MINUTES OF THE JOINT INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THE JOHNSON COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:

OCTOBER 30, 1997

Chairperson Stutsman called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 5:01 p.m. Members present were: Joseph Bolkcom, Charles Duffy, Jonathan Jordahl, Stephen Lacina, and Sally Stutsman. Planning and Zoning Commission members present were: Maynard Hebl, Randy Lackender, Bob Saunders, Bill Terry, and Kae Wild.

Work session with the planning and zoning commission on the proposed land use plan

Stutsman thanked the Planning and Zoning Commission for agreeing to meet with the Board of Supervisors and said she appreciated them coming in. Stutsman said the purpose of meeting was to get both groups together and work on a process for the comprehensive land use plan. Stutsman said there was confusion in regard to everybody's role with the comp plan and she asked County Attorney Pat White to clarify the role of the public, the Board of Supervisors and the Planning and Zoning Commission in regard to the comp plan.

County Attorney Pat White said the roles of everybody were what the Board of Supervisors chooses them to be with one exception, the Board of Supervisors is required to obtain the recommendations of the Zoning Commission before it adopts a comprehensive plan. He said Chapter 335, the chapter that triggers county zoning, says that county zoning regulations shall be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan, with the word regulations meaning ordinances. White said the only statutory requirement would be that whatever plan is adopted by the Board of Supervisors must be subject to recommendation by the County Zoning Commission and then there is also a public hearing requirement. He said that the visioning meetings that the Board held were discretionary with the County and the Board of Supervisors can define the process as much as it wants or leave the process as much as it wants to it's staff or to it's Zoning Commission. White said one issue that has caused some of the confusion is that the letter signed by Lacina in which Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak thought an opinion was being sought on this issue, referred to Chapter 352 of the Code of Iowa. White said that Chapter 352 has no legal relevance for Johnson County, because Johnson County's comprehensive plan didn't come out of Chapter 352. Chapter 352 was an attempt by the legislature to try to get counties who had not dealt with zoning to do so.

White said the bottom line was that the roles of the public, the Zoning Commission and the Board of Supervisors were whatever 3 out of the 5 members of the Board wanted them to be, subject to the legal requirement that the Board cannot adopt anything that they don't give the Zoning Commission a chance to give them a recommendation on. White said, to give an inappropriate hypothetical, a member of the Board of Supervisors could go into hiding, write a comp plan, if 3 members of the Board said they wanted to look at this and they sent it to the Zoning Commission and the Zoning Commission recommended 5 to nothing to deny it, 3 members of the Board of Supervisors would still have the power to adopt it. Lacina asked if the interpretation wasn't that it had to be a positive recommendation, and White said that was correct. White said it was the same as when the Commission recommends denial of zonings on occasion and the Board of Supervisors approves them. Lacina said that in reality he would assume that the Board of Supervisors would not have the Commission and staff go through all of the work of doing a comp plan and then ignore it. White said in 1977 there was unanimity that the Zoning Commission recommend approval of the plan and the Board ultimately adopted it. Stutsman asked if there were changes in that plan once it came from the Zoning Commission. White said he wasn't positive if there were or not, that there may have been one change. He said the 1977 plan was massaged thoroughly by Zoning Commission members and Board of Supervisors members through the Regional Planning Commission, on which the Board of Supervisors were active members.

Planning and Zoning Commission Member Bob Saunders asked if it was a joint effort from the beginning, so that when it was a final document that it was a done deed and at that point in time the formal vote was a routine matter of giving approval to something that had been jointly written. White said he wouldn't go that far, because public hearings require that both the Zoning Commission and the Board of Supervisors keep an open mind, so that anything that's presented at the public hearing is given weight. Saunders said that given the public hearings the document was written keeping all of that in mind; so that when it was finalized it was approved, because it was what everybody wanted from the beginning. White said yes, but it was developed in a different fashion because the '77 plan was developed through the Johnson County Regional Planning Commission rather than the internal process that's been used this time. Zoning Commission Member Kae Wild said that Chad Sands of ECICOG was a great help. White said although there was staff time spent on the '77 comp plan, it was an agenda item for the Regional Planning Commission, which the Board of Supervisors had representation on. The Johnson County Regional Planning Commission, which is now JCCOG, adopted the proposed Rural Development Policy and forwarded it to the Board of Supervisors, who had participated as part of the Regional Planning Commission.

Planning and Zoning Commission Member Bill Terry said that he knew the Board had listened to the tapes of the last Commission meeting. Terry said that this was a meeting that did not have to be, and he would like to emphasize that he is not trying to be insubordinate, arrogant, or disrespectful of the Board of Supervisors; however, he feels that there have been a lot of charges against the Commission that are unfounded and he wants to set the record straight. He said the Zoning Commission was charged to set up recommendations for a new comprehensive plan. He said they did that working through ECICOG and having village meetings. Terry said he personally chose not to go to the village meetings because he didn't want to intimidate members of the public from speaking. He said after the village meetings they had numerous public hearings. He said he was given a job when appointed to the Commission and he didn't miss one of the public hearings. He said the bottom line was they came to the Board with a document and every time they had a public hearing he would open the meeting and tell the people that this was their comp plan and to tell the Commission what they wanted. He said the comp plan that was before the Board was the document that the citizens of Johnson County want.

Terry said that in the 30 years he has served on boards and commissions he has not had better cooperation and work than he had with the existing Johnson County staff. He said they were there at any time and he was called several times at home, and staff would be working at night on the comp plan. He said they deserve due recognition for how hard they worked on the plan. Terry said as he reads the Code and understands from the Code it's the Supervisors job after being given the comp plan to review it, send it back to the Commission with revisions, but definitely not for the Supervisors to try and write the comp plan. He said it's supposed to be the job of the Commission to write the plan and send it to the Board for their approval or disapproval. Terry said that's why he and Planning and Zoning Commission Member Randy Lackender spoke so vehemently against having to go through the joint meeting with the Board, but he agreed to do it because he wants to try and be a team player and see things done right. Terry said he wants the process to go in a positive fashion and was tired of certain people in the community saying that the Planning and Zoning Commission didn't do their job. He said they did their job and that the League of Women Voters was on record saying they didn't. Stutsman said she hadn't heard that. Terry said they all worked hard on this.

Wild said that she agreed with Terry. She said all the hard work that went into doing the plan would be nothing if it just lays on a shelf and collects dust. Wild said the plan is a reference point and it can be amended at any time. She said just because there might be things in the plan that people don't like doesn't mean they shouldn't approve the plan. She said there were 5 visioning meetings out in the County and less than 100 people total showed up. Wild said some people showed up more than once and so they were counted 2 or 3 times. She said it was published in the paper, it was on a bulletin board, and people could call the Board of Supervisors Office. She said she didn't think that they should be told that the people in the County didn't have a chance to hear all of the plan because they did and they chose not to do it. Wild said that what the staff, Chad Sands, and the Board did was outstanding. She said they worked and worked, according to the guidelines of the State and she doesn't know what else the Board could expect. She said she expected the cooperation of the Board of Supervisors in this process. Wild stated that they had worked on the comp plan for a year and half and the Board of Supervisors should either implement it or forget it. Terry asked the Board not to make the Commission go through another year and a half of work. He said it wasn't a perfect document. Wild said that nothing is perfect. Terry said it was as close as they could come to bring before the Board of Supervisors. Wild said the Board of Supervisors would review it every 3 to 5 years anyway, which they would have to do to update it. Wild said they did everything as they were expected to do. She said she voted for the Board to accept it and implement it.

Saunders said he took the time to read all 70 pages of the Board of Supervisors minutes that dealt with the comp plan. He said the process for doing the comp plan probably could have been better. He said there maybe should have been some joint sessions with the Board of Supervisors. He said he agreed with Wild that the public had a chance to give input. He said that they were like a judge and jury, they had to listen to both sides, and weigh it, evaluate it, and write something down. Some people are going to be happy, some are going to be unhappy, and some are going to fall in the middle. Saunders said that he was sure that there were strong development people out there who don't like the plan, as there were probably anti-development people who didn't like the plan. He said there was no way they would make everybody happy in the process. He said the feeling of the Planning and Zoning Commission was that given the charge to try to look at what they've got in the comp plan and make some changes, that one of the frustrations that has arisen in the last 20 years is that there were many noble ideas expressed in the original plan, but there were never any ordinances written to put the law behind it.

Saunders said they have been talking with staff and with the County Attorney's Office to begin the process, realizing that any comprehensive plan essentially is like the vision statement that Iowa City wrote in Vision 2000. He said anytime anybody in the group tried to put something specific into the plan, people said they couldn't do that because specifics had to go into departments' ordinances, rules, and regulations and could not be in the plan. Saunders recommended to have the plan have an idea and then give that idea to the departments and they will see how they can best make ordinances, rules, and regulations to achieve what the plan wants to achieve. Saunders said one of the observations and criticisms of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the past 20 years was there were a lot of good thoughts but not as many ordinances created that would have achieved some of the desired effects of the plan. He said it was the intent of the Planning and Zoning Commission to move forward with some of the ordinance regulations that would put the teeth into the plan, that they are lacking right now, that would send a clear message to people.

Saunders pointed out that there has been extensive criticism of the comp plan, that it is a plan that characterizes the urbanization of Johnson County. Saunders said that they are not trying to urbanize Johnson County; however, compared to other counties, Johnson County has an urban flavor that other counties in Iowa don't. He said that's all they were trying to say by the phrase urban. He said they are not trying to turn Johnson County into a big city. He said that only coming back to the comp plan every 20 years is a disservice to the Supervisors, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and to the public. He said these documents cannot be ignored or they will always end up where they are now. Saunders said it would be the hope of the Planning and Zoning Commission that with the comp plan is reviewed annually. He said they would like to see the Planning and Zoning Commission meet with the Board of Supervisors, probably in the first week of January every year, to review what the year was like in regards to zoning to see what in the plan has worked and not worked and what might be some modifications and changes that they could make, to not wait another 20 years to look at this document.

Saunders said the message they wanted to send is that nothing was perfect and they understand that. Any group that has to summarize the thoughts and feelings and emotions of hundreds of people can only do that to some extent. Saunders said it was their intention to accomplish as much as they could and at the same time provide for controlled and managed growth in certain parts of the County. He said if there are parts of the document the Board doesn't like, they should send it back, saying what they don't like, and the Commission can spend a month or two looking at it. Saunders said it was the document of the Board of Supervisors to approve it and at some point in time they've got to approve it. He said they were here to try and work with the Board, but at some time they've got to move forward because it's an ever changing document and they want to keep it an ever changing document. He said he doesn't want the public to think they can just ignore it once they do something with it.

Planning and Zoning Commission Member Randy Lackender said that it was Saunders opinion as to having a review of the comp plan every year. He said he wasn't in favor of that. Lackender said that if they take a year and a half of time to do the plan it should be good, not necessarily for 20 years, but it need not to be reviewed annually.

Lacina said that one of his concerns was that they would adopt a plan that was an individual's plan but under the guise that it was coming from the public. He said that when they did the North Corridor Plan they set up a citizens panel that they felt was balanced and people were involved in that; they received good input from the public, and then they went with that. Lacina said when they talk about their concerns, they all have some and it has been pointed out that they will never have a perfect document. As he went through it he tagged areas that needed to be fleshed out more or clarified and he said that's his opinion and not what came from the public. He said they have a valid point that this is going to be a growing document. Lacina said there would be certain areas that they would want the fire districts and school districts to comment. He said the economic development plan needed to be fleshed out. He stressed that he would like the input to come from the public, not his own warping of this and then call it the public plan. Lacina said, given the work that was put into the plan, he was ready to pass the plan as is and they can continue to develop the areas they need to develop and move on; otherwise he thinks they don't meet the intent of the law.

Terry said the citizens that worked on the plan and gave input would be tolerant of moderate changes, but to drastically change this is a slap in the face of what they've asked the county residents to do. He said to the extent he understands the electoral process the Board has a responsibility to the citizens of Johnson County. He said unless there are just minor changes they are in error if they don't pass the plan. He said they can change it.

Lacina said there are components which haven't been fleshed out. He said they did discuss trying to go back to certain segments, like the economic development component. He asked how do they envision the best way to flesh parts of the plan. Should they go back to specific committees from those areas or should they take a lot of areas at once and move forward; should they take specific projects and goals and move forward such as going to the school districts and fire districts have have them work on it once. Terry said that he was the Chair of the Commission when they were going through most of the comp plan. He said he called the school district and told them that they would like them there at their meetings and they didn't come. He said they also called several fire departments and asked them for their input and they got minimal input. He said he didn't know because what more can you do than call somebody and ask them to come and participate and give them some input. Lacina said they did have a school board representative, Jerry Palmer, sit in on one of the Board of Supervisors meetings and didn't comment, but he was there.

Saunders said as a reference point when they were doing the North Corridor Plan they had a school night and all of the school superintendents showed up for that plan. He said the fire departments also showed up for that meeting. He said that surprisingly the schools said build all of the houses you want, but we only have one request, that the houses be in subdivisions because the scattering of houses is a logistics nightmare for the bus drivers. He said the fire department concerns were that they wanted to make sure that there were ponds in the subdivisions and dry hydrants. He said they just carried the thoughts from the North Corridor meeting into the comp plan. Saunders said if the fringe area agreements were done they could also put them into the plan. Saunders said speaking for himself he fully expected the plan to come back to the Planing and Zoning Commission. He expected to see a letter from every Supervisor back to the Planning and Zoning Commission addressing their concerns specifically. He envisioned that the Commission would then sit down and put the 5 letters together and see what the Board had to say. Saunders said if the Commission sees that a majority of the Board doesn't like a section of the plan they would change it. Stutsman said that Saunders brought up a very good point, because they all have to be in agreement with the final product, since it wouldn't do any good if the Zoning Commission is in one direction and a majority of the Board was in another direction.

Stutsman said she really regretted that the Planning and Zoning Commission got the feeling that the Board of Supervisors didn't like the comp plan at all. She wanted to say publicly that she does not want to convey that feeling. She said she knew a lot of work went into the plan; a lot of good things are in the plan, but it wasn't perfect. She said the Board had a lot of interest in making the plan the best plan they possibly could and she really regrets if that interest was taken personally and interpreted that they didn't like anything that was done because that wasn't meant to be. She said they have a responsibility and they were just responding to what they felt was their responsibility to respond to the document. She said she didn't know where the idea came from, that if they had some comments or some criticisms or some improvements, that it was a direct criticism, that it wasn't a good plan.

Lackender said he didn't care whatever the Board does, they can't leave the public out, because it was a grass roots plan. He said it wasn't the Planning and Zoning Commission's plan; it was the people's plan. He said they tried to take a majority of what the people brought forward and put it into it. He said if the Board wanted to change anything it should go back to the people. Saunders said his feeling was if they have to do that, they have to do that. If they end up seriously modifying the plan to address 8 or 10 concerns the Board has, then Saunders thinks they would have another public hearing at one of their sessions to let the public look at what they're proposing to revise.

Jordahl said with regard to the voice of the public, it was an issue that was really key. He said they were all emotionally wrapped up in the question of what is it that the people want. Jordahl said that Wild pointed out that in the visioning meetings that were held around the county that about 100 people participated. Jordahl said the public has had it's chance to have their input through the process that the Planning and Zoning Commission used. He said it would be crazy to reject that process. He said that it also has to be ultimately that the plan is something that they are happy to enforce and live by. He said that isn't something they had in the past. Jordahl said it was important to recognize that many people spoke about their views when they elected the Board of Supervisors to their seats, and that was also public input into the process of the comp plan.

Stutsman asked where they were supposed to go from here. Terry said that he liked Saunders' idea that the Board write letters to the Commission members highlighting what they like or don't like, particularly what they don't like. He said he is hoping that they will be more clarifications rather than dramatic changes. He asked if the County Attorney's Office had gone through the plan yet for wording. White said he had gone through it, but not given any feedback to the Commission. Terry pointed out that they should receive a copy of the Attorney's interpretation and they should also go back to the department heads and ask them again what they thought of the plan. Terry said he would like to see a time limit, that the Board have their letters to the Planning and Zoning Commission by their December meeting, so they could act on them. He said he also wouldn't have a problem with having a special meeting. He said he would like to have a final Land Use Plan by February 1st. He said they owe it to the county to get the plan on the books because it has drug on long enough. He said any verbal comments could be harmful and they will accomplish more if they just do it by letter.

Jordahl said it was a very interesting idea. He said he liked it, because each person would have the opportunity to express him or herself in a consistent way about the entire plan. He said that way they would have the satisfaction of having been heard, of being on record, and that it would be personally satisfying. Saunders said for him it was just the next step. Saunders said people who elected the Board have a voice through them. He would like to have it on a January agenda, have a February public hearing, and get back to the Board by March. Saunders said there should be no reason why the Commission would not want to know what the Board thought about the plan. Wild said she personally would like to see it in writing because she was sick of the stories and gossip that she hears about how personalities are entering in it. She said our personalities cannot enter into it; it has to be the best plan they can do. Terry asked the Board if they agreed that their letters should probably zero in more on clarifications than drastically trying to change any one particular section. Saunders said they ought to just be able to lay it on the line, and Bolkcom agreed. Bolkcom pointed out that Lacina had about 20 post-it notes on his copy of the comp plan and that he probably had a few minor things and possibly a couple bigger things. Terry said he was hoping that they were minor clarifications. Lacina said most of his notes on the plan were just things that needed to be fleshed out or legal questions for the County Attorney, and also a few philosophical questions. Lacina said the idea was very good to write the letters.

Bolkcom said he would like to suggest another alternative to writing letters. He said ultimately they have to be able to pass a document that a majority of both bodies agree on. He said he thinks they've done a good job getting to the point they've gotten to. He said he would reinforce what Stutsman said, that it was unfortunate that their making suggestions was taken as they don't like the work the Commission has done. Bolkcom said it's been a struggle trying to figure out what their role was and they lead off the meeting trying to clarify what their role was as elected officials. Bolkcom said in a year when someone asks why the Board doesn't take a specific action, they can point to an appropriate clause in the plan. He wants to be able to say he supports the Land Use Plan. Bolkcom said he had issues with the plan. These were in part things that haven't been addressed in the plan, such as: in-fill development, encouraging people to buy the 800-1000 available lots; and what a build-out would look like for all the residentially zoned land in the North Corridor. Bolkcom said he didn't understand how the North Corridor Plan intersects with the Land Use Plan. He said he likes what has been done with the Land Use Plan, it was a very thorough start, but he's not sure that writing letters will work with the issues he has with the Land Use Plan, unless there is substantive discussion. Bolkcom said he wants to ask the public about in-fill development and the residential zoning in the North Corridor. He would argue for not only an internal process between the Board and the Commission, but an external process to open it back up to the public.

Terry asked if December 1st was a realistic date for the Board of Supervisors to have their letters to the Planning and Zoning Commission, so they would have 2 months to review and discuss the letters. Lacina said it was very realistic, because all of the Supervisors have read the plan. Lacina said it was important that they put down their thoughts in writing, so it is very clear and communication needs to continue, so there won't be a power play that would result in a flawed plan. Lacina said that Bolkcom had done a good job of going through the plan and detailing points and the rest of the Board could also. Terry made the suggestion that as the Board went through the Land Use Plan, it would be helpful if they would cite chapter, verse, and paragraph from the plan. Lacina made the suggestion that all of the Board members make sure they are reviewing the 5/2/97 version of the plan. Saunders said if a Board member feels like there was an entire issue that wasn't discussed in the Land Use Plan, it should be brought up. Bolkcom said there wasn't a vision in the plan. Bolkcom said there needed to be a public process to figure out a vision for the comp plan. Bolkcom said it was never asked of the public what they wanted Johnson County to look like in 20 years. He said the statement in the plan regarding urbanization doesn't come to mind when the public says environmental protection and agricultural protection are the number one and two priorities. Lacina said another reason for communication was that the protection of sensitive areas and valuable ag land shouldn't to be viewed as being an either/or. He said if they have the clustering concept it would preserve ag land and sensitive areas. Terry said if the Board of Supervisors could get their letters to the Commission by December 1; then in January there could be another joint meeting to discuss the letters with the Board; and then a public hearing and have a vote and send it back to the Board. Bolkcom said the risk of these letters was that the Board would bury the Commission in paper. Lacina asked if they should try and keep their documents to less than 5 pages and Terry said that was fine.

Wild reminded people that the comprehensive plan was not carved in granite for 10 or 20 years. She said it was expected to be amended or looked at every 3 to 5 years. She said that was something they should remember and the public should be aware of also. Lackender asked why the Board of Supervisors doesn't vote on the Land Use Plan, because if they pass it, they like it; and if they don't pass it, it will go back to the Commission anyway. He said it will be spring at least until they get close to hammering out a new plan again. He said it's not a perfect plan and they can't come up with a perfect plan. Lackender said pass it or don't. Stutsman said she wasn't ready to pass the plan. Lackender said a majority of the Commission voted to pass the plan on to the Supervisors. Jordahl said it was their choice to make whether they voted on the plan or not. Lacina said it would be a way of going back and addressing specific concerns. Bolkcom said if they vote it down the current plan will continue to be enforced. Lacina said he was interpreting Lackender's statement as adopt the plan and then go back and address the areas that there were problems with. Lackender said he wanted it either accepted or turned down. Stutsman asked if the Board turned it down how would the Commission know why the Board turned it down. Saunders said he would rather keep the process on a positive note rather than a negative note. Terry said he had the fears that Lackender had about the comp plan process dragging on and that's why he's asking for the Board to make a commitment for a deadline for the plan to be passed.

Stutsman said she wanted to get a deadline nailed down and the Board could forward letters to the Commission by December 1st. Terry said the Commission and Board could meet in January and they would give the Board a chance to present a verbalization of their written statements. Wild said she thought the Planning and Zoning Commission should meet in January and see what everybody has to say and they could meet with the Board later in the month. Saunders agreed. Lacina asked if the Commission was scheduled to meet December 8th. Wild said yes and January 12th was their next meeting. She said they would either discuss the letters on Dec. 8th, if the letters are received in time, or Jan. 12th. Terry said they could then meet sometime in January and they should have the plan done by February 1st or February 15th. Bolkcom said he wasn't pressed for a time frame because the Board will be in the middle of the budget in January. He said the goal ought to be to have a good document. Bolkcom said his sense is the Commission feels like they've submitted the plan and he wonders what is the process the Commission is going to use to work on the plan if changes are proposed by a majority of the Board. He said they need to compromise and hopefully get to a point of a 5 to nothing vote. Saunders said the point of the next meeting was for the Commission to come back to the Board with the surveys of the document. Then they will sit down with the Board and hammer out agreements on key issues. Lackender said he doesn't agree with Saunders because then it will be the Supervisors' plan and not the people's plan. Lacina said, if they want to know where the 3 votes are, they should just turn the plan over to the Board and have them write it.

Bolkcom asked what the difference was between the comp plan and when a zoning application is approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and then denied by the Board. Saunders said there wasn't a difference. Bolkcom said a zoning application was a recommendation they received from the Zoning Commission, but the Board then reviews it with public input, and on occasion they reverse the decision. Lackender said that any application he looks at on its own. He said he didn't want any influence by anybody but the public. Bolkcom said that the Planning and Zoning Commission does the best they can and so does the Board. Terry said he doesn't think they'll know until next November how the public feels about how the Board acted on the comp plan. Terry said the letters the Board is going to write to the Commission are going to be more clarifications as to what the public asked to be put in the comp plan. He said if they ask for big changes they will be back to square one.

Duffy said he remembered doing the old plan and it took three and a half years. White said if they're frustrated at the length of the process, it hasn't even come close to the last time they did a comp plan. Duffy congratulated the Planning and Zoning Commission for the work that they've done, and also the Planning and Zoning staff and ECICOG. Duffy said writing a land use plan wasn't an easy job and any land use plan should have some flexibility. He said in looking at the land zoned residential in the North Corridor, farmers are farming much of the land that was rezoned in 1960, and he's not for saying start building. Duffy said the State of Iowa might come up with some things regarding growth in the cities. He said people can't have everything their own way and people have to compromise. He said he doesn't like one house per 40 acres, because it would only enable the rich to live in the rural areas. He said, if he was to vote tonight, he would vote yes on the plan. Duffy said they are hurrying the plan along.

Saunders asked if they can get the letters. Stutsman said they can get the letters to them by December. Jordahl said in terms of the time frame they could keep a goal in mind, but the goal was really to finish a plan that they believe in and will be willing to adhere to. Bolkcom said they should ask the public for a vision statement, because he doesn't think it hasn't been done yet. Stutsman asked if they should do that. Saunders said they could do that in a January or February Planning and Zoning meeting. Lacina said there was a lot that needed to be added, such as to the University component, economic development component, and the educational opportunity. He said he thought Wild's point was valid that there would be a lot of ongoing work.

White said that hearing the discussion and hearing it in the context of the tape recording of the Zoning Commission's meeting he listened to, he would like to answer the question raised in a non-legal, more philosophical policy way. He said when he listened to the tape of the meeting he was really surprised. White said with all due respect to the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, they were more defensive and more contentious than they really needed to be. The reason they didn't need to be is because the Board is ultimately the arbitrators of public policy. Whatever a majority of the Board decides is public policy is going to be public policy. White said they are at a stage in the comp plan process where the Board wants more of a role than they've had. White said they didn't want to be presented with a vote yes or no scenario. White said they'll have a public hearing, and if they end up with a plan that the public doesn't support, they'll hear it. White said the current plan was a terrific plan, but it had one major flaw and that was after it got adopted unanimously, when zonings started to show up against which the Comprehensive Plan was measured, the reality was that although the Board in 1977 supported it unanimously, in their heart they didn't. White said that when individual zoning applications began to show up members of the Board didn't always follow the Comp Plan. White said in the last 20 years there has been a lot of zoning that has been done contrary to the comp plan, because the Board of Supervisors wasn't supportive of it. White said the goal right now ought to be to involve the Board and turn the Land Use Plan into a document that the Board will support enthusiastically; and then in the weeks and months that come after, when there is a zoning application people will be able to say that it is either consistent or not consistent with the comp plan, so that they don't end up with a plan again that the Board will back away from. Terry said he was not trying to be insubordinate, but he will be defensive.

Terry said that White was not at the last Planning and Zoning meeting and that there was a lengthy document before the Zoning Commission that they were supposed to read and act upon that night. He and Lackender didn't appreciate it. Terry said Saunders was being a good commissioner, but he was proposing the Commission have a meeting with the Board based on a document that was placed before them before the meeting which they hadn't had a chance to read. He said that's why he made the comments he made and he doesn't think he was out of line or being a bad commissioner for doing it. Terry also said that based upon the statements that White made his feeling is let the Supervisors go ahead and write the comp plans from here on out. Terry said they've got the public input, so let them do what they want to do, and don't even come back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Terry said the Planning and Zoning Commission will do their best to enforce the comp plan as the Supervisors write it.

Lacina said the plan is a little bit like a computer, because towards the end of the plan's 20 year life it was out-of-date. So when rulings were made on zonings, the County had changed significantly with the development of the Avenue of the Saints, traffic flows, and the mall in Coralville. Lacina said the Planning and Zoning Commission is empowered from time to time to sit down and update the plan. White said the Planning and Zoning Commission can recommend changes any time they want. White also said the process of writing a comp plan is so time consuming and it tends to be contentious because it's so important; that once it's adopted everybody is so happy to have it behind them, that nobody really wants to go back to it in 3 or 5 years. Lacina said that's why it's important that it's not a 3 to 2 vote, it's important that they have a plan that everybody agrees on. Lacina complimented the Planning and Zoning Commission by saying that if they didn't care about what they were doing they wouldn't be in the Board Room arguing, they would just walk away. Lacina commended them for the hard work that they've done and said they've obviously put a lot of work and energy into it. Wild said to White that 20 years ago they didn't have the involvement from the public. White said they did have involvement from the public. Wild said that everybody that sits on the Planning and Zoning Commission has an understanding of what a comprehensive plan is, so she doesn't think they won't look at it for 20 years. Stutsman said when she says she wants to keep the process moving, she means she doesn't want it to drag on indefinitely. Stutsman said she wanted it to be a good and thoughtful plan, so they should just see where they're at in January and go from there.

Bolkcom asked if in terms of this process there was a way to begin moving ahead on some of the specific issues of concern that could be immediately implemented, such as a conservation subdivision design ordinance, right-of-way dedication, dust alleviation, and school bus turnarounds. Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak said he was going to recommend the same thing. Dvorak said he really didn't want to see a time frame put on it as long as they were going to continue to move. Dvorak said they've got a decent plan now and he just wants to see a better plan. He wants a document both the Board and the Commission likes. Dvorak recommended that they take the good things out of the plan and start implementing them now. He said he wants to follow up the Land Use Plan with the documents for implementation. Dvorak said his office had logistical problems in how quickly they can bring some of these items to the table.

Jordahl said that he was increasingly impressed with how closely lately the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission have adhered to the Comprehensive Plan. Duffy said that one important thing was to preserve prime agricultural land and they have done a good job of doing that. He also said that this didn't mean that they have to build houses on all marginal land. Duffy recommended a State law be made preserving prime agricultural land, because in many cases the problem was annexations. Stutsman asked if they were all in agreement where they would go from here. A consensus was indicated.

Barbara Beaumont stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission asked the County departments for input and they gave them a month, but she said that a month wasn't enough time. Beaumont also said that a school district representative showed up at one of the Planning and Zoning meetings, and since he wasn't called on, he left and never came back again. Beaumont asked why should he bother to come if he wasn't specifically being asked questions. Beaumont suggested that they be more specific on their agendas so that people come prepared to talk. She said that an environmental committee was formed and it never met; it was an area of public concern and nothing was ever done about it. She said the public meetings were set up in May for the summer of '96. She said a lot of people are gone in the summer and that could explain the low attendance. Terry said they asked different department heads in advance of a month, sometimes 6 or 8 months. Terry felt that her first statement was erroneous and that her second statement regarding school input was erroneous, because he asked many times if there was anybody in the audience who wanted to have input. Bolkcom said it had been suggested that they have a joint meeting with the fire departments and school districts. Wild said they could've written a letter and none of them even did that. Beaumont said that they only gave them a month's notice and Terry and Wild said they gave them more than a month.

Pat Cancilla, member of Environmental Advocates, said that he had attended meetings when the Board discussed the comprehensive plan and had thought that the Board had come to a consensus that it was not a comprehensive plan, but a land use plan. He felt that now it was reversed and it was a comprehensive plan again. He asked where the consistency was in what they were doing and asked them to tell him whether it was a comp plan or a land use plan and if so what are the differences. Cancilla cited the document regarding the proposed plan submitted by Environmental Advocates, saying they have not received feedback on the document. He said these issues should be addressed as part of the process. Stutsman said she had reviewed the document and didn't realize that Environmental Advocates wanted public feedback from the Board on the document. White answered Cancilla's first question by stating what is proposed is a comprehensive land use plan, saying the term comprehensive plan comes out of the zoning statute. He said the Board had early discussion about a broader definition of comprehensive plan and decided that is not a realistic goal; they were struggling enough to get to a land use plan and they would not tackle all those other things. He said a second intended purpose of the proposed land use plan was to also serve as the community builder plan, if that can be accomplished. Lacina said many groups had input and they don't single out any one group to go into dialogue. He said he would take all comments seriously and try to address them as best he can, but he probably wouldn't be responding to every issue that a group brings up because of the volumes of input. He said he appreciates the different groups and their input, but ultimately the Board of Supervisors will determine what is the best interest of all the citizens of the county. Cancilla said many of their concerns have not been discussed at all. He said the word sprawl was only used once in the whole 70 page document. Lacina said groups such as Environmental Advocates had an opportunity to present their ideas in public hearings. Cancilla said they didn't have any opportunity to get feedback from the Commission. Jordahl said the discussion of the proposed plan is not over and there will be opportunities to discuss issues that have been brought forward.

Adjourned at 6:40 p.m.

Attest: Tom Slockett, Auditor

By Casie Parkins, Recording Secretary