MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY ELECTED OFFICIALS AND INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
JANUARY 19, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Approval of Minutes for October 6, 2010................................................................................. 1
Update/Report/Discussion of the Following.............................................................................. 1
Advertising on County Materials/Website..................................................................... 1
Restrictions on Firearms on County Property................................................................ 4
FY 2012 County Budget............................................................................................ 10
Johnson County Strategic Plan................................................................................... 13
Employee Parking..................................................................................................... 14
Reports from Elected Officials................................................................................... 16
County Treasurer Tom Kriz............................................................................... 16
Sheriff's Major Steve Dolezal............................................................................. 16
County Recorder Kim Painter............................................................................ 16
County Auditor Tom Slockett............................................................................ 17
County Attorney Janet Lyness............................................................................ 18
Supervisor Sally Stutsman.................................................................................. 19
Supervisor Pat Harney and Supervisor Rod Sullivan........................................... 19
Supervisor Janelle Rettig.................................................................................... 19
Set Date and Time for Next Meeting......................................................................... 19
Discussion from the Public.................................................................................................... 20
County Supervisor Pat Harney called the Johnson County Elected Officials Meeting to order in the Johnson County Health and Human Services Building at 1:35 p.m.
Elected officials present were: County Supervisors Pat Harney, Terrence Neuzil, Janelle Rettig, Sally Stutsman, and Rod Sullivan, and County Auditor Tom Slockett, County Recorder Kim Painter, and County Treasurer Tom Kriz; absent: County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek; County Attorney Janet Lyness arrived at 1:45 p.m. Staff present were: Sheriff’s Major Steve Dolezal, Board of Supervisors Executive Assistant Andy Johnson, and Auditor’s Office Recording Secretary Nancy Tomkovicz.
Motion by Stutsman, seconded by Sullivan, to approve the minutes of the October 6, 2010, meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
Executive Assistant Andy Johnson said the Board had received a proposal from a video company. The National Association of Counties (NACo) organization was aware of this proposal. The video company's pitch is that they would prepare five thirty-second to one-minute videos that could be posted on the County website. It would be free to the County. The company would use the videos to sell advertising to local companies that would go around showing clips of the video. The video would be shown and there would be links to companies. He said the Board looked at this option and decided against it. The Board was uncomfortable with that kind of advertising. Johnson said he wanted to put the item on this agenda because there probably will be opportunities in the future for advertising in various ways. He said the County received an email from Information Technology Director Jean Schultz about County advertising on the County map.
County Recorder Kim Painter said she thinks it would be interesting to hear what Schultz's feelings are regarding this type of advertising. Painter said she knows this type of advertising can carry different types of Malware and Spyware a little bit easier than other options because of the activity level. She may be wrong about that perception, but she thinks it is true. She said she tends to be more negative about the advertising, but she does not like to miss out on opportunities either.
Johnson said with this particular program type, he expects that the videos would have been hosted on a separate website. There would have been a link to the County website, but it would have been hosted by the company’s site. Painter said that is more controlled. Johnson agreed.
Sullivan said he recalls when County Treasurer Tom Kriz had an offer to insert a pizza coupon in the tax bill. Kriz said, through the Iowa Department of Transportation (IDOT), the County continuously receives requests to insert advertisements with the motor vehicle renewal notices. A company recently approached the Tax and Tags group about helping defray the cost of processing the tax statements by inserting notices and advertisements in with tax statements. Kriz said this practice can be problematic. At that time, about 90% of the treasurers did put an insert in with the renewal notices. The feedback was about 90% negative for all those counties. Kriz said fortunately that was a time the County made the right decision, but the pressure gets greater and the dollar amount goes up. Sullivan said he remembers Kriz saying that he had some concern that someone might mistake the mailing for a coupon only and throw the bill away. Harney said he feels the same way and would not necessarily agree to include advertisement in tax bills.
Harney said the Iowa City/Coralville Convention and Visitors Bureau (ICCCVB) may want to put advertisements related to the County on the maps they provide. He would not have a problem with another governmental entity placing advertisements for the County.
Rettig said she had a problem with the video proposal because the County would have been allowing the website to be used as a tool for potential advertisers that the Board may or may not agree with, who may not fit the County’s best interest or strategic plan, and who may not fit the County’s diversity statements. The County would have no control over such ads. Rettig thinks that is different than discussing advertising with a partner the County already has, such as the ICCCVB. It is also different from the map with Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County (MPOJC) that is funded in part by Bicyclists of Iowa City (BIC) and the Johnson County Trail Foundation. She said if the ICCCVB, the Johnson County Trail Foundation, and BIC wanted to pay for that, it makes sense with MPOJC doing the work. She is also not interested in anything that involves exclusive rights, such as only selling Coca-Cola® products in County buildings. She said the Administration Building is owned by Johnson County taxpayers and not by MidAmerican Energy Company.
County Auditor Tom Slockett said he thinks there is an appearance of impropriety; there is a danger in choosing advertisers. He asked why the County would allow some advertisers and not others. He thinks areas in which the County has control should be examined carefully. A recent email about healthy foods and dieting from the Board of Health to everyone in the County included a coupon for Hy-Vee Food Stores. He feels that is inappropriate because other food stores were not included. Rettig clarified that the Wellness Committee sent a countywide email. Slockett said he assumed it was countywide. Sullivan said he received the email. Slockett said the email was asking people to participate in Weight Watchers and another program. It had a pop-up from Hy-Vee for a $5.00 coupon.
Rettig said she is not sure she saw that email. Stutsman said she does not think she received the email either. Rettig said during Bike to Work Week and Earth Week's One Less Car Week, the Green Team bought $10.00 gift certificates to each bike shop in town to give away to the winners of the best inventive idea for the day. The Green Team may have listed the names of each bike shop. Rettig said this is different than putting up a coupon or advertisement for the company.
Stutsman said her concern is that when the County logo is on something, regardless of intention, it is an endorsement by the County. She does not like getting into the business of selecting and rejecting potential advertisers, and it does not seem worth the trouble. Rettig said the map is an example because MPOJC could not fund the trails map with their current budget. As opposed charging Johnson County $500 more to have the map, they approached BIC to subsidize the map. MPOJC choose to not sell advertising, but in order to put the County routes on the map, they needed a larger map and needed another partner to be able to fund the printing. For this reason, they partnered with Johnson County Trail Foundation. BIC and the Johnson County Trail Foundation contributed $1,000 each, and MPOJC has complete editorial control. The partner's logo and a thank you comment to the sponsors are printed on the back of the map. That sponsorship enabled the production of around 8,000 more maps. Rettig said she thinks those relationships are slightly different because the County does not give up editorial control.
Slockett said he agrees with Kriz that this is still a slippery slope. Slockett said it might be worth having a policy committee examine the best practices and the pros and cons. Rettig asked if the County is willing to pay an extra $1,000 to have rural bicycle routes on the MPOJC map. Slockett said Kriz could have saved a lot of money by inserting advertisements in the mailing, and the County could probably place a McDonald’s logo on voter identification cards, but he thinks it is a slippery slope. He said that MPOJC and ICCCVB materials are covered with advertisements which provide funding. Harney said he does not know about the local one, but many do. Sullivan said they rely heavily on advertisements. Slockett said it is a tough question.
Rettig said MPOJC is a done deal; they have been doing it for years. The only difference is that in order to put the County road bicycle routes on the map, they needed a bigger format map and another $1,000. They got that money from the Johnson County Trails Foundation. She said that is different from the County map. There is the bicycle map prepared by MPOJC, and the County has no say in that map. Other than paying dues, the County does not pay into the production of that map. Rettig said ICCCVB approached the County through Schultz, regarding advertisements on their County map. Rettig asked if anyone knows how Schultz responded. Harney said Schultz just gave the Board information that an inquiry had been made and that she thought it would be good for the Board to discuss the topic.
Rettig asked if ICCCVB was going to sell advertising. Harney said Schultz asked if the Board would want to sell one or two advertisements even if the ICCCVB decides not to participate. Harney said he is not in favor of that; he would go along if the ICCCVB wanted to put something on the map, but he wants nothing more. Stutsman and Rettig said they are not in favor, either. Harney said he is also not in favor.
Kriz said the response to the last map was incredible. The Treasurer’s Office went through a box of those maps every week. He said GIS Coordinator Richard Havel was constantly bringing maps to the office; the map was a popular item. Harney said the demand for newer maps would depend on how often the map is updated. He said it sounds like the Board is in agreement that most do not want to include advertisements.
Harney said there is a lot of discussion about the restriction of firearms on County property. He would like to know why Washington County withdrew their policy and why some of the others counties who were making weapons illegal in their buildings are now allowing them. He wonders if this is due to pressure. Neuzil said he thinks it is from public pressure; that is what the newspapers indicated. Rettig said she thinks The Gazette newspaper reported that someone from the City of North Liberty went to Washington County and complained about the policy. Stutsman said there were complaints from North Liberty and the Cities of Ottumwa, Frytown, and Wellman. Stutsman said a majority of people at that meeting were not from Washington County.
County Attorney Janet Lyness said she is drafting a policy for review first by the Security Committee, which is meeting right after this Elected Officials Meeting. She is hoping to present a draft policy at the Board's Informal Meeting scheduled for January 24, 2011. The policy would basically prohibit people from carrying guns in the Courthouse and in any other County buildings, parking lots, or on County grounds, with the exception of law enforcement officers, active military officers, or someone required to carry a firearm while performing their duties of transportation of prisoners. An exception could also be made by the Johnson County Conservation Board (JCCB) for controlled hunts or training sessions. The JCCB would have control over the Conservation property.
Lyness asked the Board if this is the direction they want to pursue. Her understanding regarding the situation in Marion is that people were in opposition to the legislation because they had heard there was going to be a three-to-two vote in favor of prohibiting guns in the City of Marion. However, a Council member switched their vote, changing it to a two-to-three vote. Stutsman asked if any legislation has been passed. Rettig said a few counties have passed a policy. Lyness agreed but was not sure exactly where. Stutsman said she and Neuzil will not be at the Board meeting scheduled for January 24, 2011, and they have an agreement not to schedule items that attract a heavy discussion when all Supervisors are not present, so this discussion may have to wait until the following week. Lyness said that is OK, the Board could discuss this at a Key Issues meeting and then again later at a Formal Meeting.
Neuzil said he wants to make sure that whatever Johnson County proposes is in agreement with what the Attorney General says is allowable. He is sure the Attorney's Office will monitor this very closely. If the Board is interested in banning firearms, the Physical Plant would need ample time to order signs that will need to be posted at the entrance to buildings. If people want to question the Board’s decision, Supervisors will be able to say that the Attorney General has made some interpretation and has provided an opinion that allows County government some discretion. He said he is comfortable moving forward as long as it falls under those guidelines.
Rettig said she is interested in how Lyness worded the draft about County buildings and grounds. She does not think anyone other than on-duty law enforcement or people with permission need to have weapons on County property. She thinks this applies to the campground also. There are times when the County would grant permission, such as during controlled hunts or trainings. The Board could give permission for someone to carry a firearm if they feel the need. The County employee handbook says there are to be no weapons on County property. If employees cannot carry firearms, neither shall the public. Rettig does not think anyone has a need to carry a weapon on County property, and if they do, they should ask for written permission. She said it is not just about the County buildings and the grounds, it is about all County property. Conservation or the Board could grant permission for hunting purposes. Rettig said the County has other Conservation land that is available for public hunt. There will be a growing list of this type of land. Public hunting dates are known and permission for public hunting on the specified land is given during a period of time. Outside of that time period, a person does not need their weapon. Rettig said that is what she would like the wording to indicate.
Lyness said the policy is a prohibition with an exception for law enforcement and prisoner transports. The Conservation property is included in all of that, but with an exception that the JCCB could give written permission for controlled hunts or training. She said generally the JCCB has been given that control. Rettig said she thinks that is alright, but she does not think firearms should be allowed in the campgrounds. If JCCB decides it is OK that anyone can bring their firearm into the campground, then she would have a problem with that. A provision for hunting or training is different.
Harney asked how the federal law that permits retired officers and active officers with a federal permit to carry weapons anywhere in the country fits into the picture. Lyness said the language that she has seen and that is used would be that law enforcement officers required to carry a firearm as part of their duties would be allowed to do so, so she does not think retired law enforcement would be required to carry a firearm. They would have a permit, but they could not bring their weapon onto County property. Lyness said they would have to follow the local regulations.
Stutsman asked if Lyness is talking about all weapons, including concealed or otherwise. Lyness said yes. Stutsman repeated that Lyness is talking about all weapons. Lyness say yes, this applies to all dangerous weapons. She said she is not going to try to exclude pocket knives that are not considered dangerous weapons by Iowa law. Stutsman asked if the document includes a definition for what constitutes a dangerous weapon. Lyness said yes. A dangerous weapon would be a knife with a blade over five inches or a switch blade. Neuzil said as long as the Iowa Attorney General has given the authority to the counties, the County has the discretion to determine what is best for Johnson County. Lyness agreed. That is what the Attorney General’s opinion is. The County has had the right, and there are previous decisions showing that the County has the right to control its own property, including enforcement of a smoking ban. The smoking ban is a good example of a County law which is different from the State law, but the County has the authority to control its own property; nothing in the new law usurps this. She has heard there will be challenges to every municipality, but the County has a legitimate basis for this policy. Lyness said all she is hearing is that County employees want the prohibition and they do not want people to carry guns on County property.
Sheriff's Major Steve Dolezal said he will follow up on a question Harney asked earlier about retired officers. He thinks there are a few states that do not recognize retired officers' right to carry, even though it is a federal law. Those states include Illinois, Wisconsin, and maybe New Jersey. He said if a retired officer is stopped with a weapon in one of those states, they will be faced with a court challenge. Stutsman asked if there have been any weapons observed on any County property. She said she asked at the Courthouse, and they had not had any incidents.
Slockett said Lyness and Neuzil have been talking about the Attorney General's opinion, and he wondered if there are any limits on what the County can do. Lyness said the County cannot make a different restriction on the permits. The big change from the new law has to do with getting a permit to carry a weapon. The County Sheriff previously had the discretion to deny permits for any reason. This was a "may issue" statute, and the language has changed to a "shall issue." This has limited the Sheriff’s ability to either deny a permit to certain people or to put other restrictions on the permit. For example, the Board would not be allowed to stipulate nonprofessional permits will only be honored for people over the age of 25. The County cannot usurp the authority of the permitting process. They cannot say the Sheriff cannot issue any permits unless they are for concealed weapons. That would be a violation. The County has authority to restrict activity in County buildings, such as not allowing smoking, setting the hours the buildings are open for business, or banning food from County buildings. The County has control over the buildings. State law is not going to preempt the County’s ability to control County property.
Stutsman said it sounds like there is interest to move ahead. She asked if Lyness will be bringing a draft to the Courthouse Security Committee and then back to the Board. Lyness said yes. Harney said he would prefer to discuss the policy draft at an Informal meeting such as a Key Issues meeting and asked if the Board has a preference. Stutsman said there is much public interest on this subject and therefore it should maybe be discussed at a regular Informal Board meeting. Neuzil said that seems reasonable to him. Neuzil said he would forward the Attorney General's opinion to everyone, but in summary, the opinion says that Iowa Code 724.28 would not bar a city or county from regulating firearms on City or County property.
Rettig said the sooner they can adopt a policy, the better. Iowans are lucky that people have not been flaunting this law already. The Sheriff’s Office sent a report with documentation that in the first two weeks of applications, 20 people with criminal histories obtained permits. These individuals do not have felonies, but one can be a pretty bad criminal and not have a felony. Those 20 people with bad records are walking around with guns, and they could bring a rifle or shotgun to a Board meeting. Banning firearms is a good idea.
Lyness said she was late to this meeting because she was doing a presentation for law enforcement at the annual Multi-Agency Training Seminar. She said they were talking about the new gun law, and law enforcement is pretty concerned about getting called by businesses or local citizens who see someone with a gun. She said if someone calls about this, law enforcement wonders what they can do. Rettig said they can verify whether the person has a permit. She said she has been clear that if she sees someone with a gun, she is going to call 911 and have law enforcement figure it out. She is not going to assume that the individual is harmless. Harney said that is true, but the penalty is minimal. In the case of criminal trespassing, the person must be warned once to leave, and if they do not obey, then they can be arrested for trespassing. Slockett clarified that people still have to have a permit, but it is not restricted as to who can get one. Lyness said there are minimal restrictions. There is an age restriction, there must be a firearm training, and the individual cannot have a felony conviction.
Slockett said he read somewhere that firearm training is not required. Lyness said the person must have a safety training course but does not necessarily have to do the training on the range. Dolezal said there is no standardized training. A person does not have to show they are qualified to use the weapon, but they just have to go through a National Rifle Association approved course. Slockett asked if the training course is at the discretion of the Sheriff. Dolezal said it is not. There are many different courses offered, and the training varies also. He would describe some of the courses as thorough and others as not so thorough. Rettig asked if it is true that someone can get a permit without ever having fired a gun. Dolezal said that is true. Rettig clarified that to obtain a permit, she does not have to prove she can fire the gun, but she just must be able to pass the test.
Dolezal said he is not anti-gun, but he is pro-public safety. This law was not written well. There are many things that the Sheriff's Office used to be able to restrict on permits that they can no longer restrict, and there is no mechanism in the new law to deal with those issues. He said an example would be that the Sheriff may have indicated on a permit that the person could not consume alcohol while carrying their weapon. The provision in the law now states that a person's blood alcohol content must be under .08 or they are in violation, yet there is no mechanism to make someone take a breath test. Dolezal said there is an implied consent law to deal with drunk driving, and this is a mechanism to make the person give a breath test, or there is a penalty for those who do not. With this weapons permit legislation, there is no mechanism to enforce a breath test, and that is one of the many flaws that could be discussed.
Harney asked if the purchase regulations have been changed with this law. He mentioned the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona and said unless a person with a mental illness declares their illness, the seller would not know about a person's mental health history. He asked if they could still purchase a gun or if they would have to follow the guidelines that were in place before. Lyness said if the person has not been committed, and if there is no documented evidence within the last two years showing that they would be a dangerous person in possession of a firearm, they could not be restricted if they are otherwise qualified. Someone who has not been committed and who could not be proven to have been a danger within the last two years would get a weapon.
Harney asked if they would run a background check on him if he were to apply for a weapons permit. He asked how one would know if a person has been committed. Lyness said they are working on a database that would allow the Sheriff to find out if a person was committed somewhere else in Iowa. Right now it is a problem, and it is her understanding that they are working on the database. Stutsman said it sounds like the honor system. Rettig clarified that a provision was not put in the law allowing a person to research if someone has been committed. Lyness confirmed. Rettig said Dolezal can look up someone's criminal history but has no ability to find out if someone has been committed. Dolezal said they are able to pull up criminal histories which would tell them if there is a felony or any other documented charges. Rettig clarified that she could get out of a metal health institute in another town, come to Johnson County, take a class, and get a non-concealed weapon permit. Dolezal said yes.
Dolezal said there were numerous times when County Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek would receive calls from doctors or employers informing him that a particular individual is applying for a permit and that they have certain mental health issues. Pulkrabek probably received those calls because of the relationship he has with many people in the community. Dolezal said Pulkrabek sometimes received calls from mental health doctors recommending against issuing a permit to a particular person to purchase a firearm. Stutsman said that cannot be done now. Dolezal said there are restrictions, and those restrictions now apply. Rettig said there is no database and that is scary. Dolezal said the Sheriff no longer has discretionary authority.
Slockett asked if the database being developed is for use in state only. Lyness said yes. She has not heard of any that are going to be nationwide. She asked Dolezal if he has any more information about that. Dolezal said he is not familiar with any nationwide databases. Neuzil asked if there is any objection to this. All the people present at this meeting are elected officials, and the Board needs to know if anyone has any concerns. Stutsman said they can also attend the meeting when the Board discusses this. Kriz said he thinks it is important for the Board to have that meeting. He said he was meeting with the bank today, and the topic came up regarding what the County is doing. The bank had posted some signs, and the response to the posting of those signs has been overwhelming negative. Kriz said the Board needs to expect that negative response. The bank was a little shocked at the overwhelmingly negative response to them posting signs stating weapons are banned from bank property. Rettig said she told her banker she was glad there is a posting and she plans to repeatedly tell them this.
Stutsman said she can verify from what has happened in surrounding communities that the Board can fully expect those people opposing the restrictions to be at the Johnson County meeting as well. Dolezal said it is typical that people who support the law are very passionate about it. Johnson County will get the word out about such a meeting. He said as the County continues these discussions, it is his understanding that the pro-gun advocates are going to continue to work to make Iowa’s law similar to those of Arizona or Alaska, where there would be no permitting process necessary. Those that are concerned should continue to talk to their local and state representatives.
Slockett asked if private properties have the same authority the County has in determining policies for their own property. Lyness said yes, any private entity can control their own building and grounds. There is nothing in this law that is taking private property owners’ rights away from them. A business can exclude guns, and this law does not address or change anything about that. Kriz recommended checking with Insurance Associates of Iowa City Partner and County Insurance Agent of Record Robert Saunders about liability. One thing the bank considered was liability in posting or not posting signs about the ban for their staff. He thinks it would be legitimate for the County to ask that question.
Painter said she thinks everyone is very aware of the fact that they all represent the citizens of Johnson County, including those who choose to bear arms and do so in a responsible fashion and those who chose not to. Both sides are going to have strong feelings about this topic. She thinks it is perfectly legitimate and critical for the Board to consider this issue because people do look to the elected officials to create an environment that is as safe as possible. The Board does not allow employees to bring kids to work because they could get hurt, and there are many other basic preventative measures. Even though feelings are strong, this is a pretty basic issue. There are precious free speech rights, and yet there are certain things people cannot yell and certain things people cannot do in public places. The Board has responsibility for public safety. Citizens should realize that elected officials work for all the citizens of the county, and most people who choose to bear arms are extremely responsible in doing so, and many of them are not happy with certain aspects of this law as well.
Johnson said during January 2011, the Board is focusing on some of the decisions to be made. He said the handout he distributed may be somewhat confusing, but the items highlighted in yellow are essentially new requests. There are some items in white, and these have been ongoing and are generally included in the budget, but the Board wanted to look at them as well. All of the items are tentative, and nothing has been adopted at this point. If there is an amount listed on the right hand side of the page under the adopted amount column, then that is something the Board is interested in continuing to look at. The Board has also added a column that shows cost savings. Some of the items carry savings or income potential with them, and the Board wanted that to be reflected in the document. Johnson said he is going to highlight some of the larger decisions.
Johnson said the Attorney’s Office has proposed hiring an additional Assistant County Attorney to focus on case expediting and collections. The estimate is that the position could result in $51,000 in additional revenue and or savings. The Board is interested in moving forward with this item. The Auditor’s Office has requested an additional Account Clerk to help with payroll, and that is anticipated to reduce overtime pay and create some cost savings. At this point, that request is also moving forward. Having gone through the strategic planning process, there are some items the Board is interested in considering supporting. The issue of vehicle replacements has come up a number of times. There is an interest in creating a vehicle fleet system as opposed to the current system of each department owning and maintaining their own vehicles. The Board is looking at funding a study to see how that goal could be accomplished.
Johnson said a number of departments have suggested adding a grant writer on staff. At this point, the Board is moving forward with putting some money toward a position that would be focused mostly on grant writing but possibly also on communications. The Board is considering putting money toward a justice center or toward some of the studies and expenses that would be associated with moving forward with that item. The Board recognizes that there may be a need in the future to have some funds to address health and safety issues for mobile homes or for people who are affected by any new regulations regarding mobile homes.
Johnson said the Board had a work session with the Sheriff’s Office and discussed the need for additional funding for inmate housing expenses. At this point, the Board is considering allocating an additional $350,000 over what was budgeted in FY11 for that expense. The Board is also looking at adding one additional Patrol Deputy in FY12. Another personnel item includes the addition of a Medical Examiner Investigator. This position would take the place of some of the on-call investigators currently employed by the Medical Examiner, because those on-call positions are difficult to fill. The SEATS program is experiencing increased call volume, and at this point, the Board is looking at providing additional funding to expand the hours for casual drivers. This change would not necessarily involve additional employees but there would be additional hours available for current part-time and casual drivers.
Johnson said funding is also included in the budget to address some of the Board’s green and sustainability goals. He said this would include funds for dues and other training, although this is not necessarily additional funding, since the Planning and Zoning Department is already doing this. The goal is to improve tracking of these expenses. The Board has considered hiring an intern for green or sustainability efforts, but there is also a possibility of enlisting an AmeriCorps volunteer to work on that goal.
Johnson said those are the proposed budget highlights. Johnson said that Budget Coordinator Rich Claiborne is working on developing a packet for the Board to consider at the Budget Meeting scheduled for January 21, 2011. Neuzil said the Board is still researching two decisions right now. One of these topics came up at a meeting on January 18, 2011, and the Board has to make some determination regarding it. This could probably be done on January 21, 2011 with the Compensation Board. He said there had been some discussion from the Board regarding health care provisions and the costs associated with employees buying in. In the past, the County has had the non-union employees follow the Administrative Unit of the union in regard to policy. Neuzil said the Board is slightly straying from that this year.
Neuzil said regarding health care, the Board will be supporting a policy that requires some additional costs for non-bargaining employees to buy into their health insurance. He said there are six union contracts coming up in FY12, and the question is if it would be advantageous to also look at all of the non-bargaining employees and look at a reduction. The Board has the right to do this, and this has been seen in a number of other communities, including Linn County. Neuzil said Linn County has put a freeze on non-bargaining employees' salaries. The Board discussed whether Johnson County would reduce salary increases to 2% rather than 3%. That is another part of the discussion the Board has been circulating for the last week. Neuzil said that would have an impact on every employee who is not in the union.
Stutsman said the Board needs to make decisions soon, so they can publish the budget public hearing notice. Neuzil said if the Board does not make some of those decisions right away, the County will still tax at that predetermined level. The Board could then choose to put any savings into reserves. There is some philosophy relating to the sign of the times and the cost of living, and the Board of Supervisors heard this from the Compensation Board. There is a question of whether the County could or should continue to have a 3% salary increase. Another question is whether it would be more advantageous to do a 2% increase this year, with the knowledge that the Board will have some ability to negotiate with this when they renegotiate. He said the Human Resources (HR) staff is currently investigating the pros and the cons of that decision.
Rettig said she is curious about elected officials’ opinions regarding the following item. The Board has already informally made the decision that the non-bargaining unit employees will pay $7.50 per month if they elect the single insurance plan and $40.00 per month if they elect the family plan. Rettig said the Board is scheduled to formally vote on this decision on January 20, 2011. She asked what everyone thinks about separating the non-bargaining unit from the Administrative Unit. Kriz said he thinks this makes sense and this is a good place to start with all of the contracts coming up. He said this always becomes the starting benchmark. He thinks they saw at the meeting on January 18, 2011, that the Compensation Board felt that a 2% increase is the maximum that should be allowed in most cases.
Lyness asked what the other unit contracts charge for a single plan. Rettig said most of them are $7.50 for an individual plan and $40.00 for a family plan, but the Administrative Unit and the Sheriff's Unit are exceptions. The Sheriff's Unit is open. Lyness said if many employees are already paying that amount, it helps to justify having additional employees in the same area pay that same amount. The Attorney's Office probably has more non-bargaining unit employees, but they are paid better. They are attorneys, and they earn higher salaries than the bargaining unit support staff. She does not think she will hear many complaints from them.
Rettig said Linn County settled with their Sheriff’s bargaining unit. She said that unit settled voluntarily on amounts that are high for an individual and significantly more for a family. A charge of $7.50 for a single plan is on the low end of what the Board has been seeing in the rate studies, even for governmental bodies. Some of the units in the City of Iowa City are paying $10.00 for a single plan. She said a rate of $7.50 is still a bargain, because it buys around $480.00 of insurance coverage. Sullivan said the comparability group is really skewed, because two or three out of the seven rates are $0.00, one is $90.00, and another is $65.00. He said the buy-in is huge in some of the counties, and it is $0.00 in others. There are only a few that are in the middle.
Slockett said this is a complex issue. Personally, he thinks health care is a human right as defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Traditionally, public employees have not paid very much for health care, and that is generally in exchange for lower wages. This employee buy-in proposal is basically changing the formula and will change what will happen in collective bargaining sessions. Management and the union look at the total cost of the personnel package, and it will shift from wage increases to increases in benefits and health care costs. Slockett said he thinks those should be required costs. He said he is generally not in favor of it because he believes the United States should have the same humanistic policies that Canada and all other industrialized nations have. All of these nations, except the United States, have universal health care. The more this County's health care depends on employees' contributions, the more difficult it is for the employees. Slockett said the country is in the greatest recession in its history and there is a great deal of unemployment.
Slockett said a recent Kaiser Study shows that under the health care proposal enacted by U.S. President Barack Obama's administration, the number of people with health care has increased 5.5 million during the greatest recession in this generation's history. However, there are still a total of 50 million men, women, and children without health care. The more dependent the health care system is on contributions from employed people, the more difficult it is going to be to provide universal health care for everyone. He generally does not like this trend, but Slockett said he is aware that the Board has to make difficult decisions. If comparable wages in the community are higher because other employees are paying more for health care, then Johnson County employees will want increased wages also, not recognizing the benefits of having their health care paid for. He thinks the nation is headed in the wrong direction, and Johnson County is caught up in this. He is sympathetic to the tough decisions the Board has to make.
Rettig said she does not disagree with Slockett, but the County's health care costs are going up 8.5%, and that translates to over $1 million this year. As a body, Johnson County employees are unhealthier than their counterparts. The insurance claims are higher than would be expected for the number of people in the County's insurance pool. She said the Iowa City Area Development Group proved that County wages are not lower than those in the public sector, according to the studies done by Iowa Workforce Development. A token amount of funding from the employee to have buy-in to their health care plan is not necessarily negative when compared to some workplaces where employees are paying 70% of their premiums. Rettig is against that, but she thinks it is unfair when some of the units are paying $7.50 and others are paying $0.00. She thinks the contributions should be the same for each unit.
Slockett said Canada has universal health care for everyone, and the country has less child deaths at birth, generally healthier people, and people who live longer. He said if the best response to the insurance companies increasing their rates is to figure out more ways to pay for the increases, then the country is on the right track. However, he thinks the nation is on the wrong path. He does not blame the Board for having to go along with the trends, but his personal feeling is that the whole nation is making a mistake, and the County is caught up in this.
Johnson said the Strategic Plan will be a standing item on the Board's agenda for a while. They have been working on developing a schedule for when to consider various parts of the plan. Two Strategic Planning meetings per month are scheduled now through June 2011. The calendar lays out when various action plans will be addressed by the Board. The roman numerals on the document represent action items under the Strategic Plan.
Neuzil left at 2:35 p.m.
Rettig said the Board needs everyone’s support if the County is going to move forward with its goals. She said the Board has demonstrated their commitment by the number of Strategic Planning meetings they have held. The Board needs the help of the elected officials. The County will not accomplish its financial, green, quality of life, customer service, or greenhouse gas reduction goals without everyone’s support. She hopes they will look at the Strategic Plan, which is available on the County website, if they have not already done so, and spend some time thinking about how everyone can be involved. Rettig said the task is difficult, and the Board is already questioning why they selected specific dates for goal setting because the schedule is aggressive. The ability to make progress on these items depends on many people.
Johnson distributed a draft letter to employees from the Board. Sullivan said Slockett, Stutsman, and himself are on the Parking Committee. Stutsman said Dolezal also serves on the Committee. Sullivan said the Committee recently submitted a recommendation to the Board for a formal vote on January 20, 2011, at their next scheduled Board Meeting. Included in the recommendation is the draft letter to be distributed to employees informing them about the upcoming changes in County employee parking. He thanked Johnson for writing the letter. He hopes everything is clear and that everyone is on board.
Slockett said employees in the Auditor’s Office are wondering if there is going to be a line in the morning at the entrance gate to the new parking lot next to the Administration Building and if that is going to create any problems. Stutsman asked if there is a line at the parking ramp next to the Health and Human Services (HHS) Building. Johnson said there are sometimes two vehicles in line and in his experience, there may be a short wait.
Slockett said Facilities Manager David Kempf mentioned there was a problem with one of the sensors on the arm in the parking ramp, and that was part of the problem. Johnson said there was a problem at first. Kriz said he thinks there are enough employees coming at different hours and with different schedules that there will not be a problem. He said Treasurer’s Office employees start different shifts anywhere between 6:30 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. He said that will hopefully alleviate the traffic back up. Sullivan said there are employees who like to be ten minutes early to work because they like to take their time, and there are other employees who arrive right before their shift starts. Slockett said those are the employees that might have a problem. Sullivan said people do tend to spread out their arrival a little bit.
Slockett said he really likes the gesture of making the entire parking lot in front of the Administration Building available to the public and thinks it creates a welcoming image. Stutsman said parking should not be a problem for the public any longer. Sullivan said the biggest issue is to make sure employees have their badges with them once the gates are activated, since they will need their badge to enter the lot every time. They will not need their badge to exit the lot. Harney asked if there will be temporary passes for election personnel. Slockett said yes. Sullivan said the understanding is that when Lyness, Dolezal, or Pulkrabek come to the Administration Building to do business, they can park in the public lot.
Slockett asked if the Parking Committee has thought about the possibility that someone may park and hand their badge off to someone else. He asked if there is any way to keep track of a person having multiple entries. Rettig said an employee is only going to get charged $1.25 per day no matter how many times they enter and exit the lot per day. She said this could happen, but hopes someone would report this if they saw it happening. Sullivan said history shows that people are pretty good about reporting on fellow employees. Kriz agreed that self-monitoring works well. Sullivan said the people parking in the HHS Building parking ramp have done well, with the exception of a few problem parkers. Sullivan said Kempf is planning to put stickers on those vehicles to get them to move, and if they do not move they will be towed. Stutsman said the Board is aware of those employees who abuse parking privileges. Johnson said the problem has been with people parking outside of the gate when they are supposed to park inside the gate.
Rettig said Kempf told a story of seeing a person parking in a carpool parking spot, but this person was driving alone. She said Kempf confronted this person about it. He sees problems with people not parking in the correct areas, but Rettig is not sure how much the County can police the parking lots. Slockett said the system records the time the badge is swiped, so there would probably be a way to see if someone had multiple entries in close succession. Rettig and Sullivan agreed. Slockett said it would be good to tell employees that such records actually exist and monitoring does occur. Sullivan confirmed that they exist. Information Technology has been keeping those records and can provide the information to any department head who would like to see it. Slockett said those records would be available if there was a complaint. Sullivan agreed.
Dolezal said his thought is that this type of behavior is stealing, and it would be grounds for termination if the employee worked for the Sheriff’s Office. He assumes that would be the same for most offices or departments in the County. The letter the Board is distributing to employees could include the information that passing off a badge for entry into the lot is stealing a service and it could cost an employee their job. Slockett said that information should be made clear in the employee handbook. Sullivan said it does not say this in the letter, but Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell is going to update the ordinances to clarify that employees can be ticketed and towed.
Kriz said the Treasurer’s Office has been in meetings, and there will be drastic changes in the next year regarding how the IDOT operates concerning car licensing, tags, and registration of vehicles. The consolidation of services is underway. He said there are some current proposals that the IDOT is backing. There will be a new person joining the IDOT who was formerly with the Attorney General’s Office. The County will see some big changes, and business will be conducted completely differently over the next few years. He will not get into details, but this will change the County process. Car dealers will be more involved, and there will be regional centers.
Harney asked if there will be changes regarding registration. Kriz said there will be changes on everything. Stutsman asked if Kriz thinks these changes will be positive. Kriz said he is undecided, but he does not think these changes will be positive for small counties. Slockett asked if there will be more consolidation and fewer locations to issue licenses. Kriz said the possibility of that happening is very great. Slockett said the changes are not moving toward all counties offering these services. Kriz said no, it is moving away from each of the 99 counties offering these services. Kris said the IDOT believes there is money to be saved. He will keep the Board updated over the next two to three months when decisions are announced.
Dolezal said the Sheriff’s Office is in the middle of Mutual Aid Training Sessions, known as MATS. This is a five-week program with two days devoted to providing refresher training for all of the officers in Johnson County. He said it has been going well, and he appreciates Lyness helping with the legal training.
Dolezal said the Sheriff’s Office staff hopes to have a year-end report ready by the end of January, 2011. The up-to-date statistics from 2010 will be included. They are also working with Emergency Management, which has the specs and bids back for the new rescue vehicle. A panel will review that information and put together a recommendation on which vehicle should be selected. Dolezal said he has not seen the information, but Emergency Management Coordinator Dave Wilson said the prices that came in were good. Dolezal said the permitting process is continuing at a high rate.
Painter said the Legislative Session is underway and an amendment to overturn the decision in the Varnum v. Brien case was introduced in the Iowa House. The particular amendment introduced bans not only same-sex marriage but also closes the door on civil unions, domestic partnerships, and any other legal recognition of same-sex couples. She said the amendment is pretty expansive. The bill did not get the support that was initially predicted, because four Republican legislators would not sign on, and none of the Democratic legislators have signed on at this point. This amendment would ultimately affect the Recorder’s Office. The Recorder's Office is otherwise busy, and the refinancing for real estate continues even through the winter season. There is a slightly higher volume than normal.
Slockett asked if the amendment was in the House. Painter said yes. Slockett asked if it would have to be passed by the Senate in addition to the House. Painter said yes.
Slockett said on January 18, 2011, the Board canvassed the all-time voter turnout record in the University Heights city special election. This election had a higher turnout than any other city election. The previous record was established in 2009 when the members of the council were elected. Over half of the people voted early, and that has only happened three times in Johnson County. He thinks this shows a trend and also shows the interest in that election. The General Election in November 2010, set an early voting record by 22% over any other off-year election. He said Johnson County now has an all-time record number of registered voters. Voters in Johnson County are well educated, well informed, and politically active. It is great to be in Johnson County.
Slockett said the real estate area is also busy. As employees may have noticed, the net pay in current paychecks is higher because U.S. President Barack Obama made cuts to the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) for the Social Security tax. Slockett said he can understand why this was done, because there is an accompanying increase in the income tax rates and previously these rates had been temporarily lowered. He said the amount of take-home pay may not have increased quite as much as people hoped, but the paycheck is higher. Slockett said Account Clerk II Carla Scherbring has been working to complete those changes and distribute W2 forms to employees.
Slockett said Stutsman asked about checking on the impact of Governor Terry Branstad’s proposal to cut commercial property taxes back 40%. He said Deputy Auditor Mark Kistler is preparing a document and he will release it after putting more information together. Slockett said, if the 40% reduction occurred, it would presumably happen over time and not all at once. A 40% reduction in commercial property tax, using the current tax rates, would amount to an annual reduction of $1.153 million for Johnson County alone. When including all countywide jurisdictions, schools, cities, townships, agricultural extension, and the assessors, the amount equals about $7 million. Sullivan asked if the amount calculated is just for commercial property or for both commercial and industrial property. Slockett said the amount is just for commercial property and he asked if the State is considering lowering both taxes. Sullivan said he assumed that both were being considered. Stutsman said she thinks only commercial property is being considered. Slockett agreed.
Stutsman asked if the amount Slockett listed is per year. Slockett said yes. Stutsman asked what the amount would be over five years. Slockett said the five-year amount for the County would be a reduction of $5.8 million and for all the jurisdictions in the county there would be a $34 million to $35 million reduction. He said Kistler will have additional details and the information will be forwarded to the Board when it is available. Harney asked if the $35 million for the five years includes the County’s portion. Stutsman said it includes the whole county. Slockett said yes, the number includes the County’s $5.8 million plus all of the other entities. The school districts would lose $11.8 million, and the cities would lose about $11.8 million combined. It will be a big problem.
Rettig asked if Kistler has taken Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts into consideration. Slockett said yes. The amount includes the reductions to TIFs, and over five years there would be a $4.4 million reduction in TIF income. It would take the districts longer to pay off bonds. Rettig said this compounds problems for Johnson County, because if TIFs cannot pay off their districts as quickly, they will expand the districts or gather more.
Lyness thanked those who attended the retirement reception for Assistant Attorney David Tiffany, who retired after almost 27 years in the Attorney’s Office. She said there have been large vans parked on Clinton Street outside of the Courthouse due to the trial that is currently going on. They are awaiting the verdict for that case. Drug Court graduation is scheduled for January 25, 2011, at 1:30 p.m. This program has been in Johnson County for nearly three years. She said it is always exciting to see people who have made it through the program, which can run from a minimum of a year to a year and a half or longer. The length depends on how the participants do in the program. It is really nice to see the graduation and give the participants praise and encouragement for getting through the program and avoiding prison or other consequences. Lyness invited anyone to come.
Lyness said the Attorney’s Office started the Marijuana Diversion Program, and they have had some of their first successful participants complete it. There have also been some participants who have not successfully completed it. She said that program is another effort to deal with substance abuse problems as opposed to having people spend more time in the Johnson County Jail. The County would rather have these individuals get their lives together and not have a drug problem than just have them housed in the County Jail. Lyness said they are happy to see some successes in those programs.
Harney asked how long after marijuana use does it stay in bodily systems for a person to test positive. Lyness said generally 30 days. Participants in the Jail Diversion Program have to provide a clean urine analysis report. The County has had some people who have done the training and gone through the educational program, but they cannot provide a clean urine analysis and therefore fail the program. Lyness said they anticipate it to be a four to six month program. From the time the person gets charged, it takes around a month to get into the program. They then have 90 to 120 days to complete the educational program and provide the clean urine analysis. The participants are on warning that they should be able to provide a clean urine analysis if they want to get through the program. That is a good indicator of whether the participants are taking the program seriously.
Stutsman said she is going to be out of town and will therefore be unable to attend the Drug Court graduation. She said she attended the last graduation and it is pretty powerful. She encouraged people to attend.
Harney and Sullivan said they do not have anything to add.
Rettig said according to Planning and Zoning's recently published Greenhouse Gas Reduction report County employees are driving a lot more miles while commuting and burning a lot of electricity. In the coming months, there will be a broader picture about how the County can get back on track.
Slockett asked if those findings are cyclical and due to weather. He imagines more people are driving to work in the winter. Rettig said there are many reasons. Part of this relates to the fact that some people who previously worked in a cubicle now have individual offices. Additionally, lights are left on and there are more electronic devices. Rettig said a recent study showed that if every American family got one digital picture frame, three brand new coal fired plants would have to be built just to power the new electronic frames. She said if a cell phone charger is left plugged in at work, energy is being used. There is a multiplying effect of everything, and the County will have to figure out how to consume less energy in the coming months. Sullivan said the County has also added thousands of square feet that they did not previously have. For example, Public Health now has an expansive area compared to the area they used to have.
Johnson said Pulkrabek is unable to meet on the third Wednesday of the month due to a conflict with another standing committee meeting. He asked the group if it is possible to have the quarterly meeting on the fourth Wednesday of the month in the afternoon. Elected officials agreed to schedule the next meeting for April 27, 2011 at 1:30 p.m.
Former Coralville police officer James Amelon said he is present to speak about the restriction of firearms on County property. He agreed with much of what was said at this meeting. The law that was written regarding firearms was not done correctly, and there should have been other restrictions involved. These restrictions should have included more training in the use of firearms. He said he would like the Board to stop and think about their intent in approving restrictions. He said he assumes the goal of the proposed restrictions is to protect the safety of the Board, employees, and citizens of Johnson County by restricting people from carrying a firearm into the County facilities. He said Lyness does a wonderful job at what she does, and she has a job because some people do not pay attention to the law. Certain people have no regard for the law. He said if those people are going to carry a firearm, they do not care whether the Board has passed an ordinance that does not allow them to do this.
Amelon said in his opinion, Johnson County has the best law enforcement in the state. Johnson County has the best sheriff’s office in the state, and the best the Iowa City Police Department has to offer. He said those law enforcement officials are minutes away from this County building, and that is unfortunate. Law enforcement is not present today if someone would intend to cause a tragic situation. For example, if Amelon, as an ex-policeman with a permit to carry a firearm, comes to County property, he may think he needs to leave his gun in the car. However, if an ordinance is passed to say a firearm is not allowed in a parking lot, he could not leave his gun in the car. He would have to leave County property. He said the Board does not address the professional carrying of weapons other than the statement that the individual has to be on duty. He asked if the County has security people that come to take care of the ATMs that have professional carry permits. He said that was not mentioned in the ordinance, and it is something to address.
Amelon said there were quite a few items that were not addressed in the County's draft of the ordinance. He thinks it is good that the ordinance includes a potential provision for an official to be able to give honest, upstanding people the ability to legally carry a firearm into a County building or office. This protects the citizens, the Board, and employees if something should happen. A County ordinance banning firearms in County buildings is not going to stop people who want to carry firearms from doing so in this day and age.
Amelon said a lot was mentioned about semiautomatic weapons in the campgrounds. He said he is a hunter and lives in the country. If people hunt and camp in parks on the weekend, he asked where they are going to store their firearms if they cannot have them at the campsite. That becomes an issue if firearms are not allowed. He said a semiautomatic weapon will do no more damage than a single shot weapon in a similar situation. He said that point is just based on rhetoric. These are some things for the Board to think about in passing the ordinance.
Amelon said he agrees with a lot of what was said at this meeting, but he thinks a few things need to be tweaked and others need to be seriously considered before there is a reflexive reaction to something happening in the state. Everyone is so worried they will see people walking around with exposed weapons, and that is not happening and will not happen. If someone is out in public with an exposed firearm, that person is an idiot and should not have a weapon to begin with. Citizens in that situation should call 911. If that individual gets enough complaints, he will either stop carrying the exposed weapon or he will lose his license because he will have too many trespass charges.
Dolezal asked if Amelon would agree that changing the law to restrict permits to concealed carry would be appropriate. Amelon said he believes that would be the first thing to do. He said a proficiency test regarding proper firearm use should be required also. Harney said he understands what Amelon is saying. His concern is that individuals can get a gun without any practice and a weapons permit without ever having any practice and without having any knowledge of guns. The gun holder may harm people who they had no intention of harming. Amelon said he will not disagree with Harney, but he asked how long it would take a person to discharge 20 rounds from a gun, how many people would be hit, and how long would it take law enforcement to respond to the scene. He said if there was someone else sitting in the room that was legally carrying a firearm, they could resolve the issue. Harney said if the person were properly trained. Amelon agreed. Harney said that is his point. Amelon agreed, and said the ordinance the County is proposing is going to restrict a properly trained person from stepping in to help. He does target practice weekly because that is his hobby, and he carried a firearm professionally for years. He still has the ability to carry a firearm and has been licensed to carry a concealed weapon since 1962.
Adjourned at 3:12 p.m.
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By: Nancy Tomkovicz, Recording Secretary