done this winter.
Harney clarified that Dahms is basing his estimates off of the City’s. Harney said that he is unaware that the City actually clears the snow off of their trails, and that he knows that Scott Boulevard uses sidewalks and they don’t clear those. He said the south they clear periodically, unless they’ve changed it this last year. Rettig said they clear the Iowa River trail because it’s in town. Rettig said that they have a priority list, and they’ll get to the Sycamore Trail eventually, and so if there are multiple storms after multiple storms they don’t end up getting out to the outlining trails but they do clean them in a priority list based on how many people a day use it. Rettig said they can be seen on the East Side trail cleaning it too, but they’ll clean the Iowa River trail first, because people are getting to classes and work. She said they go down a list and if there is another storm before it happens they never make it to the end of the list, but Iowa City does clean the urban trails. Dahms told Harney eventually they would get to Scott Boulevard. Harney said he understands what Dahms is saying. Harney said that the only concern he has, was that they had some discussion in the past about whether they should clear the snow, or whether people who are skiing should be able to utilize those trails. Harney said that he understands that people may want to use those trails in the winter, but at the same time it seems more important to have the brush and gravel cleaned off through the summer months more so than the winter. Dahms said that the complaints that the Committee is hearing, and that the Board is probably hearing too, is that during the winter people can’t use it for walking or bicycling, if they so choose. Harney said that he’s had a lot of complaints about North Dubuque, particularly the gravel along the hill. Dahms agreed. Stutsman said that tonight they aren’t making any decisions as far as policies about maintenance of trails, but this is what the Trails Committee is asking to be included in the budget. Dahms said that his main point is to tell the Board that the worst case scenario is $5,200.
Sullivan addressed Dahms and said that it’s not completely clear to him. Sullivan asked Dahms if he expects the $5,200, which is a worst case scenario, to come out of the $175,000. Dahms said yes. Sullivan confirmed that Dahms is not asking for additional money for maintenance. Dahms said no, and he said that he was glad that they could clear that up. Dahms said that it comes out of the trails budget. Sullivan said there’s $170,000 approximately for construction, and then $5,000 for maintenance.
Sullivan then asked Parker if the recommendation of the Committee, since they are having trouble getting grants, is to go ahead and finish the trail, the missing segment. Sullivan then asked Parker if there is anything to be gained from having them mobilize once. Sullivan said that he knows that they have part of it ready to pave already. Sullivan went on to ask if there is anything to be gained from a cost standpoint, of having them go ahead and trench out the rest and pave the whole thing at once. Parker said unfortunately because of the cost that would be involved in adding this to the existing project, he thinks that it would be in the County’s best interest to re-bid it. Sullivan asked Parker if he meant separating it out. Parker said the existing contractor, because they have already done the work, may be a good project for them to be the potentially successful low bidder for the project. Parker said, since they're looking at $300,000, $400,000, or $500,000 they probably ought to bid the project out and have successful bids. Parker said that’s being creative, that’s a good way of looking at it and certainly if it is cost advantageous to do that it would certainly be considered.
Stutsman said it’s all timing, applying for these new stimulus dollars would, she thinks, be in the County’s best interest to go that route first, so they’ll just have to follow and see. Stutsman asked Parker if he said they would know by February. Parker said Department of Transportation Representative Cathy Cutler had explained to the Committee that by the end of the month they should know whether it passes through the Senate, and then like last year they are anticipating that if it does pass then President Obama would probably sign the stimulus bill, or whatever it’s going to be called, about the same time last year, which would be somewhere around the third week of February. Parker said there will be some caveats for those dollars as there were last year. Parker said that they are going to be requiring that those projects be let within 90 days of the President signing that bill. He said this would be one of those projects because the design is complete, and ready to go. He said that they do have some shovel ready projects ready to go and they're prepared this year, so they are patiently awaiting those additional funds if they do get approved.
Rettig asked if it’s the State Recreation Trails and Transportation Enhancement that’s still pending. Dahms said yes. Rettig said if they didn’t get something this week on their agenda, she would assume that it would be next month. She said that this is the timing that they hear these things, so it would almost be simultaneous to know whether or not there would be another stimulus pack. Dahms said they should know soon. Sullivan said that would be good timing then. Dahms said yes. Rettig said she assumes they could let a bid in 90 days for something they have already designed and that is ready to go. Rettig said that it would be even better since they could construct it next year. Parker said they could only hope, weather permitting.
Parker said also regarding the trails, which he and Dahms didn’t have the opportunity to chat about January 13, 2010 at the Trails Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting, which needs to be approved by the policy Committee obviously through ECICOG, they were unofficially awarded an additional $120,000 towards the Mehaffey Separated Trail Project, so that now has the Committee up to $240,000 and the project construction cost is $750,000. Parker said that they’re getting closer. Stutsman said every little bit counts. Rettig asked if that happened yesterday, January 13, 2010. Parker said yes. He said that’s what he thinks they were talking about earlier. It’s important to make sure that they have representation on that Committee, so it was good to have Harney there. Stutsman asked if there was any other business or questions.
Dahms then asked if the Board and Trails Advisory Committee could talk about signs. Stutsman said sure. Dahms said this was an original initiative from the Board to put in destination signs in the County. Dahms said this was for 65 signs. He said the first hurdle was to pay for the cost of those signs. He said he told the Board in an email that the cost of those signs was $2,000. He said that when he wrote that he didn’t think it sounded right and he checked. Dahms said JCCOG Transportation Planner Kristopher Ackerson told him that the actual cost of those signs was $4,200. Dahms said that he and Ackerson worked together, and the Johnson County Trails Foundation donated the cost for those signs. He said that leaves the cost of installation, which is rather insignificant. He said they could go back to the Foundation, but he’s sort of reluctant to do that since they were rather generous in the first place. Dahms said that they could have Parker do the installation, or they could take that cost out of the Trails budget. Dahms said that he thinks that the most logical thing to do again is to take it out of the Trails budget. Dahms said that they are talking a maximum of less than $3,000, so it’s really insignificant, and they really would like to, and everyone would like to get this done. Dahms said that they would like to move ahead and get it done.
Sullivan asked if this is work that would be performed by the Johnson County Secondary Roads Department sign people, and that’s just money that would be moved from one budget to another. Parker agreed and said it would make sense to have Secondary Roads install the signs. He said that he thinks that there are 65 of those, and they did put an estimate together of what the labor would be, the mileage for the vehicle and the post costs. Sullivan confirmed that it wouldn’t be costing the Secondary Roads anything, but they would be doing the work. Parker noted that as previously discussed, they have a resolution that for those types of signs they would have to invoice somebody for the services. He said Secondary Roads would just invoice the Trails Fund source for the monies expended, for the actual cost for installation. Sullivan said it makes sense to him, that rather than trying to get somebody else to get a permit to do work in the right-of-way, Secondary Roads has the expertise to know where the signs should go and how they should be put in. He said he also thinks that it makes sense to reimburse the time of those people, so it’s a win/win.
Neuzil said that of the $175,000, or whatever the total Trails Budget is, these are items that can come back informally to the Board, as far as policy or where to expend these, and as long as the Board has a recommendation from JCTAC to make those recommendations on the two separate items just talked about. He said he thinks the most important part, from the Trails perspective, is to know how much money the Board is planning to allocate for the FY11 budget. Neuzil said that he thinks that the Board will probably secure that on January 22, 2010.
Dahms said that there should be money there already, and doing these signs should not be dependant on the Boards budget for FY11. Stutsman asked Dahms about the destination signs. Dahms said that he meant to ask Ackerson to bring one. Stutsman asked if the signs would mark the trail and if these were the signs that they applied for, for the grant from the Washington Foundation, the Casino Foundation. Dahms confirmed it is the Casino Foundation, down at Riverside. Stutsman said that would just say the route. Rettig confirmed the signs would mark the route that a person is on.
Rettig asked Dahms if the Johnson County Trails Foundation is donating a total of $4,200. Dahms said that’s correct. Rettig said good for them. Dahms said yes. Stutsman said they are a fairly new organization. Dahms agreed they are. Rettig said she thinks they’re in their second year. Dahms confirmed. Dahms said they’re a 501C3 tax exempt organization. Sullivan said he wondered if the Board should ask Executive Assistant Andy Johnson to draft some sort of letter thanking them for the donation.
Harney said that the Board may want to visit with Parker a little bit. He said that in the TAC meeting on January 13, 2010, there was a conversation about the black and white trail signs, they had to be a certain way or something like that. He said they were having some problems in Linn County. Stutsman asked Dahms if there was anything else. Stutsman said that the Board will take those recommendations under consideration when they are doing the budget, and that they will let the Trails Committee know.
Sullivan asked if they needed to do anything formally with those two things for next week, in terms of spending the money. Stutsman said she doesn’t think so, their money is already there. Neuzil said the Board is talking about allocating, particularly a request from the JCTAC Committee, for a decision by the Board to spend dollars out of that budget, he would think that the Board would want to have that oversight. Sullivan said formal action. Neuzil said in some official capacity. Harney said he thought that Dahms said he is taking it from money that is already allocated to them. Neuzil said but he should still have approval by the Board before that the Committee expends it. Stutsman said the Board needs to talk about it to see if they need formal action and then the Board can decide. Rettig, said that the Committee has no authority, they’re just an advisory committee. Dahms said just to come back to one point, for the winter maintenance, at some point, a contract will have to be signed with Quality Care. Stutsman said that’s not this year. Dahms said that’s correct. He added this is sort of a heads up.
Parker said this item had been brought to the Board's consideration, before the New Year, in 2010. Parker said that there were quite a few questions that were brought to his attention, which he at that time really was not prepared to respond to. Parker said that he has done research on this as part of executive summary to the Board. Basically what this agreement does is, it is added on to the existing 28E Agreement, Johnson and the City of Coralville written and negotiated. Parker said as part of the original agreement and as part of the Oakdale Boulevard project, Coralville was to donate the wetlands land for the mitigation portion of this project and as part of the construction the Secondary Roads is required to mitigate nine acres of property for wetlands.
Parker stated that Coralville has nine acres of land that’s located off of Deer Creek Road across from the Coral Ready Mix plant, in that specific area, close to that on the east side of the road. Parker said that as part of that, Secondary Roads was initially looking at building that wetlands and after speaking with the Corps of Engineers over the past 18 months, they have been leaning more towards asking entities that have to create wetlands or to utilize wetland mitigation activities, to more strongly consider purchasing credits. Parker said what credits are, are somebody out there somewhere, in this case this is the Salt Creek Mitigation Corporation and it’s located in Tama County, have built wetlands that have been approved by the Corps of Engineers and they sell these credits. Parker said the credits are based on the amount of land that someone wants to buy. He said that in this case the recommended purchase price for nine acres of land is $270,000. Parker said that this agreement that they are currently discussing would be added to the original agreement as an option for the Board’s consideration, which would allow Secondary Roads to purchase those nine acres of wetland mitigation activities as credits from this Salt Creek Mitigation Corporation.
Stutsman asked Parker why the Corps of Engineers encourages people to purchase credits. Parker said that is a good question. Parker said if the Board remembers, he thinks that it was before him, but several years ago the County had done something like this up in Kent Part, and they had built a larger amount of wetlands working with Graves and the County worked with the Corps of Engineers, that they wanted to build the wetlands, they were more than what they needed for projects but they wanted to bank those projects. Parker said that the Corps of Engineers really were not with the County at that time, and he doesn’t know what changed the 180 degrees on it. Parker said well there were several things, one of them is, initially they wanted the County to build the credits on the existing property where the project was. Parker said that sometimes not much property would have to be mitigated, so really is that a good use of land to create a wetland that is maybe a third of an acre, half an acre wetland really what they probably ought to be looking at is creating a larger wetland. He said that is the impression that he is getting from the Corps, so that the wetland area is more successful and it would be better for the wildlife and other functions. He said that he is not an expert on this, but this is kind of in a nutshell effectively what the Corp is doing now. Parker said based on that they are looking at these larger wetland projects and certainly nine acres is a fairly large piece of property. Parker said that is certainly something that they can build in Johnson County, as part of this project. Parker said he’s not sure if that answered Stutsman’s question, and he’s trying to search on that.
Stutsman said she thinks it is interesting that the Corps of Engineers is basically encouraging the purchase, rather than developing and maintaining their own wetland. Sullivan said that he could understand them wanting, like Parker said, some sense that an acre here and an acre there might not be as good as a bigger system. Sullivan then said that he wonders if it is actually an issue where they ought to talk with their local representative about just not favoring one over the other because they have had so much flood damage in this County in the last couple of years that it would be nice to mitigate here. Sullivan said that the Board knows they have places that could probably benefit locally, and it would be nice to get that double benefit.
Parker said that the Corps of Engineers is not telling the County that they have to buy the credit. Sullivan responded that the Corps is making them more affordable. Parker said that he thinks that the credits are less expensive. Sullivan agreed. Parker said the County can build wetland mitigation activities, and the County could build wetlands wherever they would like, but the Corps really have been expecting to the County to give more documentation for that. Now they want the County to buy credits from an established wetland instead of creating a new one. Parker said that the Corps is not discouraging the County from creating a new one, however it is more review time on their part because now this is something that the previous individual who has already created the wetlands, now the County would have to follow the process that they did to get where they’re at for the County’s use effectively. Parker said that it’s the time on this issue, they know the wetlands, it’s been approved by them, so it’s easier to approve the permits effectively. Parker said the County could create the wetlands themselves. They could buy the property, they could do the archeological studies, they could do the wetlands design, they could build the credits and they could do all of those things. Parker said the thing about the wetland credit is, if the County buys the credits they are not required to monitor the wetlands for five years. Parker said, if the County builds the wetlands, they are required to monitor the wetlands for five years. Parker said that there are different things that they have to balance when they do this. Parker said, not that these options aren’t available, they certainly are. Parker said, in this case, the County is down to three options for this specific project. Parker said that future projects, certainly, he thought that he had mentioned to the Board, that he thinks that it would be a good thing, for all of them to sit down and bring Graves, Planning and Zoning, and Secondary Roads staff to discuss how to handle future wetland credit activities. Parker said that he thinks it's a great thing, and he’d like to get back together with everyone, within the next 30 days if they could find the time and have an agenda item to discuss this.
Rettig asked Parker what the three options he had mentioned are. Parker said the first option is to buy the credits for $270,000. Parker said that this agreement that is in front of the Board tonight for their consideration defines the fact that the County would purchase the credits and then the cost would be split between the City of Coralville and Johnson County. Parker said this means that Johnson County would pay $135,000, and the City of Coralville would pay $135,000.
Parker said the second option, which is a part of their initial agreement, is that Coralville will donate the nine acres of land, and they’re okay with the County building the wetlands for the mitigation activities of the Oakdale Boulevard project. Parker said that he spoke to Coralville City Engineer Dan Holderness and had explained to him the Board’s concerns and that the County would like to see the wetlands built in Johnson County. Parker said that Holderness said that he understands the Board’s concerns, and that they will still donate the property but due to the cost differentials, because for the County to build the nine acres in Johnson County, the estimate as it sits right now is $498,000. Parker said that it is not and has not been reviewed buy the Corps at this time and typically when the Corps reviews the County’s mitigation plan for new property, historically they have come back with some recommended changes, and historically those changes have not been to cut costs, typically they have been to increase costs, unfortunately. He said that the County estimate is as the design sits right now. He added that historically they haven’t seen the lower costs, but at the $498,000 it would go to the Corps for their review, that may potentially extend the review time for the Corps which is a downside for the third option that Parker will present to the Board. Parker said that the second option is to build the wetlands on the nine acres that Coralville is going to proceed with, if that’s the County’s wish. Parker said that Coralville has expressed that they will do that, but Parker said he will only recommend to the Council that they pay the $135,000 which is what the credits will be and if Johnson County wants to build the wetlands then he would expect that the Board would want to pick up the difference of that cost. Parker said that is kind of the verbal conversation that he had with the City of Coralville. Parker said that the 28E agreement that they initially have, Parker hasn’t discussed that with Johnson County as far as the language and whether they can do that. He said he doesn’t know.
Rettig asked if Coralville wanted Oakdale Boulevard, because she really doesn’t see how it benefits the County actually that much. Rettig said that she thought that Oakdale Boulevard was a Coralville driven project. Stutsman said no. Sullivan added it was cooperative. Parker agreed. Neuzil said it’s a JCCOG driven project, but obviously the City of Coralville and a number of its residents would benefit by not having a neighborhood as an arterial as much as what Oakdale Boulevard should be. Neuzil said nonetheless though, he doesn’t blame, if that’s Coralville’s direction and that’s something that Holderness would have to get official direction from his Council. Neuzil said when there is the potential cost of $135,000 and the potential of moving the project forward quicker versus a different option, it would make it potentially more difficult for that community to want to come up with those additional dollars and take on that extra responsibility. Neuzil said he thinks that the Board would likely act in a similar fashion, and that’s he isn’t surprised by that kind of reaction.
Rettig asked what the third option is. Parker said the third option would be, if the Board did not want to purchase the credits and the Board did not like the nine acres of land that Coralville was going to utilize, the County could seek another location out in Johnson County somewhere. He said that the downside to that one would be that, one, they would have to purchase the property at whatever the property costs would be, secondly, the County would have to then have an archeological study done which has already been completed for this property that Coralville has. Parker said they would have to do a wetland mitigation design activity, which takes considerable time. That’s a downside as far as the time factor. Parker said by not following through with the first two options, the County would have to start from scratch on the wetland mitigation activities, which he thinks would seriously impact the time frame that they would be looking at to get this project into a letting. Parker said as far as how much time, those are all variables that he doesn’t have a timeframe on. He said that the County may be able to find a piece of property fairly quickly. Parker said they may be able to look to negotiate the cost of the property fairly quickly. He added then they are looking at the archeological activities and design of it, and then Corps approval. Parker said they are typically seeing, once the County has to find the property, negotiating could be 60 to 90 days into the purchase of the property, possibly more, maybe less. Parker said that design will take at least that, and then the County would have to resubmit all of their documentation back to the Corps for permit approval, and that can be anywhere from three to six months to a year. Parker said that he just doesn’t know, those are good and bad variables, he just doesn’t have a handle on that.
Stutsman said that Parker mentioned in his executive report that the County would be responsible for monitoring the wetland for five years at a cost of $30,000. Parker said option two and option three, the County would have to monitor the wetlands for five years regardless of which option they picked. Parker said that option two has a monitoring cost of $30,000 for the five years, on top of the same thing, and he doesn’t know what the cost would be for the other wetlands, maybe more, maybe less, but this is what the cost is that they have negotiated for the Coralville property. Parker said that on top of the five year monitoring at $30,000 they would have to, even on both option two and three, replace any trees that were planted that did not survive over that five year period, so that’s an added cost. Parker estimated that 20-30% of trees die, on average.
Rettig said when it was decided to put a major road in the middle of the wetlands, all of this should have been foreseen at the time, that wetlands would need to be mitigated. Rettig said that she is not sure that the intent of the mitigation law is to take a wetland and destroy it and remove it, and replace it 40 or 50 miles away. Rettig said the intent is to lessen the impact on the watershed in the area that is being disturbed by doing these projects. Rettig said that all of this was known at the moment it was decided to take the road through the wetlands. Stutsman said, well yes and no. Stutsman said that she thinks that they ended up with a little different route in order to satisfy some home owners in the area that didn’t want the road close to their backyards and homes. Stutsman said that’s why they got more into the wetlands than what was the original route. Sullivan said he thinks that original suggestion, for the least environmental impact, was a mile long ridge. Parker confirmed and said as an overpass, which no one would ever drive under. He added that would mitigate the wetland loss. Sullivan said that was going to cost millions of dollars to do. Parker added that it would be on top of the bridge inspections and the maintenance of bridges and the freezing and thawing and all of the maintenance activities that go with it.
Harney said, bottom line, if the County doesn’t buy the credits it’s going to prolong whenever the project begins. He added that the study that the Corps of Engineers was doing on the impact on that got set back with the stimulus dollars last year. Harney said that they are looking at another stimulus package coming up that could push it back further if the Board does that. Harney said that it already delayed the project about a year, so the problem is, does the Board want to move forward or don’t they at this point.
Stutsman said that she guesses that the she and Sullivan talked about it during their liaison meeting, and she certainly understands where Rettig is going with this, and she supports it, but the Board has never gone this direction before. Retting said that Parker and Holderness made plans based on what have been past policies of the Board. Stutsman said she thinks that’s where Parker talks about having a discussion about whether the Board wants to change the policy. Stutsman said right now this is where Coralville was heading, this is where the County was heading and there is no reason to think of another way to do this. Stutsman said that she is glad that Rettig bought up these issues, but she thinks that quite frankly they are too far along in this project to change this whole mitigation thing at this point. Stutsman said that it’s going to cost the County many more dollars, $365,000 is what she figures paying for Coralville’s cost to this, that there not going to increase. Stutsman said plus the time delay, it’s going to push this project back years if they don’t continue.
Harney said that he would like to keep those dollars in Johnson County as well, but in this particular instance he doesn’t think that he has much choice if they want the project to move forward. He added if they want to make sure that it comes to Johnson County, they have to start over and delay the project for a considerable amount of time.
Sullivan said he is very much in favor of reviewing for the future, and he actually thinks that when they do that, they ought to make sure that somebody from the Representative and maybe even Senators offices are here, because if the Corps is actually starting to push local governments in a different direction and they don’t think that it’s in their best interest, they really need to probably invite them and let them know. Sullivan said that he would have to agree with what’s been said thus far, as much as he would like to do it here, and he hopes they could do it there in the future, he can’t see spending the $200,000, or more, additional money right now.
Neuzil said that he agrees with that. Neuzil said he also thinks that it’s probably at least worth communicating with the Conservation Board and with Salt Creek Mitigation because it seems like what they heard from Johnson County Conservation, as they acquire properties particularly between Tiffin and Kent Park there may be some opportunities. The Board should see if that organization would be able to work with the Johnson County Conservation Board since they have plenty of potential ways to slow the water systems down and create more wetlands for Johnson County's section of the river from the creek, so maybe this is kind of a blessing in disguise, in a way that maybe the County can take advantage and encourage other communities if this is what the State of Iowa has as far as it’s rules to see if Johnson County could get more wetlands in Johnson County from these kinds of initiatives.
Parker said that one of the questions that he thinks came up at the last meeting when they briefly discussed this item was, where there any purchase of credits available in Johnson County. Parker said that they did research that and they know that it was done a long time ago. Parker said that there is not, and to his knowledge, there has been any credits like that He thinks it would be a great conversation to have with Conservation to see if maybe they could proceed with something similar to that so that credits could be purchased or wetlands could be used, as the County has utilized Kent Park in the past.
Harney said that if he remembers correctly Kent Park had built some of their wetlands with the same investments from other areas here a couple of years ago and the Board had some discussion on that. Stutsman asked if there is a majority of the Board that would like to put the 28E Agreement on the agenda for next week, going with the purchase of the credits. Stutsman said that will be put on the Board’s agenda.
Parker said if there are any questions that they Board like to chat with him about then he’d be happy to discuss it further. Sullivan asked Parker if he would try to do this through a Key Issues Meeting a month or so down the road. Parker said that would probably work out, maybe that’s a good option for discussion. Stutsman said could it be part of the Five Year Road Plan discussion. Parker said that he thinks that they will be utilizing a lot of time for the Five Year Road Plan Meeting, around two or three hours for that meeting. Parker said that he probably wouldn’t have enough time to get both of those conversations in, but he is hopeful that they can get back together and discuss that on a pretty quick short order type of activity so that they can plan for the future on wetland purchase activities or mitigated activities and get clear direction from the Board on where they would like for the County Engineer to go.
Stutsman said she looks forward to that. Stutsman asked Parker if there is anything else. Parker said no, he kind of took all of his storm away when Dahms was there about the unofficial award of $120,000 towards the Mehaffey Bridge Separated Trail Project which is on the Five Year Road Plan. Parker said unfortunately those funds won’t be available until 2014 so that kind of puts a little bit of a wrench in when they can utilize them but hopefully between now and then they could acquire additional funds and have a great project. Sullivan asked if that is FY14. Parker said yes, FY14. Parker said that’s the Federal FY14 which begins October 1. Stutsman asked if there is anything else. Parker responded no, unless the Board has any questions for him. Stutsman said no. Parker thanked the Board for their time.
Johnson said he wanted to let people know that the Department of Public Health has an advisory on their website that they are continuing to encourage folks to receive the H1N1 vaccine. Johnson said the influenza rates have been at pretty low a level which is good, so maybe the interest has died off a little bit but the vaccine is available at pharmacies and from medical providers. Johnson said that it is available for free at the Public Health Department on Wednesday afternoons, but people have to call for an appointment, and that number is (319) 688-5894.
Johnson said that he wanted people to know that there is an opening for a County Representative on the Iowa City Assessors Examining Board. Information about that position is on the website at www.johnson-county.com, under the jobs tab at the top of the page.
Johnson said that the Board’s next Meeting, next week is not on January 21, 2010 due to scheduling conflicts. It’s on January 22, 2010 currently set at 9:00 a.m. Johnson said that there is a scheduling issue because it turns out that it conflicts with the JECC Policy Board Meeting, so Johnson will be visiting with the Board about possibly moving that back a bit, but it is on January 22, 2010. Sullivan asked if the budget is that day as well. Johnson responded that following the Board’s meeting, they have set several hours aside for a budget meeting.
Neuzil attended a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) training course and the Corridor Business Journal's Economic Forecast luncheon. Neuzil said his next Listening Post is scheduled on January 19, 2010 at Iguana’s Grill in North Liberty.
Sullivan attended the Finance Committee meeting, a joint meeting with the Johnson County Department of Health, and a liaison meeting with Parker. Sullivan said that he is serving on the Senior Center Self Evaluation Committee. Sullivan attended a meeting with the Livable Community for Successful Aging Committee and Senior Dining in Solon. Sullivan also stated that there is a series of Martin Luther King Events that would take place over the next few weeks that includes an ecumenical service on January 17, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. at the new St. Thomas More Church in Coralville. Sullivan said the University of Iowa is hosting a Human Rights Week to begin on January 18, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. at the Iowa Memorial Union.
Rettig said she encourages the people of Johnson County to do everything they can to help the world relief agencies.
Harney had a liaison meeting with Facilities Manager David Kempf. Harney attended the Johnson County Community Foundation grant presentations, the Health Department Pre-Accreditation Meeting, the Chamber of Biosciences Ag meeting, the East Central Iowa Council of Governments Technical Advisory Committee Meeting, and the Iowa City Chamber of Commerce Local Government Affairs Meeting.
Stutsman said she spent January 13, 2010 in Des Moines with the Department of Human Services Council. She also attended the Finance Committee meeting. Stutsman announced that a legislator has breakfast at the Capitol on Wednesday mornings and that anyone can make an appointment to have breakfast with him.
Adjourned at 7:04 p.m.
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By Nancy Tomkovicz, Recording Secretary