MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, IOWA CITY CITY COUNCIL AND IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL BOARD:
APRIL 2, 1997
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Iowa City Willow Creek Sewer Interceptor Project and Southwest Area Economic Development
Update on Iowa City Airport Master Plan
Planning and Coordination Strategy for School Sites
Parking and Status for the Johnson County Senior Dining Program at the Senior Center
Update on Share the Road Program
Proposal for Regional Quality in Government Network
Tax Increment Financing Districts
Update on Johnson County Human Services Decategorization Project and Innovation Zone
Conference on Complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act
Proposal to Schedule an Emergency Preparedness Program
Update on Safe Schools/Safe Communities Juvenile Crime Prevention Conference
Update on Telecommunications Act of 1996
Update on Funding for Senior Center Contract
Proposal to Utilize Local Option Sales Tax to Fund School Construction and Maintenance
Scheduling a Future Joint Meeting
Johnson County Board of Supervisors Vice-Chairperson Joe Bolkcom called the Joint Meeting of the Johnson County Board of Supervisors, Iowa City City Council, and Iowa City Community School Board to order in the Westfield Inn at 4:14 p.m. Present were: Iowa City City Councilors Larry Baker, Karen Kubby, Ernie Lehman, Dee Norton, Dean Thornberry, and Dee Vanderhoef; Mayor Naomi Novick; Johnson County Supervisors Joseph Bolkcom, Jonathan Jordahl, Stephen Lacina; Supervisor Sally Stutsman arrived at 4:45 p.m. and Supervisor Charles Duffy was absent; and Iowa City Community School Board Members: Ernie Galer, Linda Levey, Vice-President Marvin Lynch, President George Matheson; School Board Member Alan Leff left at 5:26 p.m. and School Board Members Susan Mims and Cindy Parsons were absent.
Also present were: Iowa City: City Attorney Linda Woito, City Clerk Marian Karr, City Manager Stephen Atkins, Assistant Director of Planning and Community Development Jeff Davidson; Johnson County Board of Supervisors Administrative Assistant Carol Peters; Iowa City Community School District: Superintendent Barbara Grohe.
Johnson County Supervisor Joe Bolkcom: Why don't we go ahead and start and for the minute taker from the Auditor's Office if we could go around and introduce ourselves so she knows who we are as we take minutes for Tom.
Iowa City Mayor Naomi Novick: OK, the minute taker is right here. I'm Naomi Novick, Mayor of Iowa City.
Iowa City School Board President George Matheson: I'm George Matheson, President of the School Board.
Iowa City School Board Vice-President Marvin Lynch: Marvin Lynch, Vice President of the School Board.
Bolkcom: Joe Bolkcom.
Iowa City City Councilor Dee Norton: Dee Norton, City Council.
Iowa City City Councilor Larry Baker: Larry Baker, City Council.
Johnson County Supervisor Steve Lacina: Steve Lacina, County.
Iowa City City Councilor Dean Thornberry: Dean Thornberry, City Council.
Iowa City City Councilor Ernie Lehman: Ernie Lehman, City of Iowa City.
Johnson County Supervisor Jonathan Jordahl: Jonathan Jordahl, Johnson County Supervisor.
Iowa City School Board Member Alan Leff: Al Leff, School Board.
Iowa City City Councilor Karen Kubby: Karen Kubby, City Council.
Iowa City School Board Member Ernie Galer: Ernie Galer, School Board.
Iowa City City Councilor Dee Vanderhoef: Dee Vanderhoef, City Council.
Iowa City Willow Creek Sewer Interceptor Project and Southwest Area Economic Development
Novick: OK, we all have received an agenda and we're just going to run through it. Whoever of our groups had proposed that item should give us some idea of why it was proposed and what kind of information they would like to supply. The first one is Southwest Area Development of both economic development, airport master plan, southwest interceptor sewer. The City had some background information provided here on that, however it was an item proposed by Johnson County. Does anyone from Johnson County want to give us an idea of what they were considering here? Nobody wants to discuss this one huh?
Bolkcom: Obviously the correspondence from Bob Wolf to the City and then back again. Bob is here and Robert Miller is here from the Fair board and Rich Gay also from the Fair board that are concerned about issues associated with the dewatering associated with the sewer project.
Novick: Is there anything within the letter from Chuck Schmadeke that is disturbing?
Bolkcom: I would say there is a number of things that had me bothered. Bob, do you want to make a comment about or City staff on what the status of...
Robert Wolf: Sure.
Novick: Well it was the County Supervisors that put this item on the agenda, not Wolf so...
Bolkcom: We also invited Bob to be here for the discussion, because there is concern among not only Bob but folks that are involved with the operation of the County Fair there so... Jonathan or Steve maybe you could jump in at this point. Steve I think you...
Lacina: Go ahead Jonathan and then I'll follow up.
Novick: We're recording this we need to get whoever is speaking close enough to a microphone so that it can be recorded.
Lacina: You go first, then I'll finish up.
Kubby: It would be great if comments could be why items about Chuck's letter that don't seem right that there are continued concerns about.
Novick: OK, somebody from the Fair board, was that who you said?
Lacina: Two major concerns, I guess one would be the dewatering of the area that might impact the water supply for the neighbors down there. It would be the modular home park as well as Shucherts and the Fair board itself. The timetable would be another factor as far as when the dewatering took place so that it didn't impact the 4-H Fair. We have a large population down there and if an impact takes place and the water with a large population we're going to have septic problems and the like. I think a third major concern was whether or not dewatering of the ground would actually cause a reverse flow and pull river water back through what used to be a landfill. When I was a kid we threw lead based paints, DDT, all kinds of nasty stuff in the old landfill down there. There would be concerns about the backwash of river water moving possible contaminants into the water supply which I think you had an environmental impact statement done and it is now clean, but that it doesn't actually contaminate that ground and cause health problems. I would lay those 3 out as points of discussion and possible clarification for staff. Maybe that's been addressed.
Novick: Well the letter from staff did address the dewatering and the possible contamination based on the fact that they were talking about 800 feet distance from the Wolf property. I was not really too concerned about it. However, how is the distance from there to the fairgrounds? Is that any closer because of the way the thing is done? Does anybody know?
Wolf: No it's probably another 2500 feet from the edge of my property. A correction I just learned today that the...
Novick: Can you come forward and somehow get recorded?
Wolf: My name is Robert Wolf, I'm developing the Lake Ridge property. Our concern is that we've tried to enhance the lake property down there so that people can fish in there as you read in Chuck's letter and mine. That's how this all started. I just wanted to caution everybody that we do have some really nice clean water there, probably the best in the State and we're really fearful of having it contaminated through the dewatering process. Very possibly from pulling that leachate back through and we don't really know where it is on the other side of the road. But the well driller has informed us that it's over there and it's working its way down along Riverside Drive and I don't have any geological information do share with you to know where the clay layers and all of that stuff are. The other thing that Chuck's letter said that it was going to be 800 feet away and I just learned a while ago that it is in fact going to be within 200 feet of our property. In fact it is 150 feet off which basically as I see it puts it right at the end of the runway. I have a drawing I can show you.
Thornberry: While he's doing that... Naomi, do you remember what Chuck said that in the Elks property, we didn't want to put the golf course how close to one of the wells in fear of the contaminants getting into the city well water?
Novick: I don't remember the numbers.
Thornberry: What the distance was for those wells? Steve, do you remember?
Vanderhoef: I think it's 200.
Thornberry: 200 feet.
Vanderhoef: Yes, and they think it is probably going to go up, but it's a federal requirement.
Novick: The current requirement I think is 75 feet. But there is some change in the offing based on EPA or DNR and I've forgotten what that number is.
Kubby: It seems we can certainly time the project that whatever dewatering has to happen can avoid the fair. That makes perfect sense to do and that Linda aren't we required if we're dewatering and it affects other people's major water sources to make sure that they are provided with water during that time?
Iowa City City Attorney Linda Woito: Yes.
Kubby: So we need to communicate with people about what our responsibilities are.
Woito: They would need to notify us.
Novick: What are the dates on the fair?
Wolf: July 21-24.
Norton: (Inaudible).
Novick: Steve wants to say something, go ahead Steve.
Iowa City City Manager Steve Atkins: I asked Chuck to kind of give me a brief idea... Chuck Schmadeke our Public Works Director and he indicated to me that we have some preliminary soil borings on the route for the sewer and we have some similar information with respect to where Bob's well is and at least initially there does not appear to be a problem with that conflict. We'll have to do additional soil borings. Secondly as far as the scheduling has been suggested I can't see why that cannot be accommodated. Thirdly, the proposal that the engineers are working on now is a series of small shallow wells as opposed to the deep well thereby minimizing that cone of depression with respect to drawing water for dewatering purposes. And then finally if it was necessary we can certainly pipe the water right back into the sand pit if it would be necessary. I think these issues are being dealt with. I have not had a chance to communicate those with Bob and any of the other folks and we'll be happy to spend some time with him on that, but that's where we are with that.
Kubby: Most of this issue it seems like it's technical things, that we have an obligation to make sure you're not without water. We have an obligation to make sure that we're not contaminating people's water supply and that we need to have staff talking to people.
Wolf: My point is though from a land use point is it appears that the sewer is going to come at this point. This is Lake Ridge. And if he's going to come up 150 feet or right off the end of this runway, being a contractor and all and a land developer, it would seem to me that we would be better off to have the sewer out here in the middle where it would be accessible from more of the property as opposed to running down that property line. I'm sure that we can work out these details. I just don't want a big problem later on.
Atkins: We agree with that.
Wolf: That was my reason for initiating the letter to Chuck.
Novick: OK, do we have a reasonable conclusion that we can work out the details by staff conferring with Wolf and with the County Fair board?
Atkins: All I have is preliminary information. I will have Chuck or someone from my office contact Bob in the next couple days to come in and go over everything we have and I think take it from there.
Wolf: I can do that. There is one other point. Along the same lines the Johnson County Fair board is proposing a new building down in their area and they can tell you more about it than I can, but we have our package treatment plant. And as we understand it there is quite a bit of opposition of letting them tie into my plant when there is nothing else available at this time down there. I just want to lay that on the table, because they have already made a commitment based on my agreement to let them tap into my plant. I think I read in the paper that they are about to do some major fundraising based on that commitment.
?: This would be the community theatre.
Novick: It's not the Fair board though, it's a community theatre building and the Fair board as far as I know isn't doing the building.
Wolf: But they can't get a building permit, because they have to apply for sewage.
Novick: OK, can we ask Chuck to find out if that affects us at all? I don't know that it would.
Atkins: That's in the County and we don't really have a...
Norton: There's no problems with hooking on there now.
Kubby: Yes, but they don't have any say about sewer hookup in the fringe, do they?
Lacina: I don't think we would have any jurisdiction over this as well. So if you enter into a contract and Linda correct me if I'm wrong...
Kubby: Yes, that's like a DNR thing or something.
Lacina: ...my understanding would be they would clear it with DNR and the County and City would probably be out of it.
Woito: Yes.
Novick: Well that's what I'm thinking as well. I think that within County property you have to clear it with DNR and the Board of Health and people like that, but I don't think the City Council has anything to say about it.
Wolf: Well this has basically been the first public meeting that's been held since I got that information and I've shared it with people from the Fair board and I guess I'd like to find out if there is some problems that we'd like to deal with it immediately. We really can't make commitments to do fundraising and then turn around and say whoops, we can't have any sewer.
Novick: Well I think Department of Health and DNR would have jurisdiction, wouldn't you think so?
Atkins: I would suggest and Linda and I will work...
we need to confirm that though in writing in some fashion so that
there is no misunderstanding on that. If you have authority, then
we can communicate to you that you have authority to deal with it
the way you choose to do it or not. If you have no authority,
then we'll discover that also and let you know. We'll
do those things.
Update on Iowa City Airport Master Plan
Novick: OK, thank you. There was some discussion of economic development within this... there was some concern about the airport master plan. Does anyone from the County have any comment on that?
Bolkcom: I think the airport master plan was just maybe to get an update on where things were at.
Novick: Well things are moving along. The FAA has...
Kubby: The Council voted on a contract for acquisition of easements, so we'll be talking with property owners in the immediate area to get the aviation easements that we need.
Norton: They are in the process.
Lacina: Is there a timetable for completion of this?
Novick: It's really sitting in the hands of the FAA? We have hired somebody to take care of the value of these easements and the FAA has our application to help us pay for these easements, but they haven't said when.
Thornberry: The work is ongoing now though yes.
Kubby: But it's going to take a few years, even the acquisition issues may take a couple of years.
Woito: There will be monthly updates, perhaps we could carbon copy the Board of Supervisors on those updates.
Kubby: That would be a real good idea.
Novick: That sounds good.
Thornberry: Quite a few property owners have already been contacted so. From my feedback from a property owner is that they're very fine people to work with.
Lacina: Now the easements pertain to streets or sewer?
Kubby: For aviation protection zones.
Norton: Runway protection zones. Some of them are (inaudible) rights and some of them are actual properties.
Novick: In some cases we're going to have to condemn, purchase property in order to preserve the airport rights.
Woito: Would you like the land consultant to come and give a presentation to the Board of Supervisors? This is a different consultant.
Lacina: Karin gave us a good overview the other day when she came in on the Streb property and that helped us a lot. At least it helped me a lot. I think that would help. Because in the discussion of the airport, Phase I so to speak kind of fell back behind the Ranchaw property where a street could be easily laid in there and there should be I think already sewer.
Atkins: Now, there isn't.
Lacina: There is not sewer, OK then I misunderstood.
Atkins: There is a separate issue pending whereby the land that is behind the row of properties on Highway 1 and the airport trying to find an access road in there. There is interest in development of those for commercial purposes Steve, that's correct. But there is no street network, there is no utilities. Jeff and some other members of the staff are working on it. We haven't even brought the concept to the City Council yet. But that's part of the airport master plan and also some development interests are taking place.
Lacina: We had another developer looking at the County with roughly 100 jobs that we're trying to now locate on some property out by Tiffin on the Interstate, but as the companies come to us it's a little bit frustrating to say see you and see them head to West Branch or other areas so a timetable would help us at least. The one mega company has put their project on hold for 2 years and we'd like to be able to go back to them with a timetable and say well maybe in 2 years we'll be ready or at least say no, we have no idea. An update would really help us. Thank you.
Novick: Is this something that could possibly use the Streb property?
Lacina: We brought that up and they did look at it and that is an option, but again what's the timetable for the sewer line that will go up through Snyder Creek? Will the TIF help install that?
Atkins: No. At the next Council meeting the Council will consider beginning the process of the TIF. The Sewer Project has had a minor delay, because of a change in Corps of Engineer regulations, but barring anything that's wildly unforeseen we would hope to be in the ground with that project late this summer or early fall.
Lacina: Oh really.
Atkins: Yes, so that project is still moving along.
Novick: We don't have the exact location for the line that's going in near the airport, but we did move it forward on the agenda so that we can get some commercial and industrial development near the airport.
Atkins: That's the Willow Creek. Yes that's moving along.
Novick: Right.
Atkins: And that's a far bigger project and a lot more work yet to be done on that one.
Novick: Right, is there any other comment or question on this issue?
Bolkcom: I think we can move on to SEATS.
Novick: OK, is there a computer update on the SEATS?
Bolkcom: Well we continue to work with our new software, as folks know the County bought some new software to track how we provide rides and in terms of how costs are allocated and we continue to work with that. We're still struggling a bit by way of update. So we'll continue to work on trying to get reports out. In terms of contract discussions we are prepared to begin negotiations next week with the City on this. We are concerned initially about the City Council's proposal or the City's proposal as it relates to having 5 dedicated vehicles in Iowa City and only in Iowa City and having cab service provide transportation evenings and weekends. We just want to let you know we're concerned about what you made as an initial offer to us about what you want us to provide to you. But we hope to sit down and negotiate a long term contract.
Novick: I realize that there will be contract negotiations. We haven't yet appointed City Council members to be on that committee. We plan to do that next week. We have Council Meetings next week and we just haven't had Council Meetings in a couple of weeks so we haven't done that yet.
Bolkcom: That's fine. Steve and I will be on the County's committee.
Novick: We had a letter from Sally asking us to appoint some people from the City Council. I'm sure there will be a couple of staff people also. We just haven't yet put the City Council people on there.
Kubby: I know in the past that the school district, well some of the kids using the school district use SEATS. Are there any issues in contract negotiations that School Board needs to be involved in?
Bolkcom: To the degree to which 5 vehicles can transport the present number of people we have concerns that we have anywhere from 8 to 9 vehicles in a given day in Iowa City providing transportation. And if the City is only interested in 5 dedicated vehicles that don't leave Iowa City, we're concerned that fewer people are going to ride whether those are young people that are involved with School District things, they might be impacted.
Kubby: Do those students go through the school district to get rides or are they getting rides to school as a citizen of either Coralville or Iowa City?
Iowa City Community School District Superintendent Barbara Grohe: I think generally the rides are to work sites or jobs during the day rather than to and from school transportation.
Kubby: OK, so how do children with physical disabilities get to school?
Grohe: We run buses too.
Kubby: OK. Your regular school buses?
Novick: OK, so it's from school to a job after schools finished.
Grohe: Or during the school day, because some of the kids go to a work site as part of their school experience.
Novick: OK.
Thornberry: How many children are we talking about?
Grohe: I'm sorry I don't know that number.
Novick: Can we get that information to the committee that's going to be negotiating a contract, because it may help with scheduling and how many vehicles, et cetera? OK any other questions on SEATS? Can we have the committee who will be negotiating a contract have some computer update information before that negotiation starts?
Bolkcom: Yes.
Novick: Thank you. Anything else on SEATS from anybody?
Planning and Coordination Strategy for School Sites
Novick: Moving on to item 3. Strategies for overall coordination and long term planning and schools sites was part of the proposal from the schools. I think the City added the streets and other recreation, park land, neighborhood, et cetera, trails. Would the schools like to tell us what they started with when they proposed that?
Matheson: First of all what I'd like to say as your guest and our first association with this meeting we want to thank you for the invitation and we appreciate being here and hearing some of the discussion that's going on. Obviously some of this affects us and some of this is foreign, at least to me. I think probably the other Board members are really up on top of this, but as far as the potential school sites we have 2 new high schools in the planning stages and we were wondering where the land might come from.
?: It's April 2nd, not April 1st.
Matheson: Nobody fell for it so... Barb and I talked a little bit about this item and I think we had heard some discussion that you were no longer reserving land as a part of future developments and we just thought it might be a good idea to discuss how things were going in terms of new developments and how you anticipate as a City and County reserving land or identifying land or planning for school sites.
Norton: How do you come up with 2 at a time here?
Matheson: We just thought the public was ready for 2 new schools.
?: Talking about high school it has to be 2 at a time. One on one side of the river and one on the other side.
Norton: Oh, that's the logic.
?: Unless you're going to build one in the middle of the river.
Novick: I think that you can put the next one out in North Liberty somewhere.
Kubby: Since we now have our open space ordinance, we were doing this as part of our open space requirements before we really had the ordinance and saving land for schools was part of that. We really haven't as a City talked about it since we've approved our open space ordinance. It's not part of our discussion.
Novick: Well it wasn't just open space. It was the School Board at some points in the past saying we think we're going to need a new school and I think they may have said a grade school here, a junior high school there, can we set aside some land? And we never did actually decide how this land was going to be set aside and how it was going to be allocated in terms of cost. Was it going to be entirely a single developer's cost or was it going to be allocated somehow to school's taxes or property taxes in some way and we never did get to the point of agreeing on how to do it?
Kubby: We talked about a school impact fee at one point Steve, is that still on the planning staff's work program?
Atkins: To my knowledge it is not. I don't think we've talked about it in along time. Jeff is saying no.
Iowa City Assistant Director of Planning and Community Development Jeff Davidson: No, there are apparently 2 sites tentatively identified as elementary school sites, because in the subdivision process we had 2 large land owners that we were working with. One in the Sycamore Farms area and one in the Windsor Ridge area. I think we've discussed those with Barb and her staff. And she has indicated to us how far the school district can go in making a commitment to that site at this point in the process. Those 2 sites are the only ones tentatively identified right now.
Kubby: They have some limitations that if nothing happens within 15 years or some certain amount of time that they revert back to the ownership and power and authority of the developer.
Norton: But those 2 are in the hopper aren't they, those 2 that you're talking about?
Davidson: (Inaudible).
Norton: Doesn't the school have to say something about the general region you're talking about?
Matheson: Well has your policy changed in terms of new developments? In the past you've asked the developer to set aside some land for school sites.
Kubby: We really haven't really had any big annexations or rezonings that were that big since the Windsor Ridge.
Norton: That's the only one I think.
Novick: Well there were 2.
Norton: Sycamore.
Novick: There were 2 large annexations in which we asked them to set aside some acreage and we said if the School District was not going to use that acreage within 15 years, it would then be available for the developer to use for some other purpose.
Matheson: You're talking about Windsor and Sycamore.
Novick: Yes.
Matheson: So that's still an accepted practice then, if there were a large acreage or not?
Novick: Well we never did set it as a firm practice. We never did put it into our zoning or annexation ordinances, because we never did agree on how we were going to pay for it. We said that there should be perhaps an impact fee of some sort and the School District and the City just never did agree on it. So it's not in writing.
Kubby: Well we never talked about it explicitly.
Norton: Well, how did you do it in the past? How did you do Weber?
Iowa City School Board Member Linda Levey: We did it, because a developer agreed to it.
Norton: In this case. But how did you do Weber before that?
Levey: We bought it.
Norton: OK, well that's the best way is money.
Leff: I don't think that planned acquisition for a new school is a big hurdle, because it's a very low percentage of the cost of the overall project. So it's more of a matter of how it fits into the development, but on the other hand if you set land aside as a proposed school there is a big potential of misleading the potential buyers that think there is going to be a school there and yet we don't know what populations it's going to create, whether it's students, non-students. That's our biggest problem is looking at demographics of the area and yet we have a large growth in population, but not large growth in the number of students. So we've got to be concentrating where our students are being placed through these new developments. So it's very hard for us to tell you as this area grows this is how we would like to target a new school site.
Kubby: We need to really know in advance so we can do our capital improvements planning so that what happened with Rohret Road doesn't happen again. Where we had to figure out where this $3,000,000 was going to come from 2 years ahead of when we had it scheduled. So in any case we need to make sure that we're communicating with each other about demographics and streets and capital improvements.
Norton: It makes me feel like Coralville ought to be here to if we're going to talk school sites, because I can see some places on the other side of the river out where Oakdale Boulevard comes across towards 965. I mean if you're talking about getting away from where present schools are and where the density is developing.
Matheson: That also relates to impact fees as far as I know a few discussions that I was a part of I think we were asked what would you think about impact fees and immediately we think about several governmental units not only Iowa City, but Coralville, North Liberty, Hills, and whether those governments would be interested in impact fees. It almost is unthinkable to think that all of those units would come together and agree on a system or way of imposing impact fees.
Kubby: But if this ends up being an important issue in the near future, maybe we need to get all of those entities together with the sole thing on the agenda is that issue.
Matheson: We did wonder the same thing about Coralville. In terms of... We're guests, but maybe they should be here, because we deal with them as much.
Norton: Well in terms of this issue particularly of overall development whether it is school sites, streets, and all the rest, they run together and we were looking at 965 and Deer Creek. They affect you, they affect the County, they affect us, and they affect Coralville. But I wonder on the school thing it seems like there ought to be a way to proceed here that is written in stone, but apparently there is not. Maybe a subcommittee ought to take a look at that question on how to formulate a plan.
Woito: Well there is one thing that you all should keep in mind and I'm sure that if you ever want to move on with this question the lawyers have to get involved, because you can't impose the burden on one developer to provide the service that the entire school district community is going to enjoy.
Norton: Right.
Woito: I mean that's I hope obvious to everybody.
Novick: Well that's the reason we talked about impact fees and we never did conclude anything.
Woito: And so really it would be a School Board impact fee.
Novick: It would be a School District kind of thing. I don't know exactly how to do it.
Matheson: That's called property tax isn't it?
Novick: Well yes it would eventually end up as a property tax. It would be something that would have to be school district wide which would be almost all of Johnson County. I think there is just a little bit of Johnson County that is not within this school district and we wouldn't necessarily have to include Coralville and North Liberty and other cities if those kinds of issues were going to be discussed.
Grohe: I think the discussion we came to though was that it would be difficult to get all of the communities that we serve as a school district to agree on process. It might even be more difficult to get them to agree on any impact fee at all and the concern that came up was part of the informal conversation was then communities that did agree to an impact fee could put themselves at a disadvantage for development if other communities that we serve don't have an impact fee. So it seems that we have this whole discussion of impact fees that was a discussion doomed for failure as you tried to bring all of those issues to bear and get everyone to agree they would have to agree at the same time about a reasonably similar process that would take place in nearly all of the communities that we serve. That seemed like a task that had no end in terms of getting it to happen. The other idea that we had for putting this on the agenda was just what Karen was talking about and that is that we have a rather continuous dialogue with both the City of Iowa City Planners and with the Coralville Planners. Those are our 2 most frequent ones and North Liberty right now. We do that internally among staff and it seemed that it might be a good idea at least initially to set aside an hour and maybe meet with each of the communities that we serve and talk about what development is going on in the community and what development the school district is talking about and say that to the elected bodies as well as the staff having these conversations. That was kind of the crux of this whole thing is that maybe it's important for us to get together once a year and say this is what we think is going to be happening over the next year or 2. This is what it looks like to us and then both the staff that are serving these various places will have that conversation and all of you would hear it too. Right now it happens at the staff level, so maybe a kind of summary discussion at the end of a year or beginning of a year might help us all get a perspective of what's going on in the various communities that we're dealing with. That was part of this whole agenda item that that might be worth doing and getting scheduled on a fairly regular basis so we kind of update each other, not just the staff, but the elected officials too get the update at the same time.
Novick: That sounds like a good idea.
Norton: (Inaudible).
Vanderhoef: That I like, but I'd like to go back just for a second on the impact fee Barb when you were talking about taking it to each one of the municipalities that are in the School District. I don't know what your possibilities are in bonding or funding from the school district in and of itself. I'm aware of bond issues that end up purchasing land and building schools. Now is there anything that precludes the School Board from going forth and saying we will have an impact fee for the School District that will be district wide that will be for the purpose of land acquisition?
Grohe: The School District doesn't have any taxing authority, so we can't do that. We can bond and say in this we're going to try to pass this bond referendum and included in the bond referendum is the land cost as well as the building cost.
Vanderhoef: But can you do a separate one that doesn't say it is also the school on it? That you are bonding for land for future development?
?: I don't think you'd have a bond issue for land. It's too small an amount.
Novick: A bond issue has to be dedicated to a specific location, but what about putting something in your current property tax, is that allowed?
Norton: What do you mean putting it in?
?: Accumulating cash for...
Vanderhoef: Cash up front for land acquisition.
Novick: Something like that, yes.
Norton: Well how did you buy land then for West High? How was that bought?
?: It was out of PPEL. Land acquisitions out of the PPEL Fund.
Novick: Well that could do. If there is money in the PPEL Fund that is now set aside for land acquisition, that's similar to what we're talking about.
Kubby: Could we speak English for a minute, I don't know the School Board jargon.
Norton: What's the fund?
Matheson: Physical Plant and Equipment Levy.
Kubby: Thank you.
Thornberry: Naomi, a point of clarification, you said that a bond issue must be site specific. When we bonded for the new water plant did we have to site specific the new water pipes?
Novick: Yes.
Thornberry: It's not the same.
Novick: It will be a little different. When we're talking about a particular construction for a particular school it's different from saying there will be water pipes that connect this to there. You don't have to be specific in the bond issue, you just have to say the water pipes are going to be paid for with water fees.
Thornberry: Well then why can't you say the land for the school will be paid for by the bond?
Novick: I don't know.
Leff: The bond has not been a problem.
?: Weber School land.
Leff: It's the planning.
Man 4?: My impression is that raising the money you have certain authority to do that, it's the planning I think what Al was saying earlier was. It's the planning and where to put them.
Atkins: It's not how to pay for the land. It's how to coordinate it with the whole community development and what's the natural process.
Baker: I think I'd remind the schools that it's more than just the cities, because for example the County government approved a large scale development and Bob's development that certainly could bring many, many children to an area so it's really more than just municipality that may have to wade in on this issue.
Kubby: As an individual council member I'd love to hear from the School Board when we're talking about a big annexation issue to understand how it's going to impact, because of the kind of development or zoning that we're talking about it may be able to help us understand what does that mean to the School District. We have this lovely thing with the conditional zoning agreement that's how we got this open space before the open space ordinance and the school site land that we need to know early in the process to begin negotiating, so keep an eye on our agenda as we need to keep an eye on yours.
Leff: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt. Our problem in trying to say how does a new development area impact the district is no one can say at what rate that development is going to be completed and what is it going to produce and we're looking numbers of children. We can't look at number of occupied buildings and so every time we deal with new development, new growth, we're late in the game because we're looking at where the students are. So when we have all of the growth in the Coralville area, we want all of the numbers that it can produce but no one can say how fast these new developments are going to be spearheaded by actual development.
Kubby: And obviously development areas can change too, they go from older...
Leff: That's right, they recycle.
Novick: We also have to say that it goes in both directions, because building a new school out on Rohret Road caused all kinds of new housing to be constructed out there that we hadn't planned on having constructed quite as soon as it was. And we had new street construction also based on the fact that the school decided to go over there and then everything else followed it.
Matheson: But wasn't the concept already there? The plan for the subdivision was in place wasn't it?
Novick: No.
Kubby: Immediately around the school was planned.
Matheson: Right. That's what I mean.
Novick: A lot of the subdivisions in that area happened after the school happened.
Matheson: It was obvious that it was going to continue to develop around the immediate school.
Kubby: Just how soon is what we're talking about.
Levey: It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Al said that you know plan a school and if you don't know if the housing is going to develop or not, but maybe it becomes a magnet for housing.
Novick: It certainly can be.
?: Cedar Rapids closed a school without ever occupying it. You don't guess where it's going to be.
Levey: We could put it in the mall.
?: We know students are going to be there.
Lacina: That would take care of it. I would like to make 2 quick points. One is for the purposes of information sharing as we move forward the County will be developing a GIS system. And by that I don't mean Johnson County, I mean in general all of the entities will be advancing forward into this GIS system and I think it's going to be very important to get a database that we can go in and pull information out and look at demographics. And the school, the City everybody is going to need to be involved in this so that we develop a good useable platform that everyone can tap into. Second point is while we're talking about impact fees there are other sources of revenue which might assist the school through JCCOG. We've had a number of ISTEA funds for transit moneys that we've reallocated into (inaudible) buses or connecting bicycle paths in order to keep parents from having to haul kids across the Interstate north and south. The trail from North Liberty down to Coralville hopefully will help some kids be able to ride their bikes to the school, so involvement in the Council of Governments I think would be very welcome if the School would want to have somebody set in. It would also be a forum for you to pass information back to all the small communities that are involved in that so I want to extend an invitation as the Chair of that to invite you to attend.
Matheson: I was going to say I don't what the proper forum is for participating in planning or even discussions, but obviously I think the School District is very interested in participating in that. Whether it be a forum similar to this, a continuation of this or some other forum, Council of Governments, but you can count on us being participants in that and continuing participation. It's to all of our benefits to do that, there's no question about it.
Norton: I'm surprised you're not in there already. Because there we're obviously talking about transportation and looking at where development is, because that's where transportation routes have to be of various sorts.
Kubby: The arterial street plan is probably the number one document that would be most (inaudible) the School Board looks at.
Norton: Absolutely.
Lacina: Should we plan on maybe twice a year trying to do something where we could do something similar to Council of Governments, because then you would have Coralville and the other entities? To start off with probably it would be information sharing and not a voting position on the Board. We would have to discuss that, but at least to start the communication.
JCCOG Executive Director Jeff Davidson: Just to clarify the School Board President is a non-voting member of the JCCOG Board currently.
Matheson: Oh.
Kubby: Where have you been?
Novick: Surprise.
Matheson: I've only been president half the year.
Novick: Well you don't get the JCCOG schedules? Jeff, do we send the agendas?
Matheson: We've been planning the 2 high schools that's why.
Novick: You and your 2 high schools, enough already.
Lacina: One in the mall right?
Novick: I think Steve Lacina's idea of a meeting with JCCOG might be something that's workable. Maybe we'll schedule that kind of thing when we get to the last item when we schedule our next meeting and we'll include some other people and maybe not have everybody attend, but at least representatives from everybody.
Kubby: At a regularly scheduled JCCOG meeting, I think we all have full.
Parking and Status for the Johnson County Senior Dining Program at the Senior Center
Novick: Is everybody ready to move on to item 4? Sally, the County is the one who put item 4 on the agenda, we just saw this today, we haven't seen it before. Can you explain a little bit about how you arrived at that?
Stutsman: Sure. These are some suggestions for items of discussion that came to the Board through the Nutrition Committee and these are things that we wanted to bring forward and to get feedback from primarily the City as far...
Norton: (Inaudible).
Novick: Well yes.
Stutsman: No pun intended huh? So maybe if we just go through the 3 of these and then we can decide how we want to approach them. The first one is that the City and County recognize the Nutrition Program as a basic program in the Iowa City-Johnson County Senior Center. I think this is basically a philosophical situation where the Nutrition Committee doesn't feel that the program is considered an integral part of the Senior Center and their planning. It's housed there, they provide the space for it, but as far as part of being a real integral part of the planning and part of the program we just don't sense that that is there. Are there any comments or further discussion about that?
Kubby: In terms of making statements, we have a Senior Center Commission that I would more feel comfortable having this discussion with them before I could say yes I support saying that this is a basic program even though my instinct is saying well yes of course.
Novick: I would like to hear why you are saying you don't think it is part of the Senior Center Program. Is it because the Senior Center Commission or the Council of Elders is not planning and governing this program?
Stutsman: Well part of this comes from the Nutrition Committee. Joe, you have served on the Senior Center Commission. Do you have anything to add?
Bolkcom: Actually I'm not. Charlie is our member on that. I think historically there has been a feeling that the congregate meal program is a separate entity that operates at the Senior Center. I guess just some acknowledgment that it's an integral program of the Center. It brings the most number of people to the Center on a daily basis and maybe it's an attitude issue more than a programmatic one.
Novick: Isn't this a program though that operates in many sites, not just at the Senior Center?
Bolkcom: It operates at Autumn Park and we also run the Hills site...
Stutsman: Solon.
Bolkcom: ...and Solon and Swisher.
Kubby: Lone Tree?
Bolkcom: Lone Tree is a separate site.
Novick: So I guess that's why it has a separate committee rather than being part of the Senior Center Commission.
Bolkcom: Right it's a County funded program...
Lacina: No.
Bolkcom: ...through the Area Agency on Aging.
Lacina: Heritage. We do not put any tax dollars into it, it's through Heritage that they give it to us.
Bolkcom: That's what I just said.
Novick: OK so Heritage operates this program and operates it at multiple sites.
Bolkcom: That's right.
Norton: I'd like to think about Karen's point, because are we preempting the Commission in some ways if we were to bless this at this point? It might be regarded by the Commission as stepping on their turf before they get it in.
Kubby: Uh-huh.
Bolkcom: I guess in general we see all 3 of these points as something to be discussed maybe with a smaller group with Senior Center Commission members, with a couple members of the City Council. Maybe that's the forum to...
Stutsman: Well let's move on to parking and this has been an issue for a long time and it seems like we just don't get anywhere with it. We've discussed this off and on and have presented it in different formats and it just doesn't get dealt with. So I think what we're suggesting are some alternatives here and then the direction about where do we go from here? Where do we start moving so that we can come to some kind of agreement. There's been some options identified as far as the Linn Street Parking, the parking in front of the Senior Center having that designated just for volunteers to the Nutrition Program and I guess that's maybe where the philosophical thing enters in. If this is recognized as an important part of the Senior Center then the parking just falls into line. We begin to make plans that this is something that we're committed to then we have to make some parking arrangements for the volunteers.
Norton: How many are you talking about?
Stutsman: Well what 4 or 5 slots I suppose to begin with.
Novick: Can't we designate those in the Chauncey Swan Ramp, because they are available there and they are not available on Iowa Avenue. Those metered slots are always filled.
Stutsman: Is there any possibility that something can be worked out to designate those spots for volunteers to the dining program.
Kubby: Right now they are earmarked for Senior Center Volunteers, not necessarily Nutrition Committee Volunteers.
Novick: You're talking about the ones at Chauncey Swan?
Kubby: Yes.
Novick: However are you talking about those or are you talking about Iowa Avenue?
Stutsman: No we're talking about designated slots on Iowa Avenue that at this point are not designated, but what is the possibility of getting some specific slots on Iowa Avenue?
Novick: Those are tough. Those are very tough.
Bolkcom: There are designated volunteer parking spaces for Senior Center Volunteers, but there are no designated volunteer spots for Senior Dining volunteers.
Kubby: Right.
Bolkcom: And I guess that kind of underscores the first point.
Kubby: I'm sure we can get numbers of how often are those filled during these times and can we designate 3 out of those 10 and 4 out of those 10 during those hours just for Senior Dining volunteers. Is that a hardship that walk, the 2/3 of a block a problem for those volunteers? I'm assuming if they can stand up to wash dishes that they can walk a block.
Stutsman: Well I don't think it's so much as a hardship just knowing that there are some slots there that they can count on always being there and that they're available for them to park.
Kubby: Is 4 a good number for us to be thinking about?
Novick: Can we get a specific number?
Norton: Where?
Stutsman: And that's what we need to find out.
Novick: And Jeff Davidson can you find out how many of these things can be done at Chauncey Swan because I know at one point there were spots available that were designated for Senior Center Volunteers and it would be easy enough to say the Senior Center volunteers and the Nutrition Volunteers can both use them.
Davidson: Sure.
Kubby: But it's the guaranteeing during those specific hours for Nutrition people.
Novick: Yes, we need to find out how many spots are needed and how many spots are available that we could mark.
Norton: But you're talking Chauncey Swan not on Linn Street or Iowa Avenue?
Novick: Right.
Stutsman: Right and the request is for Iowa Avenue.
Novick: I just don't see how that's possible.
Thornberry: I think if there were parking spaces open and it said for Senior Center Volunteers only or whatever, we would all be getting a lot of phone calls and letters or it would be ignored. It just isn't going to happen, not on the streets. Chauncey Swan I wouldn't be quite as opposed to having them lumped with some of the Seniors, because there seems to be in the daytime in the middle of the day it seems to be more Senior Center spaces open in Chauncey Swan then anywhere else.
Novick: There are Senior Center spaces in the parking lot behind the Senior Center, but it's hard to say that from 11:30 to 1:30 the other volunteers can't use it and only the Nutrition volunteers can, but they're available but you just have to have the permit on the car and you have to be able to get there at the time and find a space.
Stutsman: I know.
Bolkcom: We'd love to have some of those permits then to compete for the spaces I guess.
Novick: As far as I know the permits are designated and I don't know how many there are and we can find out. Give us a number about how many people would use the spaces and we'll see if we can find some spaces that can be marked.
Davidson: The Senior Center Lot is administered by the Senior Center, so that kind of falls under Karen's comment about the Commission and not under Iowa City parking.
Novick: But even then, even at the Commission they're saying we will sell X permits and you can come and find out if there is a space available and the spaces are designated for exactly the number of permits that are sold. We need to find out some numbers.
Norton: Well it seems to me that committee that we're talking about putting together that's going to talk about question number one in some way should make sure that the Senior Commission understands the importance of this program and among those aspects are the parking issues. Which bears on that lot behind there and see what they can shake out about it and talking with Jeff I don't see how you're going to take the spaces right in front of the Cottage you mean or somewhere like that?
Stutsman: Well in front of the Senior Center there is kind of that jut in.
Norton: Oh, the cut out there.
Stutsman: Yes and have those designated with signage saying that these are just for...
Norton: Talk to the Senior Center Commission.
Novick: That's the loading zone. That's the place to drop off people.
?: That's the place to drop people off for Senior Dining right there and then go park the car.
Bolkcom: According to our SEATS drivers the drop off is on Washington Street and that was designated that way, but it's not really used that way.
Norton: But a lot of private drop-offs are used that way.
Thornberry: Yes.
Kubby: But you wouldn't have to make the whole day.
Norton: Leave some or say between 11:30 and 1:30 it's verboten.
Vanderhoef: Is there any reason why the volunteers wouldn't be capable of parking at Chauncey Swan and walking a block?
Stutsman: Bob, can you answer that? I don't deal directly with the volunteers.
Nutrition Advisory Committee Member Bob Welsh: First of all Chauncey Swan is a metered spot, not a free spot. On Linn Street you have across from the drive in to First National Bank you have a drop off section. That is not used as Joe said as a drop off for persons, because there is big steps there. They drop off persons either at the Alley or on Washington Street. At the present time the volunteer spots in the Senior Center lot are marked volunteers only. You cannot park there if you're a volunteer for the Nutrition Program.
Novick: Well what you'd need for those volunteers is a little label on the car.
Stutsman: Well how do we get access to those little labels on the car?
Novick: Well we'll find out, tell us how many. We'll find out.
Norton: The Senior Commission.
Welsh: A point of that one suggestion is you do have spaces there on Linn Street which most of the time are vacant. Are people who pull in there for a moment and run to the Cottage or even to First National Bank. All we're saying is it would be very simple not to have any negative impact on the volunteer program of the Senior Center to just designate those spaces there like on the lot for volunteer parking to just say during the hours of the Senior Center on Linn Street to designate that volunteer parking.
Thornberry: Sounds sensible.
Novick: Well here it says, Iowa Avenue. Linn Street is also here. OK
Levey: It must be when I go to the senior Center on Thursday mornings, I'm there all morning, those spaces in the front on Linn Street where there's that parallel parking, they're always full. The band is there, I'm there, it's just packed. There's no parking anywhere in the lot even for a volunteer. One thought, I don't know how feasible this would be is those spaces that parallel parking is just such a waste of space to me, if that sidewalk could be deepened a little bit and head-on angle parking.
Novick: We're looking at it south of Dubuque so we could look at it north of also.
Levey: You can't drop off people there, because as he said the stairs are so steep that people that really need it have to go in the side entrances so...
Welsh: I wanted to mention on Iowa Avenue the impression I had with that and here again this becomes a matter of priorities and all. One of Iowa City's blessings is that it has parking problems, most communities would kill themselves to have that problem. But (inaudible) as mentioned a lot of people cannot utilize that facility, because of a lack of parking. Again Chauncey Swan seems like a very reasonable alternative and the fact of the matter is for your elderly persons that is not a viable alternative.
Novick: I'm sorry, but I know a lot of elderly persons who do use that and are happy to use that so don't generalize.
Norton: Good exercise Bob going up that hill.
Stutsman: The last item is nominating a person to be appointed to serve on the Nutrition Committee and I don't imagine that's too difficult to accomplish if that can be put on.
Novick: No, I think we can ask the Senior Center Commission to consider one of their members as a member of this committee and we'll get back to you.
Stutsman: And working on the other 2 you suggest working with the Senior Citizen Commission.
Novick: I think the Senior Center Commission.
Kubby: Yes, we'd like to maybe hear some recommendations from the Senior Center Commission.
Norton: They'll tell us what they want us to do. Yes.
Novick: We'll just ask them to put it on the agenda and then get back to us. If we can get some specific number of spaces on the parking before we ask them to put that on the agenda that would be helpful.
Bolkcom: Maybe we could be informed when it's going to be on so that we can have a Supervisor or 2 who wanted to attend the Commission meeting.
Novick: Certainly. I think there is probably a person from the County appointed by your Board, you might talk to that person and find out a little bit more about it also.
Stutsman: Is it worth exploring what Linda suggested about the angle parking? Is that a possibility at all?
Kubby: It certainly could be added to the other Linn Street angle parking we're already looking at.
Stutsman: OK. All right.
Davidson: That's already in the area we're looking at. Council has directed staff already to look at Linn Street between Iowa and College and College between Linn and Gilbert, those 3 blocks we'll be evaluating this summer for angle parking.
Stutsman: OK.
Novick: I also should say that we're probably going to do angle parking with meters if we do it. We haven't yet discussed that, but I have to tell you its certainly possible.
Bolkcom: What else?
Norton: (Inaudible).
Stutsman: Can we get tokens to put in those meters?
Novick: I think that if your Nutrition Committee wants to subsidize the volunteers in terms of paying for their parking it's acceptable to me. But it's not acceptable that other Senior Center Volunteers are paying for parking and these are not.
Norton: Yes.
Welsh: Senior Center Volunteers are not at metered spaces.
Novick: They are paying for the permits.
Welsh: Oh, that's right. I'm sorry.
Novick: So we will work it out somehow.