Fiscal Year 2004 Budget: Capital Projects

County Engineer Mike Gardner and Administrative Assistant Diane Kaster: Roads and Transportation Fiscal Year 2004 Budget

Discussion: Fiscal Year 2004 Budget

Chairperson Harney called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 9:10 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Mike Lehman, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Carol Thompson.

Budget Coordinator Jeff Horne said the revisions to draft of the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) he is presenting to the Board were made in the Space Needs Committee. He said with this new draft he tried to condense and simplify the schedule. He said last year the Board decided to follow a CIP, so this is the second year of revisions and the first year it’s been part of the budget process. The purpose of including the plan in the budget process is to focus the needs and goals of the County, to serve as a guide to the Board of Supervisors to help make consistent annual budgeting, provide realistic assessment of financial detail of possible with funding options, and to provide a method of presenting the County’s space needs to the public, Horne explained.

Horne briefly summarized the major County buildings with estimated values of the current properties in the Plan. He said that building assets add up to $23.6 million with the major buildings being the Administration Building worth $3.4 million, the Courthouse worth $6.1 million, the Jail worth $3.7 million, the County Farm worth $5.78 million and Secondary Roads property worth $1.1 million. Thompson asked how he calculated the values. Horne replied that they were insurance values. Harney asked if the Fisher building is figured in. Horne replied that it is figured into the others category. Harney asked about the storage facility on Kaplan Street. Horne replied that it is worth $231,854 and is included. Horne explained that the County farm includes the building, grounds and farmland.

Horne said that with GASB 34 being implemented the County will have to actually assess these properties and show a balanced statement of net assets similar to the way a corporation would. Stutsman asked if the County will have to have appraisals done on the properties. Horne said the Auditor’s office is working on a method of determining valuation. Stutsman said she is wondering if the Board will have to start thinking of how to pay appraisers. Horne replied that he hasn’t talked to the Auditor’s Office about that in detail yet and since they do the inventories and track those things for the County they would be more responsible for assessing them. He added that the office wants to use a straight-line method of depreciation instead of a value-added method, which are both available for use with GASB. Harney asked what is included in the valuations of Kent Park. Horne said the Nature Center, main buildings and park shelters are included. He said that includes Secondary Roads’ shops around the County as well. He said next year he will use the GASB 34 values because those will be a better indicator although they will probably be close to these numbers. He said the Courthouse in County terms is fully depreciated because it was built in 1900, but it has historical value and the County will have to decide how to measure those things.

Horne said the Health and Human Services projected building valuation is $6.128 million. He said the Law Enforcement center will be around $22 million to build. He said the northwest County Ambulance location will be just over $306,000, an expansion to the Administration Building would cost $2,652,000, and the Court Services building will cost $8,160,000. Horne said the Space Needs Committee added a new facility to the list as well, which is a SEATS facility at $600,000 and parking at $200,000, but that is very variable. He said he broke down the funding, starting with the current 2003 projected funding, the Committee once again recommended funding of $1 million annually until 2008. He said possible funding sources are general obligation bonds from a referendum and local option sales tax from a referendum. He said that general obligation bonding can be up to $800,000 per project without referendum. He said that net current property taxes, which are the transfer from the General Fund, can be used. He added that the Board can choose to sell any current land to procure funding. The Board can also use a lease purchase under certain circumstances, but a lot of the rules for bonds also apply for lease purchases as well.

Horne then went on to explain the 5-year plan starting with 2004. He said the only project stated by the Committee for this next year is land acquisition in the immediate area because the Mall Drive project will be paid in full after this current year. The Committee recommended a million dollars be put into that fund. Horne said in Fiscal Year 2005, land acquisition will again be on the list and possibly also a law enforcement center that would come from a debt service levy assuming a general obligation bond passed referendum. 2006 includes the same 2 items and also a Health and Human Services building starting in that year assuming funds come in from net current property taxes and the sale of the current Public Health building paid over a period of 10 years. Stutsman asked what the plan is for the Health and Human Services Building. Horne said that it will be in the campus area, but they don’t know the details of the campus area yet. Stutsman asked if that is the first priority then. Horne replied that that is what the Committee laid out for that year. He said that these are just recommendations that would be brought to the Board to be finalized. He said that the Committee moved back the Administration Building addition from 2006 to 2007. He said that is assuming funds come in from the $800,000 non-referendum bonding authority and net current property taxes paid over a 2-year period. He said in 2008 the difference is adding the Court Services Building, which is funded through the $800,000 non-referendum bonding authority and net current property taxes paid over a 2-year period. He said that land acquisition stops after 2007.

Neuzil asked what the goal of today’s meeting is. Horne replied that the goal is for the Board to decide what they want to prioritize and what revisions they want to make to the plan. Stutsman said the plan looks pretty well laid out. Thompson asked if the collective amount of land acquisition money gives the County enough to acquire the land for the campus. Horne said he thought they had determined that for the previous campus they needed about $3 million. Neuzil said he didn’t think that is enough and Harney agreed. Neuzil said he thought the list isn’t very realistic. He said there are too many things in too few years to be able to accomplish all those things. He said he thinks it’s too detailed for something he doesn’t see as possible. He said there are too many unknown variables. He added that he likes to be planned and organized, but this seems like there’s not enough money to buy the County campus idea before putting any buildings on there. Horne said that they had estimated $3 million to acquire enough for the campus in this area.

Stutsman asked Horne what he is asking for in next year’s budget. Horne said the major thing for next year is land acquisition because there aren’t any major building projects. He said the money would either be put away for later acquisitions or actually spending it on land. Stutsman says she sees this like the 5-Year Road Plan. She said she likes that it is laid out in black and white so the Board at least knows where they are heading. She said they should take it year by year to see what they can implement and what they can’t. Horne said he modeled this plan after the 5-Year Road Plan. Neuzil said in his mind he has confidence that the County will do what is says in the 5-Year Road Plan. He said he doesn’t have confidence in this plan because there are too many variables particularly with the jail issue still unknown. Horne said that the jail issue is something that the commitment was not known, but they wanted to include the cost in the plan. Neuzil said that the plan is too specific because he doesn’t think that they are goals that they can achieve. Lehman said the Board has had a history in the past where if they don’t get specific, that is the first place they raid in budget cuts. He said he thought that the committee is trying to put a name on the dollars, so that there is more of a target so the Board will have more resolve to leave the money there. Harney said that they discussed last year that if the Board doesn’t set these goals then they aren’t going to get achieved. Neuzil said there are so many asterisks. Harney said that is true, but there is going to be variables and changes, but the Board is at the point right now where either they commit themselves or they forget about it and move everything out to the County Farm. He said people are starting to put up buildings where the Board is planning on putting up buildings. He said as soon as this came out, where the Board planned on acquiring property people started putting up buildings so that it increased the value of the property and made it more difficult to acquire. He said the Board either needs to start getting some properties or going somewhere else.

Stutsman said she sees it like their own budget where they write down goals and start saving for that money. She said if they never write down the goals, then they will always put them off and 20 years will go by. She said she thinks it’s a good process and the Board needs to go ahead with what they’ve committed. She said that the Board has always said that this is just a guide, so they have the flexibility to say this isn’t going to be funded one year if the budget is really short. Neuzil said that he understands having goals, but having goals that are achievable are another thing. Horne said that he agrees with Neuzil in that the Plan is very ambitious. He said that the important thing was to get the projects listed as to what the cost would be so the Board will know what they’re up against financially. Harney said that it’s like the 5-Year Road Plan in that if the Board sees that they’re not going to achieve something, then the Plan gets pushed back. He said if it’s not on the agenda or it’s not planned, then they won’t save for it and they are right back where the Board is now without facilities or properties. Thompson added that one thing that makes a goal achievable is having a good plan. Neuzil said that is the part he doesn't quite agree with. Thompson said that if Facilities Director David Kempf knew that something is 2 years out in the plan, then that would mean to him that it would be more certain, so he would look at the space and talk to the architect to get some of the ground work in place. Stutsman said she thinks the Plan will just focus the Board’s discussion and decision making. She said if a huge project at the Courthouse comes up, she will look at the Plan and ask if she really wants to put the money into these things.

Thompson asked what the balance in this account is at the end of this year. Horne anticipates having approximately a million dollars. He said that the County will pay off the Mall Drive property and will also receive the School District funding back. Thompson commented that there will be $2 million for immediate land acquisition. Horne said there will be if the Board funds to that level in next year’s budget. Neuzil added that the Board had budgeted for just under $300,000 for this Fiscal Year and that the Board would be committing themselves to putting in $1 million this year. Stutsman said the Board started with $1 million last year. Neuzil said that is his point because he thinks the Board will look back 5 years from now and say good luck. He said with this budget in this economic time, there is no way. Thompson asked him what he would propose. Neuzil said he thinks that putting something on the list is one thing to factor what it should be in 5 years, but the County won’t be in the position to do it. He said the Board doesn’t even know what they’re going to do about the jail. He said it will be quite a sell when in 2 years, the Board says that there's going to be another million dollars in this land acquisition fund, when they haven’t bought anything and then the County may have to get rid of 15 employees because there is no money left. He said he understands the need, but asked if this Board will be able to commit $1 million per year. He said that the Board already wavered last year and asked if they are going to waiver again this year and next year, then why do it. Lehman said it is a starting point. Harney said that he heard Neuzil say that the Board can’t do it, but then saying that they wavered. He said that’s where if the Board doesn’t have a plan, put the money away, and start going for it, then they won’t accomplish anything. He added that he’s hearing Neuzil saying that the Board doesn’t want to do it. He said that’s why the County doesn’t have the proper facilities that they need now. Neuzil said he isn’t saying that he doesn’t want to, only that it’s not realistic. He said he will believe it when he sees this Board give a million dollars to land acquisition in this Fiscal Year. Harney said that he doesn’t see the Board laying off anybody either. Neuzil replied that the County won’t be able to hire too many.

County Treasurer Tom Kriz commented that as he looks at the CIP, he agrees with Neuzil because they are lofty goals. He said he also wants to comment on what Harney said. He first questioned if it is enough money and secondly if the Board is talking about a campus plan, Harney brought up something crucial right now. He said it probably isn’t enough now that the County is starting to see people develop everything around the Administration Building. He said that is done on purpose. He said the Board will see an apartment or major complex going up on the backside of the creek. He said a building went up on the small lot just down from the Administration building. He said at some point there has to be a commitment on the campus plan because the County will continue to see this happening and every time it happens, it drives the cost up to where it gets to be prohibitive. He said the County can still condemn, but they start with land with a new apartment house or building and it escalates the cost. He said if the Board’s not willing to start a fair aggressive condemnation process, then he doesn’t think the campus plan will be possible, because he doesn’t see anybody stepping forward saying they are interested in selling. He said it will take more than a million dollars to start the campus plan. He said Harney’s comments about what’s happening around the building are something that the Board really needs to look at. He said the improvements that go into land that was maybe attainable land are going to shoot that out of the box.

Reverend Bob Welsh asked if Kriz is proposing aggressive acquisition by condemnation. Kriz said he thinks that if the County truly wants a campus plan, then that’s something that has to be looked at although that is the negative side of it, but it’s going to have to come to that. Thompson said in order to do that, the Board would have to have something on their agenda. She asked if there is any plan for an agenda item from the Committee in the near future. Kriz said there certainly could be. Thompson said she thought they should get going on it. She said the Board had talked about this more than a year ago and they said they wanted the campus. She said that Kriz is exactly right, because the County needs to get the land at the lowest possible cost, which is now. Kriz said that the County can’t acquire a piece of land a year before adding a 40 unit apartment building because that has no real value for the County for what they want the land for, but it drives up the price. He said as Neuzil said a million dollars is aggressive. Thompson said also from basic frugality, she would be reluctant to condemn a new building where if she feels the building the County would build would improve the neighborhood, then she would be much more likely to condemn it. Kriz said that is his point, because they are starting to see these new building pop up on all these properties. Stutsman said the Board might have priced themselves out of the market if that is in fact what is happening. She said that may ask the question of whether or not they are going to have a County campus or if they missed it and it’s gotten to the point where they can’t afford it.

Thompson said she thinks the Board should instruct the Committee to put a list of properties on the agenda. Stutsman added that they haven’t had a report from the Committee in awhile. Horne said that they do have a list and the Committee has met with some landowners. He said they got to the point with some of them where they reached an impasse over price. Thompson asked if any of them said yes, we’ll sell you our property. Horne replied that one would sell, but not at the price the Committee thought was equitable. Thompson said that the Board should then condemn and see how much it would cost. Lehman said the Board needs to take a first official step so people know they are serious and have a recommendation of which properties the Board wants to go after. He said that sends the message to people that the Board is committed to a timetable. He said there are some buildings where the people might work with the County over a 3-year period so that they can relocate their business. Thompson said if the County is talking about condemning, then people may be more interested in negotiation. Horne said that makes a difference if they know that the County has that behind them. He said that there is no doubt that the leveraging has an effect. Thompson said that condemnation means that the County pays a fair price, not that they will get the property a lot cheaper. Horne replied that he thinks there are 2 appraisals done and then they meet somewhere in the middle.

Stutsman said that what she is having a hard time with is that she has not yet seen a plan of what they need and where they want it to go. She said she is bothered by hearing this piece of property over there and this piece there and linkage. She doesn’t think it’s a good use of tax dollars to condemn parcels here and there and then say oops, we now have all these fragmented pieces and no plan. She said she still isn’t clear what is planned for the parcels and until she has a clear picture of what it is, she can’t agree. Neuzil said there’s a jail, there’s a parking problem, there's a Health and Human Services building. He asked if that is what the Board has decided that they want in this area. He said he doesn’t think it is the case because he doesn’t know if there’s going to be a jail and he also isn’t convinced that the concept that the Board has come up with is too specific. He said the Board ought to consider what’s across the street with the recycling company, because maybe that needs to be a part of the equation. He said that right now is not in the County’s plan or even considered. He asked the Board if they want to consider that property. He asked if the Board wants to go back to that plan and then as Stutsman suggested come up with actual specifics of which building would go where. Thompson said most of the buildings have been on the list for a long time. She said what they asked the architect to do is look at how much land it would take to have all of these things. She said the campus concept implies that the Board says that they will build any future buildings on the campus. She said the architect gave the Board a map that showed, not specifically where each building would be, but that the County has enough space for the buildings and the required parking on this list. She said that means the Board has to acquire the block across the street and the rest of the block that the Administration Building is on. Neuzil said when the Board has to go to the taxpayer to justify spending money on a parcel of land that they don't even know what building is going to be there is a tough sell. Lehman said it is, but Iowa City sat on a lot of land downtown for 30 years. Neuzil said the idea of going into a business, condemning them and then there might be a building there in the next 15 to 20 years, isn’t a really popular sell.

Horne suggested taking the jail out of the equation because there are so many unknowns with the jail. He said last year in the Plan the Board prioritized Health and Human Services as the next building. He said if the Board wants to get into specifics, then that would be the next building, the most realistic first building to go on the campus. He added that the Administration Building, which they are in negotiations with the National Guard for them to move out to the Melrose location, will facilitate eventual expansion of the Administration building. Lehman said he thought what Neuzil is asking for is something more specific, although subject to change, because the public is going to want to know. He said on the fringe of the Mall Drive property discussion there was also discussion of another building, but that wasn’t specified and it fell apart. Neuzil said that Board is also putting in the Plan that the recommendation will be a brand new jail. Thompson said they are saying that if that is the recommendation, the County will have the space and parking for it on the campus. Neuzil said he thinks that sends a signal that a $22 million jail is in the County’s budget. Stutsman said that sooner or later the Board will come to that decision, but not necessarily through the recommendations from the Taskforce. Neuzil said it will throw a curve ball into the Committee process. Horne said that the Board can remove the jail out of the plan. Stutsman said that maybe they should. Horne suggested taking it out of the specific year by year plan, but leaving it in the possible list. Harney said that he disagrees because number one, the Jail if it stays where it’s at now part of that recommendation is going to be an alternate facility of some sort to run corrections out of. He said that the County will have to have a place for that. Secondly, if the Board remodels the current jail that’s there if that’s recommended, then the Sheriff will have to be moved to allow for a full jail, so the County will need a place for that facility. He said the County still has to put it into a campus plan. He said he doesn’t like throwing things out because the Board will be right back where they started from without the property or a plan in place. He said he thinks the Board needs to set the dollars aside as well as the property aside in the future. He said that is what happened to the jail originally, the voters voted it down, decreased the size, decreased the footings, so now the County is stuck. He said if the Board is going to have a campus plan, setting aside the property for that particular facility in the future. He said in the long term the Board will be further ahead if they do that.

Thompson commented that in regards to Neuzil’s comment that it will be 15 years before the County uses the land, but this plan would use the land in 5 years. Neuzil said that it will assuming the Board will be able to fund it all. Neuzil said that he thinks the that the jail must be removed from the plan because the Board doesn’t know what alternatives the Jail Taskforce may recommend. Lehman said that some of this money could be transferred for jail transportation and housing. He said that the Board is setting aside money for some type of corrections use. Thompson said they had discussed this greatly in the Committee. She said they did a cost benefit analysis by looking at the list of buildings they thought they needed and asked what is happening because there isn’t enough space. She said in the jail it’s costing close to $500,000 to send prisoners elsewhere. She said the next priority is the Health and Human Services building because people are too crowded making it inefficient. She said by balancing the 1/2 million in expenditures against their inefficiencies, they decided that the jail should be the first priority. Thompson said every year they've had the Space Needs Committee the Jail has been the first priority because it is causing them the most pain. Neuzil said he thought that if the Board is going to adopt this plan, that means this Board will be putting $1 million in the bank for land acquisition. He asked if the Board is prepared to do that. Thompson replied that she is. Harney said that he is as well, but they said that last year too. Neuzil said that will mean significant cuts elsewhere or significant tax increases, which there isn't room to do.

Horne said that having a fast growing County can be both a blessing and a curse. He said in this case the Public Health building was built when the population was only 70,000, but now the population is around 115,000. He said that same thing applies to the Human Services Building and the Administration Buildings, both of which are starting to outgrow their use. Stutsman said it’s logical to think that the County has outgrown these things. She said she applauds the Board for putting these things down on paper because for many years people just kept putting it off thinking it will go away. Harney said to him, the Board either sticks with this plan or looks at putting everything out at the County Farm. Stutsman said to her that’s the question, either the County Campus concept or relocating everything. Thompson said the Board has already voting in favor of a campus. Kriz said that the cost of the campus is going to continue to escalate unless something happens. Harney said that the Board either needs to start getting property or let it go. Thompson said she thinks the Board needs to aggressively move towards getting the property for the campus they said they wanted. Stutsman said she doesn’t want to have a bunch of property and then just fill up the space. She said she wants to be very frugal about buying the property and know what the space is going to be used for. She said she doesn’t want to just be buying a bunch of parcels. Harney said that they already have a plan drawn up. Neuzil said he thinks the plan was a concept to find out how much space is needed.

Neuzil said if the County is talking about closing a business, the Board needs to be able to explain what is going there. He said the Board doesn’t have those answers right now. Stutsman said she thinks there’s a disconnect between the Committee and the Board. Neuzil said that the first priority is the jail, so the Board is telling people where the jail is going. Thompson said they know the building footprints and the parking needs, so they know whether that much space is enough. Horne said that Neumann Monson Architect Dwight Dobberstein has provided how many square feet is needed for Health and Human Services and how much parking it will take, so they do know. Lehman said that Neuzil is saying that people will want to know what building is going on what parcel. He said that the Board can’t necessarily do that. Stutsman said that according to this plan, the Board can. Thompson said it will depend on how much people are willing to work with the County. Stutsman said the Board always has condemnation, but that is also a new policy for the Board. Horne said that the Land Acquisition Committee would like to know so that they can have condemnation as a leverage tool. Neuzil said the Committee will also need to know that they will have the money to back it up. Thompson said that the Committee will find that out by putting it on an agenda and having the Board vote on it. Lehman said it’s become a policy that they will adhere to. Stutsman said that they may have to call it into question. Thompson asked if 3 Board members were willing to leave the million dollars on the table for the first year. Stutsman, Lehman and Harney said they were. Thompson said they always discuss it on the last day. Stutsman said she’s willing to put everything on the table and see where they are at, but she isn’t willing to make a decision until then. Horne said that the Board has made some tentative decisions on some of the other things already. He said he will see what they have so far when they get to the first work sessions.

Horne asked if the Board wants to make any changes in how the Plan is written. Harney said that the way it is written is good, but that he would agree with Terrence that the timelines are probably compressed although they can push them back as they go. Horne asked if there is anything the Board wants to take off. Neuzil said that the Board needs to realize that if they put that they are building a new jail in the plan that means they are building a new jail. Harney said it doesn’t say they’re building, it says they are setting the dollars aside for it. Thompson said since most of the money for law enforcement is going to come from a bond, they can take it out. Neuzil said that maybe the Board should have gone to consultant and said how big of a jail? Thompson said that they can put the jail at the end. She said that instead of basing the order on what’s most painful, they can base it on what it more likely to be built and put the Health and Human Services Building first. Horne said they could put a lesser amount in the general sense towards corrections instead of a specific jail. Neuzil said if the Board has the Johnson County 5-year Capital Improvement Plan stating that the Board will build a new jail, then what they’ve given to the consultant to do is absolutely wrong. He said this sends the message that this Board of Supervisors is supporting a new jail. Stutsman said they are approving the Plan for 2004, not 2005. Horne said that the only thing on it is the acquisition in 2004. She said depending what the recommendation comes back, then the Board will make the adjustments in 2005 and so on. Neuzil said that when the Board does the 5-Year Road Plan, they are committed to the roads on that plan. Stutsman said they’ve taken roads off before. Harney said that every Jail Taskforce meeting he’s been at, when they’ve discussed what they need he keeps hearing that the County will need a jail in 10 or so years even with different alternatives. He said he still thinks that it needs to be in the Plan for the future and they need to set aside the money and space for that possibility if they are going to have a campus plan. Thompson said that the plan only shows that in 2005 the County saves $1.2 million towards a law enforcement center. She said each year it’s on there, it assumes a general obligation bond to pay the rest of it. Horne said the plan assumes the payment on the bond. Neuzil said he’s saying the message the same as what the Board gave to the consultant. Stutsman agreed. She said that the Board needs to focus on what they are agreeing to for 2004. She said the rest is a concept, but there’s no commitment to it. Neuzil said that is how it always is. Horne said that the purpose of the plan is to be updated annually, so obviously it’s flexible.

Lehman asked what direction the Board is giving to the Land Acquisition Committee. He asked if they need to start talking to people to feel out the adjoining property owners. Harney said they’ve done that for the most part. He said the Committee won’t do anything more until the Board is ready to make a move. He said there’s property owners that say they will talk with the County and they will stay in business for X number of years once the County purchases the property if they Board allows it. Lehman said he doesn’t want these people to have to read everything from the paper. He said he wants them to have direct contact to sharing the County’s intent even if they can’t give a date when an offer will be made. Harney said that the County is already to that point, but if the Board doesn’t have a plan in place then the Committee can’t go anywhere. Lehman said he wants to see that communication continuing too after this step. He said he doesn’t want to leave them alone until the time the County is ready to move. Thompson said that she’d like to see an agenda item listing all the property in the next block so that the Board can vote on it to get those properties by whatever means needed. Lehman said they are all a little leery about committing themselves. Lehman said the Plan is subject to change based on the make-up of the Board and the limitation of dollars, but it’s something to start with. Thompson said it gives people a chance for public comment. Lehman said he doesn’t want them to get the impression that it’s all going to happen next year, but he wants communication through the Committee. He said the County should take their lead from the University because they have people that specifically go out and acquire property so that they are constantly in touch with those people. Thompson said that Kriz makes a good point that if the Board tells people they’re looking to acquire the land then they’re going to start improving it. She said if they’re going to look to inquire it, the Board will have to be willing to acquire it soon. She said she isn’t willing to condemn a new apartment building. Horne said that most of the property owners in the area know. Thompson said they have already started with the improvements. Kriz said that the Committee has had contact, which is why they know what some business plans are, but it’s come to a standstill now where they’re waiting to see. Horne said the Committee negotiated with one owner who was willing, but they were overpriced. Stutsman said that was before any talk of condemnation. Horne said before they didn’t have a way to tell somebody that condemnation is a possibility, so they didn’t have that leverage. Neuzil reiterated that if the Board is going to commit the $1 million, then they will have $1.3 million or so to start buying land. Horne said they will have $2 million next year once they receive the school and Mall Drive funds.

Stutsman said the Board hasn’t made a decision about condemnation. She asked if there are 3 votes to condemn a piece of property if they feel the price is too high. Thompson said that through condemnation the County will pay a fair price. Kriz said that if an owner thinks his property is worth $1 million and the County thinks it is worth $500,000, then the only way they will get to a medium is through condemnation. Stutsman said that it’s not an issue of closing these businesses down, but relocating them. She reported that one business owner in the area said that his business is good because of the type of business, not because of location. Neuzil he is thinking of one business in particular where 5 or 10 employees are going to be fired. Lehman said for the general good the Board has to weigh who will benefit. Neuzil said they are talking about jobs here. Executive Assistant Mike Sullivan said the Committee believes that there are a variety of ways to negotiate this before going to condemnation, but that has to be an option available so they can tell the landowners. He said the Committee hasn’t heard from any property owners that they won’t negotiate, so that’s an open option and it would be the Committees’ approach to start. He said they wouldn't immediately recommend to these property owners that if they don’t do something, then the County will go to condemnation. He said there may be a possibility with some of these properties where they would do that. He said that the Committee would be at the point in negotiating with property owners that this would be something they would prefer.

Harney replied to Neuzil’s comment regarding laying off 5 or 10 employees from a particular business, he said when Kriz and Harney spoke with that particular property owner, he commented that he would be retiring in X number of years anyway. He said there’s no reason why the Board couldn’t negotiate and let them stay there for a given number of years. Neuzil said that is possible, but when the Board talks about condemning actual businesses, taking them off the tax roll, some people are going to lose their jobs. He asked if this Board is committed to only purchasing property in the areas pointed out in the campus plan concept. He said if not, then the idea needs to be expanded. He commented that as an example, if the recycling company comes to the Board and says they are going to move, in the County plan the Board isn’t even looking at that piece of property. Harney said that if they come to the Board, things can change. Neuzil said that it needs to be in the concept as a possibility. Thompson said she’d be happy if they get the block across the street. Stutsman said that the Board needs to start somewhere. She said she is ready to put it on the agenda too, to either give the Committee the authority to begin serious negotiations to acquire property and to see what it takes. Harney said what Neuzil is saying has a lot of truth, but if the Board grows in any direction they still need the block to the north for parking. He said they have to make a commitment at least to the 2 sides of the Administration Building. Neuzil said the concept may have to be more of any building next to this building. Thompson said when the Board first looked at the recycling company’s property, some of it was owned by the railroad, but now that has changed. Kriz said that the property has now been acquired. Harney said the railroad has to stay in business as long as Nagle Lumber and someone else uses it. Horne said that as long as Nagle lumber uses that track, they’ll keep it open.

Lehman said that Neuzil is playing the devil’s advocate. Lehman said if the Board decides on something though, he’d like to see everyone support it. He said once the Board decided to support the Mall Drive acquisition, he supported it regardless of his opinions. Neuzil said that he thinks the whole Board agrees that a County campus plan will work and there is no doubt that condemnation will have to be necessary on certain businesses. He said the Board has to be aware that the group that’s out there negotiating needs the Board’s backing on condemnation and that there’s the money behind it. He said it again comes back to whether or not this Board is committed to making some significant cuts in the budget to put money in the bank to buy the land. He said he isn’t even going to mention tax increases because he doesn’t think they have room in the General Fund to even think about it. Harney said that the Land Acquisition Committee’s hands are tied at this point because they can’t do anything more until the Board makes a commitment to do something further. He said it’s time to either do it or not. Thompson said that’s why she thinks they should put it on an agenda. Lehman asked if that’s premature until the Board decides what they have to work with in the budget. Harney said the legal advice at one of the meetings was to start doing it or don’t. Lehman asked if the Board has a million dollars to commit. He asked what the repercussion of taking a million dollars out of the budget would be. Stutsman said the Board would hate to approach a landowner who then starts planning for retirement and then not have the money. Neuzil said this is a long term $3 to $5 million dollar investment in land acquisition. He said if the Board is going to be serious about it, it means $1 million a year out of the budget. He said what happened last year can’t happen. Stutsman agreed, saying the Board always raids this fund. Horne said that sooner or later the County will have a facilities issue and eventually it will come back and have to be dealt with. Lehman said that this discussion has to be picked up after they sort through everything else. Stutsman agreed. Sullivan said that although condemnation is a big step, but as a workgroup talking about those things, sometimes condemnation may be a good thing for a property owner when looking at fair market value. He said it may not be something that they would see as a penalty if it happens. Stutsman said she wants to be absolutely fair to landowners too, but she doesn’t want to pay inflated prices either. Neuzil said that is the problem with the County compared to the University of Iowa or another business because they don’t have to make these purchases in the open while the County does. Sullivan said that the University also has millions and millions in their land acquisition budget.

Welsh said if the Board doesn’t go with the campus plan because it’s getting too expensive, then the County has to rethink the whole plan with the Guard. He said the Board is at the point where they can’t do it 2 different ways. He added that Neuzil brings up a good point in terms of the list. He suggested changing the law enforcement center listing to say maximum amount with the exact expenditure subject to future decisions. He said that by having it down with the maximum amount, without the Board committing a specific amount of dollars that may or may not be needed, that may address the concern because public image is an important thing. Harney said that the Board can reword that. Stutsman clarified that the Board isn’t putting anything on the agenda until the budget decisions are made. Horne said that the Board will have to have a budget by mid-February. Thompson suggested putting it on at the end of February. Lehman said regarding the Guard land swap, they are looking at 5 years for that too because the Guard isn’t looking to actually move for 5 years if that becomes a reality. Neuzil said that they would start to build their building though. Harney said that becomes a little more complicated because once they sign the papers, at that time there’s money available for them to put buildings up to house their vehicles, but there’s no money available for the administrative portion of the building and operations, which in turn has to come from the Federal Government. He said that money comes through appropriations, which could take a short or long period of time. He said it could take 3 to 5 years to get the facility up. He said that the parking may open up earlier because they would move their vehicles. He said they do have money to grade and put their vehicle storage out there.

Horne pointed out that the SEATS listing is a match, so the amount of $600,000 isn’t what the County would pay. He said the County would be reimburse so that they would pay 20% of the cost and be reimbursed for the rest. Thompson said usually when people apply for Federal money, there isn’t any other way to get the money, so they didn’t break it down. Stutsman said the project depends on if they get the Federal dollars. Horne said regarding the northwest ambulance location, they might want to see what grants are available through homeland security and emergency services. Sullivan said there’s a lot of money there, but he hasn’t seen any outline yet from the Federal Government. He said he knows how they’re talking about doing it, but it’s not in place yet. He said there’s a possibility of building an EMS readiness center where he can locate an ambulance. Harney said that Tom Hansen said a last night’s meeting that most of those dollars are spoken for. He said the County got $80,000 last year for various Emergency Management issues. He said this year it’s down to $20,000 because the State started taking the dollars including the State itself, which took a large amount of the money to start a special response team. He said in the long-term plan, which isn’t in here, Coralville is looking at putting a fire station up in the North Corridor. He said realistically the Board needs to look at putting some dollars aside to contract with them and pay for part of the building for the ambulance to be attached to the fire station. He said they currently have a contract with the fire station downtown, but it’s a small office area. Horne clarified that he heard direction to leave the Plan as is.

Recessed at 10:05 a.m.; reconvened at 10:20 a.m.

Harney said Conservation Director Harry Graves is working on a comprehensive plan that would probably include some buildings out there that they would be bringing in. He said he doesn’t know how that would fit into the picture. Horne said that has traditionally been outside the Board of Supervisors, so that would be a change in policy to include them in the Capital Projects. He said in the past their improvements have always been done from their trust fund. Stutsman said she isn’t interested in going that way. Neuzil asked if Graves is questioning it since Public Health has it’s own separate Board as well. Stutsman said the Board has enough to handle without including anybody else. Neuzil said the Board didn’t get involved when Conservation has bought land other than providing the County Attorney. Horne replied that Graves bought it from their funds. Stutsman said what Graves wants is to have access to more funds to purchase things by being part of the County’s Plan. Thompson said that she thought Grave’s predecessor concluded that he did better by funding things through his own funds. Horne said she is probably right about that.

Horne presented 2 summary sheets, one for Central Technology and one with the departmental requests for technology. He said the items shaded in yellow involve new personnel requests. Thompson said if the Board doesn’t approve the personnel, then they’ll take those out. She asked what the pink shadings refer to. Horne replied that the pink are things where the department requested a different amount and the amounts were changed by Information Services Director Jean Schultz to the correct amount. He said with a couple of the requests, especially the Auditor’s Office, they didn’t want to get by without the new numbers. Horne said a lot of these items are maintenance contracts. Stutsman asked what the total comes to for all the technology that is tied to new positions. Horne said it is $10 to $12,000, mostly for PCs and MS Office. Schultz said that this budget is higher than last year because she put $300,000 into the financial software, because she still doesn’t know how much that will be so it may be a little high. She also added $280,000 in for replacement for real estate tax collections, which is also an estimate. She said they have pretty much settled on CMS, which is a good option. She said she got a commitment from each of the Assessors who will each contribute $15,000 of that, so it can be reduced to $250,000. She said they’re going to do $7,500 for 2 years and the County Assessor told her this morning that their Board approved it. Stutsman asked if the Assessor’s Levy is included in the Board’s levy limits. Horne said it is totally outside of the County. Schultz said according to the Assessors, the County by law has to provide the real estate systems and so they didn’t think they necessarily had to chip in, but they were willing to do that. Stutsman said it certainly helps the County. Schultz said they also increased the yearly amount that they give to IS by $2,000 each for next year. Stutsman added that they contributed some to HR too. Lehman said it is $3,000. Horne asked where that is showing in the revenue. Thompson said it wouldn’t be in HR’s budget because they didn’t know about it. Schultz said the other thing the County Assessor did was approved $50,000 for keeping the aerial photos up to date for GIS.

Horne said that FinCore is obviously the big item, but the amount is a pretty good estimate given the finalists. Thompson asked what the County has saved so far. Schultz replied they’ve saved $300,000. Neuzil asked what the cost will be. Horne replied that it will cost between $500,000 or $600,000. He said that the finalists are in that range and the FinCore Committee feels that they’re a good fit for a government of this size and the software can do most of the things they want it to. Stutsman commented that they included the voting equipment in the budget. Neuzil asked if that was technology or if it comes out of the Supplemental Fund and can be bonded. Horne replied that it can be bonded without the $800,000 limit. Schultz said the Auditor’s Office also has some savings. Horne said they have around $150,000 saved. Harney asked if those savings fall under the technology budget. Horne said it’s technology because it’s a computerized system. Stutsman said it’s more for tracking than anything else. Schultz said that her department doesn’t do anything with it. Neuzil said there’s definitely a need, but when he’s in Washington next month, he’s going to try to get a clearer picture of the new voting act that’s just been approved. He said he’d hate the Board to spend the money only to find out that there are grants available. Stutsman said that they said the grants are primarily for education and training, which Iowa does well on. She added that it’s also to get rid of the old punch card systems, which Iowa doesn’t have. She said they keep talking about that, but the amount that Iowa will get keeps getting less and less. Neuzil said Iowa should still get some money because of Senator Charles Grassley. Thompson commented that they have trouble when they don’t give at least something to every State. Harney said the money will first go to the State and Neuzil said that the Secretary of State might keep the money. Horne said voting machines is identified as an essential county purpose that the State has identified. He said that based on the amount of TIFs the County has, it would certainly broaden the tax base and currently there is low interest rates. Stutsman and Neuzil agreed that they’re interested, but Neuzil thinks it’s premature until the Board knows what the Federal Government may provide to the County. Horne said that bonding leaves the option to wait because it will remain in the Code and although interest may increase, they probably won’t spike back up to 7% or 8% in a year or 2.

Neuzil said that if bonding is the direction for voting equipment that they are leaning towards, should they have money in the Technology Fund for it. Horne said like Stutsman said, it could be for tracking. He said that it would be paid from a debt service levy, not from a transfer from that department. Stutsman said the Board made a real commitment for all technology to be in this budget. She said she’d hate to see them start pulling stuff out again. Neuzil agreed, but asked if Schultz considered that technology. Schultz said it’s computerized equipment. Horne said it would be a Capital Expenditure if it wasn’t. He said he wouldn’t want to put it in the Election’s budget. Thompson asked if the Board waits to purchase the items, if they will replace the 4 items with the amount the Auditor asked to save. Horne said there’s $150,000 there and if the Board decides they want to bond, then they could release that back into the Technology budget. Neuzil asked if Slockett put that money into his budget. Horne said what is reflected in the Technology budget are Slockett’s requests. Thompson said if the Board decided not to bond for voting equipment this year they should at least save $100,000. Horne said that he requests the whole amount each time. Horne said that it’s not in the budget twice.

Stutsman said that she thinks the Board needs to start committing to decent voting equipment. Thompson asked if the Board should save the money or commit to buying the equipment this year. Stutsman said if they can bond for it, they should just commit to buying it. Harney said he’d like to see what Neuzil finds out in D.C. Horne said once the Board decides they want to bond for it, they can do it at any time in the year. Thompson said that would be a first for the County, because they’ve never borrowed. Horne said it wouldn’t have to be over time. He said that the Board would get the money by issuing the promissory note or bond, get the funds from the creditor, buy the equipment and then the next year in the budget authorize a debt service levy. Stutsman said with the interest rate as low as it is, the Board should just do it. Neuzil said he was thinking about spreading it out over 8 or 10 years. Horne replied that they can do that depending on how the terms are negotiated. Horne said that the Board would get the proceeds all at once, but depending on the terms they negotiate with the bondholder. Thompson clarified that if the Board paid for it in one year, then taxpayers would have to pay $600,000 the next year. Horne said the overall cost would be less the sooner it’s paid. Stutsman said they’d take advantage of taxing the TIF’s.

Lehman said that last year they bonded for over $1 million and it added for an average household $1. Thompson said that was because they had the principal payment in the budget, but they wouldn’t for this. Horne said they bonded for $119,000 in technology and equipment in the bonding last year. Neuzil asked if next year the Board will have $600,000 less to work with. Horne said it will be in addition because it’s in a different levy. Thompson said that it has to be paid back. Neuzil asked if they pay the money in one year or in 10. Horne said it depends on the terms of the bonds. Thompson said it’s outside of the budget, but people will still have to pay $655,000 in taxes because it adds a levy. Harney asked what happens to the $300,000 that’s already set aside. Thompson said they take that money out before bonding. Horne said right now it’s listed as technology in the normal way of funding technology, which is a transfer from the General Fund. Thompson said they would bond at the end of this year, have the $665,000, next year then spend the $300,000 to pay it back and then tax for the difference. Horne added that the Board can bond for both the financial software and the voting equipment. He added that the financial software would fall under the $800,000 limit.

Neuzil asked if Johnson County is the only entity that doesn’t bond for things like that now. Horne said that most governments do, especially in this environment, because they’re loosing on the earnings end and not taking advantage on the borrowing end. Thompson said if the Board intends to start bonding, then they need to have a policy that sets the maximum amounts they intend to borrow for and how. Horne said that the County is limited by Code for some of it. Thompson commented that the City started bonding 20 years ago with a couple of little things and now they rely on it. Horne said that the County can’t issue debt for roads and things like that. He said that the County has a debt ceiling like the cities, but they wouldn’t even come close. He said that money the Board has already saved would lower the General Fund transfer by that much. Thompson restated that it’s still taxes though. Horne added that it’s across a wider base. Stutsman said that the Board wouldn’t even be considering it if it wasn’t for the amount of TIFing in Johnson County. Neuzil asked what the amount of TIF is right now. Horne said it’s $376,000,000 increment, which grew 12% from last year. Neuzil clarified that in essence the County doesn’t draw any tax on that value. Horne said if one assumes the TIF creates value, say 70% of that value while 30% is normal growth, then the County loses $120,000 that would otherwise be normal valuation increase. Neuzil asked if the County drew most of that from the City, if they could assume 17%. He said they’d have a lot more money in the coffer. Horne said that it would add several hundred thousand dollars to the General Fund base. Stutsman said she didn’t think the average taxpayer realizes how everyone is paying for these TIFs.

Thompson clarified that the final technology budget includes the $124,800 plus whatever the Board selects for this coming year. Schultz said that it also adds document management and GIS. She said the document management request went down slightly from $80,088 to this year’s request of $78,86. She said GIS requests stayed the same. She said the Central Technology budget actually decreased slightly. She said a lot of that has to do with the T-1 frame relay, which decreased by $31,000. She said last year without the GIS part was $243,000 and this next year they’re asking for $241,000. Stutsman asked if the technology requests are included in that figure. Schultz replied that those are requests by individual departments, not part of Central Technology. Thompson clarified that Central Technology’s budget for this year will be $241,480 with departmental requests totaling $1,631,581, GIS totaling $124,800 and document management is $78,865. Schultz added the voting equipment as well. Horne replied that it’s included in the $1.6.

Neuzil asked about the Recorder’s request. Schultz said the upgrade is coming from her department, but the maintenance is in the technology budget. Neuzil asked why and Horne replied that the rest of the County has used that software for some purpose. Neuzil asked why the maintenance is in Central Technology when he thought the whole amount was going to come out of her separate Code allowed fund. Schultz said that it used to be, but she came to the Board a couple years ago and it got switched. Thompson said it’s about $40,000 per year. Neuzil commented that they’re paying an extra $20,000 for that system. Thompson said the total this year is $2,076,726 and asked what last year’s total was. Horne said he’d have to look. Stutsman asked why the County is paying for the maintenance out of that budget. Horne said he didn’t know. Neuzil said it seemed like that is the whole reason why they get a separate fund. Sullivan said that she could answer that, but his guess is that other departments have their maintenance contracts in the Central Technology Fund too. Neuzil said he understands that, but other departments don’t have the authority to generate revenue by Code through a fee. Sullivan asked if she actually makes money off the new system. Horne said that she sells it to abstracting firms.

Thompson said the greenbar from November shows $879,412 for the budget for this year for Technology. Schultz said that is budgeted expenditures, but the Board did a budget amendment recently increasing that to authorize spending some of the carry-over for the fiber-optics and Planning and Zoning, which was about $47,000. Thompson said she’s looking for a number that she can compare. Neuzil said that last year they had about a 5 to 10% increase from the previous year. He said this seems really high. Horne said the majority of the increase is the voting, FinCore and real estate software. Schultz said that overall essential technology went down by about $2,000, document management went down about $1,000, GIS is the same, so what’s left is the individual department’s request plus the voting equipment. Neuzil asked if the Board rubberstamps requests from departments. Thompson and Stutsman replied that they didn’t. Horne said that last year the financial software request was decreased. Horne said the transfer from the General Fund to Technology should be smaller this year. Neuzil said that he understands the importance of technology, but due to the tight budget he doesn’t think the Board can afford 20 to 30% increases. Thompson asked what the amount was last year. Schultz said that the proposed amount last year was $1,654,000, but the Board didn’t approve that much. She said they cut the financial software back by $150,000 and also $496,000 in voting machines that wasn’t approved. Thompson said that last year Schultz made recommendations to the Board. Schultz said that she did this year as well in the individual department requests by removing erroneous items. Stutsman said that it’s good that Schultz is monitoring the situation. Horne said that he collected the request, Schultz reviewed it and then met with him last week. Thompson asked if, other than the bigger items, these items are conservative estimates. She said that $10,000 for the Ambulance Department is a lot of money. Schultz said that money is for an upgrade regarding field data, which will reduce costs by entering the information themselves instead of having to scan and store documents. She said it will allow them to have more data in their database, give them more query capabilities and they won’t have to pay to have their documents scanned in the future. Schultz said that the real estate software could be budgeted for over 2 fiscal years.

Neuzil asked how much money is in financial software fund and if this is the year it will be implemented. Thompson asked if IS can do financial software and real estate software in the same year. Schultz said that the financial software would be implemented at the end of this fiscal year, beginning of next year and the real estate software would be towards the end of fiscal year or carry over to the second year. Thompson asked if the real estate expenditures could be split in half. Schultz said that they will go with CMS and they’re willing to work with the County money-wise. Neuzil asked about IS needing an upgrade. Schultz replied that is regarding the HP 3000 and that is why they are doing the real estate software. She said once that is done, the only large system on the 3000 will be the County Attorney’s office plus a few smaller things. She said once that is done, it will also be a payback because once things are off that server, IS won’t need the $22,000 hardware maintenance contract or the $26,000 software maintenance contract.

Neuzil asked Schultz to explain the Sheriff’s request. Schultz explained that it’s similar to the HP 3000 situation where they need to upgrade their AS400 computer system. She said the Board has been saving for 3 years and they’ve started the demonstration process. Thompson asked if the $112,000 is the full amount of the software or the additional they owe above the savings. Schultz said that the estimated cost they received 3 years ago, which still seems realistic, was $300,000, so they asked for $100,000 each time. She said the first year the Board only approved $75,000, which left $225,000 to be divided in 2 years ending at $112,800. Neuzil asked if that cost could be split over 2 more fiscal years. Schultz said that the software company is going to stop supporting their current software. Schultz said that the Sheriff’s Office feels that it’s very important and they have stretched it out quite a bit. Thompson asked if it is the system that keeps prisoner information. Schultz said yes and it is also used for dispatch. Neuzil said if the system is in a position where it isn’t available next year, then it would be on the list of have to do’s. Sullivan commented that the same thing happened with the Ambulance Department in the past because their system was going to be obsolete. Thompson asked if they would be able to split the payment over 2 more years. Horne said that they want to get the software as soon as possible. Stutsman asked what IS would be able to maintain. Schultz replied that her department doesn’t maintain their AS400 or software. She said they get support from the software company, but IS does maintain their network and office products. She said if IS didn’t do that, the price would be much more. She said she isn’t sure when they’re thinking of implementing it, but they’ve had 3 to 4 demos already and they’re going to go back to line up more of their specs, send them out and then have an evaluation process. Thompson said that it sounds like the Board needs to keep the entire amount included if possible. Neuzil said if the Board is on the last payment it could be split in 2 if they pay the providers correctly. Thompson said if the department gets it at the beginning of the year, the company is going to want to be paid for it. Harney said he would rather leave it in there and if they need to cut part of it, then they can.

Thompson asked if the Board had decided anything about the Recorder’s request. Stutsman said it’s a policy decision on behalf of the Board on whether or not they want to pay for the maintenance or have it come out of the Recorder’s Management budget. She said she thinks there’s plenty of money in that budget and it should come out of there. Schultz said that she’s using that money for the upgrade for the plat system and she’s watched the money pretty closely. Neuzil asked what the other revenue will be used for in 2 years when she pays this off. Thompson said she could then take over paying for the maintenance. She added that it sounds like in the past the Board has made a policy decision that the maintenance can be paid for out of this budget. Neuzil asked how much they paid for the maintenance this year. Schultz replied that it is $12,000 this year and it’s going up because the new system will be used for the public to look up documents. Neuzil said that this could be a phase out for paying for the Recorder’s maintenance or continue to pay $12,000. Stutsman said that decision was made when there wasn’t near as much money in the fund. She asked why the Board should tax the taxpayers when there’s already money available. Neuzil asked how much money Painter has in the fund and how much the current system is going to cost. Horne said that he isn’t sure because she was going to talk to the Board about borrowing enough money from the technology budget to pay off the system in one year. Thompson said her revenues last year were $37,500 and this year she budgeted for $29,300. Neuzil said that didn’t make sense since she is having a better year this year than last year. Schultz said that Painter has contributed money from that fund to document management that has benefited everybody. Neuzil asked if the Board wants to continue to fully fund this maintenance agreement or give only the previous year’s amount. Thompson said that this year Painter is asking to spend $90,000, which is $60,000 more than last year. She added that it’s to pay for the Cott indexing software so the $12,000 that the Board paid in maintenance goes up to $19,000 because of the new equipment. She commented that it’s an additional $7,000 for a $60,000 investment. Neuzil clarified that she doesn’t have enough money in the fund to be able to pay for the product. Horne said that he doesn’t think she does. Neuzil said that she had to borrow from the Board to be able to pay off the whole amount. Horne said that Painter came to the Board and the Board responded that she should pay it over 2 years.

Neuzil said that he wouldn’t have a problem paying for maintenance except for the fact that the Recorder she gets special money not available to anyone else. Thompson said she has used that money in ways that have benefited other departments. Schultz said Painter is planning on updating the system in April, so as of April the monthly commitment will go up to 1/12 of $19,000. Horne said that on June 30th of this year the Recorder’s fund balance was $85,352. Neuzil asked if she anticipated another $37,000 this year. Thompson said that she expected $28,030 for revenue this year. Stutsman added that she expected another $32,000 for next year. Neuzil said she will probably get up to $35 or $40,000 this year. Thompson said that in November she had $14,000. Stutsman said she’s on track for the $29,000. Horne said that assuming an 8% variance, she would get $32,400. Neuzil said Painter had a giant month in December, so the assumption seems low. Stutsman asked if the issue is whether or not she can pay for the maintenance out of the document management fund. Neuzil asked if the Board just wanted to pay a portion of it so that it would be fairer since she’s used it to help other departments or phase it out. Stutsman said Painter has other maintenance contracts in her budget. Horne said that she has been paying some of that software maintenance contract. Schultz thought that the maintenance they were referring to is her PaperClip maintenance. Horne said that she has $6,000 budgeted for hardware as well. Schultz said that she may be planning on replacing some PCs. Schultz said they haven’t been replacing her PCs out of the Central Technology amount because she’s been replacing them herself. Stutsman said that’s how it should be. Thompson said the Board should just make her pay the whole thing, although it would make her $20,000 short in her budget. Thompson said that the revenue estimate isn’t that far off. Horne said that it could be more than that.

Stutsman asked why should the Board tax taxpayers when Painter can pay for it out of a fund she’s making revenues from. She said the Board had a policy, but things are different now. Thompson said she may not be able to get her new software quite when she expected, but everybody else also has to wait. Neuzil said they're not anticipating another major technological purchase for the Recorder's Office over the next 5 years. Thompson said that if she had too much money in that fund it couldn’t be spent on other County uses because it has to be used for her technology. Horne asked if Schultz knew how long the maintenance has been paid out of technology. Schultz said she isn’t sure, but it hasn’t been that many years. Neuzil said he thought it is something that the Board should consider cutting. Stutsman agreed, but added that they should talk to Painter to find out if she has a good reason why it shouldn’t come out of that fund. She said she doesn’t want to zero out that fund, but at the same time if there’s money available why not take advantage of it.

Harney asked if the purchasing of Cott indexing software is both in her budget and in the Technology budget. Horne said that only the maintenance is in the Technology budget. He said that the maintenance cost is high considering the cost of the software. Schultz said that the upgrade is over $100,000 total. She said that she got an upgrade price, so if she had bought the system from scratch it would be much higher and most companies charge 39% in maintenance. Neuzil asked if the revenue Painter will be able to generate from the new software will go back into the General Fund or into Department 87. Horne said the money should go back into the General Fund because recording of instruments and interest is the only thing she gets revenue for. Schultz said that as part of the upgrade, she’s purchasing the PaperClip software that allows images to be put on the web, which other departments will also want to do. She said it is over $20,000, so they could look at it as the rest of the departments will benefit from Painter's purchase, so the Board could say that the cost offsets the $19,000. Stutsman said that she still is concerned with charging the taxpayers $20,000 for a maintenance contract if the money is available elsewhere. Thompson said that there isn’t money available in the other fund unless she changes her schedule, so changing this would make her $20,000 short in the future year. Stutsman asked if that is certain. Horne said she would have to change her plan for buying the software by negotiating a longer term, which would cost her more in the end. Neuzil said he’s looking 3 or 4 or 5 years down the road when she’s building up this fund. He said that maybe it shouldn’t be building up, but this maintenance should be paid for out of it instead. He added that the timing of the switch isn’t great for her because she’s going to drain the fund this year. Horne said that the Board could tell her that once the purchase is complete the maintenance expense will go back into that fund. Stutsman asked how much the Cott software costs. Horne replied that it’s just over $100,000 and she’s spending $40,000 this year and $62,000 next year. Neuzil asked what the County gets for $20,000 a year in maintenance. Schultz replied that the County gets new versions of the software, support on the phone and their questions answered. Horne added that the County will have to pay it on the financial software as well. Thompson asked what the decision is, to take it out or leave it on the table. Neuzil said he thinks it needs to be left on the table and the Board can revisit what they are currently giving. Stutsman agreed and said she has a hunch $20,000 will be a big deal at the end of the budget process.

Thompson said in regards to SEATS, the big requests are for ongoing projects while the smaller request are minor upgrades. Neuzil asked what the tower rental requests are. Sullivan said it is to put antenna on towers to get the voice and data out for the SEATS vans. He said the County has to rent space on these towers, which are cheaper than building their own. Neuzil asked if SEATS could put them on Secondary Roads towers or somebody else. Sullivan said they are already full. He said that Ambulance has one repeater system there and then another on a University building. Thompson asked if the County gets some revenue from the antenna on the Courthouse. Sullivan said that he doesn’t think there’s anything on the Courthouse that is still functioning. Thompson said that the new requests were SQL Server upgrades and that she doesn’t have any way to evaluate them. Neuzil commented that they’re not that expensive, but they add up. Horne asked why they need the server update. Schultz said Horning said he should have put some of the cost into the Central Technology, but he forgot so it’s in the departmental requests. She said if it needs to be done and the Board takes it out of the budget, then IS will have to take it out of unexpected expenses in Central Technology next year.

Neuzil asked again what the absolute necessary purchases. Stutsman asked if there are some more expensive items that they could get by with cheaper versions of. Schultz said that under Information Services the hardware purchase is because the Department has quite of bit of hardware that’s no longer covered under maintenance. She said they put this in each year, so that if the equipment dies they have something to replace it with. She said they could get by with 2 line printers instead of 3 although it would take longer to get people their reports. Stutsman said that they could take out the Board of Supervisors’ desk jet color printer as well because they have a color printer, the new one would just be faster. Schultz said that IS has 5 desk jets that they’re purchasing back from MH/DD, but she doesn’t know where 4 are going. Lehman said that the items being repurchased are a given. Schultz said that it’s her understanding that IS is supposed to be repurchasing these items. Lehman asked if those items are figured in this budget. Schultz replied that they’re figured in the current fiscal year’s budget. Neuzil said this will go down somewhat if the Board chooses not to hire any of the positions listed. Horne said that the only position tentatively approved so far attached to requests is the legal assistant. He added that the Board didn’t give White his 4% cut back, but did give him a small increases and told him that he could have his legal assistant. Thompson said they left it on the table, but didn’t say yes. Neuzil said that he will have to decide whether or not to hire that person or pay his current employees.

Horne said that in the Auditor’s request, Schultz thinks that they will be able to reuse some stuff for the Arc Info software. Schultz said that it is her understanding that the request is for the GIS Deputy they also requested. She said if the Board would approve that position leaving one as a Real Estate Deputy and one as a GIS Deputy, then the Real Estate Deputy has that software so it can just be moved over to the GIS Deputy. Horne reiterated that with the financial software and voting equipment the Board has a bonding option. Neuzil asked if the $150,000 the Board put away is part of the $655,000. Horne said that it isn’t part. Neuzil asked how this voting amount increased so fast because only a year ago they were talking about a $400,000 purchase and now they’re talking about $800,000. Stutsman said she always thought it was more than that. Thompson said it’s come down. Schultz said the carryover for voting equipment is $217,000. Horne said that if the Board wants to proceed with the bonding option, it would free up funds in the Technology budget and lower the transfer needed. Thompson said that the voter awareness sounds like the type of thing that the Feds will give counties money for. Stutsman said she wouldn’t count on a lot of Federal dollars because, like Homeland Security dollars, it won’t reach the counties. Horne said the 2000 election fiasco also fades faster and faster away. Thompson said along those lines, if the County is going to do it, then it should be this year so the Auditor’s Office has a chance to test it on a couple of small elections before there is a General Election. Neuzil said that it would be another million dollars in taxes. Neuzil said even if the Board approves it now for Fiscal Year 04, it may not be ready for the General Election. Stutsman said voting is near and dear to the hearts of Johnson County. She said that Slockett has requested new equipment ever since she has been on the Board, they’re outdated and can’t even get parts anymore. Lehman said he bought used machines for parts. Stutsman said she thinks it is time. She added that it’s another million dollars, but with bonding at least it won’t be as large of an increase. Lehman suggested buying more used ones as others update their systems.

Horne said that the State of Iowa gives counties this leeway in the law for bonding intending it will be used for this purpose. Stutsman said it’s an essential County purpose. Neuzil said that this would be creating a 4th cup because this wouldn’t be part of what they started last year. Horne said that the 1st cup is the General Fund, 2nd is Supplemental and the 3rd is rural. Neuzil said he’s counting a cup for the bonding they began last year. Horne said that the Board is already using this cup. Stutsman commented that they’re making it bigger. Thompson said that last year they used it for things that they had in the budget that could be paid back in the same year. She said that they didn’t have anything included that would be paid over time. Horne agreed. Thompson said that bonding for voting equipment would not be in the budget and would be paid over time, so this would be an additional taxation. Horne said that it’s not so big that it couldn’t be done in one year. Thompson commented that they are talking about $600,000 of new money. Horne said that it’s $800,000 really. Thompson said that if it’s not in the budget, it’s tax one way or the other. Lehman asked what it will mean to the average taxpayer considering the TIF. Neuzil reiterated that they could do it over a longer period of time. Thompson said she’d be more interested in a 5-year repayment. Horne said that the longer it’s paid out, the more the real cost is. Thompson said but it’s less per year at a low interest. Stutsman said that they wouldn’t have to deal with it next year if they paid it all in one year. Thompson argued that once the Board starts bonding, the costs take up a certain percentage of the budget every year. She pointed out that Iowa City’s debt service takes up so much of their budget that they have no leeway. Harney said that he doesn't want to see that happen. Thompson said she’s afraid of opening the floodgates. Horne said that County isn't bonding for anything of that scale. Neuzil said if they bond for it in one year then it’s a million dollars less for next year. Thompson said that the cost would be about $25 on every $100,000 house. Harney said that the difference is that it’s spread over more people because it includes the TIF districts. Thompson said she likes that.

Neuzil said that if the Board chooses to bond for voting equipment in one year, then they are still paying $1 million either this year or next year, so it will be $1 million less. He said he like the idea of leveraging it against the whole TIF district, but it still means it is $1 million paid over one year versus spreading it out. Neuzil said he would like to know an actual price tag for the voting equipment. Horne said that last year the County Debt Service levy was $8,405,000. He added if the County would have paid cash, then it would have cost the taxpayers $117.60 using the Supplemental Levy and the General Levy. He said using the Debt Service Levy it cost the taxpayers $111.63, so they saved $5.97 for that amount of debt. Neuzil asked what happens next year. Horne said that he didn’t think they would go to $8 million again because $5 of the $8 million was health insurance. Thompson said the difference is that the money was in the budget. Horne said this is the savings from using the other cup. Thompson said that it’s either a new million in debt service or in the General Fund, but it’s still a million dollars. Neuzil said that they would have to pay it either this year or next year or spread it out over a number of years. Horne said that they could do it that way. Stutsman asked Horne to find out what the total cost is if they bond over one year or over 5 years. Neuzil asked if it is beneficial to just bite the bullet and pay it off, but that’s easier said than done because the next year the Board will have $1 million less.

Neuzil asked if Horne is monitoring the decision or if it’s only the Auditor’s Office that’s going to pick the equipment. She said that the Board can fund $800,000 instead of a million and he will have to come up with a system for it. Neuzil said that for new financial software a group of people are getting together and it’s determined by cost versus need. He said that here, there’s nothing to stop the request from being $1 million when it could be $600,000. Stutsman said that Slockett is an elected official and he has decided that this is what he needs. Thompson said that Slockett has a good track record of being frugal and he makes good arguments regarding positioning the County for the future. Lehman asked if he has to put it out for bids. Horne replied that he’s looked at more than one company and he thinks he has to do an RFP. Thompson said that it’s hardware so he should. Stutsman said that he might be waiting to see how much money the Board will give. Stutsman said it is up to the Board. Neuzil said the Board understands that there is a need for a change, but he’s making the point of whether he really needs a million-dollar system. Harney said that when he spelled out the issues associated with this system over the others was whether or not Braille and hearing impaired people could be accommodated. Stutsman reiterated that the bottom line is that the Board sets the budget. Neuzil suggested that as Supervisors, they should be asking other counties what they’re paying for their new systems. Thompson said she’d like to see a plan where the Board sets a limit of $1 million over 3 years so that each year they can pay off $300,000.

Horne asked the Board if they would like him to get a comparison of different vendors from the Auditor. Neuzil said it would be nice to know. Stutsman suggested asking him what the bottom line cost is that he could obtain the equipment for. Neuzil said he’s been very opened minded about letting the Board attend demos. Thompson said that they didn’t want to borrow money and then have him decide to wait and save more to add to it. Neuzil said the legislation is changing so much, including the new legislation for blind persons, so he didn’t know what would be next. He added that he’d like to know what other communities are doing. Stutsman said that most counties updated their systems long-ago. She said it’s surprising how far ahead some of the smaller counties are. Horne said that the smaller counties might also bond over time for these types of things. He added that Johnson County has a lot more precincts than a small county, which requires a lot more machines. Neuzil asked how some counties in Iowa can get away with having the old pull tab systems and added that there’s one county that still counts them by hand. Horne said that he would guess that there are regulations based on size. Stutsman commented that some of these counties only have 10,000 residents. Horne added that for GASB 34, the small counties get an extra 2 years to become compliant. Neuzil said one of the reasons the Board is looking to update their system is so it works better, but at the same time other counties have even more antiquated systems. Stutsman said that she is embarrassed for Johnson County to have a line on Election Day because they can’t fix the machine. Parkins explained that the whole country will have to be getting new equipment to be compliant with the new legislation regarding the blind. Neuzil asked how strict the rules will be interpreted. He asked whether these new machines will have to be at each precinct. Parkins replied that equipment for the blind must be available at each precinct by 2006. Neuzil said that will total hundreds of billions of dollars across the nation. Thompson said that maybe bonding is premature so the Board could just do the savings again and leave it to the following year. Harney said if it is legislation, the demand goes up so the availability is down, so it will cost more. Thompson said that a lot of times the price goes down, but Harney said that it could go the other way too. Neuzil said one of the things the Board needs to consider is whether or not there are going to be any grant opportunities available. Thompson said that there aren’t going to be if the Board has already spent the money.

Recessed at 11:40 a.m.; reconvened at 1:05 p.m.

(continued in Part 2)