Thompson: Next is Business from the County Attorney.

Lyness: Nothing. Thanks.

Thompson: Business from the Board of Supervisors. It’s Discussion Action regarding Pathways Adult Day Health Center. Catherine Lane and Sharla Borg, Board Members have asked to address the Board about the needs of the Pathways program.

Pentacrest Inc. Chairperson David Brown: Good morning.

Thompson: Good morning. Could you say your names for the Auditor? I see that there are more people here than we expected.

Brown: Yes. My name is David Brown. I am the Chairperson of Pentacrest Incorporated, which is the entity, which is now operating Pathways Adult Day Health Center. With me this morning is Sharla Borg, seated on my right. Sharla is another board member and she is the Treasurer of the Board. We also have Catherine Lane, who is another board member, who is the Vice-Chairperson of the Board, and Jeff Kalbach, who is the current Director of Pathways. We certainly appreciate the opportunity to meet with the Board of Supervisors this morning to share information about Pathways and to also share some concerns we have about budget issues. It seems to be a current topic of conversation these days. To start off, by way of historical information, as the Board of Supervisors may recall, the Johnson County Adult Day Center was originally operated through the County. Doreen Nidey was the original director of that program started many years ago. When we took over the program in 1996, the program had been under the auspices of the Johnson County Board of Health. The decision was made to have that program become a private operated program. In 1996, our non-profit corporation, Pentacrest Incorporated, was formed to be the operating entity for Pathways. At the time that Pentacrest took over the operation of Pathways, the County had been allocating about $84,000 to help fund that program. Hopefully each of you has received a letter that I sent out to the Board Members last week. I do have additional copies of the financial summary if any of you would like to have a copy of that in front of you now. As is reflected in the financial summary in Fiscal Year 1996, the County funded the Adult Day Program, $84,316, which was 68% of the program budget at that time. The average daily census at that time in Fiscal Year 1996 was 11 clients. Now, in looking at Fiscal Year 2002, the County’s funding for that fiscal year was $40,000, which represented 12.5% of the program budget. Whereas the funding has gone down significantly from the County, the program has expanded. The average daily census for Fiscal Year 2002 was 24 clients, which represents a 118% increase in the average daily attendance in the program. This past year has been particularly exciting for Pathways. As the Board may know, we now have a permanent location. For a number of years, the program was located at the lease premises at the villa on Greenwood Drive. We were notified a couple of years ago that that lease was going to be terminated. So, we needed to make arrangements for a different facility. In large part, through the funding provided by CDBG funds from the City of Iowa City, we were able to purchase a permanent facility last summer on Pepperwood Lane, where the program is operating now. We’re in the process of remodeling and expanding that facility to accommodate even more clients. Pathways, which is a program for physically challenged and mentally challenged adults in Johnson County, we think is a very important Adult Day Program here in Johnson County. We think that need is going to continue to grow here in Johnson County. Our concern is that the timing right now is particularly bad for the County to terminate its funding support for that program. Our understanding that the County has decided to terminate the $40,000, that it has been funding for the program, by way of Block Grant Funding. Part of the reason that we are here today, in addition to sharing information about the program, is to see if there is any flexibility on the part of the County to reconsider that decision. Or if not, if there is some alternative funding source that might be available for our program. It’s our understanding that we did make a commitment to this Board to become more self-sufficient as far as funding and to diversify our funding arrangements. We are in the process of doing that, I think, as reflected by our financial summary we’ve become much less dependent on County funding over the past 5 years. We certainly understand the budget constraints that the County is operating under at the current time. These are difficult economic times. We’re not the only social service agency that is being affected by that, but I think we are maybe one or 2, according to the media, that have had their funds cut off completely as opposed to some percentage reduction in funds. I guess our purpose for being here today is to let you folks know that we certainly have appreciated the relationship that we have had with the County in the past. We’d like to keep that relationship continuing, to see if there are any questions we can answer, and to see if there is some flexibility in terms of the funding arrangements. One possibility that we would be willing to consider is a different type of funding arrangement, a purchase for service type of arrangement, which I think has been discussed in the past. In fact, I believe we submitted a proposal for that type of arrangement several years ago and never did hear back from the County. So, with that I would certainly open things up for comments or questions from the Board. If you have specific questions about the financial situation of Pathways, Sharla, who is our Treasurer, may be able to answer that for you.

Thompson: Thank you, questions or comments from the Board?

Lehman: Just a question. I know you’d been renting space and now you are purchasing. Is there a sizeable increase in that payment? I would assume there probably is purchasing versus renting it.

Pentacrest Board Member Sharla Borg: We made the decision for a couple of reasons. The first being for the programming. In the space that we were leasing from the villa, there were 17 external doors to the building. When you are working with clients with Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia, that makes it difficult. With the number of staff that we operate with, and we do that frugally and very prudently, that presented some issues for us. So, that was the primary reason. The second was, our rent has been increasing over the years through the villa. The villa also now has plans to turn that into a different type of service, more of an assisted living kind of space and our rent has been going up. By doing this, by purchasing the building, by applying for and receiving CDBG, it’s a loan however, it’s not an outright grant, we must continue to be in business for 30 years to have the loan actually forgiven. By doing that we have established a fixed class now for our building and our services. We are in the process of doing between a $250-300,000 renovation to turn what was a combination dental business and upscale clothing store, we’ve combined that into the Adult Day Health Center. The most exciting thing is the 2nd part, which was the dental portion. We are turning that into a special needs area, which provides all kinds of additional wonderful services for those with Alzheimer’s, Dementia and other special needs.

Lehman: I wasn’t questioning your choice of purchasing. I compliment you on the selection with what you ended up with. I know you had a substantial carryover or fund balance. I didn’t know if that was going to… Some people have it set aside for purchase of a building. It wasn’t a cash type purchase, so you still must have some of that left. I think maybe some of our discussion here was you might be able to buffer some of this impact with that. I realize it wasn’t what you had planned, but I didn’t know what you had that earmarked for.

Borg: Without getting very technical, there are some accounting differences with public fund accounting and government accounting that are a little different for me. My background comes from corporate side accounting. But, because we were granted the loan last year, but we didn’t actually purchase the building until July 31st of last year also, that’s a different fiscal year for us. So, we had to record that $300,000 as income and it’s an accounting treatment. When we went to the United Way Board for the first time 2 years ago, we actually received criticism for deficit spending. So, we have worked real hard on that trying to make sure that we are matching revenues with expenses and not increasing those things, to make sure that we are staying within our budget. But, this last particular year, the numbers look funny, if you will, because of the fund-raising. We have to record that as income as it is pledged, not as it is received. We also had to record as income that $300,000, when we didn’t actually close on the loan until after, and the monies exchange hands with the sellers, until after our new fiscal year had begun. So, when you are trying to look at this in terms of trends, it looks a little odd. It looks like we have a far bigger carryover balance than we do. We did have funds when we were with Johnson County, to the tune of about $50,000 that did carry into this. But, those are certainly long gone with the renovations.

Lehman: OK. I see. I think in 2001, your fees were the same, day fees, and then you had a slight increase last year. I can’t remember, but have you projected an increase for this coming year?

Borg: We have not. We may have to do that now with the decrease in funding. We may have to do that. The other thing, Sally, you had asked me about this last week, about the Medicaid reimbursement. I did get information from the case managers who handle all of the billing and all of that process. What does happen with Medicaid is yes, we have clients that qualify for elderly waivers and those kinds of things. We help the families file for those, but the process can take from 30-90 days for that all to transpire. Once the client is approved, that is when the payments begin for Medicaid. At Pathways, we are very conscious of folks needing that care immediately. We accept those clients and part of the County dollars then go to fund those clients for that interim period when they still have yet to qualify for the waivers. It is not backdated.

Stutsman: OK. It’s not retroactive.

Borg: It’s from the approval date forward.

Thompson: Are you capped as far as the amount that you can receive?

Borg: I don’t know the answer to that. I will find it for you.

JCCOG Human Services Coordinator Linda Severson: There is a monthly amount that the senior can use or their family caregiver can use.

Thompson: OK.

Severson: I believe it had been around $900 a month. That is for any services, so Adult Day would have to be fitted to that family budget. So, there is a cap on that.

Thompson: So, $45 a day times 20 days would use it up.

Stutsman: You do charge fees for your services.

Borg: There are different levels of care, which then determine different levels of fees. For example, the program, where there is not need for medications, there is not need for bathing, grooming, there is not need for those kinds of things. Jeff can probably help me out here a little bit more. Those are at one level of service. Then, we have a high end level of service where we actually do bathing, grooming, those kinds of things, too. That’s what we needed the new unit for was to handle those things.

Thompson: Is the $45 the high end or the low end?

Jeff Kalbach: $45 is the level 1, level 2 (inaudible) per day, the whole day.

Lehman: You have an average daily census of 24. I was doing some numbers of if you had to increase that daily rate. If someone came 5 days a week, if you raised it by $3, I realize it’s an impact to the individual or their family. We’re just trying to recoup some of that. I don’t think those numbers always work out because you don’t have 100% attendance every day. I’m just trying to do a little math there that if you increased it from…not to do your business for you. But, you’re at $45 now. If you went to $48, that would be $3 a day increase. You’ve got 24 clients, 5 days a week, that’s $18,000 to try to recoup. I’m sure you’ve run these numbers, too, and what ifs. I realize it’s still an impact to individuals we’re passing on here.

Borg: Part of the problem there, Mike, is also we have contracted with the VA, so that there is another source, another source of payment for those who cannot pay. Once you establish a rate with them, you have to hold to that. It’s very stringent that we absolutely do not surpass that or we don’t have our contract with the VA, which then pulls some of our participants away from that perspective. So, we do a lot of number crunching when we go to negotiate that VA contract, because it dictates how much we can charge. The unfortunate thing in health care, where it’s moving now, is private pay is subsidizing those who cannot afford to pay. You can only spread that so far and then it becomes counter-productive because you take your private pay clients out of the picture. They won’t come for the service if it is too high.

Stutsman: It’s a real balancing act.

Borg: Yes it is.

Stutsman: My concern with this is, the County… So many things are going through my mind it’s hard to get this in a coherent statement. We had a very tough budget year, as I told you. So, we just had to make some very, very tough decisions and look at what the County’s role is in providing Human Services. We’ve had a very good human service system in this County that we were able to fund when our budgets were in a lot better shape than they are now. So, the Board’s had to re-look at a lot of things and had to make some difficult, difficult choices. I do have some concerns about those frail elderly, who are on very low or fixed incomes. I think of what the alternatives are for these people. We are all supportive of community based services that are more cost effective, that are cheaper than going into nursing homes. But then, we don’t have County dollars that go into nursing homes. So, I am thinking, well, but we are still taxpayers. So, it still is an expense if people are unable to stay in their own home. So, I know where the Board’s decision came to make the cuts. But, now I have some concerns about how deep those cuts were and if we do have some responsibilities to provide those services for those people that don’t have any other resources, or until they are eligible for Medicaid.

Borg: Many counties have gone to a fee for service arrangement and we are absolutely open to discussing that with you, doing a purchase for service. What that does is it ties county dollars to specific individuals. Of course we’d prefer block grant funding. It gives us much more flexibility. You also need to understand that there is paperwork on both sides if we go for a fee for purchase because there is a qualifying process. But, we are more than open to discussing that with you. Run some numbers for you, show you what we can do and how it can help those frail elderly stay as independent, with the dignity that they deserve, for as long as they can.

Brown: One reason the County dollars are so important is our program is committed to providing service regardless of the ability of the client to pay and certainly those County dollars are very important in that regard.

Borg: We don’t want to turn anyone away and we don’t.

Thompson: We certainly had some hard decisions to make this year. In addition to Pathways, we cut the full funding for ICARE, which is an AIDS resource center, for the Mayor’s Youth Employment Program, for Maximize Your Employment Potential, which was an employment program for youth, for HACAP, Headstart and the Red Cross. So, this was one of a number of hard decisions that we had to make this year. We did try to spread the cuts across the whole budget. We took somewhere around a million dollars out of the Road Fund. We asked all of the departments to cut their budgets by 4%. We are very concerned that the cuts fall most heavily on the Human Services agencies. But, we have reached our taxing limit. We don’t have anymore dollars to tax for. That’s kind of a bind for us. Are there any other questions or comments from the Board?

Stutsman: I am interested in pursuing, just seeing what fee for service would entail. Just see if there are… Our budget is set for next year. I don’t know where we’d come up with the dollars. Maybe as the budget goes along we could kind of see or take that into consideration for the next budget year. But, I would be in favor of at least starting the process for that and just seeing what we come up with and how it goes.

Brown: We would certainly be happy to put together such a proposal or provide information at least for the Board to consider, if not for this upcoming Fiscal Year, for future fiscal years.

Thompson: We had intended to do that in cooperation with the Department of Human Services and our whole plans got sidetracked because they totally reorganized this year. In our strategic planning we are looking at every optional thing that the Board is providing and there is a possibility that we won’t be partnering with them in the future. So, it will all depend on how that falls out, too. It is certainly a worthwhile program and we are proud to have it in this community. The new building is beautiful.

Borg: I would invite each and every one of you to please come see it as we are completing the renovations. It truly is amazing.

Stutsman: When the renovations are complete, how many people will you be able to have on a daily basis? Will that increase from the 24?

Borg: Yes. On some days now, and I think last Friday or a couple of Fridays ago when I was there, we had 30. So, that’s on one particular day. Now, Mike, you had it exactly right. Not everyone comes every day. We have far more people who come on Monday, Wednesday, Friday or a morning or an afternoon. That sort of thing. But, in order to make the building work, we have projected that we need to have 38.

Stutsman: OK.

Borg: We are getting there and we are getting there in a real hurry.

Neuzil: I’m interested also in the fee for service. Not only for this, but for a lot of the other block grants, simply because we have to know where that money is going. There is only so much money left and I think this will help us. I certainly think that by working, I hope that this along with many others or part of maybe the Department of Public Health push it more towards them. Have them make a recommendation to us and use that out of their own budget if they seem that that is of necessity. I think those are some of the things that we are exploring right now.

Borg: If you just give us an idea of how we start, we would be happy to do that.

Brown: It is my understanding we did submit information or a proposal a few years ago to the County and we would be glad to re-look at that.

Neuzil: That would be neat and interesting.

Brown: Maybe try to update that and get information to the Board for your consideration.

Harney: I was down there when you had the open house and that is really a nice facility. It wasn’t complete and I would like to see that now that it is complete. It is a great service that you provide down there. It particularly gives the families a break from their day care and things like that. I as well would like to look at the fee for service program. We do that with one or 2 other particular agencies and I think that is something that is really worthwhile. Again, as we are, we’re tight on dollars. We’ve cut the Senior Center and other places which are very important programs and as they mentioned some of those others. It’s really tough. Everything we cut seems like it affects the Human Services side. We need to look at what we are doing there.

Brown: All right. Well, we’ll be happy to put information together and get a proposal to the Board as soon as possible.

Neuzil: I think it’s important, too, to understand the impact. We have to know those kinds of things to justify those expenses. What’s going to happen? Obviously this year is going to be a real test for you.

Brown: We understand. Sure.

Borg: Thank you.

Brown: Thank you.

Thompson: Thank you for coming.

Stutsman: Thank you.

Thompson: Next agenda item is minutes received from the Sixth Judicial District Department of Correctional Services Board of Directors for January 18, 2002. That brings us to Reports and Inquiries from the Board. Terrence, do you want to start? Does the Board want to take a short break?

Stutsman: I’d love to take a short break.

Neuzil: Yes, let’s take a short break.

Recessed at 10:50 a.m.; reconvened at 11:04 a.m.

Thompson: Terrence is going to start with the reports.

Neuzil: I’ll start with the reports. Another busy week as a member of the Johnson County Board of Supervisors, we continue to work on our budgets and are very close as we’ve been talking about all morning long here. I had an opportunity to meet with Pat Harney and then work with Mark Bulechek, our Facilities Manager, as we get an update and discuss some of the things happening with our physical buildings and such. I also had an opportunity to attend an MH/DD Finance Committee and also the Planning Council Meeting. In fact, I don’t know if you have the list of that meeting that is going to go on Monday, the 25th. There is a meeting that is going to be held on the 25th in regards to MH/DD. It’s in response to projections of deficit spending, recent State level funding cuts and the Board of Supervisor’s decision to implement the waiting list. The Planning Council Committee along with interested parties are invited to attend this meeting, which would be on Monday, February 25th, from 2:30-5:00 p.m. over at the north conference room at 911 N. Governor Street. So, if you are interested in learning more about that, there is going to be a session going on, on Monday. Hawkeye Friday Listening Post tomorrow at the Iowa City Johnson County Senior Center. I hope you have an opportunity to come on in and discuss some of the things that we’ve been working on and I’ll be having lunch over there. Thanks.

Thompson: Thank you.

Thompson: Sally.

Stutsman: Let’s see. I was trying to look at the calendar and see which things are of interest to the Board. Carol and I attended the Farm Bureau meeting Monday night. They had questions about our budget. Of course, it isn’t finalized yet and we certainly encourage them to attend the public hearing. But, we try to give them as much of an update as we could about where we were at. They had other questions having to do with the Road Use Tax Funds. I talked about that briefly before and what kind of impact that would have on Johnson County. According to the figures I received from Mike Gardner, the County would come out very well with the proposed changes by the Chamber Alliance. We would have an additional $4 million in our Road Fund if that formula were changes so that it would reflect more of a population rather than geography and I think the other one was need, wasn’t it. Now it would be strictly based on population, but I don’t think that is going to go anywhere with the legislature this year. But, it was good information to share with them that it would not have an impact with Secondary Roads here in Johnson County if that were changed. Other things we talked about were the jail numbers. They wanted an update on that, so we visited with them about those numbers. I think that was everything. It was a good discussion. Good group and I appreciated the opportunity to go and visit with them. Other than I think I just attended the same meetings the other Board Members have attended. That is it for today.

Thompson: Thank you.

Thompson: Pat.

Harney: Last Friday I attended the Department of Corrections in Cedar Rapids, their group up there. There was a couple of interesting things that came out of their meeting. They are staying at the projection. By 2011 for the prison populations are expected to rise by about 52%, which is really a large jump. So, they are really stepping up the community corrections issue where they released people in the neighborhoods and watched them. One of the real issues I saw was that the revocation in the Sixth Judicial District was our area, people on parole. Any type of revocation that we have for probation parole is about 1.4%. Yet, in the Davenport area, in the 7th Judicial District, that is running about 9%, which is the next lowest, which shows they are doing a very good job in this particular area. Their high risk supervisory unit is working very well because they go out and they check on these individuals periodically, even through the night to make sure that they are in their proper settings and are behaving themselves. So, it’s a very good program going on up there. As a matter of fact, they had people come in from South Carolina and Oregon to review the process that they have in the community corrections setting. They are really looking at possibly adopting some of the policies that they have here. Also, visited with Linn County Supervisors last week. They are going to Des Moines this week to resist the House File 2174, which is where I think Ron Corbett is supporting that bill as the Chamber Alliance. That’s one where they get cities over 50,000 can ask for a vote and combine and consolidate governments so that they were going to show their objections to that at the State level. Tuesday I met with City officials Mike O’Donnell and Connie Champion, the Senior Center staff. We discussed the 28E Agreement and support for the Senior Center in the future and where we are going with that. Tuesday we had a board meeting with MH/DD Planning Council. Elaine Sweet provided the updates on their budget and the effects that the State budget cuts are having. She is working with that and trying to stay within her budget. There are some real concerns about the budgets. But, like everyone, we are working through those. Tuesday, the Johnson County Conference Board met, small town mayors, the School Board representatives and the Board of Supervisors and approved the Assessors 03 budget. He provided some evaluation and updated on the evaluation and appraisals that they are going to be doing in the next year, which is going to be in the Solon area and another one of the small communities. That’s like an 8-year cycle where they go completely through the County and re-evaluate everyone’s properties. As Terrence said, the budget work sessions, we had those all week. We are coming to a closure, at least close on those. Rick Dvorak and I attended the Lone Tree City Council work session last night. It was on the Fringe Area Agreement proposal. Rick gave them a very good proposal and they are going to look at that and get back to us and within a month we should be able to come close to some type of agreement on their fringe area. They are real receptive to that and I think that is going to work well. Let’s see, last week, also we had the Chamber Ag Meeting breakfast. In the State they cut approximately 500,000 from the fairgrounds budgets throughout the State. That is going to affect us locally here for about a $50,000 cut for the local fairgrounds. June 24th there is going to be an overnight tractor ride. They are going to stay here overnight. This is Ride Across Iowa. I think there are 300 and some tractors that are going to be here that night. They are inviting the public to come down to that. Also, June 15th is going to be the cleanup day at the County Fairgrounds. That covers my week.

Thompson: Thank you.

Thompson: Mike.

Lehman: Just to follow, Pat had mentioned about the legislation efforts to join city and county services. At the caucuses we had a discussion and resolution through that and I had a chance to explain a little bit some of the 28E’s that we are involved in now, trying to do some of the joint services. There are some rural counties that do share county attorneys and also secondary road engineers and things like that. So, it’s not something completely new. There are steps they have been taking now trying to justify services and budget implications and also the need. If the need isn’t there you don’t employ a full-time person. But, you need to have access to someone so they do share. Pat and I attended a SEATS ParaTransit meeting. We discussed the by-laws of the Iowa City SEATS Advisory Committee and we discussed the membership and recommendations, how they are referred to the Board here, also the officers and the AdHoc Committee. Lisa Dewey was going to summarize those and send those back for our approval. We’ll be trying to meet again to give that final. Also, on the 8th, I attended the Iowa City Area Development, known as ICAD Board. I just wanted to give you a little update. I think I made this available for the public of what ICAD does. It helps promote existing and also new businesses. Under the leadership of Joe Raso, who has been there a little over a year as the President, in the past 6 months he has been instrumental in bringing in $27 million in new capital investments, 343 new jobs and that translates to 672,280 new work hours to the ICAD territory which includes most of Johnson County, also West Brach, West Liberty, Kalona and they do some work in the Riverside area. At $8 an hour, that is $5.3 million in gross wages in a slow economy. It’s also 232,000 square feet of new or renovated space of manufacturing, education, testing, laboratories or office. Along with this, Kirkwood has committed over $1.5 million in training funds for the workforce development funds. This was all accomplished on a limited budget with 1 1/2 staff. So, that’s a real compliment. We do pay dues to ICAD, so we get an idea we do get something for that dollar investment there. This circulated, but just to call it to the public’s attention, I think we’ll have maybe Jo publicize this. It is for the Certified Display Operators for people who come in and get Fireworks Permits. It’s highly recommended that they do have this training and it will be held on Saturday, the 23rd of March, 2002, from 8:00 in the morning until 5:00 p.m. at the United Presbyterian Church in Lone Tree. Like I say, I’ll put this in the paper and there is a referral phone here and stuff. But, it’s a training session for those that like to handle fireworks and ask for our permission to get that permit and those safety items there. But, that is all I have.

Thompson: Thank you.

Thompson: The software proposals have come in now. We got 10 acceptable proposals I think will give us a really good choice. Elaine O’Keefe made a grid to use in evaluating them. So, we have that plus our opinions about the proposals themselves. Mike is going to be reading them for the Board. When Sally and I went to the Farm Bureau, we shared some jail information, which shows that intakes, at least, for last year were lower than the year before. I feel like the cities have really responded to our request to cut back on intakes whenever they can. That is part of the information that will be shared with the Board at our work session on March 13th regarding the jail. The Senior Center Commission met this week. We learned that the budget, which the Commission had forwarded to Steve Atkins, was cut by him. Until now it really is only a cost of living adjustment over last year’s budget and it would have required $150,000 contribution from the Board of Supervisors. There has been some discussion about what will happen without the full subsidy from us, but there is no decision made yet. One of the things that has been cut out of the budget was landscaping. If you have been by the Senior Center lately, you noticed that there has been some drainage problems with the building. So, the whole lawn has been torn up. But, I learned at the meeting that Betty Kelley, the widow of Bill Kelley, who was a long time member of the Commission has volunteered. She is a master gardener and she has volunteered to use the funds that were donated for Bill’s funeral to pay for the landscaping. She’ll design a nice project and I think it’ll look really good by summer. We also had some discussion about the database. The Center has discovered that in order to determine how many users of the Center are actually rural residents will require a lot of time consuming and expensive work on their database. We sent the data over from our Information Services that the Assessor uses, so they would be able to match up the names and addresses and determine where those people live, but their data doesn’t necessarily match ours because of things like how it is entered into the system. To go back and change all of their entries so that they match ours and they could then run the sheet would be really difficult. So, I think what they are going to propose at our next 28E meeting is that, if we have a participation agreement it be based on the percentage of population in the rural areas, rather than on actual usage. On Tuesday, Pat and I met with Linda Schrieber and Andy Epstein from the Clear Creek Amana School Board. They told us about a Vision Iowa project, which that school district is proposing in order to buy land around their school building and provide additional space for programs that they are offering, which it was really nice to hear about them. Then, I would remind the Board that on Wednesday we are going to ISAC County A Day Program. On Wednesday evening at 6:30 there is the City Conference Board. As Terrence mentioned, on Monday, the 25th, from 2:30-5:00 is the MH/DD Brainstorming session at the social services office. I think that is all I had. Is there any other business from the Board of Supervisors? So, we move on to a work session, which is our monthly report on strategic planning goals, transportation planning and I think it’s Sally and Pat.

Stutsman said they had a couple of meetings with representatives from the Secondary Roads Department to brainstorm about a different way to do transportation planning in the County. She said they are still working on that. She and Harney met with JCCOG Transportation Planner Jeff Davidson to get some information on different ways to approach transportation planning. They are trying to get some ideas together to present to the Board if they want to make changes for their 5-Year Road Planning. She said they are still in the fact-finding phase. Harney agreed and said the Board has decided they need to look at what roads to improve to allow development in areas and to move people to and from their residences and to work in the best way possible. He said they are going to look at how to improve the road system to meet the needs for the roads of the County in particular areas where the County wants to see growth going. Stutsman said they began steps to get other government entities together to discuss a regional transportation system. She said a letter is going out to invite them to participate and see if it is something they would like to pursue. Lehman said this is more efficient than having each entity run their own operation.

Thompson thanked Stutsman and Harney and adjourned the meeting.

Adjourned at 11:21 a.m.

Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor

By Casie Parkins, Recording Secretary