MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
DECEMBER 28, 2000
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chairperson Stutsman called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 9:25 a.m. Members present were: Charles Duffy, Jonathan Jordahl, Mike Lehman, Sally Stutsman, and Carol Thompson.
Stutsman: Call to order the Johnson County Board of Supervisors for December 28, 2000. You had talked to the Board about this particular project, and I understand you have Tom Scott, who is also interested in addressing the Board. They asked to be moved up on the agenda because of a scheduling problem. That’s why we’re recessing the formal meeting and moving into the informal for a brief period.
County Engineer Al Miller: The first item is we’ve set the bids on the Dubuque Street Recreational Trail. You should have in front of you the bidder list and their bids that they submitted. We had 4 bids and the low bid was from Metro Pavers for the amount of $307,469.65. That was below my estimate and it’s also below what we had approved funding for. We do have Federal Enhancement money to build the project. It’s an 80/20 split, up to a maximum of $380,000. This came in under that. We’d be looking at 80% of that total being federally funded with Enhancement Money.
Stutsman: OK. Of the $307,000 would be federal funds?
Miller: Yes. What the final contract is going to be. There’ll be additions and subtractions in the field when we build it. So whatever the final quantity is, we’ll get 80% of that back from the federal government.
Stutsman: OK.
Duffy: That’s a lot, too, because I think they start out some counties 50/50 as a good deal. So 80/20 is something you can’t pass up.
Miller: Yes. We’d have the 20% match from local funds, and I would recommend that you approve the bids. Next week we’ll have it on to have Sally approve to sign the contracts with Metro Pavers.
Stutsman: It’ll be Mike.
Miller: I’m sorry, with Mike.
Stutsman: That’s OK. It’s a transition, and I’m ready to move on.
Lehman: Will there be right-of-way purchase costs added to this?
Miller: There will not be, no.
Lehman: OK.
Jordahl: This is different in being a separated Rec. Trail as opposed to the paved shoulders that we’ve seen on Prairie du Chien and West Overlook Road. Perhaps you could speak just briefly to the question of how that comes to be, how that fits into the overall plan of trail construction as you see it going forward.
Miller: The 2 different options that John’s been speaking of is on our new grading and paving projects, we’ve been electing to pave the shoulders to provide an area for recreational traffic as well as there are other benefits to paving a shoulder. A couple reasons for that is there’s no additional right-of-way needed to build that type of a structure. It also has some advantages for farm vehicles and other people to pull off the road. In this case there is a very, very high traffic count on Dubuque Street. We do have additional right-of-way that was purchased by the State when that was originally constructed, so we could go with a dedicated trail which is separate from the main road and fit it in the existing right-of-way, so we didn’t have to purchase any additional right-of-way to do this project.
Jordahl: Is it envisioned that when that Dubuque Street is then eventually addressed in some way, that the road will be widened, perhaps paved shoulders even added at that time, that will come closer to the separated trail as we’re going to see it built now?
Miller: I would anticipate in the future that if Dubuque Street does get upgraded, it would be by Coralville or Iowa City and it would probably be the curb and gutter cross-section to it. That’s basically the Cadillac model to giving advantage to everybody that wants to be on the road or on a dedicated trail. Similar to Rohret Road that was done by Iowa City that’s got a paved separate trail as well as the wider pavement for people to be out on the road as well.
Jordahl: OK. Thank you.
Stutsman: The Board OK to put this on for next Thursday for final approval? Tom, did you have some things that you wanted to add or talk about?
Tom Scott: I’ll talk fast.
Stutsman: All right. Well, you don’t have to talk fast.
Scott: This all started when Al and Mike came out and talked about the trail on North Dubuque Street, and most of it’s going on County right-of-way. The area north of our entrance off of Dubuque Street Northeast, where we put the dirt, we talked about where the trail would go there and what they would have had to have done is move the utility poles in and would have basically gone along the fence line. I screamed and harped at our people that we couldn’t get close enough with the tow or the fill to kill the trees along that property line, the vegetation. I said to, I think it was Al, I said God, now I don’t want the County to come in and basically clean the fence row, because if they move the utility poles in we’ve got to do right-of-way for those. It was my suggestion that land is basically as it’s going to remain as long as we own it. I said, why don’t we bring the trail in further, on our property, and leave the fence line and the utility poles exactly where they’re at? That seemed to be a workable solution. After we talked about that, it’s been our intention at some point to do a memorial to Chris Lillig. That’s my business partner, and Chris worked for us, and Mick and Jane Lillig are here today with me. But some of you may remember that he was killed on Indian Lookout in March of 1996. He was a ranked bicycle rider, and he was hit by a hit-and-run accident and was killed. After we talked about moving the trail in, I called Al and we got together and talked about doing a memorial adjacent to the trail. I apologize because Steve Ford from Schumacher was in last week, and I told him there was no hurry on it, and then Al called me, and I called him up and told him that there was a rush job. These are the 2 sets of drawings that he provided.
Stutsman: Al, can one of them be shown to the camera?
Miller: Sure.
Scott: That’s the location, basically, and as you can see, right to the far left is the River Products entrance off of Dubuque Street. This is Dubuque Street, and then this is the driveway into (inaudible), and it’s south of that tract. This is basically, the right-of-way line now, and this will curve up just after we go across the driveway and into our property. At the far north end, it shows you smaller scale, we curve up and then at the far north end we curve back to the right-of-way line. That kind of shows you where the clearing is with the present vegetation, so that basically it’s going to be a rest stop for the bikers and walkers. This is the proposal for the memorial.
Stutsman: Terrific. This is wonderful.
Scott: It’ll set back into the present hill, and these stones on each side will be large limestone boulders. These series of 5 stones here will be cut stone and those will be seating. All of the materials with maybe the exception of the aggregate and the concrete will be either from our quarry or from Stone City in Anamosa. He’s going to do a cast seat that is here, and then this is polished coral from the quarry, and the bronze plaque in the center. This is what Mick and Jane have chosen to have on the plaque. We have to work out the right-of-way language yet, and I apologize, I told Al that that would be done, but my nephew, who’s our Associate Legal Counsel has been busy with a lot of other things, so we don’t have that yet. But we do have to work out the language on the right-of-way. It’s our feeling and our intention that the right-of-way will exist as long as there’s a trail. If the trail is ever abandoned for any purpose, or if it’s moved off of our property, then the property would revert back to us. The right-of-way will include the memorial, but Al and I have talked about, we’ll have an agreement where we will be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep. Rough preliminary cost at this particular juncture is in the neighborhood of $75,000. This area here will be open to park bikes. I talked to the neighbor lady up to the north, and she was very excited about it, because she said when she comes home in the summer, she usually has a driveway full of bicyclers, who either are resting or want water. Well, we’re not going to put water here, but at least this is a pull-off for the bikes or walkers or runners to stop and rest if they so desire.
Thompson: Could you show us where Oakdale Boulevard will be?
Scott: Oakdale Boulevard is north. I think Oakdale Boulevard, if I remember right, coming from the south, is between telephone pole 5 and 6, and this is between 2 and 3 or 6 and 7 and 3 and 4. There’s enough room for Oakdale Boulevard to come through on the north as well construction easements for construction on Oakdale Boulevard. This will be south of Oakdale Boulevard. You’ll have our driveway, then you’ll have the memorial, and then you’ll have the Oakdale Boulevard onto Dubuque Street when that goes through.
Stutsman: It looks like a wonderful memorial. I didn’t know if Mr. and Mrs. Lillig had anything that they would like to say or add. I don’t want to put you on the spot, but I do appreciate you taking the time to come up this morning.
Mick Lillig: One of the things I’ve thrown around with Al and Mike is the possibility of naming the Dubuque Street Trail in memory of Chris, and at some point we’ll make a formal proposal to the Board for that.
Stutsman: Tom, again, your relationship with Mr. Lillig, he was an employee of yours?
Scott: Mick and I have worked for River Products for 30-some years. We’ve been in business partnerships, Mick and Jane and I, for 31 years, and Chris came to work for us in 1991 and he was our accountant and comptroller for a little over 5 years prior to his death.
Stutsman: Mike or Al, did you have anything that you wanted to add?
Miller: I don’t think so. We’ve been working on and off with Tom here for 6 months, and this is the first I’ve got to see the plans, but I think everything looks great, and I think it would add a lot to the trail.
Stutsman: I do too. My personal feeling too, I think it would be a real nice addition to the whole trail project.
Lehman: It’s always been well thought out and it’d be a real nice feature and a great tribute too.
Scott: Thank you.
Stutsman: Thank you. Did people have an opportunity to read, or see? You put it on the camera?
Scott: I put it on the camera, yes.
Stutsman: Well, I’ll go ahead and read what is proposed for the plaque that would be on the memorial. It would say "The family and friends of Chris Lillig invite you to stop, relax, and enjoy the surrounding area, which is dedicated to his memory and spirit. I could not stay another day, to laugh, to love, to work or play. Tasks left undone must stay that way. I found that peace at the close of the day. Chris Lillig 1964-1996." OK. Thank you.
Recessed at 9:42 a.m.; reconvened at 10:05 a.m.
NEUMANN MONSON PROJECT ARCHITECT AIA DWIGHT DOBBERSTEIN: COURTHOUSE RESTROOMS REMODELING CONTRACT
Stutsman: Dwight Dobberstein is here. He is a project architect for Neumann-Monson. He needs to talk to the Board about the Courthouse restrooms’ remodeling contract. We thought if Dwight were here, this shouldn’t take too long, and then he wouldn’t have to sit through the entire budget hearing.
Neumann Monson Project Architect AIA Dwight Dobberstein: Great. Appreciate it. Thank you. You should have had a bid tabulation sheet in your information, and that shows you that we had 2 bids, and the low bid was Apex Construction, for $140,500. There was two alternates that we got bids on. One was the little restroom that’s right off of the jury room, a very small little compact, just a sink and a toilet in that room so that jurors could stay in that room rather than leaving from deliberation. If we delete that restroom, we can deduct $6,400.
Stutsman: Off of the 140?
Dobberstein: Off of the 140.
Stutsman: OK.
Dobberstein: The 140 includes the restroom. The 2nd alternate was to go with marble, that’s supposed to be lavatory tops and toilet partitions, and we just wanted to get a price for that because marble is what originally was there, and in the base bid, we had them price out Corion, if you’re familiar with that. It’s kind of an expensive material that lasts long, is easy to maintain. It’s got a lot of good features but it isn’t marble, it isn’t the original material. If you want to go the original material, well even then we’re not matching the color. The marble we picked is more of a white color, and the original was kind of pinkish. It doesn’t match anyway. But we just thought it would be nice to check out and see what actually marble costs. That’s an add of $1,500. It’s kind of odd or interesting to note that the other had a deduct of $1,000, so I guess it depends on where you’re buying the marble from. But anyway, we think these are all pretty good prices. I talked to Apex Construction. They did get a number of mechanical and electrical prices that they considered during the bid tabulation. They haven’t selected any subcontractors yet because they’re waiting for their contract to do that. But they had 4 or 5 bids on each of those subcontractors. We’ve got pretty good representation from a lot of bidders. I think we had about 40 plans out, a pretty good response. We would recommend going ahead with Apex Construction, and have a contract put together and sent over to Pat’s office. I don’t know if you’ve had time to review it but it’s a pretty straightforward contract, and what we really need is a decision to do that from the board, to approve that contract and to which alternates you would like to take.
Stutsman: Whose decision was that to do Alternate 2? I don’t remember us talking about marble or Corion?
Dobberstein: It was just our own decision.
Stutsman: OK.
Dobberstein: We got a little worried that marble might cost too much, and so we switched it to Corion. Thought we’d better get a price for marble at the beginning. Originally we had talked about making it marble, but we were just a little nervous about the bids coming in too high.
Thompson: I noticed later on in your letter, you mentioned that with predictable overruns, we might exceed the budget. Does that mean that we’d be wise to remove the jury room bathroom in order to make sure that we come in on budget?
Dobberstein: Well, we had budgeted, I think, $147,000, and if we need to stick with that number, then I would say yes, we should delete that. If you can function without it, that would be one way to bring it within the budget.
Stutsman: I think that second restroom was… It seemed like there were as many judges for it as there were against it. It seemed like it wasn’t a real burning issue to have to put that second restroom in.
Dobberstein: Well, it wasn’t clear-cut, you’re right.
Stutsman: I guess my feeling is that, beings that it will reduce the size of the jury room, isn’t that correct, by putting that second restroom in? What was the disadvantage?
Dobberstein: The only disadvantage is that it’s a little small. It’s not really an accessible bathroom.
Stutsman: OK.
Dobberstein: We do have the other 2 as being accessible, it’s just a very small restroom. Some of the feedback we heard from the restroom that’s on the jury room on the second floor is that people don’t like to use it because it’s right off the jury room and they’re a little self-conscious to go in there and use it. That was the argument against it. The argument for it is that it’s handy to have right there so you don’t have to leave the jury room.
Jordahl: Is there any question, and I might ask Pat this, of some sort of influence on the jury member who might leave from having left the room? Part of the reason of putting a jury in one room together and saying, OK, you guys stay in here and make your decision, is to put them all in the same hotbox, and keep those influences all focused. Something might get said, for example, while they be out of the room for a longer time going to some other place. This is my thinking on this is… I hear the judges were divided.
County Attorney J. Patrick White: They were divided. I consulted the 3 resident District Judges. 2 of them didn’t attribute great importance to it; one of them attributed very high importance and strongly recommended that the restroom be there. I don’t think it would be accurate to say that the 2 were opposed to it, they just didn’t think it was as important as the 3rd one. My personal view is that $6,400 is a good price, and makes sense to include it, given where the bids are. It does make the jury room a little smaller, but it’s already being shrunk. The south wall of the jury room is being moved for this project anyway.
Jordahl: Maybe we could shrink the table.
White: That’s an option, to get a smaller table in there.
Stutsman: I’m wondering, though, for $6,400, how many people are going to use that.
Jordahl: Well, I had a house where the bathroom was right off of what was supposed to be the dining room, and it was really, really awkward. So we used a different room for the dining room, and I wonder if the solution to that might not be to being using your architect’s abilities to say to yourself, sound insulation, and do something to pack that baby so it doesn’t make as much noise in there.
Stutsman: There goes $6,400.
Jordahl: Well, what’s a bunch of Styrofoam?
Dobberstein: Well the cracks around the doors are what causes some of the sound. You can put all the sound insulation on the walls, if you have cracks in the doors, the sound still comes out, unless you put a sound door on there, with seals and everything.
Jordahl: Well, they make these rubber gaskets.
Dobberstein: Well, that’s what I mean. They end up being pretty costly in a maintenance project.
White: Actually, I think the best argument for deleting it is it won’t be accessible. And putting it in as a non-accessible facility puts people in wheelchairs in a different playing field. If you leave it out, then everybody has got to leave the jury room, regardless.
Thompson: So what do you do? You have a bailiff go with the person and clear out the bathroom before they use it if they have to?
White: Well, that’ll be judge by judge, case by case. My personal feeling was the jury would have to recess, the court attendant would have to come in and recess the deliberations. The underlying reason for putting restrooms in jury facilities is 12 bodies don’t operate on the same bathroom schedule. If you try to schedule a recess in jury deliberations, it’s a little harder. But it’s no more difficult than you have during the course of a trial. Trials don’t stop every time a single juror, or lawyer, or witness needs to use a bathroom. They wait until there’s a recess so everybody can leave at once.
Jordahl: Now, 100 years ago they didn’t have bathrooms in the courthouse, right?
White: You know, I know that we know what the restroom history was in 1901.
Dobberstein: There must have been some sort of facility someplace.
Jordahl: Some sort of a bucket.
White: These have been there a long time, we can certainly vouch for that.
Stutsman: Charlie, you have any opinion about the restroom, whether to leave it in?
Duffy: It’s been talked about for several years, I know that, but could we get along without it… There’s about 50/50 people that contact me that they really don’t need it that bad if we can fix the other one.
Thompson: I’d be in favor of taking it out.
Jordahl: I would concur with taking it out, primarily because of the accessibility issue and the cramping of the room. But I would urge that whatever is done with other restrooms go to the historical accuracy of actually using marble. This is a showpiece, we intend it to be, ultimately, a restored facility in completion, and we shouldn’t be throwing in any more plastic.
Stutsman: Mike, the restroom. Well, actually Mike, there’s 3 supervisors.
Lehman: So you don’t need my opinion? That’s good.
Stutsman: No, I do. You might say something profound that might sway all of the other supervisors to reconsider.
Lehman: Don’t hold your breath. I really guess I wouldn’t have one feeling one way or the other, although I would after Pat’s instructions. I guess I did have a question. The comment here on your page was deduct $1,000 for marble, but in the table over here it shows $1500.
Dobberstein: I’m not sure what you’re looking at. One contractor had a deduct for $1,000; one had an add for $1,500.
Lehman: OK.
Thompson: In your letter you said an add of $1,000.
Dobberstein: I’m sorry. That must be a mistake in the letter.
Jordahl: So that would be an add of 15.
Dobberstein: Yes.
Stutsman: And my thoughts for $1,000 for marble, I guess I would say it’s too much money, and that Corian will serve just as well. I can understand accuracy. I’m taking up Charlie’s stance about taxpayer’s dollars and our budget and where we’re at on our budget, and it’s just going to be a very, very tight year, and it’s hard for me to justify $1,000 for marble vs. Corian. And Corian is expensive enough, so I’m one vote for throwing out Alternative 2, too.
White: We should add that, it’s fair to say Dwight and I have identified a couple of things that will probably result in change orders, that didn’t make it into the original plans. Diaper changing stations is an example. We’re committed to getting in at least the restrooms on at least one of the 2 floors, and that wasn’t covered in the bids. We had some discussion about lighting in one of the rooms.
Dobberstein: Well actually, the things we discussed…
White: You got in? OK.
Dobberstein: We got in, so we’re OK. But there undoubtedly will be change orders. One thing we talked about was that floor, been kind of rolling, and we’re going to get in and figure out what that’s about. In a job like this, there are always changes that come up, so that’s why I say, we’ll most likely go over our budget as the project proceeds that we find problems.
Thompson: Well, since one of the contractors thought that they would actually deduct to use marble instead of Corion, can you work with them to figure out what provider has it a little cheaper?
Dobberstein: Yes. We could not accept it at this time, and do it as a change order later, if we could…
Thompson: …if you can get the good price?
Dobberstein: …get the price down, sure.
Thompson: I think we should go with historical accuracy if it doesn’t cost us anymore, but…
Lehman: It’s kind of interesting, we look at try and do historical accuracy but then you talk about diaper-changing stations and lighting and stuff, and it’s kind of contradictory, but you’d like to keep somewhat of a…
Dobberstein: You could make a marble diaper-changing station.
Lehman: A little heating element in there.
Stutsman: What’s the message that we’re sending to Dwight about the marble? Not to use it unless he can… I don’t know if the Historical Preservation and their recycling would have a model slab? I know the University used to take out…I don’t know, Dwight, if that’s possible or not, but…
Dobberstein: The problem would be trying to get enough to match.
Thompson: And getting it recut or whatever, too.
Dobberstein: Because it would be real expensive.
Stutsman: Are we OK with that, then? Accepting the bid and then basically directing Dwight to work with the marble to see what he could do.
Dobberstein: And deleting the restroom. OK.
Stutsman: All right. Very good. Thank you.
Dobberstein: Thank you.
Recessed at 10:15 a.m.; reconvened at 1:36 p.m.
MINUTES RECEIVED: JOHNSON COUNTY TASK FORCE ON AGING FOR OCTOBER 9, 2000
Stutsman: Minutes Received Johnson County Task Force on Aging for October 9, 2000.
REPORT (STUTSMAN): OPENINGS ON COMPENSATION COMMISSION
Stutsman: Reports and Inquiries, any reports or inquiries from the public? I guess from us.
Jordahl: From us?
Stutsman: Yes, one thing that I wanted to bring to the Board’s attention is that we still do have openings on the Compensation Commission. We have extended the advertising deadline to, what Carol Peters?
Administrative Assistant Carol Peters: I’m not sure. I was gone and I haven’t checked that yet.
Stutsman: OK, we did advertise, we had a deadline and we only had one new applicant which we will appoint under Owners of City or Town Property. But we need to have another appointment under Owners of City or Town Property and Other Occupations. I think what we’ll do is go ahead and advertise again, but if any of the Board members or anybody in the public who knows anybody that might fit into those categories, please encourage them to apply. This is a Board that doesn’t meet all that often, just when there’s a dispute about a…
Lehman: …property values and during projects and stuff like that.
Videographer Andy Small: Where should they call?
Stutsman: 356-6000. And when was the deadline Carol?
Peters: I couldn’t find it out there. I (inaudible) the one that was posted for December 21st.
Stutsman: OK. Should we go ahead and just set a deadline then?
Peters: Sure.
Stutsman: Why don’t we set… Can I do this under other?
Peters: Also, I would encourage Board members to try to encourage…
Stutsman: That’s what we were just talking about, recruiting among ourselves. Why don’t we say maybe January 12th?
Peters: OK.
Stutsman: Reset that deadline. We also need an additional person for the Cluster Board, the Social Welfare Board. We need to recruit there a Republican or an Independent. Those are 2 Boards that still need to be completed.
Jordahl: There’s no such requirement for the Compensation Commission?
Stutsman: Not political affiliation, but there is as far as categories as owners of properties, real estate, individuals, people that have real estate licenses and things. But the 2 categories we need to fill are Owners of City or Town Property and Other Occupations.
Peters: That leaves it very open.
Stutsman: Very open.
Peters: It can be anybody as long as they’re…
REPORT (THOMPSON): ATTENDED SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION MEETING; ATTENDED NUTRITION COMMITTEE MEETING
Stutsman: OK, any other reports or inquiries?
Thompson: I’m sorry. This is postponed from last week so I feel like I wanted to get it in. The Senior Center Commission met 2 weeks ago and there was some news that I wanted to share with you folks. First, they’ve taken bids on repairing the kitchen, which is something that the Board has been promoting for quite awhile now. The bids range from $4,000 to $9,750 and they’ve been referred to the City Engineer for review. They also mention that service in our dining room will probably be interrupted while the repairs are completed, because for at least part of the drying time, the dishwashing area of the kitchen will not be able to be used. We’ll either have to close down or use paper plates for that particular length of time. There’s also a parking proposal, which provides 85 parking spaces weekdays and Saturday. Parking is free in the parking ramp on Sunday, in the new ramp? The Senior Center would be paying for those at a cost of $21,000 versus the $6,000 that’s in their budget now. That means the County will have participate at the rate of our share of the additional money, but it’s about $15,000 additional cost. The cost to a person who holds one of the permits will probably be raised to $50 per year. This is the proposal that’s on the table. It still has some more hearings and approval to be gotten. I’ve got a copy of that here. Also, the Nutrition meeting, a week ago Monday, reviewed the consultant’s report. We had been talking about what we had to do as a result of getting the report. They’ve sent us their response, but I learned from the Heritage people that we’re not expected to make any response to their reports, we just need to take the report under advisement.
REPORT (LEHMAN): ATTENDED CHAMBER OF COMMERCE MEETING
Stutsman: OK, very good. I do want to remind Board members that we have a little reception in here at 2:00 so if we could keep our reports to a minimum. But, I don’t want to cut anybody off either. Mike, did you have anything?
Lehman: I just have a short one on the Iowa City Chamber of Commerce that met a week ago. John Beckord, the President, announced his resignation. He’s been with us since 1994 and has accomplished quite a bit. (Inaudible) where we are today we’re hoping we can find a successor to do just as well and maybe carry the ball a little bit further. They also discussed Chamber Alliance, which is a group of 13 urban counties that have organized advanced progressive growth agenda. They represent almost 60% of the population in Iowa. They like to promote legislation, and some of the areas would be brown field sites, which are areas that need to be reclaimed. They would not be rebuilt on, but what they do is access assessment dollars and remedy to clean those areas up. Like again, they would not be developed in the commercial type properties. Just clean the sites up. They want to promote discussion on TIF’s, venture capital that would use for start-up businesses. Envision Iowa which improves the quality of life, which is expand recreation, culture, education opportunities. Interesting discussion on what they’d like to see promoted and stuff. That’s all I have to report.
Stutsman: Great, Jonathan.
Jordahl: Believe it or not, I actually have something that I’d like to point forward to. Which is an exciting thing to me and to the future of Johnson County, which will be occurring after I’m no longer sitting in this chair. That is the 18th of January, I understand the Iowa’s Child folks are going to be here before the Board of Supervisors to talk about that project. I may just reappear in the room to see what they have to say.
Stutsman: That sounds good.
Jordahl: Hundreds of millions of dollars, this is a big change. I’m excited about what that’s going to be. Other than that I just want to thank you all for being apart of a team, instead of a bunch of squabbling, whatever we were, we actually worked well together and I’m darn happy and proud about the way that worked out. Thanks.
REPORT (DUFFY): THANKS TO VOLUNTEERS FOR CHRISTMAS HOME DELIVERED MEALS
Stutsman: Charlie?
Duffy: I’ll second that Jonathan. If we all agree, don’t need five (inaudible), only need one. I want to thank the folks that helped with the home delivered meals, the Senior Dining on Christmas. Everybody had a good time. I’ve never seen a happier group. It was well attended, the Senior Center itself and especially thank (inaudible), and First Star bank for letting the seniors park in the lot. Bob, did you get the figures on the seat dined at the Senior Center alone?
Reverend Bob Welsh: I think at the Senior Center it was 120.
Duffy: That’s pretty good, plus all the home delivered meals. There’s dedicated people that do that, and the folks that need a good Christmas meal, Thanksgiving too, and home delivered meals I’m sure that we’ll be back next year.
Welsh: Hope you keep doing that Charlie.
Duffy: I said we did, you notice that?
REPORT (STUTSMAN): ATTENDED KIWANIS MEETING; and THANKS TO BOARD FOR HELP as chairperson
Stutsman: Is that it Charlie?
Duffy: Yes.
Stutsman: I just wanted to say one other thing. My Kiwanis group this morning, we had Dan Holderness, Engineer for Coralville, come and oh my goodness, did he present an impressive presentation about Coralville is doing. I kind of plant that seed for the Board to maybe invite him to come in, or at our joint cities meeting, to give an overview of what they’re doing. Cause so much of what they’re doing out there coincides with what our County plans are. It was really interesting. The other thing is that this is my last meeting as Chair. Mike, I think you have the votes to become Chair.
Lehman: Might need a recount, you might be reelected, you don’t know.
Stutsman: I do want to thank the Board for all your help and to allow me to say it was a fun year and it was year that went fast. I can’t believe this is the last Board meeting I’ll be chairing. But I thoroughly enjoyed it and it’s only because of great people to work with. That makes the job much more enjoyable. I appreciate all your work and really look forward to 2 new members on the Board next year, although it’s sad to see 2 reliable Board members leaving. They will be missed. Are there any inquiries or reports from the public? If not, we are adjourned.
Adjourned at 1:45 p.m.
Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor
By Casie Parkins, Recording Secretary