• Senior Center Commission Member Eve Casserly: Senior Center Update

• County Engineer Mike Gardner and Assistant County Engineer Al Miller: Sanitary Sewer Design and Related Issues Associated with the Land Exchange Under Consideration with the National Guard

• Discussion: Spring County Cleanup Week from Saturday, June 7 Through Saturday June 14, 2003

• Report (Thompson): Attended School to Work Project Meeting

• Report (Neuzil): Attended SEATS Advisory Committee Meeting; Attended Site Visit of Sugar Bottom Road; Attended Safety Committee Meeting; Attended Communications Committee Meeting; and Attended Fundraisers for U.S. Troops

• Report (Stutsman): Attended Housing Task Force Meeting; Attended Communications Committee Meeting; Upcoming DNR Workshop Regarding Illegal Dumping; Attended Mental Health Funds Foundation Meeting; and Attended Meeting with Secondary Roads

• Report (Harney): Attended Meeting with Secondary Roads; Attended ECICOG Board of Directors Meeting; Attended ECICOG Transportation Policy Committee Meeting; Attended E911 Board Meeting; Attended 6th Judicial District Department of Corrections Meeting; and Attended Emergency Management Commission Meeting

• Greg Pickett: Secondary Roads 5 Year Construction Program

• Reverend Bob Welsh: Upcoming Johnson County Task Force on Aging Meeting; and Upcoming Environmental Protection Agency Senior Listening Meeting

• Mary Ellen Hill: Emergency Housing Program

• Jonathan Jordahl: Upcoming North Corridor Plan Work Session

Chairperson Harney called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 9:00 a.m. Members present were: Pat Harney, Mike Lehman, Terrence Neuzil, Sally Stutsman, and Carol Thompson.

Harney: We'll open the Informal Meeting of the Board of Supervisors for Thursday, April 03, 2003. First item of business is from Eve Casserly, Senior Center update. Good morning Eve.

Senior Center Commission Member Eve Casserly: Good morning. I'm Eve Casserly, and I'm a County appointee to the Senior Commission. I'm here this morning to report on the actions of the Senior Center Commission at the last meeting that was the 24th of March. At that time they were addressing taking a final vote on their proposal for change at the Senior Center. As you know that's always been a Center operating with no membership fee. The Commission has voted to incorporate a fee. It will be a 3 level fee: $25 for Iowa City residents, $40 for those who live in Johnson County but outside of Iowa City, and $60 for those living outside of Johnson County. For another person in the family living in the same dwelling unit that would be an additional, for Iowa City, $16; for Johnson County people an additional $24; for out of County people an additional $36. In terms of how many people are affected: according to February information at the Center, there are about 2,500 registrants all told, of which about 1,723 are Iowa City residents, and 622 from Johnson County but not Iowa City, and an additional 151 from outside of Johnson County who come in for one reason or another. The vote was not unanimous. There's certainly some variety of opinions on the Commission. It was passed however on a 7-2 vote. In other matters, the Center will be encouraging contributions by any person or business, and they set up a level of contributions. It's in the folder there. The bottom level will be anywhere from $1 and $74. The next, bronze, contribution level is $75. Silver, $150. Gold, $250. Platinum, $500. Supporting contributor, $1,000. Now, membership isn't required for those who want to simply come in and have access to the public areas, meaning Senior Dining, or using the agency services such as VNA, that are housed in the building, or AARP, or the Ship people. But one would have to have a membership in order to buy a parking permit, with the exception that those who are Senior Dining customers, as evidenced by having their names on the NAPAS forms, would be allowed to purchase the parking permit. In the future, the plan is to explore changing the name of the Center as part of a marketing plan. Again that's something that has some difference of opinion. There was a petition submitted by Betty McCrae, at the Commission meeting, 177 people signing that, advocating that the name Senior Center be retained, and also advocating for a uniform and lower fee. However, as I said, that was not supported. Can I answer any questions?

Lehman: The membership fee level, that's a recommendation from the Commission that will be considered by the Iowa City City Council?

Casserly: Yes, at this time it will be taken to the City Manager, and then the Iowa City City Council, and then following that, it's my understanding that Jay Honohan, the Senior Commission Chair, will be coming here to present the final version. As it now stands, it's final insofar as the Commission itself is concerned. Future input would have to come from the City Manager and/or City Council members.

Lehman: Thank you Eve.

Harney: Thank you.

Stutsman: Thank you.

Harney: The next item is County Engineer, Mike Gardner, Al Miller, and Rob Winstead, referencing sanitary sewer design and related issues associated with the land exchange with the National Guard.

Assistant County Engineer Rob Winstead: Good morning. As promised, we're back. This is a follow-up from our early February meeting, where we talked to you about the sanitary sewer issues for the proposed National Guard site. Mike's handing out a worksheet that I'll tell you about in a second or 2. I guess the bottom line is, we've gotten Iowa City's approval for the preliminary design and concept of the sewer, and what Mike is handing out is basically what's been approved.

Stutsman: What does that mean, preliminary? Does that mean the 8-inch or…

Winstead: Well we did a preliminary design, a concept design, and the first step was to figure out what size sewer we would need to sewer the different drainage areas that we've identified on this map, and then go through the calculations to show what that size is. We did a preliminary layout as far as what direction it would travel and how deep it would have to be. That was submitted to Iowa City on February 20, and we got their official approval just this week that that looked good to them. I guess I just want to point out that we're submitting all this to Iowa City because this sewer will become a City-owned, City-maintained sewer, once we're done. It won't be a private sewer that the County will be maintaining in the future, so we're working with them on this design and getting their approvals. To get you oriented, north is up, we've labeled 218 and Melrose Avenue on there, and we've labeled where our Secondary Roads shop currently is. The proposed National Guard site shows up on there. You can see the County Home. At the very bottom of your sheet there's a manhole number 15, and it works its way north, 16, 17, and then you get up to number 18. That thin line sewer is the existing 8-inch that's out there. We don't have to redo that part of the sewer. As you continue to head north, manhole 19, 20, 21, 22, and 22a, it's kind of that thicker, solid line, that's the layout of the new sewer that we would propose to service that drainage area B. It's about 27 acres, and that includes the proposed National Guard site, but not only the National Guard site, a portion of other County-owned property. You can see the boundary of that drainage area. It's the long solid line with 2 dashes, it kind of outlines that. The other thing that this shows is as you continue west from that manhole 22, you go 23, 24, and 25, that sewer's the dashed line. That extension would service an additional 33 and a half acres. That's shown on there also. That would include the Secondary Roads site, and you can see that it also includes quite a bit of County-owned land south of IWV Road, all the way out to Slothower Road. Those drainage areas basically are a picture frame of what can drain to that sewer. It's defined by the lay of the land, and really the limiting factor of what we can service with this proposed sewer is not so much the size that we choose to run, but how deep it's getting. For instance, north of the Secondary Roads office, that land really starts dropping off, and that' s really what's forming that limit of what this sewer can serve.

Lehman: Your points 18, 19, and 20, just south of Chatham Oaks, that's a duplication, but you had to go back and probably drop that elevation a little bit so you could pick up further out?

Winstead: Right. It's dropping in elevation quite a bit in order to be at the right elevation to serve the National Guard site.

Thompson: So you just replace what's already there.

Winstead: The existing sewer that this 18, 19, to 20… We would remove that existing sewer and replace it with the new. It would go in the same spot but deeper. And then of course the County Home's sewer service would get tied in to the new sewer.

County Engineer Mike Gardner: I thought he was asking about 16, 17, on south of there.

Lehman: I think it confirms what Rob was saying, that from 18 on, 18, 19, 20 is not necessarily a duplication but a replacement because it probably came up on a sharper elevation and then you drop it down so it can go further out.

Winstead: That's correct. So I guess in summary, we've got approval to construct new sewer from manhole 18 north, and the next step in this process would be to kind of work out the final details and prepare the final design and specifications such that that could be put out for bids. There's some choices here. Obviously there's a component of this sewer that would serve the 27-plus acres, including the National Guard, and then there would be another component that would expand that, and serve an additional 33.5 acres, which would include Secondary Roads also. We do have a cost estimate for the National Guard piece, that drainage area B, 27 acres, it's approximately $120,000. Then there would be an additional $100,000 to extend it further and pick up that other 33 and a half acres.

Stutsman: What's the advantage of extending that further? Just basically to get Secondary Roads on?

Winstead: That would be the most immediate benefit to that sewer. We could tie in Secondary Roads, but as you can see it would leave some currently non-sewer used areas… There would be a sewer available for those if the County…

Stutsman: But we don't have any immediate plans for any of those areas.

Winstead: No.

Lehman: Is that a decision we'll need to make after the bids are out? Are you going to have 2 options, one for just servicing Chatham Oaks and the National Guard, and the other one would be to go on out… It may be a cost savings to do it all at once, but as Sally pointed out, if there isn't an immediate demand for the second phase of it, maybe it's something we…

Winstead: Well there's 2 choices I guess. You could certainly define what you want to see in the final plans and specs, whether it's just to serve area B, or to serve B and A. You can bid both of them, one maybe as an alternate…

Lehman: I'm wondering if you're suggesting that we bid the base of what we need to service Chatham Oaks and the National Guard, and then ask for an option if we ask for service of an extra 33 and a half acres.

Winstead: That can be done. If prices come in real good on the bids, you certainly have the opportunity to…

Lehman: It would give us a good benchmark if we decided not to do it. It might be in a few years from now, at least you know halfway where it might be with the cost interest and that type of thing. It's going to be considerably higher if you wait to do it, and also the fact that if you're going to have somebody do it, and their equipment's all there and they have permits and that type of thing it's going to be a cost savings. It might be valuable information to have.

Winstead: I know contractors would prefer to see a nice solid this is a for sure project. Sometimes when you have these alternates that make up almost as much sewer as the other piece, sometimes you're not sure if you get the cut bottom price, because there's uncertainty for them, but you can certainly do that.

Stutsman: Where's the money coming from to pay for this? Is this out of Secondary Roads Mike?

Gardner: I don't think that discussion has taken place yet.

Assistant County Attorney Andy Chappell: I think the best way to approach that question, and all this is pretty preliminary. I think Secondary Roads told you they'd be back as soon as they could and that's what they're doing. I've had some more correspondence with the National Guard and hope to be back in front of you folks in the very near future with a recommendation, or at least more information as to how we can proceed assuming the Board still wants to proceed with the land exchange. Obviously they're not looking for a decision on any of this right now, but wanted to get you thinking about it. You ask what the benefit of extending that line is, and the short answer to that is, we don't know. It depends on what you end up doing with the County farm property. There's been some discussion of whether that property would want to be more utilized in a more tourist-intensive, if you will, fashion. Obviously that's been nothing but talk at this point, but this is the type of project that you would probably need to do something like that. There's also been talk about the future of the Secondary Roads property itself and whether, at some point, given the lay of that land and the value of that land, maybe at some point we won't chase Secondary Roads out of there just because the land becomes too valuable. Obviously all of this is just talk at this point. But given that we've at least come far enough on the project to have Secondary Roads do these estimates, it made sense to have them do an additional estimate to extend the line out to Secondary Roads property, and to cover those 2 areas, both north and south of Melrose. As far as where the money comes from and everything, this isn't a project in the whole, at least as far as Area B is concerned, that would benefit at all Secondary Roads, really, for that matter. I think the best way to approach that would be to have your Executive Assistant get with his budget administrator and come up with some sort of proposal as to where that money would probably come from. It is my understanding, probably at least the first phase would be part and parcel of the land acquisition, assuming that went through the cost of making the swap. No one assumed it was going to be a true cashless endeavor, and they can certainly advise you on whether, given the cost, it's still a good deal for the County. I think that in all likelihood, given the numbers I've seen that will come back, that the response will be that yes, it's still a very good deal for the County to proceed with the land swap. This is just preliminarily, they wanted to get the information out to you, and I think that's appropriate. I'll have some more information for you in the very near future, and we can talk more about these issues then.

Stutsman: These cost estimates, are these pretty accurate, do you think?

Winstead: They're the best we can do at this point in time. They're more refined than maybe what the Public Works Director in Iowa City indicated to us back in November, but until we do those final detailed plans, we won't have a final cost estimate, but we feel comfortable with the numbers we've reported. Iowa City did in fact take a look at those estimates along with the preliminary design and we got feedback from them that they were comfortable with those also.

Stutsman: But they're not interested in contributing at all to this project, or have we got to that point yet?

Winstead: I haven't had any discussions with Iowa City regarding that.

Stutsman: Would that be part of the discussion?

Chappell: That's not a discussion that I think would be appropriate for the Secondary Roads department to be having. It's more of a policy level discussion, and the answer to that, too, depends. It's quite possible that, if there's been discussion of perhaps some County property being contributed someday to a City park. If that were to take place, then maybe Iowa City would have some more interest in participating in some of that process. But those aren't discussions that have been had. In fact I think the plan for the County property still hasn't been approved at this point, I mean the preliminary Land Use Plan, so it's still kind of preliminary.

Stutsman: Well off the cuff, I think while we're out there and we've got everybody out there, let's just finish it. But then I'm thinking, am I ready for the consequences of finishing this sewer line, and that's what I need to think about. When it's built, then do we get all kinds of pressure then to develop this faster than what we're ready to do. So that's where I'm coming from.

Harney: But if you look at the lower part of that, that wouldn't be served by that sewer, either, that would be a separate portion. We're just talking about the areas along Melrose Avenue.

Stutsman: Well, and still that area. Are we ready… We haven't even approved this preliminary plan, and if we start talking about putting a sewer line, I'm afraid the plan will direct us, instead of us directing the plan. I'm just thinking aloud, are we ready to get into that position. Gee, you've got a sewer line out there, gee we need to do this, we need to do that, and things, so… It's an investment, and we have to think of the consequences of that investment, and if the Board's ready to move on quicker than what we anticipated.

Thompson: But your assignment was just to design a sewer that would work, right?

Winstead: Yes, we strictly looked at the numbers with Iowa City, the engineering type stuff. They're on board with this concept and the preliminary design. When we construct or if we construct manhole number 22 to service the National Guard, there's nothing saying you can't continue on from that point at a later date. It would still be at the appropriate elevation to continue on.

Thompson: In terms of sewer projects you have seen in the past, is this an ordinary one? Did you find any unusual problems or barriers that you have to overcome?

Winstead: I think the trickiest thing, if there is one associated with this, might be we've got some depth on this sewer that's deeper than what you would normally come across. We're going to have some manholes that are 20-plus feet deep. So from that standpoint I guess that would be a little bit different than normal. Normally they aren't putting them in that deep. That would be the biggest thing.

Stutsman: So, you brought this information, what's the next step now to…

Gardner: Our main purpose in coming in was we were in earlier in February, I think February 6th, and got guidance from you that we were to proceed with the design, and thought at that time we'd be back a little quicker than we were. But Iowa City, like Rob said, just got back to us this week on their approval of the proposed design. We wanted to get back to you as quickly as we could to give you a status report on where things stand right now and let you know that we've gone now as far as we can until some other discussion and some other decisions take place. That's all we're doing this morning, is giving you an update on where things stand with this.

Harney: I think Rob has done an excellent job on this, in laying it out. He did most of that work himself, in conjunction with you guys…

Gardner: He's done an excellent job, and of course as you know he has some contacts down at Iowa City, with the City, and so he's been able to work very closely with them, and get some input from them that's been invaluable to us in this whole process too.

Harney: I think the next step now is to wait until Andy gets back to us with that information that he's putting together and then we'll get back together with you folks on a decision how to proceed with this.

Gardner: Sounds good.

Stutsman: Just for my clarification, Andy, what information are you putting together?

Chappell: Well, I've had some more contact with the National Guard as to where they're at in their process in approving the preliminary plan and that sort of thing.

Stutsman: Thank you.

Chappell: We'll also advise you on where we do go from here if the Board still wants to proceed.

Harney: Thank you. Do you have a question Bob?

Reverend Bob Welsh: If I heard right, I'm not sure I heard right, but it might be that you get a better bid if you bid the whole thing as a total project rather than having an alternate serving just the National Guard.

Harney: That's what he said, yes.

Welsh: Rather than the other way around.

Gardner: Good point.

Harney: Any business from the County Attorney?

Chappell: No business.

Harney: Business from the Board of Supervisors discussion referencing County Clean-up Week, Saturday June 7th through Saturday June 14th. What this will be, the rural residents of Johnson County will be able to bring up to 1,000 pounds of free disposal per household with a minimum of 150 pounds per trip to the landfill. They would leave a ticket at the landfill, which in turn would be billed, to the County to cover that 1,000 pounds of free disposal.

Stutsman: Did we hear anything about the tires? Did we get OK on that, that they were going to take tires at half the cost?

Budget Coordinator Jeff Horne: The tires were going to be part of this. That’s what we talked about last week when Brad was here.

Stutsman: They are going to be part of this.

Lehman: The weight of your tires will be part of your…

Horne: I think the Board wanted to discuss, as I recall, today whether or not things like appliances were going to be included or how to address that issue.

Stutsman: I thought we were going to…

Thompson: It sounded from Brad’s written materials like it would just be easier for them to just count the weight of the load and not have to be sorting stuff out. I wasn’t here for his presentation, but it seemed like he was hoping that we were going to just say whatever they bring.

Harney: I think you were gone last week when he talked about that. When he talked about it, if I recollect correctly, the appliances he wanted to keep separate from everything else because they have to separate those. It was up to us if we wanted to pay for the appliances because they go to a different area and they’re handled differently. I think they charge something like $15.

Horne: Yes, there’s a charge.

Stutsman: And now they’re starting to take computers and monitors. Electronics.

Thompson: So we need to vote on that next week?

Stutsman: Well we need to decide if we’re going to include that in the 1,000 pounds or if we’re going to just include basically what we had and people will still have to pay for their own appliances. We’ve not done that in the past, included the appliances in the 1,000 pounds.

Horne: It’s kind of hard if there’s a surcharge with the electronics and things like that, what effect that might have on budgets and that area.

Stutsman: Maybe that’s something we should consider for next year for budgets. The monitors. It’s a new program, so not even a lot of people may be aware that you can take monitors and old computers out there. You can’t just take them random, you have to make an appointment to do it. We thought it might be a good idea to include it with the Spring Clean Up, but maybe that’s something we can think about for budget.

Horne: We budget pretty close to what we need for the 1,000 pounds as is right now. I think we’re probably looking at some kind of increase there that right now we don’t have in the budget as it currently stands.

Harney: The increase I think is the half-price on the tires, which they didn’t have before because the State dollars stopped coming down to cover that, so we’re picking that up. I would like to leave the appliances I think as they have been in the past.

Horne: We did add something in for the tires for next year, but not for appliances or electronics or anything else.

Lehman: The weight of the tires will be deducted from your 1,000 pounds limitation. If you take 1,200 pounds out there you get the first 1,000; the County pays for it and you're charged for the rest.

Stutsman: Good point. I received a phone call from the individual who is head of the Furniture Project out at the landfill. She was asking if we could include in our press release that people also can deposit good used furniture at the Furniture Project out there just as kind of a reminder for people. I didn’t realize the Furniture Project was out there now. If people have a couch that’s in pretty good condition, that they can drop it off at the Furniture Project and haul the rest of the stuff to the weigh scale. She talked to me. I had her talk to Jo. I noticed that it’s not included on the press release. I think it’s good information for people to have that that’s available.

Lehman: That wouldn’t, that doesn’t count against your 1,000 pounds.

Stutsman: It would be a donation to the Furniture Project, so yes.

Lehman: Is that open every day of the week?

Stutsman: My understanding is that it is, yes.

Lehman: You wouldn’t need an appointment like hazardous waste.

Stutsman: You might clarify that with Jo to see if that might be incorporated in there.

Harney: So we’ll put that together and put it on the formal agenda for approval.

Horne: Yes, I’ll talk with Jo after the meeting.

Harney: Next item is reports and inquiries. Would you like to start Mike?

Lehman: I don’t think I have anything that needs to be covered. I think I’ll pass.

Harney: Carol?

Thompson: I’m passing too. I was going to talk about the Work Force Development. Well yesterday Pat and I met with… is her name Mary Lou Erlacher from the School to Work Connection?

Harney: Yes.

Thompson: I get the names of the programs confused sometimes. She did point out to us that when she actually presented us with a letter that asked for funding and we somehow overlooked this in our budget process. So there was discussion about whether we could find a way to make up the difference to them. It’s $4,400 that they were asking for. That would mean that if we joined their group, it would mean that all but one of the counties in their area is now participating. So that will probably be on for a future agenda. You folks can be thinking about how you feel about it.

Neuzil: It was brought up in the budget process, it just didn’t have…

Thompson: Boy, it sure slipped my mind.

Neuzil: Well there’s $48 million of budget items.

Thompson: Well that’s true.

Neuzil: I think at the time we just wanted to focus in on the current projects that we were giving money too. I think that’s why it just got lost.

Stutsman: Yes, I remember talking about it during the budget process too and basically saying no new projects is what we determined.

Neuzil: It needs to be probably discussed a little bit closer. By the way, Mary Lou Erlacher has a real nice letter to the editor in today’s newspaper. You can check that out. I don’t know which one, the Gazette or Press-Citizen.

Harney: OK, Terry.

Neuzil: Briefly, I met with the SEATS. I’m the secretary of the SEATS Advisory Committee. That means that I get to help put the agendas together and so we had a little agenda meeting this past week. The SEATS Advisory Committee will actually meet tomorrow morning over at the Civic Center in Iowa City. Mike Lehman and I, we had the opportunity to go out to do a site visit over near Sugar Bottom Road. It was kind of an interesting one. It’s one of those that’s going to be discussed pretty soon here on the Planning & Zoning agendas if you will. Next Thursday night is with… Location is near Sugar Bottom. It’s land owned by Dick Schwab and a number of others, but we did a site visit there. Had a Safety Committee meeting. We’re continuing to work closely and had a presentation with Tom Hanson from Emergency Management, discussing the kind of response that Johnson County needs to be prepared for. He gave a very good overview of terrorists threats that are certainly even here in Johnson County. Sally and I had an opportunity to attend the Communications Committee meeting. I know Sally, do you want to talk more about that when we get to it. OK, I’ll let you do that. I had the opportunity also to attend a couple of fundraisers. I went to the Hope United Methodist Church over the weekend. They had a troop fundraiser. It was a real nice event, raising money for our troops. Also Lone Tree had real nice event on Sunday. Besides that we had another site visit with Planning & Zoning. Had the opportunity to do that with Sally. We’ll have a couple of pretty interesting discussions again with that location up of Sugar Bottom and also with the Yutzy project down near Kalona. So those will be 2 pretty active meetings. I anticipate a lot of people coming on in. We hope that people will call and let us know what you feel about those projects. At least let us know. That is it.

Harney: Thank you.

Harney: Sally?

Stutsman: OK. I had a pretty busy week. Had a Housing Task Force meeting last Thursday. Just kind of brief updates. Lone Tree got some rehab funds to update their water system and some housing. They got a $200,000 grant. There also was an update about the Housing Trust Fund. That is used to fund and allocate projects locally. The organizational work has been done on it as well as the fiscal management and now they’re going to be applying for a grant for Fannie Mae funds to hopefully hire a staff person that can get that project going. They hope to get half a million dollars to start projects. The median family income for one person will be $39,800 so it will allow for more people to participate in housing projects. Communications Committee as Terrence said, we had a good committee meeting. We’re just really getting some things done. It’s a terrific group to work with. The County video is currently with Andy Small and he’s working on that. We wanted to hopefully have it done by County Government Week, but that’s not going to happen. It will be done later on in the spring. County Government Week is going to be April 7th to the 14th. So we are having a number of things going on for County Government Week. First of all we're having a reception for the volunteers that we have serving on various boards and commissions for the County. We’re going to have it downstairs, Thursday afternoon, just prior to the Board meeting. Terrence is making the punch.

Neuzil: Neuzil punch. Right before our Board meeting.

Stutsman: And all elected officials and department heads are being asked to contribute a dozen cookies or bars or something to defray the cost and have some food available. We’re also on target to have the presentation of our, well it’s not called a kiosk, it’s a monitor system downstairs to give information to the public. What we decided to do, at first we were talking about having a cabinet with some computers inside. But now we’re going to have what we call the flat screen wall monitor, so we’re going to purchase 2 of those monitors that will be put on the wall in the entry area. People can use those to access information about County Government. We’ve got a software program that will be user friendly, similar to what people use in the library. You go in and you want information. The idea is eventually to replace that tipsy directory downstairs so that people can find out where the Recorder’s Office is, where you get driver’s licenses, where you pay your property taxes and things. So that hopefully will be ready by the 10th, so that we can demonstrate it and show people what that’s going to be like. Information Services has updated the County brochure and these will be available during County Government Week. They’re just great. I think they did a terrific job on the color. There’s information about all the County Offices; where they’re located, what their hours are and also a map inside to help people so they know where the location of County services and things. So that will be available. We’re also planning to have the posting of the offices for County Offices on the outside of the building. See I had a copy of what that would look like. David Kempf did a great job of getting that lined up. So that’s going to be posted on the outside of the County Administration Building. It will tell, which offices are on the first floor and which offices are on the second floor, plus also their hours. So that should be real helpful. We’re going to also include the address of the County Administration Building. It’s real helpful to have the Budget Coordinator and HR downstairs because they are good to answer the questions, the frequently answered questions. That’s one of them is what’s the address of this building, am I at the right building, is this the Administration Building or is it the Courthouse or whatever. So you can look at that and get an idea. I think that’s everything. There’s the poster downstairs that everybody, all the employees, are encouraged to sign thanking the Commission and Board members for participating and helping County Government run smoother. So I think that’s the list of things that we had from the Communications Committee. Then our next big project will be the County Fair. So that will be on the agenda for next time to discuss. I wanted to mention there is a workshop being sponsored by the Department of Natural Resources. They are going around the State and having these one day workshops on how to establish and operate an illegal dumping prevention and response program. One of the sites that they’re going to have that workshop is going to be here in Iowa City at the Conservation Educational Center. That’s May 13th from 8:00 to 5:00. I am going to plan to attend that and hopefully Kevin Hackathorn from Secondary Roads will attend that too. We are getting to see more and more of an issue of illegal dumping in the rural areas, so I think we might get some insight and some ideas on how to prevent it. One of the, I’ve asked Secondary Roads or Secondary Roads has been tracking what it has cost. The cost isn’t that exorbitant at this point, but what is a problem is now the Secondary Roads workers are all getting hepatitis B shots because of handling illegal dumping in the road side. I think as time goes on it’s going to be more and more of an issue, so I think it’s good to kind of stay ahead of the curve on that one. I attended a preliminary meeting to begin work on setting up the foundation funds for the Mental Health Fund. We are going to have another meeting just before the Planning Council that we will involve providers and anybody else that’s interested in finding out more about the project. Pat and I met with Secondary Roads for our monthly meeting. One of the issues that we talked about was the Izaak Walton and the deannexation on that. That’s kind of hit a snag, so it may be awhile before that little section is deannexed. They finally got things all cleared away with the railroad and now they’re running into some issues as far as Hills Bank and bonding, that are going to have to work out. So I’ve been in communication with Kathy Fitzmaurice and Jay Honohan from Hills, letting them know that we’re interested in following that and keeping informed about how that’s going. We get a number of complaints from the people that live out in Izaak Walton about that terrible bumping stretch between the railroad and old Highway 218. It’s not a very big stretch and I think the County’s on board to go ahead and make repairs, but we don’t want to do it until all this deannexation is taken care of and cleared up. I wish it had moved along a little faster, but it hasn’t. So if you get calls, that’s what we’re waiting for. That’s it.

Harney: Thank you.

Harney: As Sally said, it’s been a busy week again. Just a tidbit to follow up on the roadside dumping. It’s really become a safety issue for the County road crews. They’re beginning to find a lot of chemicals and containers of large quantities being dumped along the roadsides. Naturally they don’t know what those chemicals are. It becomes a real problem trying to dispose of those and determining what those are.

Stutsman: They talked about that. They had some cans that were dumped. They picked them up. Now they don’t know what they are so they’ve got them sitting in a shed and don’t know really what to do with them.

Lehman: No labels on them.

Stutsman: No labels.

Lehman: You don’t want to open them, because you don’t know what’s in there.

Stutsman: Yet if they’re hazardous materials, they don’t want them sitting in the shed.

Harney: No labels and there’s restrictions on where they go so they really have a hard time with it. It is becoming an issue. Last Thursday I attended the ECICOG Board of Directors meeting in Cedar Rapids. They adopted procedures for the support letters for cities requesting annexations. They also reviewed the Community Housing Fund applications, the CDBG awards, water and sewer funds, and Community Facility Services Funds. So they’ve got a lot going on there. I also attended the ECICOG Region 10 Transportation Policy Committee meeting. They had their public hearing on the transportation plans for East Central Iowa Transit for FY 2004. I’ve got a copy available if anyone would like to see that. Also they had a public hearing on the transportation improvement program for Region 10. It’s Benton, Cedar, Iowa, Johnson, Jones, Linn and Washington Counties. Friday had an E911 Board meeting. There was a demonstration from DCC, which is Dialogic Communications Corporation. It was a demonstration on high-speed notification for emergency services like public safety. Any notifications that need to be made, they make all the phone calls to particular areas. They can pick out a particular area that you may have an issue with, such as near Procter & Gamble where they may have had a chemical spill or any other particular area where something might have happened. They have a recording that can automatically call all the particular residents in that area. It’s a real good system. Linn County is using that system currently and it can be used for many more things, any types of notifications you want to make. There’s a lot of tag-ons that can go on to that for public service. As Sally said, we met with Secondary Roads personnel. Friday had a 6th Judicial Board of Directors meeting in Cedar Rapids, Department of Corrections. They had the same thing. They’re beginning to get a lot of their much needed budget dollars back. The State has restored some of those funds and it’s going to be used for corrections for supervision, offenders and other advisory needs. There’s been a real need for the supervision of the people that’s being released and this is going to help them an awful lot. There was also a presentation given by Jerry Allen on sex offender supervision. She oversees the sex offenders out of the program at Cedar Rapids. They do a rehab program that goes with that. They have approximately 70 sex offenders in this particular district that they’re overseeing. It’s a real task. They’re working very close with Canadian officials as well. The 6th Judicial here is probably one of the premier departments in the Country that’s overseeing sex offenders and they’re doing a very good job. Johnson County Emergency Management Commission meeting with Director Tom Hanson. Homeland security and some of the security procedures such as he talked about this morning. There’s also going to be a weather spotter-training program on Wednesday April 16th, at Montgomery Hall. That’s basically for law enforcement, fire fighters, first responders, school officials and medical facilities people. So that’s pretty much my week.

Harney: Do we have any inquires or reports from the public? Please identify yourself for the Auditor.

Greg Pickett: Hi, I’m Greg Pickett and I live at 361 Newport Road. What I wanted to discuss was the local funds being used in the 5-Year Road Construction Plan. I believe that purchasing $1.3 million worth of right-of-way with Farm to Market Funds is a better use of the local taxpayer dollar. I am opposed to the current proposal for using $1.3 million of local funds for right-of-way purchases. I had previously believed that local funds had to be used for these until I received an email from the State. The State said use of the fund, said Farm to Market Road Fund, included in it is the acquiring of additional right-of-way and all other expenses accrued in the construction, re-construction, or improvement of said Farm to Market Road. I talked to Mike Gardner about this and I’m sorry that he had left. In one of his emails to me he said that Farm to Market Funds can be used to acquire right-of-way for projects on Farm to Market routes. Johnson County has not done this historically. We have considered it and will possibly do it in the future, but have no plans at this time. Now there are other counties in the State that do use their Farm to Market Funds for right-of-way purchases. If you look at your budgets, you’re going to have a budget session this afternoon. In your Capital Projects you have a total budget of $3.8 million. Part of that, about 1/3 is the 5-Year Road Construction Plan, of which you have $1.1 million and you list roads, bridges and culverts when actually you should add to that. On the bottom, farmland and front lawns, because of this $1.1 million, you are spending $435,000 to buy right-of-way. That’s 38%. The reason I just put it in pencil is it doesn’t need to be there. This doesn’t need to be in here. You can erase it, take care of the problem as you're doing the budget. What could you do with that? We heard about the Senior Center today and your County Space Needs. You could have a no fee Senior Center. You could pay it off. You could cover it all. What else? You have Capital Expenditures. You could buy other Sheriff patrol cars. You could buy another ambulance. You could buy a SEATS vehicle. You could buy a water tanker maybe for Iowa City so that Iowa City if they are first response to a rural fire, could go about their business. As it stands now, if they are the first response to a rural fire, they have to wait until either Solon or one of the local fire companies get there because they have the tanker truck and Iowa City does not. I had in technology software for Road Plan, but we’ll just pass on that one. That’s all I have to say.

Stutsman: Thank you.

Harney: Thank you Greg. Anyone else.

Welsh: I have a couple things. I’m curious, I don’t know what all this gentleman’s background is, but is that something that you all have considered and decided not to apply for Farm to Road Markets?

Harney: No. We get Farm to Market Funds for road improvements and things like that. I think what he’s saying is that there’s other ways of using it than the way it’s been used in the past.

Thompson: But if we used it for the things he’s suggesting then we would have less for other areas and we would have to use local money for those. So in my opinion it would be a wash.

Pickett: It’s the choice between roads and people.

Horne: Can I clarify something for a second? The County is mandated by the State of Iowa to levy certain minimums and maximums for roads no matter what. So it’s not quite as simple as shifting this and that. We have a mandated levy that goes into the Secondary Roads Fund as a minimum. We tax at the minimum for the General Fund now. Then we tax just above the minimum from the Rural Fund.

Pickett: That’s true, but it’s not saying that you can’t use it for something else. You're talking about minimums, but I don’t ever hear any exact dollar amount, what’s left over or anything like that.

Horne: But we couldn’t shift that money back from the Secondary Roads Funds into the General Fund.

Pickett: It’s in Capital Improvement.

Horne: The way that the State breaks that… That’s a service area that’s broken up by the State, but we’re not allowed to transfer funds back out of that fund to our General Fund and co-mingle those funds.

Pickett: There are forms online for the State to transfer funds between Farm to Market and local funds. You have transferred $1 million a couple of years ago from local to Farm to Market because you were behind on Farm to Market.

Horne: Those are all within the Secondary Roads Fund.

Stutsman: See I think you have to remember that the Legislature in their wisdom wanted to make sure that we didn’t raid the Secondary Roads Fund to pay for other projects. It’s very clear that money has to stay in the rural side for Secondary Roads projects. I’m done.

Harney: Anything else Bob?

Welsh: 2 events that you might want to know about and the public might want to know about. The Johnson County Task Force on aging on Monday the 14th is having their task force meeting at 1:30 at the Senior Center. Eve Casserly has arranged for the program there to be on Emerson Point, which is the affordable assisted living project in Johnson County, which is the first project of it’s kind in the State of Iowa. There will be an opportunity for discussion and explanations of that program and how the Nutrition Program will be handled at that facility. You may want to be interested in that program.

Harney: That program is at the Senior Center, not at the Emerson?

Welsh: That’s right, at the Senior Center at 1:30, that’s Monday the 14th. The other and I don’t know whether you all have heard of this, the Environmental Protection Association is having a nationwide senior listening turn to discuss the impact of environmental rules and regulations in the Nation on the senior population. One of the sites that’s been selected for that listening is Iowa City, Iowa. That will be on the Tuesday the 15th at 1:30 at the Iowa Memorial Union. You can go onto the web site to register. There’s also an opportunity for people to register to speak if they desire. It seems to me that that becomes a real opportunity for the County in terms of the whole area of public health, environmental, to speak. I don’t know whether you all have discussed that or not, but I guess I’m just encouraging you, saying there is that opportunity. I would think the County would want to have some input into that national policy because there’s only going to be 7 places across the Country that have that opportunity and Johnson County is one of those.

Harney: Thank you. Anyone else? Do you want come forward and…?

Mary Ellen Hill: I just have a question. I just wanted to know if the Board, if you contribute in any way to the Emergency Housing Program.

Stutsman: Jeff?

Horne: Yes, we have a block grant to the Emergency Housing Project through our General Basic Block Grants through our General Fund.

Hill: Is there any way plan in the future to contribute to building another Emergency Housing Area? Is that what that money would go towards?

Horne: It’s just basically to operations. We have an agreement with them as to what that covers. Without having the agreement in front of me I can’t lay out specifically, but it’s basically to help cover the operations and the cost of the services that they provide.

Hill: Well of course you’re well aware of that the services that we have are not sufficient to cover the need. Emergency Housing is… More people show up at their door than they can ever handle. My question is, isn’t this something that the Board of Supervisors should be interested in? We need a larger facility for emergency housing. It seems to me like it’s something you and the City could… I know the City is now working towards something on this and enlarging that. I just wondered if this couldn’t be a joint project. People shouldn’t be sleeping in the woods in the wintertime and they’re turning away. Especially the men who show up there are being turned away because so many families are now showing up. I know I was down there once and they had 12 families. They were turning everyone else away. This is a crime that a County that’s as affluent as this County, that we aren’t providing housing for these people.

Harney: I think one thing on that, just to respond a little bit to that. Emergency Housing had traditionally been set up for as you said, overnight individuals, places to stay for short-term when they’re on their own. Recently they have chosen to change that operation to more of a transitional housing where families and so forth are staying. You're correct, they have pretty much eliminated the over-night housing for people passing through.

Hill: I think it’s just sinful that we have so much and we’re not doing something with it that is not more helpful to people. I sit here and I hear you talking about so much of your budget going to Secondary Roads and we have people sleeping in the woods in plastic bags. This is not what we’re about hopefully. Hopefully we should be addressing this problem of the people problems. I just got very involved with it this winter when I saw the conditions down there. It was quite by accident that I got involved with it, but I was just appalled. I was appalled that we as a people aren’t doing more for those of our own who are in need. It bothers me very much. I’d just like to throw it out to you to do something as a matter of discussion or something that we can work together for providing a better situation for these people. The truth of the matter is, we could all be in that position. I just think we owe more to those in need than we’re giving. That’s all.

Harney: Thank you. Does anyone else have anything? Jonathan?

Jonathan Jordahl: I have a question about the agenda for the rest of the morning. I understand that there’s a work session coming up on the North Corridor amendments. As a work session, if my memory serves me that may be a time when the public is not invited to comment. Is that going to be the case?

Thompson: Discussion from the public is on the agenda.

Jordahl: Is it on the agenda for that? OK. Good.

Welsh: Eve reminded me that in relation to the meeting on the 15th with equipment and others from the Environmental Protection Association, there will be a shuttle from the Senior Center every 15 minutes over to Memorial Union beginning at what time?

Casserly: Beginning at 12:30.

Welsh: Beginning at 12:30. So at 12:30, 12:45, 1:00, 1:15 there will be a shuttle to take people over to that meeting.

Harney: Will there be a publication of some sort coming out about the activities and times other than what you’ve just said that the general public will be able to be notified what’s going on?

Casserly: I think there’s been a little squib in the newspaper. However, it’s so easy to miss those sorts of things. So any opportunity helps.

Welsh: I think that’s a valid thing. I would hope that the press that’s here would check. I can email them if I get their email, the correct web page where they can get all this information.

Harney: Thank you. Does anyone else have anything? The meeting is closed.

Adjourned at 10:40 a.m.

Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor

By Casie Parkins, Recording Secretary

Sent to the Board of Supervisors on April 6, 2003 at 12:00 p.m.