MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
FEBRUARY 4, 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SEATS Director Tom Brase: Progress Report
Social Services Coordinator Amy Correia: Free Tax Help
Mental Health/Disability Services Director Kris Artley: Hiring of Targeted Case Manager
Mental Health/Disability Services Director Kris Artley: Property Tax Relief Dollars
Executive Assistant Andy Johnson: Progress Report
Reports and Inquiries from Executive Assistant Andy Johnson
Reports and Inquiries from the Board of Supervisors
Chairperson Stutsman called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Health and Human Services Building at 9:10 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Terrence Neuzil, Janelle Rettig, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan.
Brase said he knows the Board is familiar with Johnson County SEATS but he wants to begin with a bit of information about it. He said SEATS provides service throughout all of Johnson County, and on occasion will leave the County with enough funds that would support them without having to subsidize anything. He said they provide services to the general population in rural areas, they provide ADA Paratransit service in the cities wherever there is a fixed route. Brase said they contract with Iowa City and Coralville right now for those.
Brase said with the recent American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), Johnson County SEATS has received three new vehicles from East Central Iowa Council of Governments (ECICOG). He said they will also be receiving one more from Coralville Transit. He stated that Vehicle 326 arrived on November 11, 2009, Vehicle 327 arrived on November 17, 2009, and they received the third ECICOG vehicle on November 18, 2009. Brase said they should be receiving the vehicle from Coralville Transit in the next month or two. He expressed that SEATS really appreciates the new vehicles with the funding, and he said that it has been very helpful because some of their vehicles were fairly old and in need of replacement.
Brase said a team was formed through the Transportation Committee of the Johnson County Livable Community for Successful Aging Initiative. He said the team competed for and was awarded a grant to attend the annual Mobility Planning Services (MPS) Accessible Community Transportation Institute of Easter Seals Project ACTION in Washington D.C. in July 2009. He said the team members consisted of Stutsman, Brase, Iowa City Transit Representative Chris O’Brien, Goodwill Representative Marc Rahe, and Johnson County Livable Community Successful Aging Initiative Representative Dee Vanderhoff.
Brase said this last fiscal year, SEATS increased 4% over the previous fiscal year. In FY09 SEATS had 103,543 trips, and in FY08 there were 99,605 trips. For the 2009 calendar year, SEATS had 104,698 trips. Brase stated that the location the Board is currently looking at shows where SEATS shares with Secondary Roads and their new garage in the Administration Building. He said this has helped them with less deadhead miles and less refueling, and they have been able to share some administrative things, so the location has been working very well.
For FY09, the total trips provided were slightly over 12,000 for Coralville, about 76,000 for Iowa City, over 12,000 for Pathways, and 28,026 for rural. Brase said that ridership on rural trips continues to decrease, and they are working on that by going out to different meal sites and encourage those types of trips wherever they can. All these numbers come to a total of 103,543 trips. Brase said that the total expenditures in FY09 were $1.75 million, and there were 38,625 revenue hours with about 446,000 revenue miles. Brase stated that the cost per revenue hour decreased from about $50 for the year to about $45 in FY09. He said that the cost per trip was below $17.
Stutsman asked how SEATS’ cost per trip compares with other paratransit services. Brase replied that they usually compare the trips per revenue hour, and that number is lower than what it has been, but the cost is also substantially lower. He said that SEATS’ cost per trip is $16.93, compared to $23.00 per trip for LIFTS in Cedar Rapids. Stutsman said that is fairly significant. Brase said that the cost per trip also depends on whether it is city or rural.
Brase expressed that SEATS appreciates the Maintenance Coordinator position and the Mechanic position. He said the last three months the position has not been filled, but it is filled now and is doing well. He noted that compared to the end of January of FY09, SEATS is now using more motor fluids, tires, and minor parts now that they have a mechanic. Brase said that SEATS is using the minor parts budget to pay for the replacement parts and minor equipment increase. He said that the repair costs for SEATS decreased by a substantial amount now that they are doing more in-house repairs instead of out-of-house. Brase said that including the Maintenance Coordinator’s year-to-date (YTD) pay and benefits, the total expenditures for SEATS’ repairs and maintenance in this fiscal year is $73,000, which is almost $23,000 less than what they spent last year.
Sullivan asked if Brase is projecting about a $45,000 savings in this fiscal year. Brase agreed that they are hoping it will be around a $45,000 savings. He said they have a lift and a lot of equipment, and he said these are nice to have and he appreciates the lift very much. Brase said fuel costs with the deadhead miles finally decreased after the last six fiscal years, which is very helpful for SEATS. He said the percentage for how much is used out of the budget for fuel costs is a large amount, so it is not such a huge factor when fuel prices are lower. IN FY08, fuel costs were $150,000 and in FY09 they were $136,000. Brase expressed that he is hoping costs will be below $136,000 this year if prices remain the way they are.
Brase said that maintenance costs for SEATS goes up and down somewhat, but it has fluctuated a lot by newer vehicles. He said now that SEATS has a person doing in-house maintenance, it will help a lot. He said that in FY07, the shop price went from about $55 per hour to about $75 per hour in the shop, which was a $20 increase. Brase said that SEATS continues to have quarterly Labor-Management Committee meetings and customer service and other quarterly training sessions with the staff. He said they promote intergovernmental collaboration and cooperation with Coralville, Iowa City, North Liberty, University Heights, Solon, Lone Tree, ECICOG, Pathways, and a few others that SEATS contracts with.
Brase showed the Board the breakdown of tax funding from the General Fund that has gone to SEATS since FY01. He expressed that SEATS tries to keep that number as low as possible. He said that the SEATS Director improves communication with the public, goes to meetings, provides presentations, and talks to the public as much as possible about what SEATS offers them and can offer them. Brase said people sometimes do not know how their needs can be provided for, so SEATS is trying to improve that. He said rider surveys were completed and posted on the website, and SEATS received an earmark grant of $123,000 to purchase maintenance equipment.
Brase said SEATS attended the Easter Seals Mobility Management Session, which was through a grant. He said they continue to get training grants through the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT), so they can go to different training sessions and have them paid for. He said that Billing Supervisor Nick Pacha is going to route match training in April, and 80% of this will be paid by the Iowa DOT. Brase said that the SEATS service continues to grow, with service growing by about 4% and the revenue and expenditures growing by about 5.5% last year.
Brase stated that another accomplishment is that SEATS received an upgrade in their route match software and scheduling system, and they also now have the Maintenance Coordinator. He said that SEATS works with the region and ECICOG on transit planning strategies, and they also work with Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG) for the urban and rural area. Brase stated that they are continuing with training programs, improving service efficiencies, and working on maintaining a higher number of trips per hour.
Brase said that goals for the future are utilizing more of the grants that are possible. Brase noted that SEATS usually has to go through transit entities to get the grants because they are not recognized by the state. He said they contract with ECICOG, Iowa City Transit, or Coralville Transit. Other goals are to keep expenditures below revenue increases, and plan and develop ways to meet rising growth demands, customer service, and staff development. He asked if the Board has any questions.
Rettig said that SEATS has 103,500 total trips, and of those trips, around 76,000 are in Iowa City. She said that according to her math, this is 73.51% of the total trips. She asked where SEATS gets the money to buy buses and provide service to Iowa City. Brase replied that SEATS contracts with Iowa City, and they pay a certain amount for those trips, and the buses are paid for through a federal grant. Through this grant, the federal government pays for 83%, and the County pays 17% to purchase those things. Brase said the County has purchased those with the 17% as part of the contract of leasing them, and if SEATS would leave the agreement of that contract, part of that money would come back to the County. Brase said the buses’ substantial life is about four years, and the contract is five years, so the vehicle never gets replaced within five years. Rettig asked how the County gets the federal grants to do this.
Brase said that the Iowa Public Transit Association determines which vehicles are up for replacement. This is determined by somewhat of a formula which looks at which vehicles have the most miles, which ones are still being used, and how old they are. With the stimulus funding, or the ARRA funding, SEATS was able to replace three and get a brand new bus without any 17% matching funds. Rettig asked if they were able to do this because they are members of ECICOG. Brase agreed, saying they are also members of Iowa City Transit and Coralville Transit. Rettig said that Brase had said three of the new buses were ECICOG’s. Brase agreed, and he said those were up for replacement first.
Stutsman added that the County goes through ECICOG but the City goes through JCCOG for their transportation and vehicles. She noted that this is from two different sources, but the County contracts. Rettig asked how many of SEATS’ current buses have been secured through ECICOG. Brase said they currently have 12 vehicles that are ECICOG’s. He said that three of them have been replaced because they had over 200,000 miles. He stated that one was a 1996, one was a 1997, and the other was a 2000 and they had all come up for replacement.
Rettig asked how many vehicles are in SEATS’ fleet. He said that SEATS has 22 vehicles in their fleet right now and will have 23 after Coralville adds an extra vehicle. Brase said they utilize some of the vehicles from ECICOG and share all those vehicles, and 73% of SEATS’ trips are in Iowa City. He said one would think 73% of the vehicles would then be vehicles from Iowa City, and he said they have talked to the City about increasing the number of vehicles they provide. Brase said that since they share rides, they have been able to use some of the ECICOG vehicles and Coralville vehicles. He noted that Coralville increased the number of vehicles they provided, and at one point Iowa City was going to increase with another vehicle for the one that got replaced, but ECICOG somehow got that vehicle. Brase said he does not know exactly how that took place.
Rettig said it is safe to say that Iowa City residents benefit from the buses that are provided through ECICOG. Brase agreed that Iowa City benefits greatly from the ECICOG vehicles. He added that the software that was purchased for scheduling went through an ECICOG grant, as well as radios and other things. Sullivan said that although the overall ridership is increasing, it is only going up in the urban area and is actually slipping slightly in some of the rural areas. He asked if Brase could talk a little bit about the possibilities for why that might be.
Brase said that originally, there was a setup for rural residents to go in for medical appointments, and SEATS provided service from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. He said that he thinks transit is changing somewhat now that a lot of people go to work in between those hours. Brase said that there are some riders that go to work in between those hours, but he expressed that it is difficult. He said that most of those rural community residents who used SEATS for trips have moved on or moved into an assisted living home within the Iowa City area. Brase said that SEATS is seeing the population of their ridership declining. Sullivan asked if they are not being replaced by new people. Brase agreed that they are not being replaced because they are educated about what is out there and what is available.
Brase said that SEATS asks for an amendment that they only provide service to different sections of the rural communities three days a week. He noted that other counties provide service five days a week all through their county. He said if ECICOG would not approve that, then there would be a point where SEATS would need to provide that service. Brase said that the difference between the ADA Paratransit service and the rural service is that SEATS could decline if there is a capacity issue. He said he does not see this as a big issue, and it could be beneficial if they did provide five days of service a week from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Stutsman asked if anyone in the rural area can ride SEATS. Brase said that it is open to the general public, and he said this does not meet those possible ADA requirements of only those people who cannot ride the fixed route being eligible to ride. Stutsman said she had an ECICOG Board meeting last week, and she said they talked about more stimulus dollars coming to purchase more vehicles, so that would be good. Brase said the two vans that were possibly going to be used for van pools may be replaced with vehicles that are wheelchair accessible. He said that these vans could still possibly be used for van pools, but if they were replaced, SEATS could be utilizing them better.
Correia said she spoke a few months ago about the Transitioning Youth Initiative. She said these are funds that the Department of Human Services (DHS) area manager made available to the Johnson County Decat Board, designated for certain activities. The Decat Board met on January 25, 2010, and voted to support these two efforts. She said that the $10,000 of this contract would go to support the Transitioning Youth Initiative, which is a special project of the State DHS that is currently operating in six Iowa communities. Correia said the purpose of the initiative is to support youth as they are transitioning out of State care, whether that be foster care or being involved in the juvenile court system. She expressed that communities can additionally choose to serve other youth as they are approaching adulthood, such as homeless youth.
Correia said the idea of the initiative is to train adults and youth to be able to facilitate a Youth Dream Team with participating youth, and this is all voluntary. She said that these trained facilitators would work with the young person to create a dream path and help them determine their self-directed goals for moving into adulthood. A team of people would be assembled, potentially including people from both the formal service support system and informal support system, such as friends and trusted adults. This team would come together to support the youth as they present their dream path and move into adulthood.
Correia said the $10,000 would go to support the youth leaders to participate in training and co-facilitate the Youth Dream Teams. The funding would also help with some of those things that youth need when transitioning into adulthood. She said one thing that the Community Shared Decision Making Team and the Decat Board discussed was putting together move-in kits, including such things as laundry baskets, sheets, and laundry detergent. Correia stated that they have already started amassing donations, but with the funding they could purchase items to put together those move-in kits for young people.
Correia stated that the other $4,950 dollars would be to support efforts to the Community Partnership to Protect Children. She noted that this is an additional special initiative of DHS to support local based efforts to create safe communities and healthy families. She said this money would go to assist with those efforts, and it would be the responsibility of the Shared Decision Making Team. Some of the efforts they are supporting now are the Public Policy Initiatives around disproportionality in foster care, neighborhood networking, and youth programs in North Liberty that include Savannah Village and the Peaceful Place. They are also currently supporting mini-grants to support efforts throughout the County that are helping youth and families. Correia said that the $4,950 would be used to support those efforts.
Stutsman asked if these are all State dollars. Correia confirmed this. She said there would be a contract between the State and the County, and the County would be reimbursed for all costs to support those activities. Harney said that would be administrated through Correia’s office. He asked how she operates those dollars, whether it is through the schools, through volunteer groups, or through her agency. Correia replied that the Transitioning Youth Initiative is operated primarily through the Shared Decision Making Team of the Community Partnership. She said this includes representatives from the County, DHS, nonprofit agencies, the Arc of Southeast Iowa, United Action for Youth, Neighborhood Centers, and school districts. She said the operations are through this already established networking group. Stutsman said this issue will be put on the agenda for formal action by the Board next week.
Correia said that these are State dollars that were transferred to Johnson County Decat with the designation to support this effort. She said this is a current contract that they have with the State, and it is to add dollars to support the efforts of that group. Community Projects Specialist LaTasha Massey from Johnson County Social Services is the co-chair of that committee, along with Officer Sam Black from the Department of Corrections. Correia said in the last year, they planned and put on a Save Our Children conference. This conference brought together former foster parents, potential foster parents, and other service providers to talk about how to address the issue of overrepresentation of minority youth in foster care.
Correia said the $4,950 is to assist Club Kazi with their efforts. She said they have surveyed former foster parents, and they are going to be doing focus groups with former foster parents. They are doing this to hear some lessons foster parents have learned, and are going to use this information to develop recommendations to the DHS. Correia said they are also planning a 2nd annual Save Our Children conference. She said the dollars would go to support all of these efforts.
Sullivan said he had a chance to go to one day of this conference, and he said it was very neat. He said one of the neat things is that many professionals in this community, including African American attorneys and doctors, are starting to get involved and are stepping up to do something about this disproportionality. Sullivan said it was neat to see so many of these people, and he heard from a lot of people who had just learned about it but would definitely go to the next conference. He said it was a very positive experience. Correia said Club Kazi had very positive feedback about the conference, so they are getting ready to do it again. Stutsman said that this will be put on the agenda for formal action next week.
Correia said that the free tax help clinics started on January 31, 2010. She said she spoke to UI Tippie College of Business Professor of Accounting Dr. Joyce Berg, who said the first session was a big success. She said they had over 50 tax filers that first day, so Correia wants to let people know that those sessions are up and running. She said there is information available on the Johnson County website, where there is a button on the main page to look at the schedule and all of the sites that are open in Iowa City, Coralville, and North Liberty. Correia said there are east Iowa City locations as well as the downtown Iowa City Public Library location.
Correia said the clinics are off to a good start, and they hope for over a thousand tax filers this year. She said that they do electronic filing, so people can do a direct deposit of their refund into their account. She noted that the tax returns are quicker with the electronic filing, because it files the taxes that very day with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Correia said the refunds can come back in as soon as ten days through the mail.
Stutsman asked Correia to identify the eligibility for the tax help clinics. Correia said that households earning $49,000 per year or less are eligible to go to the free tax help sessions. She said that there is Spanish translating at all of the sites, and people needing translation in other languages, including American Sign Language (ASL), can call Correia’s office at (319) 356-6090. Correia said they can arrange for translation for languages other than Spanish if they have advance notice.
Artley said that the annual Community Mental Health Center Affiliation is a form that Mental Health/Disability Services (MH/DS) is required to complete each year and have the Board’s signature in order to receive the Community Services’ dollars. She said that they have to complete this form for FY11. Artley said that interestingly, this agreement will be for 15 months. She expressed that she does not know what exactly the issue is, but the agreement will start this fiscal year and carry through FY11. She said it also lets the division know which Mental Health Center they are affiliated or contracted with, and who therefore should get the block grant dollars in FY11.
Artley said that this form is ready to be completed with an envelope, and she will leave it with Executive Assistant Andy Johnson. Stutsman asked how many dollars the agreement is for. Artley asked is she is referring to the dollars for Community Services. Stutsman confirmed. Artley said those were some of the dollars that were hit with Governor Chet Culver’s reduction, and she said they will discuss them momentarily. Sullivan asked if the County is affiliated with the Mid-Eastern Iowa Community Mental Health Center in Iowa City. Artley confirmed that the Community Mental Health Center for Mid-Eastern Iowa is Johnson County’s designated provider, and they will receive the block grant dollars.
Artley said this second contract is a brand new situation. She said that Magellan is the contracted entity with DHS which manages the moneys to fund Medicaid eligible clients for chronic mental illness. Artley said that after all these years, they have determined that they should have a contract with Targeted Case Management providers. She said Magellan has sent MH/DS three documents, and she said it is a normal boilerplate relationship contract that the County signs with any other provider. Artley said that Magellan is requesting that the County returns three of the documents to them prior to March 1, 2010, in order to be a Targeted Case Management provider with them. She noted that this is the first time Magellan has requested this since the beginning of their funding.
Stutsman said that it is interesting that now Magellan all of a sudden wants this. Artley said this is just a standard contract, and there are three documents here and an envelope ready to go. She said it is her understanding from their cover letter that the documents all need to go back to Magellan where they will be signed, and then one will be returned to the County.
Stutsman said that the Board usually has County Attorney Janet Lyness go over contracts that they sign. She asked Lyness if she had seen the contract. Lyness replied that she had not. Artley said that the documents just arrived on the afternoon of February 1, 2010. Lyness asked if Artley has an electronic version. Artley replied that she does not; she only has the hard copies. Lyness said if Artley wants to send the contracts over, she can take a look at them. Artley said that she will give the envelope to the Lyness. Stutsman said if there are no issues, then the Board will take care of it next week.
Artley said that during budget talks, MH/DS was talking about needing a computer upgrade. She said they did some research and looked at the ID tag of one of the case management supervisor’s computers. She said they cross referenced the ID tag on the inventory sheet and found that the computer was purchased in June 2005. Artley expressed that it is no wonder that MH/DS is having all the computer problems that they are having. She said they were trying to give their staff the encouragement of help with the drag-on voice recognition software, but when they open other necessary applications in addition to this software, the computer systems keep crashing. Artley said that staff needs to use these other applications in order to do their job so this has become a very frustrating situation for them.
Artley said she is suggesting that when MH/DS does a computer upgrade, they need to upgrade the entire department so that they can move forward with all of the applications. She said that employees need to have the minute for minute time tracking required by Iowa Medicaid Enterprises (IME), so they have to constantly have a time sheet up. She said they also need to be able to switch back and forth between the various forms that they complete so that they can import information. Artley said this has become a huge challenge for them.
Artley said that the staff who have dual monitors operate much more efficiently, so MH/DS is incorporating that in the upgrade. She said they had a quote for the cost as of December 1, 2009, and the estimate was just short of $48,000. Artley expressed that she thinks that MH/DS has enough computer monitors to phase some over to other staff members. She said there are a few employees who use spreadsheets, and they could use a 22 inch monitor because the 19 inch monitor is not quite large enough. She said that for doing the case management requirements, a 19 inch monitor would be fine. Artley said that she, the Account Clerks, and Assistant MH/DS Director Jan Shaw all have to use spreadsheets, and it is a challenge to see all of the little parts on a small monitor.
Rettig asked if Information Technology (IT) provided the cost quotes. Artley confirmed that the quote came from IT, but quotes only last for 30 days, so MH/DS would have to secure another cost quote. Rettig said she was on a tour of IT, and she said they said they do not normally replace monitors, keyboards, or mice unless there are problems with them or there is a need to get something bigger. Artley said that some of the employees already have a smaller dual monitor system, and she would encourage that those systems be moved over to other staff members so that the staff working with spreadsheets could get the larger 22 inch monitors. She said they would not need the full set of monitors that is on the cost quote.
Artley said there is a whole list of things on the quote that mean absolutely nothing to her. She expressed that she has no idea what Optiplex960MT’s are, but MH/DS needs one. Sullivan said that IT usually has a few sales every year to look where they can reutilize old equipment, and if MH/DS does this fairly major computer upgrade, some of their old stuff could go to this sale. He said the problem with MH/DS is that the money from those sales would have to be tracked back into their budget as revenue. He expressed that this is still something that the Board should investigate, however. Artley said that all of the computers are inventoried, so she thinks it would be easy to know which ones were sold.
Stutsman asked if the money for this upgrade would come out of the current year’s budget for MH/DS. Artley confirmed that the intent is for the money to come out of the current fiscal year. Sullivan said that the County might have internal needs for the older computer equipment, so some of it might be transferred from one department to another. He said that a lot of times IT sells old equipment to schools and places like that. Artley expressed that if there is any use for any equipment internally it should take priority. Stutsman agreed.
Stutsman said she is sure IT has figured out which things will stay within the department and which things will be allocated elsewhere. She said she assumed Artley has been working with IT. Artley said that all she has from IT is their cost quote, and when MH/DS can move forward they can coordinate with IT to find out where the needs are. Stutsman asked how the Board feels about giving Artley the approval to start working on this. Sullivan said it is important to know that the $48,000 is not an absolute cost because there will be some revenue coming back. He said it is like a trade-in; they will get some revenue back for the sale of the old MH/DS equipment, but they just do not know how much.
Artley said her intent is to create some more efficiencies for staff, so that they can get more of their workload done. She said they are on overload right now, because of all of the changes that IME has made with process and case management. Stutsman asked if the monitors are recycled internally within the County, if the County will be paying for them. Sullivan responded that the County should because of the separation of the Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities (MH/DD) funds. He said if, for example, the Auditor wants the old computers, then the Auditor should pay Artley for them. Rettig noted that the computers are five years old, and they cannot be worth that much. Lyness said that the monitors maybe worth more, but the County may be able to get monitors from other departments as well. Stutsman said a lot of times the purchase is just to replace something that is broken and not to upgrade.
Sullivan said it is a little more difficult to work out the computer upgrade for MH/DS than it is for other departments. Stutsman said that she thinks the Board could explain to IT Director Jean Schultz that there is tracking to be done for the sales of MH/DS computer equipment. Stutsman asked if Neuzil and Harney are OK with giving Artley approval to start working on this. Harney agreed.
Artley said that right now, the staff at MH/DS is required to track their time minute for minute, and this is a very laborious system. She said she is specifically talking about the Targeted Case Manager. Artley explained that this is a requirement by Iowa Medicaid Enterprise (IME) in order to do the billing, because they are still saying that they will change to a 15 minute billable unit effective July 1, 2010. She noted that this was supposed to have happened last year, and it has not moved forward yet.
Artley said the last time she spoke with the Board, the new assessment was a 28 page form which went into effect late last fall. Since then, DHS reformatted it into a 31 page assessment. Artley said this is a situation where the staff cannot even cut and paste. She said she does not understand the mechanics of all of this, but if the client’s name and address is typed in on the first name, it physically cannot be cut and pasted into the parent/guardian or emergency contact information. Artley said that everything is so unbelievably locked down on the form that things have to be constantly retyped instead of replicated via cutting and pasting.
Artley said there is a lot of stress on employees right now to get these new cases open and running, and this has to be done in order to generate revenue. She said that more and more requests are coming in for compensatory time, and she is reluctant to start granting this because it will cause a mushroom effect. Artley said that right now, as of December 1, 2009, MH/DS has taken the 2.5% reduction as a Medicaid rate. However, DHS is still operating off of FY09’s projected rate and they never made any changes. She said she does not know how all of this will play out. Artley said that with the reduced rate, MH/DS is receiving $306.64 per month per client if they can get all of the billable activities in.
Artley said that in the fall of 2007, she noticed that there was a huge amount of un-billable activities. She stated that MH/DS worked very hard to close that gap and to collect back dollars on the books that were still owed to them. She said they did close the gap, but now she is seeing it start to widen again because of the workload and she does not want to lose out on money. Artley said in December 2009 MH/DS lost $2,759.76 in revenue. She said that this revenue is lost and there is no way to recapture it, and it was lost simply because the work could not be completed on the bills for nine clients.
Artley expressed that she does not want to see this amount of lost revenue increase, and it is her apprehension that the staff is on overload. She said employees have an average caseload of 33 clients, and there are ten cases sitting on the desk of the Case Manager who is designated to open up all the new cases. She said there was such a backload for awhile that this Case Manager had to filter out 13 cases that were brand new for the Case Managers to open up. Artley said that the new cases have not stopped coming.
Artley said MH/DS has been fortunate in the first six months due to the fact that some people have transitioned out due to moving away or passing away. She said that now MH/DS is starting to see slow growth again, and Medicaid is a mandated service. She said if a person walks in the door tomorrow, is Medicaid eligible, and requests Targeted Case Management from the MH/DS as a provider, MH/DS must provide this. Artley stated that it is taking longer to get these cases open and people into services, so they desperately need to get another Case Manager in and trained. She expressed that it will take a new person some time to learn the ropes of the program.
Stutsman asked how much the County is reimbursed for. Artley said that Medicaid currently reimburses $306.64 per month per client. She said they have not done an actual cost report for this fiscal year, and she does not know how the cost report will factor in the 2.5% reduction. She said that this reduction is for all Medicaid providers including MH/DS, Mental Health Centers, and the local providers who offer the Home and Community Based Waiver Program services. Sullivan asked for confirmation that the County’s share of Case Managers is about 12.5%. Artley said the County’s share used to be 18%, but that got reduced with the stimulus money. She said that number then went down.
Artley said that part of the formula for amount of stimulus money from the federal government is based on the unemployment rate. She said that Johnson County’s unemployment rate sustained itself at a higher rate, so the County’s obligation went down further. Sullivan said the point is that if the Board approves a new person for MH/DS, the vast majority of the cost is paid for through Medicaid billings and not County dollars, although there is some amount paid by the County. Artley agreed that there is some County money. She said there used to be a flat 18% share, but that has currently gone down because of all the stimulus money. She said she assumes that the percentage will probably go back up when the unemployment rate starts to go up. She said that December 31, 2010, is when that number is supposed to sunset, unless the Legislature is able to find another way to support that.
Stutsman said that this situation is a catch 22, because there have to be people to do the billing in order for the County to be reimbursed. Artley expressed that MH/DS is starting to lose money because the employees cannot get the work done. Stutsman said that with the Board being located in the Heath and Human Services (HHS) Building temporarily, the Board has seen how hard the staff works. She said the MH/DS employees are really doing the best that they can, but there is a limit to what is humanly possible to do in a day’s time. Artley agreed.
Artley said that from where she sits, when she looks at numbers, it is counterproductive to have employees go into overtime compensatory time. She said it takes away an hour-and-a-half away for every hour worked, and there is no spot in their month of work to take that time off. Sullivan said that the Board needs to remember when they go to Des Moines that the interpretation by IME is ridiculous, and other states are not doing that. He said the Board really needs to hammer this point with the Iowa Legislators to say that they recognize the person at IME told the Legislators that it is supposed to be this way, but they only have to look around to know that the rest of the world is not forcing this on people, so why is the State of Iowa. Artley agreed.
Stutsman said this message has been taken repeatedly, but DHS will not back down. She said that everybody lobbied, and DHS had more response to that rule change than any other rule change they have ever had. Stutsman said for some reason, they will not back down. Sullivan said that is why the Board needs to get the Legislature to put some common sense on DHS, because DHS has not listened. Rettig asked Artley if there is one Targeted Case Manager budgeted for in the FY11 MH/DS budget. Artley replied that there were initially two in the budget, and what she is asking permission for now is to hire one of those positions earlier to start now. She said there would then only be one Targeted Case Manager in the FY 11 budget.
Rettig asked if the budget MH/DS is preparing has one more Targeted Case Manager coming in July. Artley confirmed this. Rettig asked what it would take the caseload to if MH/DS adds two more Targeted Case Managers, so that there would be 19 1/2. Artley said she does not intend to hire the other person at the beginning of FY11. She said she would wait until the caseload warranted it, and then she would come back and let the Board know what the numbers are.
Rettig said that lost revenues do not really matter to her, and she asked if clients are losing out on services because MH/DS is not opening their case. Artley said the clients are not getting their services as quickly because MH/DS cannot get the case open fast enough. Rettig asked if the nine clients whose bills are just sitting there are not getting services while MH/DS is waiting to open their cases. Artley confirmed that they are not getting services yet. Rettig said that to her, that is a much better argument than lost revenue. She said that people who are in need are waiting on the County to get their cases opened. Artley agreed that that is a good point.
Stutsman asked if there is a majority of the Board members who want to give Artley the authorization to hire another case manager. Neuzil agreed. Stutsman said that Artley has Board support to do this. Artley said that they will get the position posted internally first, because of the Union contract, and then they will go from there.
Artley said that in regard to the dollars from the State, MH/DS just received the spreadsheet for the whole State of Iowa and the target reduction for two pots of money, including the Community Services moneys and the Allowed Growth dollars. She said that the State is trying to reduce the state-wide dollars by $7,664,576 with those two pots of money. Artley said these are the moneys where the formula is applied based on what MH/DS had as ending fund balances in 2008, or two fiscal years past.
Artley said that in 2008, MH/DS had about a 14.9% fund balance. She said that was the year where they started really managing the Med Fund, and they saw some good return on that which bumped the fund balance up. Artley said that because of that, they fell in the 10%-25% range. She explained that the State then has to do their calculation where they look at all the dollars of the ending fund balance that were over the 10% mark. For MH/DS, that amounted to $1,595,965. Artley said that she budgeted based on Culver’s original projected reductions for this fiscal year. She said that for FY10, MH/DS re-estimated that they would receive $380,932 for Community Services. She said they will actually get $1,710 more because the State went back and redid all their figures based on new poverty figures.
Artley said that for the Allowed Growth, MH/DS initially budgeted a figure, and the State is coming in with $1,309,831. She said this is $5,852 more than MH/DS estimated, so overall they are coming out about $7,500 ahead of what they anticipated. Artley expressed to the Board that there are many holes on this spreadsheet, which tells her that there are a lot of counties that did not qualify for anything according to the State’s formula. She said that she is feeling really good that Johnson County got some money. She noted that they did not get as much as they would have the year before, because in FY07 MH/DS had about a 5% fund balance. Artley said that MH/DS is a little above what they projected, and she added that this includes the Governor’s cuts and is for this fiscal year.
Artley said that those dollars were supposed to be coming this week, so she needs to check with the Auditor’s Office. She said the State was only going to give them 2/3 of the dollars and then wait and see if the balance could be out of the General Fund for the State. She said if it is not, then the State will have to use stimulus dollars, and the Auditor’s Office has to do a huge amount of tracking and accountability because of the stimulus moneys. Artley said the Legislature is apprised of that and they are trying to avoid using it, so MH/DS is supposed to get 2/3 of that money this week. Stutsman said that this is just an update of where the County is at with those dollars. Artley agreed.
Artley said that Linn County started what they called a Governmental Affairs Committee, and she said she thinks this is probably an offshoot of all of their issues with the flood. Artley said that over the course of time, this Committee has come to realize that they need a bigger voice with the State, so they have invited some Johnson County people to join them. Artley said that MH/DS is now meeting with them periodically, and one of the efforts they are working with the Committee on is training people to advocate for themselves.
Artley stated that the week prior to this training session, Linn County will be hosting a similar session. She said MH/DS chose to wait a week because they want the same speaker at Johnson County’s training session. Artley said that the Governor’s Developmental Disabilities Council Representative Rick Shannon will be coming, and he will be sharing information and educating people on ways to communicate with their legislators. She said the hope is that with all the impending fiscal cuts, the session will train more people in how to communicate well and stand up for themselves.
Artley said that MH/DS is asking each of the County’s providers to target all of their Board of Directors members, parents of consumers who are using the services, and also some consumers who wish to be involved in this type of activity. She said that MH/DS will be sending out letters to everybody who is on the State payment program waiting list, so that their voices can be heard too.
Artley stated that the advocacy training session will be held in the same room as the current Board meeting, and she said, if any of the Board can make it, that would be great. She said it will be sponsored by local providers and MH/DS. Stutsman asked if Artley would invite groups like the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) also. Artley replied that anyone will be welcome to attend, and she asked how many people can legally fit into this room. Rettig said she does not know. Artley said she does not want to break any fire codes. Neuzil said there were a lot of people in the room during the Sutliff Bridge project meetings. Rettig said it is just a matter of rearranging the tables.
Artley said her hope is to have some computers set up in-house with templates ready to go so that people can actually print out a letter to be mailed. She said MH/DS could maybe find a mechanism in which they can help the people email their Legislator. She expressed that they will try to do whatever is easiest and whatever will meet as many people’s needs as possible. Sullivan said another good issue for this group to take on is the minute for minute time tracking required by IME. He said that all the administrative time that employees spend on the minute for minute time tracking is time that clients are not able to meet with their Case Managers. He expressed that the clients are directly affected by this poor decision.
Artley said that she finds it interesting that the minute for minute tracking is the key topic here. She said when MH/DS was having their management team meeting yesterday and discussing the possibility of hiring another person, they were emphasizing that when they interview, they need to let people know that if their intent is to be a true social worker, then this job is probably not right for them. She said the paperwork requirements are insurmountable, and this type of social work is different than the type of social work people go to school to get their degree in. Artley said this job is heavily endowed with accountability.
Sullivan said it is absurd that if an employee opens the door for a person with a box in their hands and goes back to their desk, they have to document the task if it took more than 30 seconds. Sullivan said this minute for minute time tracking does not treat people as professionals at all. Artley agreed, and she said they are having some challenges in having all staff to have a similar mindset on the tracking. She said there was one MH/DS employee that turned in a time sheet that included some clerical support. She said they think this person took all the time that they were designating for their time tracking and called it clerical, so they supported themselves with clerical support. Artley asked what else the time spent tracking could be called. In conjunction with that, Artley said they need to understand that there are billable services for case management and there are non-billable services, and MH/DS has to track both of these. Artley said they need to figure out how many of the billable service hours translate into 15 minute units. She said this will be a real challenge next year. Stutsman agreed.
Stutsman said that Artley had something to bring to the Board’s attention, but the Board will not be able to discuss it or have any input on it. Artley said she knows the Board also has their lobbying affiliate, and she does not know all the ins and outs of levies. She said that the property tax relief dollar amount has been consistent since FY97 when they got to make a choice between one of two years. Artley said she believes that that this amount has been hard coded on the Auditor’s Office’s reports back to the state, and she does not think the Auditor can change it. She said she was hoping that maybe Deputy Auditor Dana Aschenbrenner could enlighten them on this topic.
Artley said if this amount is already programmed in and is taking the Governor’s cuts, MH/DS thinks the Code, in Chapter 426B, says that the cap is on the total amount of revenues. She said that MH/DS has not had a chance to review the Code, but they are a capped budget and that includes the property tax relief dollars. Artley said that when the State goes to do all the other formulas, they pull those dollars out. She said that MH/DS’s thought is that the Code reads that there is an automatic property tax increase to make up for the State’s cut.
Artley said that as she does not understand everything about revenue, she is deferring to the people in the Auditor’s Office on this topic and also to Lyness for interpreting the Code. Artley said if this is the case, then this information needs to get back to the Legislators. She asked how the Board can deal with the differential if the form is hard coded and the Auditor’s Office cannot change the amount in the cell.
Sullivan left at 10:07 a.m.
Stutsman said Artley makes a good point and the Board will have to get this clarified. Artley said that would be great. Stutsman expressed that there is a lot going on. Artley agreed that it has been a very busy year.
Johnson said that the Board has an email in their packet from JCCOG Executive Director John Yapp regarding the committee that is being set up to consider local government payment of assessment for ECICOG. Johnson said he put this on the agenda so that the Board could discuss which members would be serving on that committee. Stutsman asked if the Board is limited on how many members they could have. Rettig said that they have two members, including one from the Urban Policy Committee and one from Rural. Stutsman asked how many people they could put on the committee. Rettig responded that they can approve two members, one from each of those two committees.
Sullivan returned at 10:09 a.m.
Neuzil said it makes sense that those who serve on the committee would have a little more insight and relationships. He asked who are on those committees. Rettig replied that she and Harney are on those committees. Stutsman asked Rettig if she has enough background to feel like she can adequately discuss and represent the issues that are being brought up. Neuzil said that Rettig was privy to the budget discussion enough to know what the Board’s concerns are. Primarily, he said the Board’s concern is that the City of Iowa City wants to change the system that has been in place for quite awhile and have the County pay for its fees.
Rettig said that the system in Iowa City has been in place for 30 years, and Iowa City wanted this committee formed but Harney and she voted against it. Rettig expressed that there is no need to have a committee if people wanted the system to stay the same. She said that now that there is a committee, she and Harney lobbied to get two seats on it, including one from Urban and one from Rural. She said they had a very extensive conversation about the benefits Iowa City received from ECICOG, including SEATS and the Landfill among others.
Neuzil said he thinks it is important that the Board has participation in all of this. He said a big concern is now that there is a committee set up, there is the potential of all the committee members saying that Johnson County should pay for everyone and voting to approve that. Neuzil expressed that this is a lot easier said than done, but if that is the direction that the Board sees things going, then Rettig and Harney could give a report back to the Board about what is going on as two members of the committee. He said the next step is probably for the Board to determine who has control and who serves on the committee.
Harney said he does not mind serving on this committee, and he does not think Rettig does, but he thinks they need to have some history about the issue. He said that Sullivan and Stutsman actually argued against this issue last session, and he said he does not know if they want to be on the committee or if they want him and Rettig to be the members. He expressed that he and Rettig need some more information about the topic from Stutsman and Sullivan. Stutsman said they would be more than happy to talk individually about this topic. Rettig stated that there were only two people who voted against forming this committee, so the Board might know where the direction is headed.
Sullivan said he thinks it is important to remember that this is something that was initiated by Iowa City, but at the last meeting Sullivan attended, the Coralville representative said that if the County is going to pay for Iowa City then he did not know why they would not also pay for Coralville. Sullivan said that this logically makes sense. He said he thinks Neuzil is exactly right, and that this will not lead to the County paying for just Iowa City; it will result in the County either paying for all the municipalities or none.
Neuzil suggested that this topic be put on Key Issues or on an Informal Meeting agenda, so that the Board keeps on top of this and what the options are. He said, if the committee decides to go in the direction of having the County pay for all the municipalities, then he wants to talk about strategies in regards to the Board’s presence on that board, who they choose to be on that board, and where the Board plans to cut other funding levels to come up with those dollars. Stutsman said she wants to talk about the County’s membership in JCCOG. Rettig suggested that the Board put this topic on Key Issues.
Stutsman agreed that the topic should be put on Key Issues, and she said that the last meeting that she and Sullivan attended was the vote for the change in assessment. She said the only ones that voted in favor of this change were the representatives from Iowa City, but it was suggested that a committee be formed for all the information to be put out on the table and discussed. Stutsman said she thinks this is where the idea for a committee came, and they wanted to make it clear to people what benefits they get from ECICOG. She said at that time it seemed like there was some confusion about the benefits. Stutsman said she thinks it is good to get all this information out there, and she is OK with Rettig and Harney being the members of the committee.
Harney said that, for the public’s information, ECICOG provides services to the local communities for tax dollars that come into transit and other areas within the Counties. He said it has been assessed amongst the cities and the County all paying a share of those dollars, and now Iowa City is starting to want the County to pay their share. He said this is because the cities do not feel they get that much service, but Harney noted that they do get a lot of service, such as the transit service Brase previously spoke about. Harney said, if the County dropped out, then JCCOG would not represent them and the County would not be able to draw on those funds as well as they do now. Stutsman said this somewhat flies in the face of regionalism, sharing, and working together. She said this will be put on Key Issues so the Board can do some more strategizing on it.
Johnson said that the Board had an earlier report from Brase as one of the departments of the County. He said another smaller department is the Office of the Board of Supervisors, which consists of the five Supervisors, himself as the Executive Assistant, Budget Coordinator Rich Claiborne, and Secretary Jo Hogarty. He said this is a progress report for this office for the year. He said it might be dangerous for him as the rookie to say that it has been a unique year, but it seems to him that it has been a unique year. The Board has a new Executive Assistant who is new not only to Johnson County but to new County government. He said he has been on a pretty steep learning curve, but he thinks the Board knew this when they hired him.
Johnson also expressed that sadly, this year included the death of Johnson County Supervisor Larry Meyers. Johnson said that Meyers was committed to being kept up-to-date through his illness, so they worked hard to do this. Johnson said that there was also the appointment and election of a new Supervisor this year, as well as two office moves. He said he does not want to say this second move is completed, but most of the physical work was done as of yesterday, and the Board had been operating out of temporary quarters for the last five months.
Johnson said that maybe there is no such thing as a normal year, because it seems that this year has followed on another unique year. He said some of the consequences from that unique year are still being felt this year, including the effects of the 2008 floods. Johnson said that much of the paperwork and grants are still being worked on and dealt with for that. He said that the Board has been learning more this year about the passage of the Conservation Bond, and they have been working on the communication and the process for that. He said the Board has also been working on the creation of the Joint Emergency Communication Center (JECC), as well as capital projects, including the HHS Building. Johnson said that all of these projects have had impacts on what the Board has been doing this year, as well.
Johnson stated that in order for the Board to do anything, legally, they have to have meetings. He said that this is a big part of what happens, and although meetings may not seem very significant, they do require agendas, preparation, public notice, and a significant amount of follow-up. Johnson said some of the unique one-time or annual meetings that have been held this year have been the training of township trustees, and a meeting with area lawmakers that was preceded by going through a process of identifying the County’s legislative priorities. He said these priorities were brought to State lawmakers at that time, and Harney and Neuzil will be delivering these to federal lawmakers as well.
Johnson said there was a joint meeting with the Conservation Board and a meeting with the Criminal Justice Coordinating Committee. He said the membership, name, and charge of that committee was clarified over the course of this year. Johnson noted that this is a monthly meeting, but there was some work to be done on clarification for the committee. He said that the Sutliff Bridge project has involved quite a bit of work and several unique meetings, including a meeting with all of the representatives and players involved in the project, which resulted in about 20 people around the table in addition to the Board. Johnson said the Board also had a meeting to receive public input about the Sutliff Bridge project, and the Board Room was packed with probably about 110 people. A survey was taken at the meeting, and there was an online survey as well to follow up with that meeting.
Johnson said that these meetings have been in addition to the regular work sessions of the Board, and these have all involved agendas, preparation, and follow-up. He said these sessions are where communication happens and where the Board gets things done, so to speak. Johnson said part of this has included the budget work sessions, and they are currently at the point of wrapping up the budget process for this year. He said the Office also coordinates the membership on boards and commissions, appoints members, fills vacancies, and publicizes of those vacancies.
Johnson stated that policies that have been adopted or worked on this year include the Buy Local Policy. He said the Board has had a clarification of policies and procedures for rural residents using the Landfill under the County’s Cleanup Program. Johnson said the Economic Development Committee is working on a process for oversight of the Economic Development and Quality of Life Block Grants.
Johnson said that internally, Board Office staff, in addition to the Supervisors, serve on a variety of committees that involve employees and staff members from across the range of departments and offices in the County. He said that working on these committees helps to facilitate communication and the work of the Board.
Johnson said he serves as the County’s representative on JCCOG’s Affordable Housing Task Force. He said he is also a member of a new group that has started up and has met several times, but he has only been able to attend once. Johnson said this is a group of City and County executives from corridor communities that get together once a month with a specified topic to discuss. Johnson said he is also a member of the 2010 Census Partnership, coordinated by Iowa City City Clerk Marian Karr, and the Johnson/Linn Leadership Group, involving the Supervisors and Supervisors Offices of Johnson and Linn County. He said he has agreed to be the session leader for the 2010 Government Session of the Community Leadership Program.
Johnson said that the Board Office also coordinates the grants to which the County is a party. He said the Board Office is not really doing the grants, but the County is a legal entity participating in these grants, so there is an element of oversight and tracking involved. One of these grants is the completion of the FEMA reimbursements for flood damage. Johnson said that just last week, the County received the final payment for the ice storm that preceded the floods, so they are still in the process of receiving reimbursements for costs to the County from the flood damage. In addition, Johnson said there are grants to provide for the property buyouts and demolitions. Johnson said the County had closings on the first five properties two weeks ago. He said that in the near future, the Board will be determining how to proceed with the process for examining the Sutliff Bridge Project.
Johnson said he was involved with the application, and now follow-up of the I-JOBS grant for demolition of the old Armory project and construction of a parking lot and green space on that property. He said that follow-up information on MH/DS has been requested, not minute for minute, but in a quarterly report of hours involved and what level of professional and what level of pay is involved in that. Johnson said this will increase in the near future.
Johnson stated that the Board worked on the Federal Grant for Energy Efficiency that will help pay for new windows in the County Administration Building. He said the County is the applicant for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program for a safe room at the County Extension Building. Johnson said that application has been submitted, and the Board Office is waiting for word on whether it will be funded.
Johnson said that for continuing education this year, besides himself being in the Board Office on a steep learning curve, Claiborne spent a week at a training put on by the Government Finance Officers Association. Johnson said he attended the Iowa State Association of Counties Fall School and has attended several classes geared for Public Information Officers, as he has been designated the Public Information Officer for the County.
Johnson said, looking forward, one goal is completion of a Board Office manual. He said, now that he actually has a desk, he thinks he can make progress on that. Johnson noted that while that project has been a little bit behind, just being a part of the Board Office has helped him to keep identifying things he wants to include in the manual. He said that a year from now, the Board Office should be farther along on decisions and projects on both the State and Federal grants. Johnson said that the Board has talked about the potential efficiencies of a centralized purchasing process for the County, and he looks forward to looking into this. He said that the Board will continue work on the development of a process for oversight of the Economic Development Block Grants.
Johnson said that he looks forward to refining the strategic planning process addressing an Animal Ordinance for the County. He said he thinks there are many areas that fall under improving communications, and he said the Board Office is working on overseeing communication with the departments and offices, the public, and others. Johnson said they may be looking forward to a normal year, but he does not know.
Stutsman noted that Johnson forgot to mention a couple policies. She said that he helped write the Wellness Policy that the Board just discussed today, and the Art Committee has a policy about accepting art into the building. Johnson confirmed this. Stutsman expressed that Johnson was even busier than he thought. Stutsman asked if Johnson’s schedule just does not allow him to attend meetings for the group of city and county executives that meet from corridor communities. Johnson said he made it to one meeting, a County budget meeting conflicted with another meeting, and he did not get notice of a third meeting. He said they meet the second or third Friday of the month over the lunch hour, so he should be able to make the meetings. Stutsman asked to confirm that it wasn’t as if Johnson did not think that that the time was worthwhile. Johnson agreed and said no. He said the one meeting he went to was comprised of all city people and he was the only county representative. He said that he knows Linn County is also involved in the group.
Johnson said he wanted to point out that the Board meeting on February 11, 2010, is at 6:30 p.m. instead of 5:30 p.m. He said he has pretty firm word that this meeting will be located back in the regular Board room.
Harney said that Sullivan and he had a liaison meeting with Brase. He also attended the Health and Human Services Planning Council with Artley and their staff. Harney had a Cedar Rapids Chamber Pre-Conference Federal Issues Trip Meeting in Cedar Rapids. He said that he and Neuzil also attended the Iowa Disaster Recovery Learning Conference at Kirkwood through Rebuild Iowa. Harney stated that on January 30, 2010, he attended the Chamber Legislative Forum with area legislators. Harney said that Stutsman and he attended the Coralville Round Table this last week. He added that the Board all attended the Johnson County and Iowa City Assessor’s Conference Board. Harney stated that he and Neuzil also attended the January 2, 2010, state-wide drill for Emergency Management Association (EMA).
Neuzil said he attended Emergency Operations Center event at JECC. He said he also had a chance to attend JCCOG’s Regional Trails and Bicycling Committee. He said he appreciates all those that serve on JCCOG. Neuzil said he met with Johnson County Trails Foundation Representative Steve Baker. He attended liaison meetings with the Ambulance Department and the Medical Examiner. Neuzil said his next listening post will be at Bruegger’s Bagels in Coralville at 7:30 a.m. on February 5, 2010. He will also be hosting a series of courses on County government at the Iowa City/Johnson County Senior Center.
Sullivan said he also attended the liason meting with Medical Examiner Administrator Mike Hensch and also had two other liaison meetings, one with Johnson and one with County Engineer Greg Parker. He said that the Board has a Road Meeting with Parker today at 1:00 p.m. Sullivan attended a meeting of the Job Evaluation Team on February 3, 2010.
Sullivan announced that the Iowa City Assessor’s Office, headed by City Assessor Dennis Baldridge, was ranked eighth out of 115 assessor’s offices in the State of Iowa. The highest ranking office, first out of 115, was the Johnson County Assessor’s Office, headed by County Assessor Bill Greazel.
Sullivan said he serves on the Iowa State Association of Counties (ISAC) Scholarship Committee, and commented on the opportunities available to Johnson County students to earn college scholarships. He also stated that the Swisher Library is having an open house at 10:00 a.m. February 6, 2010. Additionally the Domestic Violence Intervention Program (DVIP) Souper Bowl Soup Supper is scheduled for February 4, 2010.
Rettig said she and Johnson attended the Safety Committee Meeting. She visited Chatham Oaks twice, for a Board Meeting and then for a tour. She also attended the Iowa Bicycle Summit. Rettig reported that she toured the Free Medical Clinic and the flood mitigation and buyout areas of Driftwood Lane with Johnson and Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak. Additionally she attended the Iowa City Chamber of Commerce Roundtable this week.
Stutsman said she attended the Local Food Coalition meeting in Mount Vernon, a Mid-Eastern Council on Chemical Abuse (MECCA) Board Meeting, a meeting put on by Congressman Dave Loebsack at the Hills Community Center, an ECICOG meeting last week and the Policy Board meeting after ECICOG, and an American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) meeting. Stutsman reported that she was in Ames on February 3, 2010, to talk with officials from the Department of Agricultural Extension about their budget cuts.
Sullivan asked if farm contracts are usually done by the end of February, and said that will be coming up for the Board. Stutsman confirmed and said that Real Estate Sales Agent John Yeomans has sent out RFP’s and people have submitted proposals, so she is sure that he will be bringing that information. Sullivan asked to confirm that this was not a cold call if Yeomans has already been doing this. Stutsman agreed. Johnson said Yeomans is on the agenda for February 25, 2010.
Adjourned at 10:50 a.m.
By Nancy Tomkovicz, Recording Secretary