Stutsman: Discussion item B, under Board of Supervisors business. Discussion action needed regarding notice from the City of North Liberty regarding corrected petition for voluntary annexation of property owned by Fox Run Development Company. That’s…

Peters: Just what that is. It’s correcting the legal description.

Stutsman: OK. Do we put that on Thursday then, Carol, for… We don’t need any action in that.

Peters: Unless you want to…

Stutsman: Respond.

Peters: Send a letter to the City of North Liberty.

Stutsman: Is there any feeling from the Board about sending a letter.

Thompson: Is this the one they were already in on?

Jordahl: We had articulated a notion last millennium that we wanted to respond to all of them. Having this framework of, here’s our Land Use Plan and so forth. Maybe this points up a… I don’t know. If you want to do that I have a form letter in my computer.

Stutsman: Well, and I think that’s what we were going to do was basically send the form letter that said we are concerned about continual annexation of prime ag ground. Just a blanket statement so that the City Development Board is hearing from Boards of Supervisors. Carol, you’re trying to say something.

Peters: This is, this is actually being heard before the City of North Liberty before it will get to the City Development Board.

Stutsman: OK. So it’s premature to even act on that. So, why don’t we defer.

Peters: But, but you might want to send them a letter just letting them know your concerns.

Jordahl: We could send them a letter. Hey.

Stutsman: Yes.

Duffy: Well, I think it’s a little bit too late, because they’ve already stockpiled a lot of prime ag crops.

Jordahl: (Inaudible) more done though.

Duffy: It’s more than a… It sounds like a political thing now isn’t it.

Stutsman: Well.

Jordahl: Everything is political up here Charlie. There’s no distinction to be made there.

Stutsman: The reason I’m advocating is responding to this is because there’s concern, as you said earlier Charlie about these cities, continuing to annex prime ag land. Unless we respond, then to me silence means that we have no thoughts about it or no concerns about it in it. So, I think if we do have some concerns we need to respond in a letter. So…

Duffy: I talk about a long time Sally, there’s been a lot of land.

Stutsman: Yes. Well, this is one opportunity we have to respond to that or to…

Jordahl: Maybe we want to…

Thompson: We get 2 notices. The first notice comes from the city that is planning to annex and we said that if we had questions of them we would invite them to come in here. Then, the 2nd notice comes from the City Development Board and we said we would send our letter. So, this one is… We’re not up to the letter yet.

Stutsman: OK.

Jordahl: But, maybe we could have a different letter that is part of our invitation to the city to come in and talk to us about it. Saying something along the lines that we are concerned about the continualization of prime farmland of the cities and would you please come in and talk to us about this.

Thompson: Well, that was my question. Was this, was this the one that’s called Mekota Addition.

Jordahl: Yes. There’s a map on the back of it.

Thompson: OK. So, they’ve already been in and talked to us about this and we had a chance to…

Stutsman: Actually I think they… Right.

Duffy: (Inaudible).

Thompson: Now they’re just changing the legal description.

Duffy: Legal.

Peters: And there was just…

Stutsman: So, does the Board want to send a letter expressing our concerns about continued annexation of prime ag land or are we OK with it?

Jordahl: Not if they’ve already been in and talked to us about it. It would be a little backwards.

Duffy: (Inaudible) think it’s too late.

Stutsman: OK.

Stutsman: Moving on to Item C. Discussion action needed regarding notice from the City of Iowa City regarding the requests from Palm Grove Acres, Incorporated, to annex approximately 6.68 acres located in the southeast corner of Scott Boulevard and Rochester Avenue.

Jordahl: Actually, this is 26.88.

Stutsman: Oh. Thank you. 26.88 acres. Do we need to respond to this?

Lehman: I’m curious. Does that include the Joe ?? property or, which is up in the left corner there of Rochester and Scott Boulevard. (Inaudible) think… I don’t think (inaudible) will make this land across the road still ag.

Stutsman: Mike, do you want them to come in and talk about this?

Lehman: Rick and R.J. might know enough to… I can visit around. I don’t have any big objections. I was just curious. I’ll do some research on it.

Jordahl: Yes. Is ag still on the north side?

White: It doesn’t look like it (inaudible).

Lehman: No, I was just going to…

White: From the flags and the earth it’s (inaudible).

Lehman: Yes. I didn’t know if that Iowa City has already taken care of all of Scott Boulevard maintenance. Joe’s here and there’s a little triangle there between the old road and the new Scott that I... I don’t know who owns that property.

Duffy: I think that’s across from (inaudible) by that (inaudible) Systems.

Lehman: I’ll do a little research on it just to satisfy my curiosity a little bit.

Stutsman: Well, does the Board have questions, too, and would it be appropriate to have somebody come in and visit to with the Board about it?

Peters: (Inaudible).

Stutsman: Why don’t we wait.

Jordahl: And there’s certainly…

Stutsman: Yes. OK.

Jordahl: Herbert Hoover Highway questions and…

Stutsman: Maybe some rural questions. Is this butting up to Lower West Branch?

Jordahl: Yes.

Thompson: Yes.

Stutsman: OK. Why don’t we ask for Karen’s…

White: It’s up to Hoover Highway, not Lower West Branch.

Stutsman: Oh.

Jordahl: On the south.

Lehman: On the south.

White: It (inaudible) around, but…

Lehman: Go down here to the south.

Jordahl: It runs down into both it looks like.

Stutsman: All right. Why don’t we ask Karin to come in and discuss that.

Stutsman: Discussion action needed regarding contract agreement with McLeodUSA for the Ambulance Department’s new phone voicemail system.

Peters: Mike Sullivan, a representative to McLeod, representative from County Attorney’s office and myself met with McLeod and the Ambulance Department and basically, the Ambulance Department’s requests have not changed significantly in front of the original request. McLeod prepared a contract in the amount of $11,014. Once the contract is prepared it would take 4 to 6 weeks for the installation.

Stutsman: OK. We basically have already discussed this and approved to go ahead with this. So, we just need to have this on for Thursday for final approval. Are there any other questions? It’s all been taken care of as far as budget and things?

Peters: There is still enough money in the capital projects for this.

Jordahl: I’ll take care of Ambulance and we were talking earlier, in the same breath, about the County Attorney’s office. Is there funding for that similarly available?

Peters: We would need a budget amendment.

Jordahl: That’s going to take a budget amendment.

Stutsman: Moving on to Item E. Discussion action needed regarding appointments of Board Members to various boards and committees.

Jordahl: Oh boy.

Stutsman: Yes. The Board has a copy that Carol so graciously distributed and we just need to go through this. This is something we do every year to decide who is going to serve on various boards and committees.

Thompson: Is it attached to your agenda?

Peters: Subsequent to that I did receive some additional information. It was brought to my attention that out of the Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities there are several more subcommittees.

Stutsman: OK.

Peters: So, here is a copy of those subcommittees and which Supervisors.

Stutsman: All right.

Jordahl: Oh thank you.

Duffy: There’s one there I…

Stutsman: Well, why don’t we take this first of all. Let’s see. Is anybody looking for any change on this? I would guess I would suggest I move on to the Executive Committee and Jonathan, you take Research and Development. Would that make sense?

Jordahl: Oh. I hadn’t looked at that. Yes.

Thompson: Where are we at?

Stutsman: Oh, I’m doing the Johnson County. What Carol just handed out. The Mental Health, Developmental Disabilities, Planning Council Subcommittees.

Jordahl: Yes. I guess if that’s where you’ve been that would be the easiest thing to do, unless Carol would like to switch.

Stutsman: Does anybody want to make any switches in what… It seems like we’ve just gotten started with these committees. They’re kind of only been 2 or 3 months that they’ve met.

Jordahl: Yes. I’m fine with that.

Stutsman: I think you’ll like Research and Development. As a matter of fact, I hate to kind of even go off of it, but that’s, that’s, I’ll be big about it.

Jordahl: Well, Executive’s fun, too.

Stutsman: Yes.

Jordahl: Get to see all these charts that Elaine produces.

Stutsman: OK. Got that one done Carol.

Thompson: Carol, do you have an extra copy of this?

Peters: Oh, why don’t I make a couple of extra copies.

Stutsman: You know what. I think I do have an extra copy here Carol. That, yes, here.

Duffy: I had it.

Stutsman: It’s OK. I have an extra copy. All right. Let’s just move through these.

Jordahl: Let’s just go down the list.

Stutsman: All right. Administrative Unit Labor Management Committee, Jonathan Jordahl, Lora Shramek and Pat White.

Jordahl: I have not been real active on that. I went to a couple of meetings some time ago. It seems like, I don’t know, I’ve fallen out of the loop with this thing somehow.

Stutsman: Actually, in the contract it spells that they meet quarterly. Maybe this one isn’t spelled out and doesn’t meet that often.

Thompson: Do we need to have a member around all the labor management committees. Do you think, Pat?

White: I don’t think you do.

Thompson: My thinking is that if the purpose of labor management is to have an informal discussion between labor and management to work things out, having less there makes it a little more formal than it probably was intended.

White: I agree. I think actually you’re better off not being there. Historically, in at least one department, the decision was made that we needed more participation and it turned out to be correct and it worked. But, the idea would be for these to be department managers and employees and never have to involve you guys.

Stutsman: I would support Carol’s suggestion for the Board not to be represented on these labor management committees unless there’s a specific request.

Lehman: Would that also pertain to page 3 of labor negotiations? Charlie and I, we’ve never met, yet it kind of falls in the same category or…

White: Well, yes. Traditionally we’ve made unit by unit, meeting by meeting judgments about whether it’s good to have a Board Member there. Sometimes it is, sometimes it’s not.

Lehman: Well, what if that might be the case where we just have the Chair as a standing rep and if…

Stutsman: On call. Yes. That’s…

Lehman: With an alternate to be chosen by the Chair.

Stutsman: Or maybe the Vice Chair would be. OK.

Jordahl: Yes. Maybe the Vice Chair.

Stutsman: OK. Let’s move on down to Chatham Oaks. I wonder if we need to have a Board representative on there anymore because…

Lehman: It’s not voting. It’s kind or a rep.

Stutsman: It’s kind of a liaison.

Lehman: The meals are good.

Stutsman: Oh.

Jordahl: The meals are great.

Stutsman: I was going to ask your input Mike, if you felt it is worth the Board’s time to have a representative on there.

Lehman: I enjoy going but I don’t think it’s necessary. I don’t know if they send us minutes on a regular basis. I don’t think we get them. We could request minutes and that’d be fine.

Stutsman: No, we don’t get them. I’m not seeing minutes, but I don’t always see everything that comes. For those of the public, we’re trying to… Each year we try to cut down this list because we are just so overloaded that if there is anyway that we can kind of manage the workload a little bit I think it’s to our advantage.

Jordahl: It’d be easier, too. You can get done the things that we really prize.

Stutsman: Yes.

Thompson: I worry that they would feel slighted if we didn’t go. I think we should work out some way to have a liaison with Chatham Oaks.

Stutsman: Mike, do you want to continue or does another Board?

Lehman: Yes. I’ve enjoyed it.

Stutsman: All right. Then, bring back a doggie bag if you can.

Thompson: Share with all of us.

Jordahl: Carol, we had a conversation just the other day about, or maybe it was just yesterday, about the history about how things came to be funded at certain levels. Aren’t there other entities that would analogous to Chatham Oaks and like Goodwill Industries or Systems or something where you can think, well, don’t they, shouldn’t they feel slighted? We don’t have a representative…

Thompson: We own that. We own that building and property there, and lease it to them. It’s a family sort of relationship that we need to nurture.

Stutsman: I guess there have been a number of issues that have come up where I think it is important to have a liaison with the Board, especially dealing with the physical area and things. OK, let’s move on the Citizens Advisory Board at Independence.

Jordahl: Never been there.

Stutsman: I have gone, and to be perfectly honest I don’t think it’s worth the time and the trip up there, but I think we’re required by law to have a representative.

Thompson: Can we appoint a representative?

Stutsman: I think it’s Board members. I’d have to look at the code at that, but any time I’ve gone to those meetings, it’s always been the Board of Supervisors representative.

Thompson: Do you want to just leave it whoever can go whenever they have a meeting?

Stutsman: City Assessor Conference Board we’re all on that. Clear Creek Watershed, Jonathan, are you facilitating those meetings?

Jordahl: I have not been attending recently, in part because of transportation problems but also because of scheduling conflicts. The last 3 or 4 months it’s fallen out of focus…

Stutsman: But they are still meeting?

Jordahl: …but they still exist, yes.

Stutsman: Part of the reason for Jonathan being appointed on that, at that time he lived in the watershed. Are you still considered as living in Coralville?

Jordahl: Well, I do still live in the watershed. Yes.

Stutsman: It would be OK for you to continue, or do you want to be…

Jordahl: I would be willing to continue if no one else wants to do it. If someone wants to, I’d be happy to relinquish it. They’re doing a lot of outreach to farmers in particular in the area of promoting ways of being involved in conservation that might actually be profitable. I was mentioning that to you the other day, that they’ve got this deal, it sounds like it pays better than farming.

Stutsman: Well, Charlie, do you want to be on that?

Duffy: Not exactly, Sally. I want to do more work with the State Economic Development Board I’m on. That’s important.

Thompson: Is this an important one also.

Duffy: I’ve been on these before.

Stutsman: I think they asked for a Board of Supervisors representative. I don’t know if it’s all that important that a Board... What do you think, Jonathan?

Jordahl: It’s kind of an initiative of the Soil Conservation Service, what do they call that now?

Stutsman: Soil and Water Conservation District.

Jordahl: No, it’s like the USDA thing?

Lehman: Farm service agency.

Jordahl: NRCS. Natural Resource Conservation Service. That’s what it is. They want to have citizen input, an effort to do outreach to try and get people involved in changing the way that conservation is done. It’s really being guided by the NRCS.

Stutsman: You’re willing to stay on it then?

Jordahl: Yes.

Stutsman: OK.

Duffy: If you don’t want to, I’d take it. It’s up to you. If you’re overloaded or something like that…

Jordahl: Well, I have kind of transportation problem for a while.

Stutsman: Why don’t we put Charlie on there? That’s might be a good…

Duffy: Which one is this, now?

Jordahl: Clear Creek Watershed.

Stutsman: Decat. Jonathan and Sally have served on that.

Jordahl: I think that you can give them the initiative that we’re trying to pull together on community (inaudible) development that it would be good if we had some kind of coherence about that and Empowerment.

Stutsman: I serve on the Empowerment, I’d be willing to serve on…

Thompson: Empowerment’s not listed on here.

Stutsman: No, because we don’t appoint. The Empowerment Board appoints that. That’s a flaw in the law, but that’s another issue. Does anybody else want to be on Decat besides Jonathan and I? We would like to continue to serve.

Jordahl: Yes, I think we should stick with that.

Stutsman: The Diverse Team? Jonathan, are you still on that?

Jordahl: I have not been able to attend any of their meetings. That’s just a coincidence.

Stutsman: Do you want to continue, or does somebody else want to serve on that? There, again, they specifically asked for a Board rep on that?

Jordahl: Yes. I’d be OK with it. Carol would be really good, if she wanted to, but she doesn’t want to.

Stutsman: You don’t want to? OK, looks like Jonathan, you’re it. E 911? Mike, you’re…

Lehman: Yes, I’d enjoy staying on that again.

Stutsman: ECICOG Board of Directors? I’ve served on that for a year. Jonathan, you were on the previous year. I’d be willing to give that up. It’s a trip to Cedar Rapids. Usually, whoever serves on that serves on JTPA.

Jordahl: Again, until June, I would be unavailable to make the drive to Cedar Rapids. I could link up with…

Stutsman: There are other people from Iowa City that go there. What are the Board’s feelings? Do you want me to continue?

Peters: Jeff Davidson.

Jordahl: Wait for Jeff? Why?

Peters: We need to wait to be notified. It’s something about the way that...

Stutsman: The bylaws are written. OK.

Thompson: Let these members stand until they notify us.

Peters: That’s why that notation is on that grid.

Jordahl: Wait until you notify JCCOG. I just want to state for the record that I think Sally is going to buried as Chair and this is the most paperwork rich appointment that I’ve ever been involved in. Plus driving to Cedar Rapids, I think you don’t want that burden, but if you do want that burden, feel free.

Stutsman: We’ll put that for further discussion. It’s East Central Iowa. They’re missing an I in that. What about ISTEA Policy Board? Do you understand what I’m saying, Carol? It’s East Central Iowa Council.

Duffy: I happen to be Chair of that instead of Vice-Chair.

Stutsman: OK. I was confused about that appointment.

Thompson: It says it expires on January 1. Are you still Chair?

Jordahl: See, you may have expired.

Stutsman: Do Jonathan and Charlie want to continue with that?

Duffy: I just talked to Mary Rump. Yes, I’d like to continue with it.

Stutsman: OK. How about the ISTEA Technical Advisory? Charlie, you’re on that?

Duffy: That kind of goes along with it.

Stutsman: The Deer Committee. That is no more.

Jordahl: They might come back.

Lehman: It could be ongoing.

Duffy: I told you I got all this information in case anything happens to the County, and I believe sooner or later that we’re going to have to do something.

Jordahl: I think they’re going to make more deer, too.

Thompson: OK. Charlie, do you want to continue on that?

Duffy: I spent a lot of time on it.

Jordahl: He invested himself in this.

Stutsman: FEMA Board? Mike?

Lehman: Yes, unless someone else has a desire.

Jordahl: I think you get such knowledge now, it’d be a shame to lose all that institutional experience.

Stutsman: OK. HACAP. Carol, you’ve done some work on this.

Thompson: Yes, I have.

Stutsman: OK.

Thompson: First of all, I learned that we’re not required to have a member on that HeadStart or the Housing Committee. That was just a polite thing they offered us. It does help to go to those committees if you’re on the Board, but mostly the Board considers corporate issues these days. We have a slot on the Board that’s ours by right of our population, and we can either… One of us can do it, or we can appoint someone else. If we decline to take our place, it would go to the next most populous area in their district, which Dominicci tells me would be Marion. The city of Marion. If we choose to do it, we can either have one of us do it or appoint someone else. My suggestion was to appoint Linda Severson to do all 3 of them, but Carol says there’s maybe some question about whether she can actually serve on a Board as an employee of Iowa City.

Jordahl: Boy.

Thompson: These are very time-consuming, and I haven’t felt… The Head Start and the HACAP housing committee really deal with day-to-day issues of running those programs. I haven’t really felt like I had much to offer, because it’s been a long time since I dealt with a kid in Head Start.

Jordahl: The structural stuff, when I was on the HACAP Board, was just this interminable exercise in considering the possibilities of bureaucratic reintegration and I just think…

Stutsman: That was my experience, too. Why don’t we maybe advertise for that and see if we can’t find someone in the community that might be willing to be the Board’s representative.

Peters: Do you want to advertise or not advertise.

Jordahl: The question is, what is accomplished? What could be accomplished?

Peters: Do you want to just wait until I get back to my (inaudible)?

Stutsman: Fine. Yes.

Thompson: That’s good, because Linda would be a good person.

Stutsman: I agree, and think there would be a good linkage with her on it.

Thompson: She already has agreed to do Head Start.

Jordahl: That’s a foot in the door.

Stutsman: Heritage Agency on Aging. Carol, are you…

Thompson: I’d like to continue with that.

Stutsman: The Highway 95 Extension Study Committee. That’s no longer…

Lehman: They’re working the Mormon Trek. A lot of the same people in Coralville and Iowa City worked on the Mormon Trek. We haven’t met to work on 965.

Stutsman: I thought that was kind of put on hold because all the resources were going to be used to…

Jordahl: I think it’s like the next thing. They’re going to do Mormon Trek first and turn around and talk about that one.

Stutsman: I guess my thought is just put your names down and continue, otherwise we can reconsider it if this committee ever becomes active again.

Jordahl: Yes, you might want to put that on inactive. Let’s just leave it the way it is.

Stutsman: OK. Housing Task Force. Carol, do you want to (inaudible).

Thompson: Yes. I’d like to continue.

Stutsman: Human Services Labor Management Committee. We’ll take my name off of that. This is one where Labor has requested the representation go from 5 until 3. This will be a good one for me to go off of, and any Board member then…

Jordahl: Representatives go from 5 to 3 what?

Stutsman: They agreed to expand the committee to 5 and Labor has requested that it go back down to 3 members. We need to eliminate 2 members, so by eliminating me, we only need to eliminate one member. The Board will have to decide.

Jordahl: This isn’t one of those labor management committees. We were systematically removing ourselves from those. If you removed me, too, then you would have, assuming that Pat’s logic holds…

Stutsman: You’re an alternate, though.

Jordahl: Oh.

Stutsman: OK, let’s move on to ICAD. Do you want to continue on ICAD, Mike?

Lehman: Yes, please.

Stutsman: I think that’s a good fit for you. The Chamber, Mike is going to serve on the Chamber. The Iowa City Fringe Area Agreement Study Committee, I don’t think this is relevant anymore. We’ve been kind of appointing people as we go along.

Thompson: Yes, because we’ve got to approve them.

Stutsman: OK. The Iowa Valley Resource Conservation and Development Council. I’ve served on this. I’ve found the meetings just really interesting. They’re doing some neat thing. But there’s a lot of driving.

Duffy: It kinds of hits us wrong too, Sally. I’ve missed a lot.

Stutsman: They’re in the evening, and every other month they meet in Williamsburg, which is their office. It can mean driving to Tama or whatever. I would like to go off of it. They have asked that a Board member serve on that. I don’t know if it’s really practical to expect people to drive clear to Tama for an hour meeting.

Jordahl: It’s kind of analogous to the Clear Creek Watershed thing in terms of focusing on a watershed area, but this is more focused with Economic Development.

Stutsman: Right.

Jordahl: Charlie, you’ve taken over the Clear Creek Watershed thing for me. It would make sense if you’d continue there.

Duffy: This here is, like Sally said, it’s wrong of me to drive all over eastern Iowa.

Jordahl: Well, it’s an Economic Development thing. You interested?

Lehman: I’ll go as an alternate. Between Charlie and I, maybe we could work something out.

Stutsman: Why don’t we do Mike and Charlie then. Actually, you could go together.

Duffy: Could we go back to Chamber of Commerce. It’s the Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce Rural Development Committee.

Stutsman: Where’s that at?

Duffy: We meet about once a month.

Jordahl: I don’t have that down here, do I?

Duffy: Jim (inaudible) called me this morning.

Stutsman: Oh.

Jordahl: Is that the Ag?

Duffy: The Ag Committee.

Stutsman: That’s just some other committees that we serve on at the end of this form.

Duffy: I report to them.

Stutsman: But you’re not actually the Board’s representative to there. They’ve not asked for a Board rep to go just to Tama.

Duffy: It’s just about 25 or less. Steve Lacina and I used to be on there.

Stutsman: OK. JCCOG Board of Directors, 2 appointments?

Jordahl: I’d like to stay on that one. I spent the first 2 years on the Board not able to attend those meetings. They’re very interesting meetings to me.

Stutsman: I’ve been on 2 or 3 years. I think it’s time for someone else to take over. I’ve enjoyed it, and would like to stay on, but I think new people need to be familiarized with that Board. Carol, Mike or…

Lehman: Where does this meet?

Stutsman: It meets at the Senior Center the 3rd or 4th Wednesday, and they usually start at 4:00 and they get over around 5:30 or 6:00.

Jordahl: Pretty crisp agendas.

Stutsman: There’s good exposure to a lot of different issues as far as ITS, as far as Human Services planning.

Jordahl: As Vice-Chair, I think it would make a lot of sense for Mike to be a part of that, to get your feet on the ground about some of that.

Stutsman: Do you want to continue then, Jonathan?

Jordahl: I do, if that’s all right.

Stutsman: Let’s see. We’re not going to appoint anybody to the administrative unit. Moving on the page 3. Rural Policy Board. This Board only meets once a year. There is a meeting set up for January 26. I’ve been notified of that. I don’t mind serving on that, unless somebody else wants to be on there. Johnson County Emergency Management. Charlie, do you want to continue on that?

Duffy: Yes.

Stutsman: Yes, Carol?

Peters: For the Rural Policy Board, you will stay on there, along with Jonathan?

Stutsman: OK, Jonathan?

Jordahl: Yes, I would be interested in attending that meeting. I no longer live in the rural area, but that doesn’t mean that my awareness of the rural area and responsibility for it as a supervisor are any different.

Stutsman: Is that a criteria, Carol? You know what, I think it might be.

Jordahl: It might well be.

Peters: The criteria that I know of is one of the people appointed to the Rural Policy Board needs to be one of the Board of Directors also.

Stutsman: Well, the Rural Policy Board tells me that it needs to be rural.

Jordahl: What if you had 5 supervisors all from the city? If Mike says one needs to be on the Board of Directors and LIC.

Peters: That’s OK, because you’re going to be on the Board of Directors.

Jordahl: Assuming that it doesn’t have to be a rural person.

Stutsman: We're OK, then, the way it is. Johnson County Emergency Management. Charlie, you’re going to continue with it?

Duffy: Yes.

Stutsman: The Johnson County Ambulance Advisory Committee. Mike, does that continue to meet?

Lehman: Quarterly or something like that.

Stutsman: Do we need a Board representative on that, Carol?

Peters: They basically just ask, you know, there’s nothing in the resolution that asks for that.

Jordahl: This is one that I think at one time was needed, and if we, as a general practice, are saying that it might be better to have a less formal circumstance…

Peters: This is the committee that’s being revised.

Stutsman: Carol, you do attend those meetings.

Peters: I try to, yes.

Stutsman: I guess Carol is a good liaison for the Board, if there are issues that come up.

Jordahl: Pull Mike off of there and have the Board, as needed.

Stutsman: Iowa Airport Commission.

Duffy: None of us goes there.

Stutsman: We all go the Planning Council. Juvenile Crime Prevention Board.

Jordahl: That’s related to that Community Center Development question. Carol and I sat down and talked about some issues related to that. It’s kind of a frustrating thing because Carol knows a lot about juvenile crime stuff, and that’s pertinent to what goes on in the communities. I’m really interested in seeing this thing happen.

Stutsman: Do you want to be on that? I guess I’m ready to go off of that. I’ve been on there for a long time.

Jordahl: I’d like to do that with Carol, maybe.

Stutsman: Labor Negotiations. We decided to leave Charlie and Mike on there? MECCA?

Jordahl: I am interested in that and would like to continue.

Stutsman: Jonathan, you’ve got quite a few. I just wonder if maybe we should…

Jordahl: Well, we can also turn that around. I also know enough about MECCA, and could happily give it away. It does represent a certain transportation problem.

Stutsman: Does anybody else? I guess I would be willing to go on that.

Jordahl: You want to do that again?

Stutsman: Yes, I do. I wasn’t able to go last year at all, even though being on it, because of a conflict with another meeting that wouldn’t be a problem now. Carol, you said that we don’t need to have an appointment to the (inaudible).

Thompson: They’re changing their bylaws to not require a Board member, but they haven’t finished yet, so I’m willing to continue until they get it completed.

Stutsman: OK, that sounds good. Nutrition Board?

Jordahl: Wow, what a pain. I’ve got a pile of paper I gave to Pat earlier concerning the waiver dollars issue. They’re going to need to get a reading from him on it, that contract stuff, it needs to be done in this month. It’s just like, oh no.

Stutsman: It sounds like a good board for you to continue.

Lehman: It doesn’t expire until 6-30-01.

Jordahl: There you go. I tell you what. I stick with it until June. How about that. Then I’ll retire.

Stutsman: Carol, it sounds like you might be interested…

Thompson: I would be willing to do it along with Heritage and the Senior Center Commission, because I think I see some correlation there.

Jordahl: You can kind of sit with me as we work on this Nutrition thing and help.

Stutsman: Good plan.

Duffy: I was on that Board for 10 years.

Stutsman: The Planning and Service Development Committee is no more.

Duffy: That brain injury thing?

Stutsman: Yes.

Jordahl: It’s the whole…they changed the structure in (inaudible).

Stutsman: Random Cash Counts. It’s just a Chairperson and Vice-Chair instead of the whole Board. We’ll continue that. REAP. Charlie, do you want to keep on that?

Duffy: We don’t have too many meetings a year, but still, it’s important because there’s money connected to REAP.

Stutsman: That Regional Mental Health, Mental Retardation Committee, I’ve never been notified or gone to a meeting on that, so I’m going to say, let’s take it off. Regional Trails and Bicycle Committee?

Jordahl: I want to keep doing that, if I may.

Stutsman: Roads Liaison. Charlie Duffy and Mike Lehman. Do you want to continue with that? SEATS Advisory Committee?

Duffy: I think we’d better stay on that, Sally, until everything is 100%.

Stutsman: I was just thinking about the process of that, and if those terms are even up. We’ll have to review that, Carol. SEATS Labor Management, I will be taken off of that. SEATS Operations Committee. Do you people meet?

Lehman: Just once is all.

Thompson: It’ll come up more when that contract is (inaudible).

Stutsman: Do the 2 of you want to continue with that?

Jordahl: I’m on as an alternate, so that’s fine.

Stutsman: Sixth Judicial. I’m on that. Study Committee. Is that still meeting?

Jordahl: Oh yes.

Stutsman: It makes sense to me, Jonathan, that you continue with that. The United Way Joint Funding Hearings, Carol and I serve on that.

Thompson: I don’t mind continuing.

Stutsman: I didn’t know if there was another Board member that wanted to be a part of that.

Jordahl: That might be another good one for you to spend your evenings with, Mike.

Thompson: Come on, Mike. There’s cookies.

Jordahl: Do they have ventilation this year?

Thompson: No ventilation, but there’s cookies.

Stutsman: Actually this would be for next year. There wouldn’t be any meetings. It only makes sense for…

Lehman: I’d consider it.

Jordahl: Bring your own air.

Stutsman: Right. Now these other in-house committees. Economic Development. Charlie and Mike. Do you want to continue to serve on that?

Lehman: Yes.

Stutsman: OK. Finance Work Group. Carol and Jonathan?

Jordahl: Yes, I suppose. I’m going to be arguing for hiring a consultant at some point, when I get frustrated with trying to make this thing work on our own.

Thompson: We might change some of these when we do our strategic planning.

Stutsman: You’re right. Communications Committee, I’m willing to continue to serve on that unless somebody else…

Jordahl: I want to be on that.

Stutsman: Do you want to be on the Communications?

Jordahl: It can could be like and, as far as that goes, but I very much want to participate in that. The others have 2. If you want to stay on it…

Stutsman: It really doesn’t make that much difference to me. Why don’t we just have you go on it, Jonathan?

Jordahl: OK.

Stutsman: Johnson County Computer Committee Technology. Jonathan and Mike?

Jordahl: We’re having a very important meeting coming up here this next week to talk about that. I’d like to stick with it.

Lehman: Tomorrow?

Jordahl: Yes.

Stutsman: The Space Needs Committee? I guess I would like to stay on that, and Carol, if that’s OK with people.

Jordahl: Carol’s pretty good at math. I haven’t been to those meetings because 2 Supervisors go to them, but it’s a huge doggoned thing.

Stutsman: It seems like you’re… I’ve served on that for a long time. I guess I could go off of that.

Jordahl: Consistency is probably worth something too, though. I would do it, if you wanted to, but it seems like we’ve already got a report from the Space Needs Committee. What else are they going to do?

Thompson: We were hoping to get a recommendation, but we might not be able to achieve that. They need to meet with some regularity to consider new things that need to go on the table.

Jordahl: I’d be interested in doing that, because it’s not going to be nearly as much of a time commitment as it has been, as they attempt to put together this.

Stutsman: They do meet every month. OK.

Lehman: After decisions are made, are they going to help a little bit in the promotion of the decision?

Stutsman: Well, they could. It depends on what role they decide to take. OK. So we’ll put Jonathan on the Space Needs then. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan. We’re all on that. Human Resources. Carol and I serve on that, and that’s where we just meet with Lora a couple times a month to talk about issues. I’d like to continue to serve on that. Chamber of Commerce Ag Committee. Charlie and Mike?

Duffy: That’s the one I was talking about. I didn’t notice (inaudible).

Stutsman: That’s National Water Quality Assessment. Charlie, you’re on that?

Duffy: That’s very interesting, normally meet once a year at the Cedar Falls. I’d like to stay on it. I’d been on it for about 5 years.

Stutsman: These below here really aren’t Board appointments. I think we just put those on so people would have an awareness of other committees that we serve on.

Duffy: That’s an important one to be on, because they talk about water quality and what’s coming down the river. I gave reports on that before. It’s very interesting.

Stutsman: What I would suggest, if Board members serve on other committees outside of Board appointments, if we could get those to Carol before Thursday, we could just include them so it’s a complete list of the committees and things that we serve on.

Peters: Actually, (inaudible).

Stutsman: Oh, thanks Carol.

Thompson: We also have appointed 2 fringe areas, Hills and the other one. I think I took Hills.

Stutsman: And Oxford.

Jordahl: That should maybe be listed somehow as a subset of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan follow-up.

Thompson: Mike and Charlie are doing Oxford?

Stutsman: I thought Charlie was doing Hills?

Duffy: It was the other way around, I think.

Thompson: OK. I’m doing that.

Duffy: Doesn’t matter.

Thompson: No, that’s OK.

Stutsman: All right. Why don’t we just put that…

Jordahl: I got drafted into Shueyville, didn’t I? We’re going to do Shueyville next?

Stutsman: I don’t know. Why don’t we… That’s a good suggestion, put that under a subset of the Johnson County Land Use Plan.

Peters: Who is Hills again?

Stutsman: Mike and Charlie. Oxford was Carol.

Duffy: Unless we can change.

Stutsman: Shueyville was Jonathan.

Lehman: I’d like to stay on Hills.

Stutsman: Are we OK with Mike and Charlie on Hills, or was there going to be a change?

Duffy: No, I said if Carol wanted to do Hills, maybe we could switch. Maybe we better stick with Hills.

Thompson: No, I don’t mind doing Oxford.

Stutsman: All right. That completes the list.

Jordahl: Now lets tally them up and see how overloaded any one of us is. There were references made to me earlier.

Stutsman: Can we tally up the list some other time? I’d like to move on to the rest of the agenda before it gets any later.

Jordahl: OK.

(Continued in Part 5)