Lehman: The next item on our agenda is Business from the Johnson County Historical Society, Margaret Wieting. Margaret has provided some information forwarded to us. Margaret, if you’d like to introduce maybe people that came with you that are on your committee and such.

Johnson County Historical Society Executive Director Margaret Wieting: OK. Yes. I am Margaret Wieting, Executive Director of the Johnson County Historical Society. I do thank you for allowing us to come today. John Chadima of the President of our Board of Directors was unable to come today. At 8:15 this morning, Rita Brannaman, a Board Member, who was to be here to represent the Board called, she had come down with the flu. I want to assure you that the Board, we did discuss this last month at our meeting. Our Board has received the packets that you were given and John and I have discussed my time here today, so you know that I am not here on my own. Yesterday, as I mentioned, each of you were given background material for today’s discussion so that we could focus in the short time that we have together on setting the stage for what we see would be the beginning active exploration with the Board of Supervisors for the future use of the original 1855 Johnson County Poor Farm. In your information, I put the commitment by the Board of Supervisors in 1997 for the Society to come to you with a feasibility study for a 5-acre portion. We would respectfully request the Board of Supervisors revisit that commitment as stated in the materials. The initial study by the Society, it was missing 2 very critical elements. One was the unmarked Poor Farm Cemetery at the back of the 40-acre section bounded by Melrose and Slothower Road. Also, the original 20th century dairy barn silo and out building which we see as an important part of the preservation of the farm. Also, what was missing, we feel, was a comprehensive plan which involved a broad base of collaborations and partnerships with other groups for looking at the entire 160 acre farm site. This would incorporate not just the historical foundations of the farm, but maintenance of the disappearing rural setting and opportunities for revitalizing natural resources such as wetlands and native prairie. We also recognize that you, as the Board of Supervisors, may be considering other options for the use of the land. Therefore, it seems timely to come together to discuss the site of the Johnson County Poor Farm. As indicated, it’s in the opinion of the Society that it’s important to look at the site in totality. Speaking today will be individuals that represent a perspective on that vision. Each person has been requested to present approximately a 2-minute snapshot on that vision for you. We would also ask at the end of those presentations if there are people in the general audience and if it is appropriate for them to be allowed to comment. Those that would be speaking to you include, William Mathis, a retired faculty professor in the College of Education at the University of Iowa. Amy Bouska, Environmental Specialist from the Johnson County Soil and Water Conservation District, Chris Henze, Roadside Manager Johnson County Secondary Roads Department, and Emily Roberts, a Johnson County rural resident who is also a barn historian and preservationist. There are many others, as I indicated in your packets, who have been involved and some of them were not able to be here. Others may speak at a later time, so, first of all, Professor Mathis.

Lehman: Morning.

Professor William Mathis: How are you doing this morning?

Stutsman: Good.

Mathis: Margaret is running a real risk to ask a professor to speak because most of us go at a 50-minute kind of cycle.

Wieting: You forget I’m married to one.

Mathis: That affirms my observation, I think, in this particular process. I was struck Carol, by some of your comments earlier about the farm and the asylum. Like you, I had a very similar reaction to what you experienced when you were out there with Bob Burns. In this particular case, I had an opportunity to go out there with Margaret to observe and experience what is out there. It’s indeed a remarkable situation in many different dimensions. It indeed touches you at a number of different levels, one, of which was very emotional. Bob Burns talked about being silent, hear the stories, hear the life that existed out there on that farm. That farm and asylum was indeed a unique endeavor in Iowa. The use of the County Farm, basically a human service operation, was indeed unique to our particular state. In the realization that I had when I was out there, was it was a community. A community in which people lived, worked and died. If Margaret ever gets you out to that farm and gets you out to that cemetery, you start to realize the lives that existed out there. But, I don’t want to spend time talking about the emotional parts of this particular experience. I want to take a few moments, I guess you’d probably tell me I have a minute and a half now right, to suggest some things we might consider as we look at that particular quarter section of land out there. One of the things that I am indeed struck by is the whole notion of the green space concept. As I look at Highway 218, Iowa City is jumping that road in what I refer to as urban sprawl. Although, coming from the City of Chicago, I hardly consider Iowa City urban, necessarily, has jumped. It seems to me that we’ve got an opportunity as a County to preserve some of the green areas and immediate area. I started thinking about the whole notion of natural trails. I know you are starting to think about doing some more efforts in education out at Kent Park, which I endorse whole-heartedly. But, there are also some unique dimensions in that particular area in terms of the wetlands that are out there. We could very easily work in terms of developing trails and using those for educational purposes. That’s my particular bias. That’s my slant. How can we encourage people to take a look at their environment and become more aware of the kinds of things that Chris is trying to do the kinds of things you are trying to do at Kent Park? Other counties across this nation have made concerted efforts. I grew up in Cook County. Cook County has a very extensive park system that is protected if you take a look at that particular city. Remarkable what is around there, but there are still parks, parks that I remember as a child. But, we can develop this natural trail system. Schools could use it, other people could use it and we could get a large number of different groups involved in a maintenance, as well as a developmental utilization. Second point I’d make in terms of that particular area is we could nurture within our community an understanding of the history of agriculture. Indeed, this State is going through a series of transitions, economically as well as socially. But, our roots are grounded in agriculture and increasingly I am becoming aware that we need to honor our roots and what they represent in our particular area. The history of agriculture is absolutely fascinating. Again, this is a kid from the south side of Chicago talking that’s now wearing cowboy boots after 30 years in Johnson County. It’s a different ballgame and we need to take a look at our roots. My daughters have a very minimal awareness of what existed 40 or 50 years ago. Secondly, an opportunity to learn to appreciate how we responded as a society to the less fortunate. We continue to look for different models of human service delivery systems. We’ve got a model here. That old County Farm, in many ways, served some significant kinds of functions. I doubt if there is another County Farm in the State of Iowa that has been preserved and offers us the opportunity to recognize what this State had done. We’ve got some facilities out there that need some careful, careful preservation. To move in any particular direction provides an opportunity to work collaboratively with a large number of different organizations. But, the issue is not merely preservation in my head. The issue in my head is how to give these things meaning. How to work with groups. What we’re talking about and what I’m thinking about now is how to give history meaning. I know you’ve got an older brother, Terry that is involved in that activity. Gary works very diligently in trying to give history meaning to those kids on a daily basis. What we’re concerned about is saying, how do we give this thing meaning out there and how do we give guided utilization of that farm and that asylum so people can hear those voices, Carol, to understand what they went through, to appreciate what is going on. How can we give the history of our community to our children, to our adolescents, and to our adult population in this County? That’s what I’m looking for is different ways. But, I’m looking at that farm as more of a multi-faceted thing. You’ve got wetland potential, ecological kinds of things, it could be educational nature, you’ve got the buildings that we can do. You used to try to develop an understanding of agriculture and also how we can develop and understanding of mental health. 3 minutes, ok, I’m sorry, forgive me. I told you, you ran a risk.

Lehman: Thank you very much.

Thompson: Thank you.

Mathis: Take care.

Lehman: Do you want to introduce yourself and maybe a little background?

Johnson County Soil and Water Conservation District Representative Amy Bouska: I’m Amy Bouska and I’m with the Johnson County Soil and Water Conservation District. For those of you that are new, our mission is to promote the wise use of soil and water resources. We’re really excited about the opportunity to participate with the County, as well as with all of the other groups that are represented here today. In addition to the historic features that are there, there is obviously the natural resources that are present. The map on the last page of your packet, I think it gives you an idea of some of the conservation practices that could be implemented. We put together a series of shallow water wetlands. You could also look at possibly turning in the downstream wetland into a deeper pond. There are a variety of options. There is also the opportunity to restore the native plantings that were probably there 150 years ago. One thing that we didn’t do is put a trail system in there. But, that would obviously be very easy to do. If people were to visit the asylum or the barns, to be able to meander out to the cemetery as well as to the wetlands and the prairie, I think that would be really a nice feature of it. I just want to re-emphasize that our office would be more than willing to help with any of the designs or the seeding recommendations or anything for the area, as well as to help search for funding opportunities, to help get some of that installed. As you’re trying to decide what you do with that land, I really hope that you can take into consideration, the native features that are out there and the natural restoration potential that’s there. So, 2 minutes.

Lehman: Thank you, Amy.

Henze: I’ll introduce myself one more time. I’m Chris Henze, Roadside Vegetation Manager for Secondary Roads. My slants on the County Farm and the land use out there would be for a seed harvest area, mainly for prairie native grasses and wild flowers and a harvest area. In the last couple of years, we’ve planted approximately 40-50 acres of right-of-way into prairie each year. We’re hoping to at least maintain or increase that over time. There is a lot of areas that we don’t get planted into prairie because of manpower or time or cost per acre. A lot of the areas that we do plant into prairie are generally higher cost because of seed and additional seed bed preparation time and expenses. I think we can harvest it, provided we plant some of these areas into prairie grasses and wild flowers. We can harvest a lot of the seed to put back into the right-of-way in areas that normally we would say, we need to save this seed and put it into more higher visibility areas or more suited areas. Maybe we can use that seed elsewhere or in a better way. Typically, a lot of the areas that we planted into prairie grasses are anywhere from 12-15 pounds per acre. Some of the research and data that I had gotten from harvested prairie plots, they were harvesting anywhere from 300-400 pounds per acre of just grasses. Not necessarily wild flowers, those are a little bit harder to harvest. But, I think that also opens up an opportunity, not just for seed within our own program, but also with County Conservation Board, they do a lot of prairie planting and other public agencies. Maybe it’s the DNR or whoever would be interested, we maybe would have a seed surplus that we couldn’t get used and maybe other organizations that are interested in this type of work could use. I think there is a definite value in that land as far as seed harvesting. Not just recreational and heritage and cultural, that sort of thing. That’s important, too, but I guess I’m looking at it from a selfish standpoint from seed harvesting.

Wieting: Go ahead and tell them that green space that you see next to IWV Road, right across from the Secondary Road facility, is what he’s mapped out as where he could plant stuff. He can just walk across and get the seed.

Stutsman: That little area is enough?

Henze: It depends on how much you want to harvest. If you want to harvest wildflowers, it doesn’t take acres and acres and acres of wildflowers to get a lot of seed. The more we would plant into seed, the more seed we would get. We planted, right at our Secondary Road shop, we planted a little over an acre just this last year, into a seed harvest area and it will probably be 3 or 4 years before it’s mature enough to start harvesting seed. But, it’s a start at least on that side and hopefully we can expand to the County Farm if that’s what we end up doing.

Wieting: The thing that’s exciting to us about that and there have just been so many wonderful serendipities. But when Amy and I were walking along the edge of the road, I was saying, what’s so sad is the experience for someone visiting the farm starts when you drive up and right now it’s very ugly. Then she said, oh, I know someone to talk you. To have that develop naturally and to blend in to that landscape is really exciting and these partnerships and collaborations.

Thompson: Could you show me, I noticed in the materials you gave us it talks about 5 acres, could you show me on this map what 5 acres is? I’m not a farm kid.

Wieting: For the original request, the commitment?

Thompson: Yes and where is the 5 acres?

Wieting: It starts on the other side. The asylum is here. It starts on this side of the asylum, does not include the dairy barn, and goes just to the back of the asylum over to Slothower Road. It’s just that frontage road, so it includes the horse and hay barn, the asylum, but not the cemetery nor the dairy barn silo.

Lehman: Basically the northwest corner of the property.

Thompson: So, the cemetery isn’t even part of what you’re talking about.

Wieting: Yes it is. Essentially we’re coming to you today to present looking at this site in totality. Because our feeling was, in looking at the initial plan, it really left out the cemetery, which many people had no awareness of and is an important part of the interpretation of the site and the dairy barn and silo. Then, that led to the whole site being a part telling the story and also being used in many other ways.

Neuzil: How many acres are we talking about here?

Wieting: The original poor farm was 160 acres. It’s this section here and this is a 40-acre section, this would be the 5 acres along here. However, the cemetery is back here and the dairy barn and silo are here. So, this would be a 40 acre, what Amy sees as wetlands and I think this is the (inaudible) that’s down into here. There’s that gully.

Neuzil: Do you want to show that on TV and for everybody?

Wieting: This is the original 160 acres and it is usually divided into 40 acre sections. This is where the cemetery would be and the asylum, hay and horse barn, dairy barn and silo. Then over here is Chatham Oaks. There was the asylum used until 1886 it became a hog barn and there was a brick building built where the County home is. Then the Chatham Oaks was built in 1964. Right now you have a whole story of the county.

Thompson: Pat, did the old building burn down? The one that was between the old asylum and the one that’s there now? What happened to that one? Did they tear it down when they built the new one?

White: I don’t remember.

Thompson: I don’t either.

Wieting: Could Emily Roberts conclude and then we could...

Emily Roberts: I too thank you for allowing me to speak. I could speak for an hour about barns but I promise I won’t do that now. My remarks come from my deep concern for historic preservation. Particularly preservation of our rural heritage. I’m especially interested in preservation of our barns and other out buildings. Johnson County has many examples of 6 or 8 distinct types of barn architecture. This is in our rural areas and there are also barns in our small towns if some haven’t fallen down but some have. I have pictures of in-town barns. But here at our County farm we have barn treasurers too that are owned by all of the people of Johnson County. As we’ve said it next to Chatham Oaks. One of those barns has already been improved with a concrete driveway and it now houses agriculture equipment. I think Margaret has some photos here that demonstrate that. The other that I’m particularly interested in is this gambrel roof dairy barn which also has a horse stable. It is unique in several ways. It has subtle exterior decoration that is not often seen in barns in Iowa. Its similar to barns that are seen in Johnson, Iowa and Washington County. It has interior decoration that is unique too. I’ve prowled around in a lot of barns. I told Margaret 100. It has a ladder to the haymow that is distinct from any that I’ve ever seen. It has the obsolete dairy equipment still in tact. It has what I think some people call the Iowa brace. It’s part of the bracing of the gambrel roof and there are many different ways to do that. I didn’t climb up there after Margaret asked me to do this. I can’t say to that. That barn is structurally sound. It should be saved. My feeling is here we have something that belongs to the county, it belongs to the people. It has marvelous possibilities which have already been touched on and I think this body owes it this heritage that is ours, we owe it as a legacy to the future.

Wieting: I just want to make clear to the Supervisors that Johnson County historical Society certainly does not see this as our project. We see that its bigger than our organization. Its a wonderful opportunity to build on a collaborative relationship and develop some green space. Also the Historical Foundation, we’re very interested in that 40 acre section that has the cemetery and the asylum and the barns. But we’re not asking this be a Johnson County Historical Society project but that it be working with the Supervisors and other groups to try to save this land as green space for the story and for the use of the public. If its possible I don’t know if its OK to ask if there’s anybody in the audience that might say something.

Lehman: Would you like to stand and introduce yourself for the camera and the rest of the audience. You can come up and have a seat at the microphone.

Ina Lowenburg: I’m Ina Lowenburg and I’m the one who took the photographs that were passed around. I just wanted to say that 10 years ago I happened on that horse barn. It was the 4th of July and all that I noticed was that there was this nice white barn and I took some pictures. Fist I looked round to see if there was someone I could ask permission to take the pictures. I thought it was kind of strange that there was no house there. But I just went ahead. Only last year I learned what this was. Although 10 years ago the paint was a little better on the barn than it is today, it is of course so much more meaningful to know what that was, to see what it looks like inside and to see the asylum too, which is really a very special experience on its own. Simply as a resident of the community I’m enthusiastic about a project that would bring history to life in this way and would use what we have and keep it from disintegrating. Thank you.

Lehman: Thank you.

Stutsman: Margaret can I ask you about the feasibility study and what ever happened with that.

Wieting: There was a plan drawn up and I have given one piece of that for the exterior that was a history center. I’ve just became director last year and in reviewing the materials there were focus groups conducted. The project was I believe around 2 and a half million dollars and based on the study by the consultant they didn’t feel there was a base there to raise that much money. Then the organization went through a series of transitions with the former director leaving and my getting on board. Then as so often happens when there is that kind of a change there is an evolution in what the vision is and this is what your hearing now. What I saw and the Board and I have discussed is that what was missing was that cemetery piece. To just interpret the asylum is out of context. It doesn’t really tell the story. Also there wasn’t this collaboration in partnerships. That’s what’s really given life to it. By meeting Amy just in a way that was really kind of neat and then to have more and more people, that list of people you see becoming involved with thinking about what could happen to this space. So many of us stood there and have watched the housing coming and thinking this is a wonderful opportunity to save green space and use it as an educational and interpretive center.

Stutsman: I share your concerns and I know we on the Board have talked from time to time about that parcel and what are we going to do with it as continued pressure from development and pressures too from the county as far as that being an asset. What do we do with it, is it feasible to keep using it for farm land. It comes up from time to time. I think we have tossed around that maybe the time has come to do a study of that piece of property. I envision focus groups and what not. Just to say OK community what do you think is in the best interests of the community with that land. Because there’s different opinions. We’ve been approached by churches and by civic groups for pieces of that land. I think we just need a thoughtful approach to what we’re going to do.

Wieting: That’s why we wanted to come today because you can see the people involved has snowballed. Rather than us being out here and thinking wait a minute we haven’t been talking to the Supervisors and they may be out here, it’s time to put it on the table. Naturally we would like to be invited and I know all of the other groups and people would like to be invited to be a part of that.

Stutsman: I agree with you too. I have a fondness for what’s out there historically. Concern about if that’s gone its gone forever. It is such a heritage. This is what the County is all about as far as the farm buildings. I have been in the dairy barn and it’s incredible.

Wieting: All of the milking equipment is there.

Stutsman: It’s very well preserved. I think we certainly need to be proactive in what’s going on out there and not have things happen that would lose it forever.

Thompson: Sally what do we do with it now? Is this part of the farm or…

Wieting: It just sits. We’ve had the privilege of…

Thompson: this is what Charlie used to call the clay knob. The part that isn’t farmable.

Stutsman: No the barn is…

Wieting: No. It’s rented. There’s land rented out. There is corn and soybeans planted.

Thompson: OK.

Lehman: Most of the colored area is non-farm. Its grass. The gray area is crop ground.

Stutsman: You’re right Carol. It’s not the best farmland by any means. Its pretty steep and its not real productive land.

Thompson: So in that way its typical of what was usually set aside for a poor farm.

Wieting: Right. And it’s probably one of the last. I’ve been on the internet and found one that’s now a bed and breakfast. One in Arkansas and one in Colorado. The Dubuque sold it off for commercial development. There is another one that is a model where our County historical is managing and interpreting it.

Stutsman: We had a discussion about Iowa Child earlier. This to me is native and this is what Iowa was all about at one time. This is our history. This is our culture. This is what we need to preserve and keep.

Wieting: I feel that the seeds of this were planted along time ago. It wasn’t in a response to that at all but I do think its something that can be done very economically. It can also involve a large cadre of volunteers. Amy talked that youth can be involved in part of the growing and planting. There are really many facets to it.

Lehman: Volunteers is the key and this is your group, this is what you’ve put together. Willing to continue on. Like I said there’s more people. I think we all know a couple of elderly gentlemen that live in Ecumenical Towers that were part of this working farm and there are probably other people out there that could relay some history too.

Wieting: I would like to pay homage to Bob Burns because when I became director last year his was one of the first phone calls. We had lunch together and continued conversations and I feel badly because I had hoped that he could have some input.

Lehman: I agree with the history aspect. I grew up on a farm. I live on a farm and I think we’re kind of getting away from that. Everyone used to have a grandparent that lived, maybe visited but people don’t appreciate the fact where food might come from. They think it comes out of that back room at the grocery store and comes on the shelf. People that can see the basic workings. A lot of people don’t understand the difference between a bale of hay or a bale of straw. Some people don’t care. That history of what crops are raised to get that end product is always kind of interesting. I think people if they build it they will come type atmosphere. We’re right here. It’s native and something we have access to. To see it pass to the wayside would be very sad.

Wieting: Would it be possible for us to leave today with some direction from the Board? Do you need to discuss it further. Do you need to discuss the people that are listed. Do we have permission to continue and then come back to you? I mentioned in the materials that I gave to you perhaps you’d want to add people to that list.

Lehman: It sounds like you’ve recruited a lot of people. My feeling is that your on the right track your just asking now can we continue to gather information and make some type of proposal. I don’t know how formal we need to get on…

Stutsman: My concern is looking at this in the whole. I guess that’s what I talk about. A planful approach to this because your not requesting consideration for the entire farm.

Wieting: Not for the Johnson County Historical Society but what we see is what was missing. Looking at the entire 160 acres. That’s beyond us. I see we would like to be a part of the group that we’ve developed plus add more and put together a comprehensive plan. Certainly we want a role in the future of that land as far as preserving the story and sharing the story. Certainly Amy brings skills, expertise and another piece of that. It’s more than Johnson County Historical Society’s project.

Neuzil: When you do come back I just have a few questions. As you start to think about these things. Costs. Particularly where you would come up with that kind of funding, what kind of commitment your talking about from Johnson County. Not only for the value of the land but also the buildings and all of the other things you plan to add, parking lots. Is there is a loss of income from the farming that we currently have.

Lehman: Not on the buildings. Some of the surrounding land is not the cropland.

Neuzil: Impact it would have on Chatham Oaks. Then I think one of the major things to have insurance, potentially take a look at the current structures and are they safe for heavy volumes of traffic. Then for Chris can we plant a rainforest in there?

Henze: It would be hard.

Lehman: There is a wastewater easement down there. We might have a source of water. That may be something to work in. I know you can’t build over those easements. That might be something the trails could work in. I know municipalities have worked in conjunction with laying over the top of those, some type of trails.

Thompson: It looks like you’ve really done a lot of work on this and have a vision. Probably you’ve planned to do it in stages. If you could draw out what would come first and what after that that would be good. Probably give some thought to what sort of relationship we would develop with the Historical Society to do this which would mean County Attorney’s time I suppose.

Wieting: I see it as a team approach. I really do. We have a wonderful working relationship with soil and water now and I think Chris. I guess I see it as a team approach but we could facilitate the discussion for you. I would love to see a representative… I think if the Board of Supervisors would review the list of people, would there be people that you would like on that or would you want to have a representative from your Board.

Stutsman: I think we’re moving more quickly than I’m comfortable doing right now. I think we need to continue and maybe put this back on the agenda. This is one proposal. My concern is that we react to one proposal, commit ourselves and then all of the sudden say wait a minute, piecemeal it is what I’m trying to say. I think that’s what I talk about when I talk about a planful approach. Because this is a big decision and a big commitment. There’s lots of interest in the particular piece of property and I guess I want to make sure that I’ve considered all of the possibilities for this. I’m very supportive of what’s on the table here. There might be some other things. I know for instance the Board has been approached by the Armory to maybe think about an exchange and I don’t want to limit because what we’ve done at one place cut some other possibilities so I just want to make sure that I’ve got all of those things on the table for consideration before we commit to any one project.

Wieting: I think that’s why we put in there to expand the base and to get the different perspectives. So, would it be helpful, I don’t know if others besides the Armory, but perhaps if they joined the group and they looked at it and we talked together and maybe see what we can do together. So, it isn’t the Armory out here talking and we’re over here. But, maybe bring whatever other groups are interested and come together and discuss it in totality and say hey, how do we each fit together in this with that. Or you saying for us not to…

Stutsman: I think the Board needs to direct this project is what I’m saying. Certainly your involvement and the people that you’ve listed out here, but I think we need… This is a community decision.

Thompson: We should maybe put it on our agenda for the strategic planning day.

Stutsman: I’m glad you came forward. I’m glad that you brought this forward and expressed your interest. It's a catalyst to get the Board moving in a direction about what we want to do. Maybe that’s just exactly the direction we need to go.

Harney: I agree with Sally on that. I had some of the same questions that Terrence had. At the same time we do need to preserve some of our history out there. There is a lot out there, but we need to look at the overall picture of if the entire parcel should be used in that way, or what is going to benefit most of the residents in the County. We’re going to need input from many different areas of the County and the residents. I agree we need to take some small steps and take a look at it and decide from there. But, I also would like to see some of those questions answered and the proposal on the surface appears very good and I think we need to go just a little more depth and also look at the alternatives.

Weiting: The reason we have not talked cost in many of these issues is that we didn’t want to go so far ahead and then have you say, oh, wait a minute, we’ve given the land away or something. But, if you want us to proceed, do you want us to stop, hold, what would you like us to do?

Lehman: What’s the feeling of the Board? Maybe get a little time to get some feedback maybe from other members of the public through phone calls, written correspondence, maybe us to digest a little bit of this more in what we’ve heard here today before kind of summarizing some type of action here. It’s a great prospect, but I agree with the rest of the Board. We don’t want to jump to quickly here on a good idea when we haven’t heard everything.

Weiting: Right. I understand that.

Lehman: I appreciate your organization here and your volunteers of looking at these different routes to go.

Thompson: We have a strategic planning day coming up here in a couple of weeks and we can put this on the agenda and maybe get it into our plan for the next year.

Stutsman: And decide how we want to approach it, what is the best direction? We may say, the Historical Society has done a lot of work, continue with your work and bring something back. Or we may say we need more of a community-input focus on this.

Lehman: Are there members of the public, Jonathan?

Jordahl: Yes. Jonathan Jordahl, I’m currently representing the Iowa Humanities Board, known locally as Humanities Iowa. My new job, I’m still getting paid, now as Program Director there. Margaret asked me to come and speak in support of the project here. Most of what I would have said has already been said, so that gives us a better chance of me actually keeping under 2 minutes. The Humanities Iowa does support things like this. Financially we have a program, not for bricks and mortar, but for the interpretive aspect of it that’s been so spoken of trying to integrate the physical presence of objects with what we’ve all been talking about. What does this mean? What has this meant to us in terms of the development of our society and the education of the public? One of the things I was going to point, Sally has already mentioned, it’s cheaper than a rainforest. I appreciate that a rainforest might be a good idea, too. But, as far as cost, in the perspective of things, this would be a cheap thing to do. I want to remind the Board of Supervisors not of the commitment, or whatever you want to call it, the permission that we gave to Laurie Robinson, then Director of the Johnson County Historical Society, to go forward with the feasibility study. But, of the commitment made by a prior Board of Supervisors to restore the asylum. A step has already been made in the direction of restoring this property. I want to go a step further than Chris Henze did in talking about the possibility of seed production. There is on that southern land yet more possibility for producing seed. Although we did look into the economics of that in a certain portion of the ground, there exists (inaudible) Chris, that you seem to be saying, we planted a little bit and we could plant more and this seed is very valuable. It might be that the economics of the farming of that land could extend into seed production, which is an area the County is expanding into. We also have the Johnson County Conservation Board, which is not present here this morning, but also does these kinds of interpretive trails activity. We have a project at Humanities Iowa that is called Barn Again. We’ve got a beautiful poster where it’d gone all around and been involved in encouraging the preservation of barns. It would look real good in this room I think. I might see about getting you all one. I think that’s around 2 minutes.

Lehman: Thank you Jonathan.

Wieting: I think the one, if I could just say this, that I’m really sensitive to, and I know people are joking about the rainforest. But, I just would be very sensitive to anything that would look like, the joke this is different than a rainforest. This is different, the seeds for this was planted a long time ago. They’re separate and I would like this to be judged on its on merit for what it is. Does that make sense?

Lehman: Yes.

Stutsman: I want to say, too, I just so appreciate your interest and you coming to the Board and the people that you have here. I think this is something that we need to keep moving forward on. This begs the question and I hope the Board will, at Strategic Planning say, OK, we have a proposal before us, let’s keep moving on this and what we want to do so we can make some decisions and move forward.

Wieting: Do you want us to present to you a succinct vision or for the sight, put together something (inaudible) cause?

Lehman: I’m not opposed to you continuing your process, but I think what we’re saying is, we haven’t given you a green light. Not to get your hopes up, but your efforts and your hearts are in this thing and if you want to keep working on this, I don’t have any problem with that. We’ll probably need some type of formal action and we need to think this thing through just a little more.

Wieting: I appreciate that. Just so we have some direction as to what the next step is.

Lehman: OK.

Wieting: We will continue putting together plans and dreams and visions and cost. When you are ready for us to come again, we will.

Harney: If you are going to work on that, I suggest you get together. It’s kind of appealing, the idea of raising the seeds and so forth there, if that would work together. Put a proposal of all of that together what it would be. What you would envision it to be. But, at the same time, I would hate to have us not agree with what is going to happen and you feel you have wasted all of your time. So, you need to keep that in mind that there is no real commitment here at this point.

Wieting: Even for the original commitment here of 5 acres. Is that what you’re saying?

Lehman: No this is a different Board.

Wieting: OK.

Lehman: Bob Welsh do you have a comment? We need to wrap this up.

Reverend Bob Welsh: Let me support what Sally is saying. I think you as a Board need to look at the total budget. My understanding of the meeting I was at in 97 was there was not a commitment of even 5 acres. What the Board of Supervisors said was, you can do a feasibility study at this point. What I think I heard today, after the question that Sally has raised that was in relation to the 5 acres, that there was a feasibility study (inaudible) something like $2 million if there wasn’t the resources to carry on that kind of project. That then puzzles a guy like myself (inaudible) say, that 5 acres seemingly was not all economically feasible. Now it’s going to be in terms of 160 acres looking at the total thing. I think that often times, people read your commitments. When you said, you can do a feasibility, Margaret’s impression was we still got the commitment on the 5 acres. I’m just saying from my perspective and my memory of that meeting, there wasn’t a commitment to get 5 acres. There was a commitment that it was all right for them to do a feasibility study. I think Sally’s question was very appropriate. What happens after the feasibility study?

Wieting: I would just like to say, that according to the minutes, and I can show those to you, from May 29, 1997. It does say that motion by Lacina, 2nd by Stutsman, to approve a feasibility study by the Johnson County Historical Society for the use of a 5-acre parcel of land, part of the Johnson County Farm, at the corner of Melrose Avenue and Slothower Road.

Welsh: That’s what I said, a feasibility study.

Wieting: Right. We recognize that, right. The original study came back and what we’ve done, is we never submitted that to the Board, so we have revisited that study so it is still pending.

Thompson: So, this is sort of the long-delayed report from the feasibility study.

Lehman: We’re kind of reviving this motion.

Wieting: Based on the knowledge of the cemetery and the collaborations and that it be more broad based than just the Society and look at the whole site.

Thompson: I think that there is a lot of options open here. The original plan seemed to be for us to allow the use of the land for the Historical Society to build a building. But, I think what I’m hearing today is that we could set aside the 40 acres as sort of a preserve and protect that from desecration. The fact that it has a cemetery in the middle of it makes that pretty attractive. We’re not going to build something on top of a cemetery I would hope.

Stutsman: My concern is that we commit to something and then all of a sudden, 50 years down the road say, oh my gosh, because that’s there, now we’re limited in what else we can do. I just want to make sure that we are focused on maximizing that property to the best that we can and not get ourselves into a corner by a decision that wasn’t looking at the whole parcel.

Thompson: We’re looking at more options than just what was discussed in the original feasibility study.

Lehman: OK. Pat had a few comments he wanted to make.

County Attorney J. Patrick White: I had an observation that leads to a suggestion. Going back a few weeks when you were discussing with Iowa City a Land Use Plan Fringe Area Agreement at the I-80 Hoover Highway Intersection, one of the recommendations that I made was that we had a serious need for joint planning for that entire interchange. That we ought to initiate a planning process with Iowa City that would try to identify what we want at that interchange and then set about to do it. We’re actually equipped jointly with Iowa City to staff that through your Zoning department and through their Planning department. I think there is an analogy to this discussion. The earlier Board had talked about going back soon on the heels even of the 1997 vote and 2 or 3 times since then recognition that the day was going to come where the County ought to have in hand a plan for the entire acreage out there. As soon as you break off a piece of it, whatever it’s for, you run the risk of impacting ultimate use of the rest of it. Where are the roads going to go? There is a major sewer line that runs up the ravine already. Within the structure of county government, this is another one of those areas that I don’t think we have anybody whose existing job this necessarily falls to. The analogy being, trying to devise a Land Use Plan for the Hoover Highway I-80 interchange. That’s probably what we ought to do for this location. We ought to devise a plan for it. Now, whether that can be staffed by JCCOG, I expect Jeff could tell us whether it could be staffed by ECICOG. I don’t know. Which by the way is where Margaret and I first met a long time ago. Or whether it would be necessary for us to find somebody who is independently not an employee or not with existing functions who could coordinate the plan. Do some focus groups, have public meetings, coordinate ideas from organizations like the County Historical Society, the Guard if they have any interest in being involved, Chatham Oaks. Ultimately devise a plan for the whole acreage that my guess is will identify a portion that could be well used by the County Historical Society and with whom I think county government will probably strongly interested in a long-term partnership for a variety of historic preservation things. I just don’t think we have anybody who it would be a logical addition to their job, who is in county government and is so often the case. I just think it has to be somebody’s responsibility to do the work. JCCOG, ECICOG or some other firm would be the logical way to do it.

Stutsman: Keep us on track.

White: The time is really at hand. If that’s the approach the County is going to take, we need to get it started.

Lehman: I’d like to thank the Historical Society for bringing this to the table.

Wieting: I’m sorry it went more than 15 minutes.

Stutsman: We’re used to that. Don’t apologize.

Lehman: It was well worth it.

Wieting: Mike said, how long are you going to take and I said, oh, give us 15 minutes.

Thompson: He certainly did impress on everyone that 2 minutes was the limit. He did a good job on that.

White: It was Bill’s fault.

Wieting: Thank you.

Lehman: Thank you very much everyone.

(Continued in Part 3)