Stutsman: Thank you for being so patient. We had a huge agenda today and it’s always so hard to estimate how long discussions are going to take. So, I appreciate you sticking with us.

Lehman: Could we have a pool? Maybe they’d like to decide how long they’re going to…

Stutsman: We have done that before haven’t we. OK. We have representatives from the Senior Center.

Senior Center Commission Member Jay Honohan: I’m Jay Honohan. I’m here from the Senior Center. I’m a member of the Commission. I have with us Linda Kopping, who is the Coordinator, and Terry Miller, who serves on the Strategic Planning Committee, and we are here today, not to ask for any money from your budget. So, you don’t have any budget amendments. You don’t have to worry about that at all. We are however asking for money. Joella Antes, through her will, gave $50,000. $25,000 directly to the Senior Center gift fund and $25,000 to the Senior Dining. This was some time ago and the $25,000 that was contributed by her will to Senior Dining has not been spent to date. We are requesting that $25,000 be given towards our fund raising drive for the skywalk. Because we believe, not only does the skywalk benefit all the programs in the Senior Center, but it will benefit Senior Dining. I believe that Mike Foster has informed you, either by letter or in person, that he supports giving that $25,000 to the Skywalk Project. We met with the Nutrition Board and discussed this matter with them a couple of weeks ago. I have to apologize to both Jonathan and Bob, as I did to the Commission the following day, that I didn’t have a lot of the actual information that was requested of us at that Nutrition Board Meeting. I have some of that information now that I’d like to mention just briefly, so that I can kind of clear the air a little about some of the misconceptions about the skywalk. There’s been some questions and some talk that the City didn’t plan this from the beginning. That the additional cost, the great cost of $358,000 comes from the fact that the City Council didn’t plan this right so that the skywalk could’ve come straight across without an elevator. That is incorrect. The reason we have to have the elevator and the reason the skywalk is in its location starts with the fact that there are 3 different streets involved with 3 different grades in the building of the parking ramp. Then, when you put in the ground floor requirement, for the retail space, the skywalk can only come at the level, actually of the 2nd floor of the Post Office Building of the Senior Center. Now, because the Senior Center is a historical building, we cannot just cut across and enter into it because we have these federal government limitations as what can be done. So, it’s for these 2 reasons that we have to have this elevator and that would have been from the day 1. The only other alternative that would have been available from day 1 was to build the ramp in such a way that they would have less parking spaces. They would have had to have the circular type exit, like you’ve seen at the Hotel Ford Des Moines Ramp in Des Moines, or the Smulekoff Ramp in Cedar Rapids. Not only less parking spaces, and with that type of circular thing, the additional cost of the ramp, offering less parking spaces, would have exceeded the cost that we are talking about now. So, for all of those reasons, this is the only way this can be done and it is a very, in my opinion and the opinion of the Commission, a very good and convenient way for this to be happen. For that reason, we strongly urge that this be a contribution from the County approved by the Board. We are also, I have meetings arranged with financial institutions, I’m continuing our fund raising efforts. We’re hopeful to be coming to some sort of conclusion here in the next couple of months. I’m here to answer and Terry and Linda if there are any other further questions.

Stutsman: Thank you. Questions? Comments?

Jordahl: Since I was directly named as a person that this clarification was specifically addressed to, I’d like to have the privilege of raising the first issue with it. That is, that I don’t believe that all of the ideas that we raised at the Nutrition Committee have been addressed by your summary of what the options were for construction initially. The idea that I brought up at that time, and I believe it was agreed by yourself and others, could have been done. At the time of the initial design of the ramp was to do a tunnel that would go on to the basement level, just as the entrance from Washington Street does.

Honohan: Well, could have. I’m not sure that I agree that that’s what we said at the meeting, Jonathan. But, I don’t think a tunnel is a satisfactory response to this. We’d have to have an elevator to the tunnel. We’d have to have some kind of an elevator up from the tunnel if we went underground. You have everything in the street that you have a problem with. There are sewer lines, electrical lines, all those kind of things in that area. I just don’t think a tunnel compared to a skywalk. They don’t have a tunnel underneath the street for Mercy Hospital. They don’t have tunnels at the University anymore for coming from the ramps. The skywalk is the most convenient and the best method. I can tell you, as an example, since you’re interested in the County, one of our associates left, so I’ve been having to go to Hills to do tax returns this year. I’ve talked to a couple that said if the skywalk is there, they’ll be coming to the Senior Center. But, without the skywalk they won’t. That’s county people who feel, and they referred to Mercy Hospital. They go to Mercy Hospital and they referred to that they like that and they like the skywalk. I think that a skywalk will increase the participation from the County. We had a lady from North Liberty at our town meeting who expressed that. She’s not from North Liberty anymore, but she says that the people from North Liberty would find it easier to come if we had the ramp in the skywalk.

Senior Center Director Linda Kopping: Another issue, related to the tunnel is when I was at meetings which that was discussed is the safety factor. Through a skywalk it’s basically a glass enclosure so that people going through it are visible to others on the street. In a tunnel, you’re in the tunnel, possibly all by yourself and there was a big safety concern in addition to all the, whatever that stuff is that goes on the street, the sewers and wiring.

Lehman: Utilities.

Stutsman: Infrastructure.

Kopping: Thank you.

Honohan: That’s a politically correct word, infrastructure.

Jordahl: That may be a very good point and that’s an argument for a skywalk being preferable to a tunnel. However, the issue that was raised here by Mr. Honohan this morning was that there was no truth to the idea that the City’s choice in designing this ramp initially could have saved money over what’s being proposed now, had the connection between the Senior Center and the parking ramp been envisioned as part of that plan.

Honohan: No. Maybe you misunderstood me. It could only be done this way because of the grades and having, if you’re going to have a skywalk, this is the only way it can be done. Because of the grades and the retail space, there is no way, without this additional cost that I talked about with the circular drive and less parking stalls in the ramp.

Jordahl: Again I differ. As I recall the discussion at the Nutrition Committee Meeting, the issue of entering directly on the mezzanine level of the ramp was indeed feasible, but it was a problem of cost of providing security for offices and equipment and so forth.

Kopping: No. That’s not correct. No matter where the entry, the skywalk connects to the building. Whether it would (inaudible) on the 2nd floor or the mezzanine level, there is still a 5 1/2 foot difference that needs to be addressed, which would require the placement of an elevator.

Jordahl: But, at less cost.

Kopping: No. It would be the same elevator. Oh, except for the elevator wouldn’t have to go as far. But, if we were to put public traffic through the mezzanine level, we’d have to remodel the whole mezzanine and in all likelihood we’d lose a lot of space that is currently used right now for various programs and activities and equipment that we have.

Thompson: Could we, since we have such a time constraint, could we move on to the future considerations? A couple of things that, when you give money you expect to get something in return and I know we would get the skywalk, but 2 things that are serious problems for Senior Dining are the parking. All of the patrons say we would come more if there was parking. The parking is awful. So, one thing, we’d really like to have considered if we make this contribution is, will there be some way to expand parking for users of Senior Dining? But, even more important is that the parking for the volunteers who pick up and deliver the meals. Those people just put up with awful conditions. They need parking for that 15 minutes that it takes them or so, I don’t know how long really, to come into the building, get the meals and come back out. So, for myself, if I could know that that was going to be available I’d feel much more amenable to this proposal.

Kopping: Well, the parking decision is related to what’s available in the ramp is ultimately a City Council decision. We can advocate for increased availability, but it’s a decision that will be made by the City Council and cost, of course, is a big concern, what it cost.

Jordahl: To pull that together though, with the concept of this bequest and your request for the bequest, is that one gift was made to the Senior Center as a whole. It seems appropriate that money given to the Senior Center might go for the skywalk, which benefits the Senior Center. But, was Carol’s calling to mind is the needs of the Senior Dining Program, which have gone unmet in the context of the Senior Center. So, in as much as the bequest was made to the Senior Dining Program, I mean, as much as construction is being made for parking, that addresses one of the concerns of the Senior Dining Program, which is parking, I think that Carol’s got a great point. That if, we’re being asked for this money, it’d be reasonable for us to hang on to it a little bit and say, OK, what about the parking question. I think that’s a good point.

Thompson: So, we could maybe view our contribution as like match money for parking consideration. Sort of a partnership arrangement.

Kopping: I think one thing that also, another point that might want to be considered is the Senior Center programming is not the only programming that will benefit. The participants will benefit from having improved access to the building. One could argue that the patrons of Senior Dining might benefit more than some of the other people who use the building, just on the basis of improved access. Of course, there will be parking available. I think there are about 600 spaces that will be available in the ramp.

Honohan: Now, the City Manager has indicated that they will be putting together, the City, I think he said several thinking in terms of 6 or 7 options for the parking. Then, those will be sent to the Senior Center Commission for our recommendations and then after our recommendation is submitted to the City Council, the City Council will make a final decision. They have indicated, or it has been indicated in one suggestion that Bob Welsh has mentioned a couple of times, is some sort of an hourly situation. I don’t know exactly how that is going to work, they need to monitor it. They obviously, that would not, I don’t think address, the volunteer problem. I’m not that familiar with how the volunteers work. Obviously right now there’s no parking for anybody there in that area. But, we cannot, at this time, we have no idea what the parking is going to be like for any of the situation. Obviously there will be parking. The City is committed to parking. The City in the past has allowed the people at the Senior Center, the participants, to get a $10 a year parking sticker. That is opposed to $40 a month for the public. That is a tremendous reduction there. It shows the commitment of the City towards the participants of the Senior Center. As a result, the concerns expressed by Senior Dining and others… Recently, the City came up with another proposal whereby if the spaces are all full at the Chauncey Swan Lot, that they can park anyplace in a paying stall and then would only have to pay half price as opposed to the full price. Obviously, the City has always been committed. One of the concerns that we have and I have observed this in the Chauncey Swan Lot is that there is pressure at certain times of the day, and then those 30 some lots are empty for the most part. Of course, we can’t overlook the fact that the City has obligations for its parking revenue bonds that they have to raise the money enough from their parking program to pay for things like all these ramps. In response, we can’t answer that question now. We think the City has always shown a commitment towards this. I’m sure that there are a lot of people who aren’t satisfied. I don’t know anybody that’s ever been satisfied with the parking in downtown Iowa City since I came here in 1955. The City survey is committed towards it. I feel that the merits of the skywalk itself are not connected with the parking. No matter what the parking arrangements are, I think the skywalk is an essential item. I’ve always felt that way, and I will continue to press on that particular point.

Jordahl: I would agree with you to the point of suggesting that it was an indispensable part of the original plan. Therefore the request for this $25,000 that’s sitting in the coffers of Senior Dining is confusing, because this should have been part of the ramp in my estimation.

Thompson: I would be willing to consider it if, in return, we could get some parking for our volunteers and users of Senior Dining, and if the understanding could be that, if the skywalk doesn’t eventually get built, we would get the money back.

Honohan: We have no problem with giving you the money back if the skywalk is not constructed. However, I would… We’re going to get that skywalk. I’m going to keep trying until we get that skywalk. No, I have no problem if you want to give us the $25,000 as just a pledge. If the skywalk is not approved by the City Council, so be it.

Thompson: Before you talked as some length about parking spaces for users, what about the space we need for volunteers, which is maybe an hour, I don’t know how long, an hour and a half, at probably a busy time of the day.

Senior Dining Director Mike Foster: Assuming the alley remains thoroughfare, more affordable for volunteers for our program, inherit within the domain of the building. Those are the more important needs for our volunteers, more so than the alleyway.

Thompson: You mean the volunteers that work at Senior Dining.

Foster: Yes.

Stutsman: More than the people that are delivering meals.

Foster: Yes.

Thompson: You think they’d be able to drive through the alleyway once it’s paved over.

Foster: I’m assuming that the alleyway will continue to be a thoroughfare.

Thompson: OK.

Honohan: We don’t have the ability… We’re only the Senior Center Commission, we’re a recommending body. We have no ability to make you a promise like that. As I say, the City is committed to helping everybody on this parking problem, and their going to send us a lot of proposals. We would have no problem letting you view the proposals, but we don’t know what they’re going to be yet. We can’t commit. Our little group is unable…

Stutsman: Well, I guess I support Carol’s proposal too. I think it sounds reasonable to have some guarantee of space. Our parking, maybe the next step is for you to get back to us to see if that can be worked out between the City Manager and the Council.

Honohan: We can check but I can’t say that we can come back with any proposal at this time.

Thompson: But would you be willing to convey our concerns to the City Council and let them know that…

Honohan: I think the City Manager and Joe Fowler have already heard those concerns.

Jordahl: What portion of the eventual contribution of Iowa City might we wind up being liable for as part of our contribution to the Senior Center? Have we straightened that out?

Honohan: I wouldn’t have any idea at this time. The only think I can tell you is that the City Manager has indicated that he would recommend geo bonds for the City share.

Thompson: What’s…

Honohan: He said that at the town meeting.

Thompson: Does that mean that we pay 20% of the payments when they pay it back, or not?

Honohan: I don’t know what he’s got in mind.

Jordahl: What I mean by asking that question is I don’t think that it’s unreasonable of us as the County Board of Supervisors to consider contributing $25,000 to the construction of the skywalk. That seems like a reasonable thing to do, and we ought to get some parking places out of the deal. But this $25,000, as bequest, that’s given to Senior Dining, and I think Senior Dining is something we’ve talked a lot about expanding into other parts of the County, for example. That’s money that’s sitting there, and we just gave North Liberty $15,000 to expand their community center program, where they serve senior meals. I would rather see that money stay as a resource for Senior Dining specifically, because that was the spirit of the bequest, and address the question of funding the skywalk as part of our normal contribution to the Senior Center and its operations.

Stutsman: That’s a good point, and I guess that’s what the Board needs to decide, you know, where the $25,000 or whatever amount of money will come from.

Thompson: I was looking at the $25,000 as an additional. If you look at the 3 parts, the $320,000 segments to the budget, one would be CDBG, one would be collected from the public, and our $25,000 would be part of that. The City would put in $125,000 and no doubt, in some way, we’re going to get billed for 20% of that in the end.

Jordahl: Right. If we’re going to get billed as part of this anyway, let’s first know what that number is.

Thompson: Yes, I agree, we need to know that.

Jordahl: Let’s ask ourselves, if we’ve got $25,000 to spend on Senior Dining, where do we want to spend it? I don’t think that this skywalk is Senior Dining. This skywalk is Senior Center.

Lehman: There’s no guarantee, like Jay said, he’s talked to people that would probably attend the Center and Dining, but we have no direct correlation, you’re going to get a dollar for a dollar. What type of traffic are we going to generate by having this skywalk? What you’re saying is we put that money in that. If we knew it would be a direct generation of increase of meals.

Jordahl: Well, to put it another way, if I was going to give $25,000 to Senior Dining, what would I have in mind? I think I would have in mind that they were going to buy better chairs and pay their staff or get a new stove or serve better food or whatever. I wouldn’t be thinking, they’ll use it to defray the cost of Capital Construction projects for the City of Iowa City. It just doesn’t wash to me.

Stutsman: Bob, did you have a comment?

Welsh: I’d like to say that I think that I was a little puzzled by one thing that Jay said. He said that from the very beginning the only way the skywalk could work is with the elevator. At first, the proposal for the skywalk was $120,000. I assume that was a legitimate estimate, and something happened with that so it kept being jacked up.

Kopping: That was before they did any estimate and looked at (inaudible).

Welsh: I’m just saying that’s what…

Honohan: That was not done by the architect. That was a ballpark figure that they gave and it even started at 100, Bob, it didn’t get to 120. That was a ballpark figure. Then we went to the City Council with that figure and we said, can you get this done, can you do this with the architect, and the architect then did the preliminary figures. Then we came up with all of this information that we didn’t know at the very beginning. We’re talking about… We started this February of last year.

Welsh: I didn’t mean to get off on a (inaudible). What I heard you say, Sally, and the others, this is what the Nutrition Committee (inaudible) copies of the minutes, is that there are a couple of things, it seems to us, it seems to the Committee, that you all need to know before making any commitments and decisions (inaudible) personally is that number one, you need to find out what are the City’s plans and financing. In other words, what would be your obligation, to use Jonathan’s terms, what would be the bill you would get and expect? The 2nd thing is in relation to parking. I was a little distressed at the town meeting that the City Manager had said, no, there’ll be at least the same number of spaces that there were before the wrap. The whole plan, and they (inaudible) when they were talking about (inaudible), and I was a very strong advocate of that, was plus that this would have for the Senior Dining Program. Jay is 100% correct that I think that if you have the ramp and enough parking, it will be a big plus to Senior Dining. If you only have the same amount of spaces that were there before, it’s not going to do a thing. I wasn’t the one who came up with the idea of the times (inaudible).

Honohan: I didn’t mean that, you just mentioned it.

Welsh: That had been a discussion, and what had been said was that that could be monitored and the number of spaces expanded as needed to meet the demands. (Inaudible).

Honohan: That’s still an option.

Welsh: I guess what I’m saying is, I would hope that before we view all of the (inaudible) commitments, that you get from the City, and I hope you would even (inaudible) with the City in helping to make the decision about how are they going to finance, what are the parking options at this point. I think Jonathan raises an interesting question, that at the present time, the Board’s policy and the policies can always be changed, is that trust funds only use the interest of those trust funds. You can change that policy, but that’s the present policy. I think you’re on the right (inaudible), saying we need to know what the City is deciding, financing and the parking. I would hope that you would not just sit back and wait to see what the City decides, but you would (inaudible). I think Jay is right in saying that’s not the role of the Senior Center Commission. I think that is your responsibility in conversations with the City to clarify their procedures.

Stutsman: OK. Thank you, Bob. Where does the Board want to go from here?

Thompson: Let’s have a straw poll.

Jordahl: I want to kind of sit where we were in terms of this bequest, and reserve it for Senior Dining, and be ready to contribute whatever our fair share is of this project as part of our contribution to the Senior Center.

Stutsman: How many Board members support Jonathan’s position of not using the $25,000 from the Joella Antes Trust for the skywalk. Mike, you’re… OK. Charlie? I’m asking do you want to…

Duffy: There’s a lot of other information that I’d like to have.

Stutsman: No, we’re just asking right now. Do you want to use the Joella Antes Trust for support of the skywalk. We’re not saying…

Duffy: It can be used for that purpose?

Stutsman: Well, it’s up to us how we want to use those dollars. Mike is…

Duffy: I hate to say yes or no on it. I just got to think about it a while and see where the ending, just what is this going to cost us totally after that ramp is built? Is it going to be 10%, 20% of the whole thing. I don’t know, Sally. It’s a deal like we got into with the Iowa City Library.

Stutsman: Yes. I think there are some other questions, but right now we’re just asking about your feelings about spending those trust dollars for the skywalk. You aren’t ready to make a decision. Carol, do you have a feeling about…

Duffy: Well, I’m not quite ready to make the decision on that, but it’s not… I’m not saying yes or no until I do a little more thinking, a little more research on it. I happen to know there were some tables (inaudible)…

Stutsman: Charlie, we need to move on. Carol, what’s your…

Thompson: I would be willing to consider it if I had answers to these questions.

Stutsman: OK. Jonathan? You’re saying no?

Jordahl: No.

Stutsman: OK. I guess I would say no. We’re pretty much at a stalemate. Saying no doesn’t mean I don’t want to entertain a contribution to the skywalk. I just don’t feel…

Jordahl: What are you going to ask?

Stutsman: Pardon me?

Jordahl: What did he say?

Stutsman: You said no, too, I’m sorry. OK. There are 3. The next thing is we need to consider if we are interested in putting dollars in, and how we want to proceed with that. I guess the suggestion has been made to ask the City about their financing plans, and I think that is appropriate. Now who’s going to do that. I know Jonathan and Carol have been pretty involved with that. It seems like it would be appropriate for the 2 of you to follow up on that.

Jordahl: Should we go over and gang up on them?

Kopping: There really hasn’t been a commitment on the part of the City at this point to finance the remaining part of the parking ramp. It might be a little premature to go over there and ask them how they’re going to fund it when they haven’t said they’re going to fund it in the first place.

Stutsman: OK.

Kopping: That would serve the procedure a little bit out of step.

Stutsman: I agree with the discussion. We need to know what is going to be expected from the County as far as the overall plan for the skywalk, or for the ramp and our contract with Senior Center. It seems that that’s the unanswered question. Can we make some progress on determining that?

Jordahl: See, if you look at the whole shooting match here, if we’re talking about the whole $360,000, 20% of that is considerably more than $25,000. I think we really need to know what that number is.

Stutsman: All right. That would be the direction I would like Carol and Jonathan to pursue so that we can then move on to a decision about the commitment on what we want to put into the skywalk. Does that make sense to Board members to proceed that way? OK.

Jordahl: What exactly is it that we’re trying to find out?

Thompson: I think Linda’s right. If the City hasn’t agreed they’re going to do it and we call and say what are you going to charge us, they’re going to say nothing.

Jordahl: No, they’re going to say we’ll charge you as much as we can get away with.

Stutsman: But they’ve agreed to do the ramp haven’t they?

Thompson: Not the skywalk, no.

Jordahl: They want to first have a commitment, which is why these folks are here. They want to get as much commitment as they can up front.

Thompson: That $120,000 segment of the budget is what they’re waiting to hear about.

Honohan: They have, I think as Carol’s pointed out, the City is not prepared to say how much they’re going to spend because we haven’t come up with our final figures on either the grants or the fundraising drive.

Jordahl: I think we’re in the same position.

Thompson: Do you have an answer about the CDBG yet?

Honohan: I beg your pardon?

Thompson: Is there an answer about CDBG?

Honohan: They have recommended that we get no funds, and we are going to the public hearing on April 18, asking for a reversal of that recommendation. At this point, the recommendation is against.

Stutsman: Almost, at times, appears like a chess game, waiting for somebody to make a move so you can react to it.

Honohan: We’re always in the middle.

Duffy: That’s about right.

Stutsman: OK. Where do we go from here?

Welsh: I think Linda’s right in relation to her statement about the financing at this stage. I think that Jay has said we’re going to be working on this parking option, and I think you all need to be involved in those descriptions. Jay had said they get the 7 options from the City, you all can be involved in that.

Jordahl: When and how would we be involved in that? Are there going to be discussions, meetings set up with…

Honohan: I said we’d show you what the options are, so if you wanted to comment to the Commission or send somebody to the Commission to say which ones you like, we’d hear that like we hear any… We will be making those public through the Commission for input from the participants.

Jordahl: Here, by Commission, you mean the Senior Center Commission.

Honohan: Senior Center Commission, that’s right. We’ll want to hear from our participants what they like and don’t like about the various options before we make our decision.

Stutsman: Well, if you don’t get the CDBG monies, does that mean there’ll be additional dollars being requested from these other entities?

Honohan: Yes.

Duffy: That’s right.

Jordahl: It won’t hurt much.

Thompson: Jonathan’s right. Even if we assume that we were going to pay our percent, we don’t know what our percent is of. It’s not possible to…

Jordahl: It could be like $70,000 or more, if you look at 20% of $360,000.

Thompson: They’ve already collected some.

Honohan: We’ve raised some. We’ve got over $50,000 already.

Stutsman: We need to wind this discussion up. Basically, we have not agreed to spend the $25,000, we just need more information before we make any decisions as far as how much we will put to this project.

Thompson: But the question is still open about the use of the Joella Antes money?

Stutsman: No, I thought we decided that no, we wouldn’t be using the money.

Thompson: It’s closed.

Jordahl: Well, it’s not so much closed as that there’s a straw poll the majority of the Board not to use it right now.

Stutsman: If we do fund it, it’ll be from other sources. OK.

Honohan: Thank you for your time.

Stutsman: Thank you.

Stutsman: Carol, what did we decide about Dwight Dobberstein?

Thompson: What if I just make a report?

Stutsman: (Inaudible) report instead of an agenda.

Thompson: OK, that will be all right. We might want to discuss it a little bit.

Duffy: I’m going to have to get going if I’m going to make that meeting.

Peters: I was going to ask you, what do you want to do about July (inaudible).

Thompson: We’ll be done by then. We had the Jail Consultants Work Group meeting yesterday.

Stutsman: Andy needs a couple minutes.

Small: I don’t know. I tried to call Bob, left a message. I think he’ll let it slide this time.

Stutsman: OK. Carol, do you want to go ahead and report on the request for proposals for Jail Consultants?

Duffy: I hate to leave, but I don’t want to miss that meeting out there in Cedar Rapids.

Duffy left at 1:05 p.m.

Thompson: Dwight sent out his request that he presented to us at the meeting a couple of weeks ago, and he got back the responses, and a committee was formed at the meeting yesterday. It was Dwight, Pete Hayek, and Bob Carpenter, who will review all of the proposals that came in, narrow it down to 3, and then an interview committee, including the Jail Consultants Work Group except Tom Kriz and Tom Slockett, and 2 additional Steering Committee members. We think maybe Norm Osland and Tim Ruth, and Dwight will be the Interview Committee that will interview the 3 candidates that they select. Dwight will be coming back to the Board with the recommendation on which one to select.

Stutsman: How many people responded?

Thompson: I think 8? I think he said 8. Yes, 8 proposals were returned. They’ll narrow it down to 3 and then make a selection. Since this person is part of the contract with the architect, Dwight would be coming back here to recommend the selection to the Board.

Stutsman: OK. All right.

Thompson: I’ll make the report about the rest of the Jail Consultants Work Group under reports.

Stutsman: OK. Any questions? Discussion?

Jordahl: I don’t know if it was clear from Carol’s report that both Carol and I would be sitting in on the decision making process once it has been winnowed down. You’d have 2 Board representatives there reviewing it, which of the 3 would be selected, even though it was part of Dwight’s contract.

Stutsman: All right. Let’s move on to business from the Board of Supervisors… We’ve already discussed the skywalk. Minutes received as outlined in the agenda. Reports and inquiries. Mike, let’s start with you.

Lehman: I’ll keep it short, I guess. Last Friday morning, the Ag Chamber held a breakfast and a speaker from Kinze Manufacturing there at Williamsburg. Gives you kind of an outlook on their input as they farm implement manufacture. Very interesting. He kind of took us through the history of Kinze. They had 19 different additions to their original site out there. I remember some of the equipment they’re producing, the majority of that is sold here in the United States with some overseas sales. They had laid off some workers here a couple years ago and now they’re hiring back some. Even with automation and stuff, with computerized welding and stuff, it’s just interesting that they’ve been able to still need human bodies and stuff to do projects. I attended most of the other functions. I guess some of you can report on that. Jonathan and I attended JCCOG, pretty lively discussion and update, things have been going on there. Gave a little report on our SEATS search for a new location site there. We’ve had several interested parties contact us, so we’re proceeding with that. It was interesting, I went to talk with Lisa a little bit more. I know Iowa City had scheduled, I believe, 7 of their vehicles to be replaced here in the next 2 coming years. I wanted to see where we’re at on our vehicles. I’ll need to talk to her a little bit about that. That’s all I have.

Stutsman: OK, thank you. Carol?

Thompson: Well, to continue with the Jail Consultants Work Group, we had talked about drafting an RFP for the Financial Consultant. Tom Kriz and Tom Slockett were working on that, and in the process of that, discovered that we really need some answers to some more questions. Namely, in the RFP, we need to be able to say what’s the scope of the project and the proposed size and cost and things like that in order to get proposals back that we can compare to each other. What we decided to do was to do this in steps and wait until the Jail Consultant is on board and has a chance to give us some of this information before we go further with the Financial Consultant. That’s where that is. They’ll continue working on a draft of a document that we could use and sort of leave blank spaces for the answers to the questions that we still need to get filled in. The other thing I wanted to report on, and I’m sorry, this is going to take a couple of minutes. I went to the Heritage budget meeting last week. As you probably are all aware, there were significant cuts in the budget requests from several of the Johnson County’s programs, namely the Senior Dining and the SEATS. Something I realized is that there’s a dramatic shift in commitment from the Federal level towards these programs. In the 70s, when these programs were begun, 27% of seniors lived in poverty. That has changed. It’s pretty clear that as the Federal government looks at the aging of the baby boomers and their commitment to the seniors of the future, Senior Dining is not going to be a primary focus. We’re going to have to make some hard decisions. Either change our focus and look at shrinkage in these programs or look at increased participation by the County. I just want to get that on the table so we’ll know when it comes up. I don’t want it to be a surprise.

Stutsman: I think we just need to have that discussion, what we want. It’s good you bring that up in an interesting perspective. I think we have to recognize that demographics and times and focus does change. We need to respond accordingly. Don’t want to spend a lot of time discussing that, but that’s something I think we probably need to put on for discussion at some time. Is that it?

Thompson: Yes.

Stutsman: OK, thank you. Good report.

Stutsman: Have I called on you yet?

Jordahl: I haven’t spoken yet, no.

Stutsman: OK, good.

Jordahl: How about some good news?

Stutsman: Oh, I’d love it.

Jordahl: You know how we always talk about trains here, how much trouble with trains blocking us out, we can’t get downtown or whatever? 10:00 a.m., Friday, the 7th of April, mark your calendars. The Crandic will cease to run across the Highway 6 bypass. There’s going to be kind of a reverse ribbon cutting ceremony there at 10:00 down the parking lot of what used to be take your pick, Mr. G’s, or the Color Tile place or what was it?

Lehman: B.A. Horner or something like that.

Jordahl: B.A. Horner Mercury Garage parking lot down there, across from Pyramid.

Stutsman: Oh, OK. We can walk down there.

Jordahl: All of these elected folks are going to be waving their arms and shouting that traffic will no longer be blocked there. I don’t know exactly how much that means for us with all of our tracks down here, but it could be something. I’ll stop there because everyone has reported on JCCOG and, what you call it, Jail.

Stutsman: I have just a couple things. Just want to announce that there are openings for the Johnson County Board of Health. Encourage people to apply. Those applications are due at the Board of Supervisors’ office on April 7, 2000. This information is on the web page, and application forms are available here at the Board of Supervisors’ office or on the web page. I certainly hope we have some good responses to that call for applications for the Board of Health. Also, did all the Supervisors get a letter from the Washington County Farm Bureau concerning a meeting on Monday? We need to decide who’s going to that meeting. When I was at ISAC last week, Iowa State Association of Counties, went to the capital to do some contact with local legislators. I was approached by Jerry Anderson with the Farm Bureau, asking if there’d be any interest by the Johnson County Supervisors to sit down and just talk about a regional jail. As many of you are aware, Washington County, their jail has actually shut down. The jail…

Lehman: June 30, I think.

Stutsman: …said that they no longer can operate that jail, and they’ve had 2 bond issues that have failed. They’re very interested in trying to look at some additional alternatives. That meeting is Monday morning at 10:00 a.m. Of course, the Farm Bureau has interest as far as their interest in property tax dollars and how this proposal will proceed. I think it’s good that they’re calling people together and just throwing…

Thompson: I couldn’t tell. Is Bob Carpenter invited?

Stutsman: No, and I couldn’t… That’s what I thought, too. I noticed he was absent as well as the Washington County Sheriff. I don’t know if he should be informed about that. I was surprised he wasn’t included in that.

Thompson: Yes, I feel like he should definitely be one of the representatives from our County.

Jordahl: Maybe we should just grab Bob and go, being Carol and I are Space Needs.

Stutsman: OK.

Thompson: I have something else that morning, though.

Jordahl: Well, maybe Bob should grab me.

Thompson: Yes.

Stutsman: Do you want to visit with Bob, then?

Jordahl: Better call Bob.

Stutsman: All right. Carol, was there something else that we were going to pull the Board on? There was, and I can’t remember what it was.

Peters: I’m drawing a blank.

Stutsman: Same here, I’m drawing a blank, too.

Peters: There are some additional things that I’d like to bring up to the Board. I can send you an email on it, I’d like to get him on the agenda. (Inaudible).

Stutsman: OK. Very good. One thing, is it OK with the Board, can I bring this up about putting things on the agenda, putting on the Scenic Roads Ordinance on the regular agenda some Thursday, just to discuss where we want to go with that.

Jordahl: Well, do we have any information on it?

Stutsman: Just, I guess, what was presented. I think we just need to get some kind of direction where we want to go with it, if we want to consider it, if we don’t want to consider it, who’s going to pursue it and things.

Thompson: That’s the important part. We need to make a strategy.

Stutsman: OK, so if we can put that on for some time. Is there anything else then, that needs to come before the Board. All right.

Small: Just under 6 minutes.

Stutsman: No reports or inquiries from the public? This is your chance. If not, we will adjourn. Thank you, Board, for your hard work this morning.

Adjourned at 1:15 p.m.

Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor

By Casie Parkins, Recording Secretary