MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
JUNE 24 AND 26, 1997
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chairperson Stutsman called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 9:00 a.m. Members present were: Joseph Bolkcom, Charles Duffy, Jonathan Jordahl, Stephen Lacina, and Sally Stutsman.
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT CAPTAIN DUANE LEWIS: TOWN LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTRACTS
Stutsman: We'll go ahead and call to order the informal meeting for the Johnson County Board of Supervisors for July 24, 1997. In order... We're going to kind of move around on this agenda. Bear with me. Duane Lewis is here already, so I think Duane we're going to go ahead and have you talk about the contracts. This approval of town law enforcement contracts and discussion.
Sheriff's Department Captain Duane Lewis: Right.
Stutsman: Good morning Duane.
Lewis: This is just... Here are the rates for an occasions contract for (inaudible) 5%. (Inaudible) on our account contracts for small towns in the County. So it's just an addendum to the current contracts. The only change is the monetary amount. If there are any specific questions I'd be glad to answer them, otherwise I'll just leave them here for your action.
Lacina: Did they have any questions, Duane, as far as the concerns of the increase or anything?
Lewis: No, no.
Lacina: All right.
Lewis: None at all, as a matter of fact, the only thing that we're busy with (inaudible) is the fact that with all this little... And us not having any people, we're going to have to (inaudible) peace contracts and see how we're going to accommodate all that. But there's been nothing specific, other than just the general knowledge, especially like in North Liberty and Solon... We made some adjustments to North Liberty already and we're going to have to continue to do that, figure out how we're going to do this.
Lacina: Sounds good.
Stutsman: You're going to meet all your expenses and what not with...
Lewis: I've met with City Council.
Stutsman: Uh-huh. OK.
Lewis: Yes, and to the best of my knowledge, not other than just being (inaudible) we're aware of that, but as far as our commitments, we've met those (inaudible).
Stutsman: OK.
Bolkcom: So, Duane, in terms of, you noted an addendum by that either we've changed something to do by hour. Is that we have a flat rate and then anything above a certain number of hours it's an hourly rate?
Lewis: No.
Bolkcom: Or is it everything's an hourly rate?
Lewis: When this was all generated a year, what it was with the accounts over the years coordinated themselves with they were paying for the additional protection they felt was necessary as far as routine contract. So it varies town to town. That's charged by a per hour basis. If we end up putting more in there, just because of the number of calls or something that happened, that's just...
Bolkcom: Billed on an hourly rate.
Lewis: Right.
Bolkcom: OK.
Lewis: There's no additional... Monetary additional.
Bolkcom: OK, I see.
Stutsman: Any other questions?
Bolkcom: Thanks.
Stutsman: If not, we'll put that on for Thursday.
Lewis: I understand in order to keep (inaudible) it's 3 here, (inaudible) if I could get the other 2, I'll mail them out.
Stutsman: OK.
Lewis: Thank you.
Bolkcom: Great, thanks Duane.
Stutsman: Uh-huh, thank you.
Stutsman: Any comments about the formal minutes and these are both sets of formal minutes for the formal meeting on June 19th, and then the meeting with Muscatine Supervisors. OK, we'll put those on for approval for Thursday.
Stutsman: Business from the County Engineer, discussion regarding Johnson County Road Study. Good morning Mike.
County Engineer Mike Gardner: I'm not sure who put it on, I didn't.
Stutsman: OK, I think that, Jonathan?
Jordahl: Oh. I'm not sure that I did, but I'd certainly be happy to speak to it. We have a desire for a consistent application of policy across the County and a lot of different instances have come up where we've discussed things where road policy has made a difference for other policies in development. For example, what's the traffic load on a gravel road that's the limit where we're going to require some upgrading of the surface, that kind of thing. Jeff Davidson and you are working on a study of transportation needs and patterns and so forth. I just wanted to update the Board, now that you're on board as the Engineer to where that stands.
Gardner: OK. Actually I haven't been in contact with Jeff to date. I understand it was something...
Stutsman: I think Rick has a comment?
Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak: I thought maybe....
Gardner: OK.
Stutsman: OK.
Dvorak: Thanks. I met with...
Jordahl: Sorry, Mike, I'm not sure I put this on the agenda. But...
Dvorak: As you know, we started doing that when Ed was here, it stopped when Mike came during the interim period. Jeff wasn't comfortable and Mike wasn't comfortable with (inaudible) here. I met with Jeff and Karen Franklin last week and Jeff's out in the mountains in...
Stutsman: Georgia.
Dvorak: Georgia, riding his motorcycle right now.
Bolkcom: He's back.
Dvorak: He just got back?
Bolkcom: He's back.
Dvorak: He'd mentioned that as soon as he got back, there'd be a little lag time, but basically as soon as he got back he was going to get in touch with Mike, myself and R.J. to start bringing it back up to speed to where we were a few months ago.
Stutsman: OK.
Bolkcom: Great.
Dvorak: As you know we're starting the north corridor area and we have some other directions we want to go that we're coming back to the Board later. So we are going to move ahead now.
Stutsman: Great.
Jordahl: I want to...
Stutsman: So it's just kind of an update as to where we're at on that now that Mike's on board as the Engineer and...
Jordahl: Yes, and I want to emphasize here, Mike, that I didn't mean to blind side you about this, I'm not sure that I put that on the agenda, but in any case, I'm concerned about where it's going.
Gardner: Yes, I wasn't sure what it was about, I just thought maybe there were going to be some questions about specific things.
Stutsman: I think it's basically that the Board is still interested in going ahead with this, you know that we'll look for units to get together and have a report back to us.
Gardner: OK.
Stutsman: Next thing on the agenda, proposal for Martin and Whitaker Surveyors and Engineers for research, survey, and design at the intersection at 245th Street and Sugar Bottom Road. This request came out of our discussion with the Oakes Subdivision and what to do with that intersection.
Gardner: Yes, I actually visited with Doug Frederick after we determined that I had a conflict of interest and asked him if he was aware of any consulting firms that would be capable of performing this type of work, outside the County. So that we didn't have any within the County, might also have a conflict. He recommended Martin and Whitaker, out of Muscatine. I made contact with them the Monday following our Thursday night meeting and met with Mr. Martin that afternoon. We went out and viewed the site, discussed the situation. I asked him for a proposal. I believe you have a copy of this proposal in front of you. I did visit with him again after receiving it. He's showing that he's going out to look at about a half a mile of Sugar Bottom Road as well as the 245th Street itself. I just wanted clarification on why he was going so far down to Anchorage Road and then on the other direction. It was as I suspected, that's just so that he doesn't miss anything. He wants to get his preliminary data over a wide enough area to make sure that he knows what... When he's designing the road, he may have to get beyond it to see what the vertical and horizontal alignment is right at the intersection. So he gathers the additional data so that he doesn't have to make a second trip out there. So that was why that may look like it's a little extreme. We are under some pretty tight time constraints. I guess I'm looking for direction from you people at this point on how you want me to proceed.
Bolkcom: So Mike, what's the total cost of... There's a lot of numbers here. I'm trying to figure out what the total estimate is for...
Lacina: 12.6. Last sentence on the bottom of your sheet right?
Stutsman: Well that... I figured almost $23,000 is possible.
Gardner: It could be as much as $23,000.
Lacina: Oh, was it 23?
Gardner: Initial...
Stutsman: Yes, that's included, these 3 items, and then...
Lacina: I see.
Jordahl: The final is not...
Lacina: Thanks for pointing that out.
Gardner: Yes, the initial research and preliminary design comes to $10,300. Then when he comes on and does the actual final design, it could be anywhere from $2,600 to $12,600.
Lacina: But we're getting that entire section of road done instead of just the intersection.
Gardner: No, that's just the preliminary survey.
Duffy: Half mile.
Gardner: The survey data will be gathered over that. The work itself will be restricted right to the intersection, or as much as we can.
Stutsman: So this is just telling us what we need to do.
Gardner: Uh-huh.
Bolkcom: Right.
Stutsman: And that's not doing the work.
Lacina: Right.
Gardner: Right.
Jordahl: Right, so the cost of doing the intersection would be this figure plus what it costs to physically do the work.
Gardner: Right.
Jordahl: That estimate's not included here.
Gardner: That would be part of what he's going to come up with in his initial.
Jordahl: OK, so this money will buy us that money, will buy us that number.
Gardner: Right.
Stutsman: Mike, when he talks about including right-of-way acquisitions, so in this cost that means he's including what he estimates it's going to cost to purchase any right-of-way. Is that right?
Gardner: No, he's actually...
Jordahl: Just the plats.
Gardner: Right. There's not a registered land surveyor on staff, we're required to have a licensed land surveyor sign the right-of-way acquisition plat. If there's any right-of-way to be acquired. So he's including that.
Stutsman: So that cost would be included in the cost of the actual work then.
Gardner: The...
Stutsman: Right-of-way acquisition.
Gardner: That, no, the right-of-way acquisition would not... Just the plat itself.
Lacina: Just the plat...
Stutsman: OK.
Jordahl: Here, I think what Sally's talking about I think is the total.
Stutsman: Right, for this whole project. If we're going to include those costs, that would be included when we actually get into doing the work, right?
Gardner: Uh-huh.
Stutsman: OK.
Bolkcom: So, Mike, we visited about this briefly last week and I know as you indicate we have a time frame we're dealing with. I think this is really expensive, but I don't know if we could ask somebody else to come in and do it? It might be the same amount of money, or in the ball park.
Gardner: That I really don't know. I think part of it is that they're coming from outside so they're going to have some additional expense in that. The other thing is with tight time constraints, they're going to be working and this is going to have to be a priority for them (inaudible) back to us on time.
Lacina: The range goes right-of-way acquisitions, if required, between 26 to 12.6. It's a pretty wide range, if it's even required, so this is probably a worst case scenario? The 32.9?
Stutsman: 23. I think.
Jordahl: 22.9.
Lacina: Well if you add up all the numbers, 12.6, if you look at the high end on everything and add them up, it comes to 32.9. Unless I'm double adding once.
Gardner: I'm missing something I think.
Lacina: OK. We had $2,800 for the lump sum fee, $3,000, $4,500, and then $12.6.
Gardner: Right, so there's 75 plus the 2...
Lacina: Oh, yes, you're right. OK.
Gardner: Then take 3, and then 12.6 on top of that.
Lacina: Threw it in there twice. OK.
Stutsman: OK.
Bolkcom: But the final design, it's going to be in the range, it's not right? What does it cost to sign off on some acquisition, the plats? Is that just a flat fee to sign a document?
Gardner: They actually draw them up and sign off on them.
Bolkcom: But that's only a portion of this cost.
Gardner: Right, exactly.
Bolkcom: But the portion of the 2,600 to 12.6 is actually the final design of the intersection.
Gardner: Yes, and the reason he wasn't able to narrow it down anymore is he's hoping to come up with 2 or 3 possible scenarios that we could do.
Bolkcom: OK.
Gardner: Then present them to you people and have someone decide what it is exactly that we think we want to do. That will determine how much over the budget we've gone in costs.
Stutsman: Well, in view of the time frame, I don't think we have a whole lot of choices here.
Jordahl: Well...
Bolkcom: What are the choices?
Jordahl: What is the time frame?
Stutsman: Right?
Dvorak: I believe we need something on the table, we're supposed to have something on the table for the 17th.
Stutsman: There isn't any legal room as far as delay with that, is that right? It had to be 45 days?
Dvorak: I don't remember, yes, we have a 45 day limitation, unless they ask for it. If they ask for the deferral, then it could be indefinite.
Jordahl: So we're talking about final plat approval.
Bolkcom: Maybe we should ask for a deferral.
Dvorak: The other option would be to ask them for...
Bolkcom: To give us a few more weeks.
Dvorak: To ask them to ask for a deferral. I don't remember, I'd have to go back to re-visit that to see if they asked for this deferral or if we asked for this deferral.
Jordahl: Well one thing that might be a motivating factor for the applicant and this deferral one way or another, is that this cost is already, even at the design phase, significantly higher than the amount of money that was proposed in the December discussions. It resulted in that $8,500 check. $8,500 doesn't even pay for half of this. The construction, I assume, will be more costly than this is.
Stutsman: But I think...
Jordahl: Is that a fair guess?
Stutsman: Aren't we pretty well set with that $8,500 figure with...
Bolkcom: Yes, my sense in talking with Pat, I think this came up, they're not paying for any of this cost.
Stutsman: I think we're obligated.
Bolkcom: We're paying for all of it. Right.
Stutsman: To do that. There's nothing...
Bolkcom: Unfortunately.
Stutsman: Yes.
Duffy: I don't think they would either be obligated, maybe it needs to be done anyway. I say go ahead with it.
Bolkcom: I'd like to get another estimate or two myself.
Stutsman: I guess that's always the better way...
Jordahl: Yes.
Stutsman: Rick can you...
Duffy: Keep trying.
Stutsman: Check with Oakes and see if they'd be willing to ask for the deferral?
Dvorak: I'll have to check the minutes. If they asked for that last deferral, then we're OK, because then we can automatically require it even if they don't.
Stutsman: If my memory serves me correct, I think the Board...
Lacina: I think you're right.
Bolkcom: I don't think they did.
Stutsman: Yes.
Lacina: They didn't ask for the....
Dvorak: Well, before I answer that, let me check the minutes.
Stutsman: OK.
Dvorak: Then I can get in touch with Mr. Neely or Mr. Oakes.
Jordahl: I think maybe we were within our time frame, or something like that, if you checked the minutes. I'm not sure exactly, it's kind of confusing what...
Stutsman: So do we want to put this on for the discussion on Thursday during the informal meeting when we hear back from...
Gardner: I'm going to be out of town.
Lacina: I think we better keep it moving. Would your recommendation... If this is the only bid that we get, would your recommendation be to go with this, then?
Gardner: If this is the only one we get, I don't think we have a choice.
Jordahl: It's a choice, we could get another bid.
Gardner: Right.
Jordahl: It might be there... Is there someone local? Johnson County surveyor?
Stutsman: Well they all have conflicts of interests, basically.
Jordahl: They all did?
Gardner: Well that's the problem, most of them were doing work within the County.
Jordahl: Conflict of time schedule more than interest. Or is it the same kind of conflict of interest that you have?
Gardner: Well it would be similar. I think they're all doing work that could be considered by some, that it might be a conflict.
Bolkcom: It's better to get somebody from outside.
Stutsman: Yes, I think in this situation, we just almost need to...
Bolkcom: Nobody wants to touch this one.
Gardner: There are other firms I can contact outside the County to get a quote, what their schedule is and so forth. I really don't know without talking to them.
Stutsman: Can you do that before Thursday? I don't expect you to be here Thursday, because you're going to be out of town, but can you do that and get that information back to us? Is that what the Board wants to do, or do you want to...
Bolkcom: I'd like to see another quote or 2. I don't know, this seems like a lot of money, and it may be the going rate. But, I think we shop for other things, we shouldn't be forced into a corner at this point, we should shop it, we might be able to save a few thousand dollars. It would be worth it. If Dean would...
Stutsman: Well we can't shop unless Dean agrees to the deferral.
Gardner: Yes, that's the only problem. The meeting was on the 13th and now it's the 24th, is to get to this point with one.
Lacina: There's a big difference if we're hiring somebody to just engineer the intersection versus this. This which if there is a factor up or down the road, they're going to take that into account. So if we do get other bids, we're going to have to have apples to apples, stay with this.
Gardner: Yes, I think we need this. We can't...
Jordahl: Yes, that was...
Gardner: I don't think you've been...
Bolkcom: Just look at the...
Jordahl: Yes, there was a question of whether you can see cars coming over the rise, and stuff, so we should definitely compare apples to apples. A comment might be fitting here that this points up to what we're getting on the County Engineer, if this is what it costs to get one intersection looked at outside, we're getting a bargain.
Lacina: So we'll have Rick check with Mr. Oakes and see if he's going to request a deferral. If he does, we'll attempt then to get additional bids. If he doesn't, our action will be to what? Put it on for discussion and action on Thursday.
Bolkcom: What's the consequence of not meeting the deferral deadline?
Gardner: Again, if he...
Bolkcom: If we don't...
Gardner: If you deferred it, you have to make a decision in 45 days.
Bolkcom: What if we don't?
Lacina: It's automatic, he gets it.
Gardner: It's automatic, I think, don't quote me, but I think he gets the approval by default.
Stutsman: That's what I...
Gardner: You might want to confer with Pat for...
Jordahl: But if he did ask... If he did ask for one....
Gardner: If he asked for one, and even if he doesn't want to ask for one on the 17th, you have a right to go for 45 days.
Jordahl: We could ask for 45 more days on the 17th.
Gardner: Right.
Jordahl: If he asks for a...
Stutsman: OK, so you'll check those minutes out first.
Gardner: Yes.
Stutsman: And then...
Gardner: And then I'll talk to him anyway, just to see if he's willing to cooperate.
Stutsman: All right, then we'll put this on for informal then on Thursday.
Bolkcom: Let them know that we really would like to get more quotes.
Lacina: On Thursday and we just won't...
Gardner: I'm talking about the problems that we're having...
Stutsman: Well then we can put it on for formal action.
Lacina: Do we put it on for formal for action and then if he asks a deferral we just don't take action, is that...
Administrative Assistant Carol Peters: He won't be asking for another deferral until the...
Jordahl: 17th.
Peters: The 17th.
Lacina: But we have to get back to the engineering firm. You're going to get feedback before Thursday from Dean.
Dvorak: I hope so, if he's available of course.
Lacina: Won't that set the course of action either for accepting this bid, or...
Dvorak: I think you probably should put it on there to accept this bid or discuss accepting this bid regardless.
Lacina: Because on the one hand...
Dvorak: If you don't need to, that's fine, but if it's not on there, we're dead, because...
Bolkcom: Why can't we get more... Why can't Mike just make contact with a couple of firms and say we've got this project, we'd like some bids on now. We go into the meeting on the 17th and... We don't need to prove this before the 17th, do we?
Stutsman: Well we were going to have it done by the 17th.
Bolkcom: The work done by the 17th?
Dvorak: No...
Stutsman: The survey, or the...
Gardner: Yes.
Bolkcom: There's still time to do that.
Dvorak: I think the intent was to have a matching dollar figure...
Bolkcom: We've got 3 weeks.
Dvorak: If I remember correctly.
Bolkcom: Right, we've got 3 weeks.
Jordahl: Yes, the cost, the estimate on the cost of construction of the intersection by the 17th.
Stutsman: Well and if we had to purchase right-of-way, I thought is basically what we were looking for if we were going to have to...
Gardner: That will come with the design.
Stutsman: Yes.
Bolkcom: We're moving as reasonably quickly as we can I think. If we get it by the 17th, we get it by the 17th. But I think we should also be careful about how much this costs.
Jordahl: Yes, exactly.
Bolkcom: Dean, I mean this has gone on for 4 years. I don't really see that we need to take the highest bidder here, just to save a couple weeks of his time.
Stutsman: What I guess I'm reacting to is that we were going to have this done so that we could make a decision on the 17th concerning...
Gardner: I think that's going to have an impact on the cost of the study. That was the parameters I gave to this individual when I asked for a quote, was to have something to us by the 15th or the 17th.
Stutsman: Yes.
Jordahl: Of July.
Gardner: Yes.
Jordahl: And the quote's here, now.
Gardner: Uh-huh.
Jordahl: So it looks like we would have time to get a 2nd, and or 3rd quote.
Gardner: No.
Stutsman: Not if you're going to have it done by the 17th.
Gardner: Right, I've got to tell this guy to get started, because he's got to have all that...
Jordahl: Oh, get this work done...
Gardner: (inaudible).
Jordahl: OK.
Lacina: I think put it on for Thursday if we find a better option, we go with that. If we don't have a better option, we...
Bolkcom: We just had an unrealistic time frame here.
Stutsman: Oh, we did. I don't think we had any idea how involved it was going to be. You're talking to 5 lay-people who do not have engineering degrees so...
Lacina: Well, and we were thinking intersection reconstruction as opposed to... And he's right, you need to look at the whole road. If you reconstruct the intersection and you've got problems on each side, you haven't solved a whole lot.
Gardner: Well we're still focusing on the intersection, and it may extend out a ways in order to deal with the intersection.
Stutsman: Be safe.
Jordahl: But, what is the intersection? Is it just the stuff where you can draw lines around a box? No, it's...
Gardner: We need to get the complying curve, that we have to run in there extends on down the road a ways, then we have to deal with that at the same time.
Jordahl: How long would it take? How long has it taken to get this estimate together and actually doing the work, do we have a time estimate here of what it would take... Time it would take them to...
Stutsman: Well he sent this on the 19th, and...
Jordahl: When did we request it?
Gardner: On the 16th, I believe is when I met with him and went out to the site.
Jordahl: OK, so...
Stutsman: And he's gearing this to have this done by the 17th, with this proposal.
Gardner: Right.
Jordahl: So... perhaps with another 2 or 3 days, we could get conceivably not clearly, but conceivably, could get another estimate on the cost of engineering.
Gardner: Basically, we're... I'm going to be gone after tomorrow night.
Jordahl: For a while.
Gardner: Until Monday night.
Jordahl: OK.
Bolkcom: I guess we just call Dean, find out if he can give us some more time. That's really going to be the catch, isn't it?
Dvorak: Yes, because theoretically on Dean's behalf, we had an estimate. Right or wrong, and that's what we're going by until this last public hearing when it was decided that maybe that wasn't an accurate estimate and we didn't have enough information. So it's really not Mr. Oakes' fault. We've had since January and December to get this done.
Jordahl: Uh-huh. We've had a change of County Engineers, so it's sort of... It's not exactly a malign on our part either.
Dvorak: No, not at all, but I'm thinking of his point of view.
Stutsman: Uh-huh. Mike, would it be too much to ask to just kind of contact some other, and just get some ball park figures to see if this bid is high? We may find that it's not out of line at all.
Gardner: No, I'll be glad to try... Spend this afternoon and try and if at all possible to get people in tomorrow to go out and view the site and explain what we need and see if anyone's actually available and then set the wheels in motion. They can go ahead and drop their estimate and get them set in. Your concern of conflict of interest, is that based off of just the fact that we have consultants within the community? There's consultants that we don't work with.
Stutsman: Well...
Lacina: Perception is going to a lot of it. Businesses that work with the County Engineer and the perception of conflicts.
Dvorak: Because we've hired other local consultants to do surveying work and we've hired them in the past and stuff. I didn't know if that would expedite things or help if we just hired somebody that is local.
Lacina: I was just trying too, to see if we could go with Mark at Cedar County and have the Cedar County Engineer come over and design this for us. But I know the Supervisors are not excited when the engineers from other counties do design work. But...
Jordahl: Yes, there's an interesting proposal. There are engineers that serve 2 counties.
Stutsman: Well is it pretty clear then, what we are doing then for Thursday?
Gardner: I'll make some phone calls this afternoon.
Stutsman: OK.
Gardner: See if I can find some other firms that would be interested in quoting.
Stutsman: Rick will check the minutes then. Talk to Dean.
Dvorak: Yes.
Stutsman: Then we'll just put this on for...
Lacina: So we're on for Thursday.
Peters: For informal and formal.
Stutsman: Right, that's what I would say.
Lacina: We don't have to act on it.
Jordahl: Yes, maybe 2 more sentences about Steve's notion of talking to Cedar County about this. It would seem like a nice system statewide, if a County Engineer had a conflict of interest, if there were some sort of informal policy among counties that engineer next door would be willing to go and help out rather than incurring all kinds of costs for this kind of engineering. Maybe... I myself would like to hear another comment about that.
Lacina: The other thing is, frankly, I would not want Mike to be liable for design work in Cedar County if for some reason a bridge went down or something and he had engineered it as our County Engineer. So... I did think about this a lot and tried to think of both sides, and I guess we hired you to do the work here, not over there.
Stutsman: I kind of feel that way too, I think we have a very good engineer and he could be on top on everybody's list, and he could be going all throughout the State.
Bolkcom: Traveling (inaudible).
Stutsman: Then we'd say, well, what about Johnson County. So I think the first responsibility is Johnson County and...
Welsh: Sally, why is there a conflict of interest? I don't understand what...
Stutsman: Well, Mike's father-in-law owns the land that we would have to get right-of-way from. Frank Shima. There's too many Shimas and I can't keep them all straight. So that would be the conflict of interest. The former Engineer, Doug Frederick, has a private consulting business and he worked with this, so I don't think it's really appropriate to contact him. He...
Lacina: And a former Engineer, Mike, owns MMS, so he's...
Stutsman: Glen.
Lacina: Yes. I'm sorry, Mike.
Stutsman: And Glen is also Dean Oakes so...
Duffy: You could tell that wouldn't work.
Bolkcom: He wouldn't need any right-of-way.
Stutsman: Did I answer your question? OK any other discussion or comments? Jonathan did you get all your...
Jordahl: I think I've had all my questions answered, thank you.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: STAFFING AT PLANNING AND ZONING PUBLIC HEARINGS
Stutsman: To save time, and because Mike's here, there's a couple of items under Board of Supervisors discussion that I think we'll just go ahead and take those up now. One of them has to do with staffing of public hearings for zoning applications and Rick, you had requested that we move that up so...
Dvorak: Yes, last Thursday, we had talked to Kot Flora representing the Health Department to see if they would be willing to have somebody attend the public hearings for us in the evenings. I'm not sure what their reaction was to it, but I think they felt... I don't want to speak for her, but my recollection is she would be willing to have somebody attend the meetings and if it's deemed necessary, more so than having them at every meeting, is that kind of what the Board felt too?
Bolkcom: Uh-huh.
Dvorak: Or does she want to have them at every meeting?
Bolkcom: I think it's whatever we want, but preferred having people here when there was a tough issue before...
Dvorak: Tough issue. That was on the agenda tonight. It does affect Mike and his staff also. I kind of asked you just to defer that so that Mike... Mike had left already, so Mike at least could have some input in that. There's been a lot of questions come up at our zoning meetings and the Board meetings that really only Mike or somebody in his office can answer. We can't answer, nobody else can answer so...
Jordahl: Well and this is particularly related to the transportation study that we were talking about earlier, that if we have a map of the County and a policy that ties to it, and interpretation of that in particular instances will be even more significant. It's hard to predict what's going to be controversial, when you get to these zoning and platting hearings before the Board. People can come in and surprise you. My experience with this is not as long as other members of the Board, but I know it's true, that you don't know what's going to blow up in your face. It's advantageous to have staff support, rather than having to defer something to be able to get some information to what the situation really is. So that's... Discussion that occurred about this did also revolve around the timing of whether we would have the controversial ones that we knew were controversial up first or last. I think the sense of the Board in that previous discussion was that the controversial ones should be last so that people who were just conducting regular or non-controversial business could get that business out of the way and staff would be available during those, in case something came up, but that wouldn't really take a lot of time for the ones we knew to be controversial and then staff would be available, so those would still be scheduled at the end and I guess my preference is that staff from both Health and Secondary Roads be present at our one monthly, or and if other ones come up, things that are scheduled at other times during the month, that staff be available during our zoning and planning hearing.
Stutsman: Mike, are you the only one that should be at the staffings? Is this something that you can delegate to the Assistant Engineer or is it...
Gardner: Eventually, perhaps we could do something like that. Right now we don't have one depending on who it is that our experience in that may be limited. So I guess we'd need to bring them up to speed on things. Eventually I can see it would be a shared duty if nothing else.
Jordahl: Where are we at in that process as a point of information.
Gardner: I got the add in the paper last weekend.
Lacina: I saw that.
Gardner: It would be taking applications through July 27th, I believe it was.
Stutsman: So do you have any comments about attendance at Board meetings?
Gardner: No, that... I'd be willing to do that.
Dvorak: On an on call basis, or would you like Mike to be involved in zoning public hearings?
Jordahl: Well again, as I suggested, we don't know what's going to be controversial.
Duffy: I'd say once a month because some of these last 3 or 4 hours and we could be getting into a lot of time there. Or a controversial one.
Gardner: I'd be happy to as however you see fit.
Lacina: Most of... Over the years, being on the Zoning Commission and then on this Board, a lot of them are standard. If they've got 3 to 500... There are certain rules and regulations, if there's a standard driveway, I don't think we would have to have you be involved in a standard application. If there was a drainage problem, or something like that, that you needed to report to us, then I think it would be important for you to explain it to us, then I think it would be important for you to explain it, but on a lot of these standard applications, it's...
Stutsman: Maybe the best way to handle it is for the Engineer and Rick, and the Chair to sit down and go over the applications ahead of time and then we can just kind of work it out.
Lacina: That's a good idea.
Duffy: Good idea.
Stutsman: If it's farmstead splits, then we could just kind of say, if you feel comfortable, the zonings start at 5:30, coming in at 6:30, 7:00. Then... Is that OK?
Bolkcom: Sounds fine.
Jordahl: Well, yes, as the... I don't mean to say that it's not possible to distinguish which are clearly non-controversial applications. I think it would be possible to say, well don't worry about it until this point. I don't know if we're going to have an entire session where nothing is going to be controversial...
Stutsman: Oh, that's our goal, Jonathan.
Jordahl: Well yes, the Comprehensive Plan is going to take care of this.
Stutsman: I think if we just kind of sit down and work that out, then we can work out something that's agreeable with everybody's schedule without...
Dvorak: Sure, yes. And Mike visits every site, with either me or on his own, so he's familiar with every one. And he also understands which ones will be controversial. So I think you're right.
Stutsman: So we'll plan for that for next... They'll have to tell me when all these zoning hearings will be. I'm all confused with our schedule for next month. It's pretty wild. That takes care of... Any other comments for that particular issue?
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: DISCUSSION REGARDING TRAIL GRANT APPLICATION
Stutsman: I think we'll go ahead and talk about the recreational trail grant, because Mike's here. Burnell, we're kind of moving around on the agenda, if that's all right with you?
Interim SEATS Director Burnell Chadek: Sure.
Stutsman: OK. All right.
Bolkcom: I'll talk about this one. Last Friday, I received a call from John Yapp, who's one of the transportation planners with the City of Iowa City, who indicated that they had just gotten word that the Iowa Department of Transportation was making available a million dollars in grant funding for recreational trails. They had just found out about it... Apparently the deadline is July 1st for the program, which obviously is not much time. The City of Coralville is going to be approaching the State in this program for grant. Iowa City is not. I guess as I talked to John Yapp, I wondered if it would be possible for us to take our ISTEA grant application that we formally submitted and basically use...Here's the paperwork on it, it's like a couple page form, or a couple page application. Take the ISTEA application that we formally submitted, just basically fill in the space that's there. It's a 75/25 grant program, much like the ISTEA proposal. So, I guess I put it on Friday. If we're going to act on it, we need to make some decision about it. I visited with Mike a little bit about it. He has pulled out the ISTEA application that we formerly submitted so we have a copy of that with the narrative and the cost in addition to some more specifics on some of the requests. They wanted some detailing of the budget, which was previously done by Ed Tice, and a few other diagrams, a cross section of a trail. So basically, I think about 98% of it's pulled together here. Mike obviously is going out of town, doesn't have really the time to work on this. I'd like to visit with John Yapp, and he's available to assist us in basically filling out the forms. I'm willing to work on it as well. The questions are when do we want to proceed to trying to get some grant money. Number 2, what's a matching requirement, do we have the money to meet it in terms of a time frame. It's likely that this kind of a... I don't know if it would be next year or the following year, in terms of actually when it would be constructed. The total project cost was about $322,000 as I recall, something close to that.
Gardner: Ball park, yes.
Bolkcom: So... That's kind of an overview.
Lacina: We'd have to come up with $80,000? I wonder if it would be better... The Coralville/North Liberty trail would allow kids to travel under the interstate as opposed to a lot of car traffic delivering them to school. That connected with Iowa City's trail I think would be something that would really get a lot of use by kids and adults that would ride that clear from North Liberty down through, eventually to hooking up with our Riverside Drive and down to Sand Road. Would it be better for us to sign on and assist Coralville in going for that money to get that part completed? Because I really do think that would receive a lot of heavy use through the school year and...
Bolkcom: I'm not sure what proposal, what they're trying to get money for this time. My understanding was the under the interstate thing was already something that they received funding for.
Lacina: But wasn't there...
Bolkcom: But proceeding on ahead with..
Lacina: Problem with the connection between North Liberty's and Coralville's.
Gardner: The last I heard there was, but I guess I have... I can't claim to be right on top of that.
Bolkcom: I don't know the answer to that either. If it was right-of-way related to property owner hassles or what. In terms of this trail, I think it's a good point, North Liberty and Iowa City and Coralville are doing quite a lot in this area. In terms of the Dubuque Street project, I think it remains a priority for me. I think it ought to remain a priority for the County that travels along one of the busiest secondary roads in the State of Iowa. It gets a substantial amount of use from what is a fairly urbanized neighborhood now. I think if not now, hopefully we're going to have ISTEA when ISTEA is authorized that we would be in a competitive position with our regional money. This is one of those grants that just comes up and you have to respond to so...
Stutsman: Is there money in the Secondary Roads Budget for the matching funds on this?
Gardner: Joe and I were talking about this yesterday. It's a little difficult to say right now. Part of the construction that was scheduled to be completed out of this year's budget is going to be carried over into next year's budget. But you don't know with right-of-way acquisition and so forth next year if we won't hit the time line to get some of the stuff that was scheduled for next year in place. So there may be some funds. We're talking 65 to 80 thousand dollars, somewhere in that range.
Stutsman: Joe, you...
Gardner: It's possible.
Stutsman: You didn't know when this grant would be awarded?
Bolkcom: No I didn't, I could get more details on it. There's hardly any, in terms of the application there, it's pretty scant about. I don't know if John had a cover letter that went with that that details that.
Stutsman: Or when work had to be done. Is that a problem too? If we got the grant and they said it had to be done by August 1st? I don't know, that's probably not practical, but within the next fiscal year. How's that going to fit in with...
Gardner: Anything's possible. We can hire outside help.
Stutsman: All right.
Gardner: To get these other things done.
Stutsman: Yes. The reason I ask those questions is sometimes grants are very appealing, but then when you get into them, do they create more problems than they're really worth? So I was just raising some of those questions.
Gardner: We have $950,000 budgeted for construction, the construction in FY98. That's a pretty full platter. That doesn't include the (inaudible) and market we're planning to do.
Lacina: There were 5 bridges, 4 or 5 that we had scheduled to do timber that if we don't have the money, some of those bridges still may have to be...
Gardner: Right, and those weren't included in that $950,000. Those were scheduled to come out of the maintenance budget. So... You're right about that.
Lacina: So there's 11 months.
Bolkcom: It's busy.
Stutsman: Uh-huh.
Lacina: You will have a (inaudible), especially if the weather isn't cooperative.
Jordahl: I'm a little confused about those 5 timber bridges, are you saying those are scheduled to come out of the maintenance budget? Did the grant not cover the, are those matching funds supposed to come out of the maintenance budget, is that what you're saying. So, we kind of talked about that before, it's not an agenda item here, I'm just wondering whether, it's again a point of information, what's going on with the timber bridge grant?
Stutsman: Let's focus on this discussion.
Jordahl: Not ask about that, OK.
Stutsman: Well...
Lacina: My suggestion is that Joe get us more information.
Stutsman: There's a quick turn around though, isn't there? When is this due, Joe?
Bolkcom: It's due July 1.
Stutsman: OK.
Bolkcom: It will be next Tuesday.
Lacina: Let me try to call Kelly. Do you know what Coralville's proposing?
Bolkcom: I don't.
Stutsman: Should we put this on for more discussion on Thursday then? More information?
Bolkcom: What specifically do you need?
Stutsman: Well I think the response from Kelly.
Bolkcom: I guess what I see what Coralville's doing is what Coralville's doing and they're doing a great job. But, I see a role for us to play as well. If we can provide a letter of support for Coralville if they want one, but I don't think that necessarily will preclude us from trying to upgrade this sidewalk along Dubuque Street.
Jordahl: This is a fairly obvious route to want to take on a bicycle out of town to get to the reservoir. It's the straightest, shortest distance between the bulk of Iowa City's population and the reservoir. It's a popular way to go, and it would be reasonable to have a good trail through there.
Stutsman: I would like to know how it's going to... When the dates are on this grant. When's it going to be awarded, when the work has to be done. How that fits in with your schedule.
Jordahl: Given the time frame for application, I understood we were under a fairly short clock on that, perhaps we could put it on for discussion slash action on Thursday. Then if it becomes clear that we do want to go forward on this, we'll at least have it on for action, be able to go forward.
Stutsman: We can do that. Charlie, did you look?
Duffy: This is a State grant? Is that right, Joe?
Bolkcom: Yes.
Duffy: It's a State grant. The State gas tax, is that where it's coming from?
Bolkcom: I don't know where the... What the source of the funding is.
Duffy: But ISTEA is Federal, 10% off the top of the Federal gas tax that you're paying when you drive your car. From what I hear, next fiscal year across the United States, $275 billion dollars. So take 10% of that and spread it over all the states, but I heard, and maybe they try to cut that back to 5%. Is that what you heard?
Bolkcom: I don't know what's going at the Federal level.
Duffy: Don't the Feds inspect our bridges every 4 or 5 years? They used to, I think. Or somebody has to.
Gardner: Yes. We have to have the bridges inspected every other year and they're being done right now.
Duffy: If they say close one, then bang. It's...
Gardner: Uh-huh.
Duffy: Boy, that's happened in the past.
Gardner: Yes. It has.
Stutsman: Does the Board want to have those questions answered? Then, put this on for informal and then action on formal?
Bolkcom: Sounds fine to me.
Jordahl: Uh-huh.
Stutsman: Anything else to add Mike, with this grant or anything?
Gardner: No.
Stutsman: OK.
Gardner: It sounds like you're on the right track with it, if we want to pursue it.
Bolkcom: So we need dates on when the money would be awarded and if we were a successful applicant, which I'm sure it's going to be very competitive and we're going to... When do we have to do the work by?
Stutsman: If there is money in this budget, or when it has to be completed for the matching funds.
Bolkcom: Right, so when the project would have to be completed in order to get the grant money.
Stutsman: Yes.
Bolkcom: OK.
Duffy: Well, is that right? It shouldn't be ahead of our 5 year plan or our bridges. See there's the problem. Unless you have a longer date that it has to be prepared by.
Bolkcom: Well, I'll find out , if we get a grant, when we have to expend the money by. Then, if it doesn't work for us, then when don't do it.
Stutsman: OK.
Bolkcom: It's going to be real competitive I'm sure. Applying doesn't mean we're going to get it. If they've got a million dollars and we want a quarter of the money...
Stutsman: OK.
Bolkcom: Anyway, thanks Mike.
Gardner: Uh-huh.