Lehman: Next item of discussion action needed on the state mental health proposed budget revisions. I think I passed out a memo here and Elaine Sweet was possibly going to give us a little insight here on how that might affect our County. It’s basically a cut in mental health dollars. Once again this goes along the same lines of counties having to pick up expenses themselves. In the past they were paid for by state and we’d have to cut back on services we were offering previously funded by the county.

Sweet: Thank you for the opportunity to share this with you. This is very recent news. In your packets I’ve given you information that was just e-mailed to CPC’s yesterday showing the proposed impact by County of the proposed budget cuts. Also in your packets is a news article from the Cedar Rapids Gazette yesterday describing the impact to Linn County. Then also the addresses and telephone numbers of state legislators.

Lehman: I think I had passed them out and Casie had a few extra ones there.

Stutsman: Elaine am I reading this right? A one million dollars…

Sweet: That’s correct.

Stutsman: Of State dollars that we would not be getting?

Sweet: It all comes out of the growth allocation.

Thompson: That’s an eighth of our budget. How much of it did we budget for?

Sweet: The full amount.

Thompson: We knew what that amount was.

Sweet: We budgeted for the full amount of revenues plus we had budgeted to actually expend some from our fund balance for the next fiscal year. The budget proposal is to cut 18 million dollars from the growth allocation. On exhibit one page 3 you’ll see that 18 million dollar total. If you look back up to Johnson County on page 2 of exhibit one you’ll see that our share of that is $1,113,700. We’re actually taking the third largest cut in the state. The impact on us is only surpassed by Polk County at 3.9 million and Scott county at 1.7. We’re followed then by Black Hawk and Linn County. Linn County’s projected deficiency is 903,981 and Black Hawk County is 586,511. So you’re seeing that the large counties are the ones that are absorbing the most of it. Though our population is less than some of these other counties we’re taking a greater cut of this deficit because its all coming out of the growth allocation. Though our population is less than some of these other counties we’re taking a greater cut of this deficit because its all coming out of the growth allocation. Part of the growth allocation is the per capita equalization fund, which Johnson County participates in. That per capita equalization fund is relatively new. It’s only been in place for a couple of years. That’s been an attempt to bring some standardization across the state so that all of the counties are expending the same amount of money on mental health relative to the population. Johnson County has been on the lower end of that. One of the reasons for that has been the University and the fact that our commitments go through the University on state papers. So Johnson County doesn’t have the expense of the inpatient hospitalizations for our commitments as the other counties do. For that reason the amount that we spend per capita on mental health services has been lower than a lot of the other counties. The per capita equalization funds has been an attempt to take those counties who have lower per capital spending and raise them to the 75th percentile. That was an amount that we had budgeted for but as you see a large part of this 18 million dollar cut in mental health services is coming out of that per capita equalization fund thus the reason for the large portion of that being born by Johnson County.

Stutsman: Am I correct to say that we cannot make up that one million dollars even if we wanted to because our budget is capped and we cannot put any more county tax dollars into that?

Sweet: That is my understanding. We are already levying at the maximum amount allowable for MH/DD services. If you’ll remember while the focus of Senate File 69 was property tax relief. The State has been picking up as we’re limiting those property tax levy’s, the State has been picking up about 50% of what in the past was revenue associated with property taxes on the County level. Now with the State budget cuts, what in effect we’re seeing is not as much money coming from the State. But at the same time our ability to levy to make up for it is restricted.

Stutsman: Not good news. Where is this at? Is it a done deal or is it a proposal?

Sweet: No. I wanted to visit with you today and also included in your packet are the telephone numbers and addresses of all of the state legislators. I will be contacting all known stakeholders in Johnson County and asking them also to become educated and study the issue. And to communicate with the legislators that it is not a done deal.

Neuzil: Elaine the proposal is coming from the Governor correct?

Sweet: Correct.

Neuzil: I don’t feel real comfortable with what we can hope for here. This is coming from the Governor. If this was coming from the other side maybe they would come together. I don’t like where this is coming from the get go. I think we all need to be prepared we may have significant cuts in mental health funding.

Sweet: We need to prepare for that. I suggest that everyone become educated in the issues, study the issues, study the implications for Johnson County and especially the stakeholders. How it will affect them personally. I think that needs to be communicated but I think it needs to be communicated professionally. I think we need to prepare for some cuts in the budget and we need to make some decisions. I think that needs to be a collaborative effort and I believe that everyone that has an interest in MH/DD services should participate in that process but the reality is we won’t have the level of revenues in the future to fund services as we have in the past. It will require we make some decisions as to how we are going to administer our mental health fund.

Neuzil: The timeline would be July first correct in the sense of if these kind of cuts come into play.

Sweet: These proposals impact the fiscal year 2002 budget. If you’ll look at the article from the Cedar Rapids Gazette, Linn County is discussing using their MH/DD fund balance during that first year as an interim expending funds out of that fund balance and at the same time planning how they’re going to respond to these reduced budgets. Johnson County doesn’t have a fund balance that’s going to be there. Our fund balance is fairly low. We don’t have that cushion to fall back on to the degree that a lot of other counties do. The projected cut for next year is just about what our fund balance is. So it would take our entire fund balance in one year just to maintain services at that level.

Stutsman: Well this is clearly the consequence of many years of tax cuts at the State level. We all want tax cuts but this is clearly the downside of it. There’s just not money there and that’s going to mean some very tough decisions.

Sweet: They will be difficult decisions. The money will not be there to continue funding the number of people that we have in the past at the same level that we have in the past.

Lehman: OK. Any other questions for Elaine or does anyone else have some input on this?

Stutsman: I guess even though it is the Governor’s proposal we do need to respond to the legislators and tell them our concerns and what that is going to mean for Johnson County.

Thompson: And the Governor too. I think we should be letting the Governor’s Office about this.

Lehman: Feel we ought to put this on for some action as far as a letter for next week?

Stutsman: Well I’m going to do some e-mailing this weekend. But it might be good from the whole Board.

Harney: I would like to see that as a group.

Lehman: Let’s put that on for next week.

Stutsman: The trouble is…

Thompson: Should we ask Elaine to draft the letter?

Lehman: Would you be willing to do that?

Sweet: I can certainly ask our Advocacy Committee members to assist with that.

Stutsman: The only hesitation I have with that is that sometimes these things move so fast is that you get wind of them and then the next day… So I’m totally supportive. I hope it’s timely.

Neuzil: I’d be willing to help with that.

Harney: The tough thing with all of this is its not just MH/DD. There’s going to be cuts other places. It’s going to affect the County dollars in many ways.

Neuzil: We’re going to continue to see more and more cuts from the State level. And more and more responsibilities left to the Counties. Obviously we’re capped and its probably coming down as well. But the next couple years could be pretty rough around here.

Lehman: OK. We have direction there to take some action then.

Stutsman: Thanks.

Lehman: Next item is discussion action on our spring county cleanup week. It’s tentatively set for…

Neuzil: We’ve got Ken.

Thompson: We have several more items.

Stutsman: We do. I think we’re going to have to postpone something’s.

Lehman: How long of a presentation did you feel you needed? We’re kind of over and we’ve got some to go here.

Kress: I can do it in as short of period of time you want.

Thompson: I need to leave at 12:45.

Stutsman: My problem too is that staff has been here all morning long and I just… The discussion we’ve had has been very good.

Thompson: Aren’t we running out of our 4 hours of television time?

Stutsman: I know we’ve got 2 executive sessions.

Lehman: I hate to ask you this but for the benefit of this being televised at a later date would you be willing to come back next week or the week after.

Kress: Yes.

Lehman: I apologize for…

Stutsman: Maybe put it on first thing on the agenda so we’ll get to it first thing.

Kress: It all depends on when you start. I’m not a morning person.

Neuzil: Well next week is in the evening.

Kress: OK.

Thompson: Isn’t this something that was being discussed in one of Elaine’s committees?

Research and Development Committee Chair Rosemary Randolph: I’m the Chair of the Research and Development Committee for MH/DD services. My name is Rosemary Randolph. This was brought to our Committee and it was discussed in our Planning Council. Because of some of the things that you’ve already been discussing you can tell that as a volunteer committee with people who have other jobs and try to do the research and development which we have many things on our plate this is something that we felt does need to be presented and looked at and discussed. 3 weeks ago we brought it to one of the members and we’ve been preparing since then because we were to be on the agenda today. Up until yesterday afternoon we were still under the assumption that we were on your agenda. We have discussed it and we are bringing it forward to you because it does address a lot of financial aspects and it does address a lot of the Mental Health issues that you've been discussing here for the last hour and a half. I just wanted to say that because this isn’t something that was just brought in and hey we’d like to tell you something. It is something that has been going on for a period of time and has had communication back and forth with Board members.

Thompson: Has it been on the Planning Council agenda yet?

Randolph: Yes it has been discussed and it has been before the Research and Development Committee as well.

Thompson: I didn’t recall any resolution at the…

Randolph: I don’t know if it was formally on the Planning Council or not but it was discussed at the last Planning Council meeting.

Stutsman: In the spirit of time and I want to give it the time its due I would prefer that we just put it on as a formal agenda item or informal agenda item next week.

Lehman: I apologize for trying to do too much this morning with people that wanted to talk and do presentations. I should have asked for someone to be moved. I know this does tie into it. Next week will be an evening meeting.

Videographer Andy Small: It will be live too.

Lehman: Yes.

Kress: What time do you meet?

Lehman: We start at 5:30 but we have a public hearing at 6:00.

Kress: I teach from 5:30 to 8 on Thursdays so unless I can rearrange that I can’t be here next week so it would have to be at your next meeting.

Lehman: That’s an inconvenience as far as time.

Stutsman: Carol you have to leave at 12:35 and we’ve got 2 executive sessions coming up. I think we don’t have a choice.

Kress: Mike why don’t we just say that tentatively it will be in the next 2 weeks. I’ll try to see if I can rearrange next week. If not I’ll have to come to you later.

Welsh: Their evening meetings start at 5:30 but they go on quite a ways.

Stutsman: We only have 2 zonings next week. I don’t think we have a whole lot of…

Kress: What I can easily do is be here at 5:30 if I can be in class at 6:15 and just push it to start a little bit later.

Stutsman: That might work.

Kress: Let me work on that and I’ll coordinate with Mike Lehman and go from there.

Lehman: Thank you very much for your understanding.

Stutsman: So basically we’re going to set up the spring county cleanup at the same times we did other years. The same arrangements.

Lehman: The first full week of June they’ll be allowed yard waste 150 pounds minimum per trip 1,000 pounds per total. It will not include yard wastes or appliances. Tire disposals are free. That will be starting June 2nd through 9th. We’ll put this on for formal action next week and get this advertised in the paper so people can be aware of this and make plans. We have had several people ask about this. They know this is coming up and they’re trying to time their schedule. It will probably be transportation.

Lehman: Next item is minutes received. The Johnson County Empowerment Area Board for March 1, 2001. I’ll ask that we maybe hold all reports and inquiries from the Board. Also if we might hold our review of our strategic planning document.

Stutsman: Put it on for next time.

Lehman: For inquiries and reports from the public if anyone would like to… If not we’ll move onto business from the County Attorney.

White: Why don’t I forego reports inquiries and other so that you could go directly to the executive session. The reasons are to discuss with council matters that are currently in litigation because public discussion would tend to prejudice the County’s position and the Auditor will reflect all of the appropriate language in the minutes.

Motion by Thompson, second by Stutsman, to enter into Executive Session at 12:22 p.m. to discuss "Lang vs. Johnson County" and "Allen vs. Johnson County" under section 21.5(1.c), Code of Iowa, "to discuss strategy with counsel in matters that are presently in litigation or where litigation is imminent where its disclosure would be likely to prejudice or disadvantage the position of the governmental body in that litigation." Roll call: aye: Neuzil, Stutsman, Lehman, Thompson, Harney.

Motion by Neuzil, second by Stutsman, to leave Executive Session at 1:05 p.m. Roll call: aye: Neuzil, Stutsman, Lehman, Thompson, Harney.

Adjourned at 1:05 p.m.

Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor

By Casie Parkins, Recording Secretary