Reconvened informal at 3:08 p.m.

Bolkcom: We've been asked to generate a list of possible ways to spend our 2.16 million dollars that we're going to get.

Duffy: Who asked you that, Joe?

Stutsman: Cole Chase did.

Bolkcom: Cole Chase from the Chamber did and he wants a list. I figured that better than having him survey everybody individually and come up with some sort of wish list, it might make more sense for us as a Board to talk about it. So that's why it's on today.

Stutsman: This isn't an endorsement from the Board, they just asked us, if it passed, what would we be spending the money on?

Lacina: In fact, I think kind of the intent was that if they felt we didn't have good uses for it, they might in fact come out against it.

Stutsman: To get the discussion going, in view of my work on the Space Needs Committee, I think there's definitely a need for additional revenues to begin to address space needs. Specifically, the jail.

Bolkcom: OK. Space needs.

Lacina: Roads and bridges.

Bolkcom: Roads.

Lacina: I think technically we're supposed to refer to some property tax aspect.

Bolkcom: There's no requirement for property tax relief.

Lacina: Really, I thought there was.

Bolkcom: No.

Stutsman: Indirectly, there's property tax relief, if you're using this money to...

Lacina: I think Houser said there was supposed to be some reference to it, but apparently not.

Bolkcom: According to one of the... I don't know if it's the most recent state publication, I reread it last night, there's no requirement for property tax reduction as a result. That could have changed, I don't know if they did that. Maybe the document's over a year old.

Lacina: One thing we do need to keep in mind, as Iowa County discovered. It's not a guaranteed steady stream.

Stutsman: It can fluctuate, yes.

Lacina: If you have a slump in the economy, you can see a dip in the revenues, so if you're funding ongoing reoccurring expenses you could become trapped.

Stutsman: Operating budget things.

Lacina: A substantial portion of it would be pretty stable. You'd just want a little bit of cushion. Say we decide we need a jail or something, we want to build it over 7 years. If the economy takes a dip and the revenue drops, you may have to stretch it to 10. If you're paying salaries or funding police cars on the road and the revenue dips, then you've got a problem.

Jordahl: We looked at roads and bridges, I'd like to specify a little just to highlight, it's not so much countywide, there's some real trouble spots. I guess if we're looking at an infusion of cash, I'd like to address some high-priority things. Deer Creek Road's been discussed. That's not necessarily the one to do, but we've got this study looking at Sugar Bottom Road, and some things that have been a real thorn in the County's side for a while.

Lacina: Shouldn't that be a question of the Engineer?

Stutsman: I don't know if I'm ready to be specific yet.

Jordahl: I don't mean label them, necessarily. I'm just saying to...

Bolkcom: We could easily use a million more dollars on roads.

Stutsman: Not just on maintenance of roads.

Jordahl: No, construction.

Duffy: I think we have pretty good roads, Joe. Just cause some people don't think so. I think so. How about senior citizens?

Bolkcom: You bet.

Duffy: Something there, but I think we lead Iowa.

Bolkcom: Congregate Meals Program?

Duffy: We lead Iowa. Well, Congregate Meals is federal dollars. I don't like to see that changed. There are things.

Stutsman: Are we that behind in senior programming, that we need to put these moneys into that?

Duffy: No. No.

Lacina: I think we really seriously need to address, though, is someday we're going to need an ambulance station by the new mall.

Bolkcom: I think our department's already looking at stationing one of our new ambulances over there.

Lacina: Well, they're talking about going to the Fire Department. I'm wondering about response time.

Stutsman: There is talk even depending on how calls go once the mall is in place, there might be a need even in North Liberty to put up a satellite office.

Bolkcom: How about daycare services? That was something we had to cut back on this time.

Stutsman: Oh, yes.

Bolkcom: The regressive nature of the tax kind of indicates that we ought to put some money into services that help people that don't have a lot of resources.

Stutsman: Affordable housing. We're starting that study, maybe this'd be an opportunity to...

Jordahl: Job training.

Lacina: Since it comes from the business community, I would like to see some reinvestment to assist either small business or promotion of tourism, which obviously does a wonderful job of selling the community.

Bolkcom: Since what comes from the business community?

Lacina: The local option tax.

Bolkcom: It actually comes from all the taxpayers that pay it. I mean, they pay it at retail businesses, but...

Lacina: Correct. But the retail businesses that supposedly are going to see a decrease in their revenue based on this tax, it would be nice if in some way we could give them some recognition or reinvestment. I don't have a clue what that would be. But it's just a thought.

Jordahl: Well, when I'm talking about with the job training, that is a way of doing both of those things.

Lacina: Empowering the workforce.

Jordahl: Exactly. Enhancing the quality of the workforce and daycare is a part of that, enabling people to go to work.

Lacina: Maybe that's a good way to do that.

Jordahl: I'm thinking prevention too, in a similar vein. It's inseparable in some sense.

Stutsman: What if the revenues go down and we're committed to this? Then where do we come up with the dollars for that? That seems like that's one of those...

Bolkcom: We'll have gambling then.

Stutsman: OK.

Jordahl: The long forestalled is something, if the tax is only going to be there for a while...

Bolkcom: It's indefinite.

Jordahl: I know it's indefinite, but say we're...

Stutsman: It can be repealed.

Jordahl: Well, people are known to vote. They'll change their minds about things one way or the other. Where we started with roads and buildings, I think, is a good idea, because these are not necessarily recurring expenses. In fact, in the case of roads, they might actually forestall recurring expenses, where you'd build a road that would have less maintenance to deal with in the future.

Stutsman: I almost think it should be just projects, rather than ongoing things that we're committed to. I guess I would rather see child care as being part of the regular budget instead of depending on these kinds of revenues to support that.

Jordahl: I'd be happy to discuss enhanced funding for child care just out of the general fund and to look at any local option sales tax dollars as something to deal with something that's clearly a one time expense.

Duffy: It is very important that we get together and have some things that the public thinks are important. This isn't our baby, of course, it's the City's. People I've talked to, really it's not so much the one cent sales tax, but it does add up over a period of years. But it's what it's spent for. If it isn't spent right, you're going to see it go down.

Bolkcom: How about services?

Jordahl: We don't necessarily want it to go through. This is just like if it happens and we have the money to spend. I don't think we're sitting here trying to promote it by putting up some glossy project.

Lacina: I don't have a position on this, so don't jump on me, but what are your thoughts on doing something collaboratively with Coralville, Iowa City, perhaps the University? Coralville floated a trial balloon on the Convention Center. Iowa City has talked about a Taft Avenue bypass around the City. Is there something that the 3, or 4, or 5 governmental agencies, a county-wide transportation system, as opposed to Coralville buses and Iowa City buses. Is there something collaboratively that we could all go together and maximize a service of some sort?

Bolkcom: We can ask that tomorrow at the meeting. I think everybody's got their individual projects that they're hungry for money for. That will probably take precedent over...

Jordahl: Well, the trail system is something that would enhance the quality of life for everyone. It'd connect the cities and be an economic enhancement thing, people would use it as a kind of tourism thing. They would travel from one part of the County to another. You're connecting places like Swisher with North Liberty, with the mall, it'd be transportation, yet it'd be special. It'd have the gloss that Charlie's looking for. Something special that people can get their teeth into. That's that type of a project.

Duffy: Don't forget the Greencastle Bridge. From what I hear, it's starting to surface again.

Bolkcom: Has it been underwater?

Duffy: Yes, it's floated to the top, Joe.

Stutsman: Doug used to talk about Mehaffey Bridge, that that might be a big...

Bolkcom: That's right.

Lacina: That is something we can't forget... When we took that boat ride underneath it and there was damage that we need to maybe put a little bit aside for. If that goes down, it's a huge hit.

Duffy: Might get some ISTEA funding for that.

Bolkcom: I think Charlie's point is, if we're going to get this money and convince rural voters to support this, then what's in it for them? There's clearly the feeling that Iowa City's going to pay for their water plant on the backs of rural taxpayers. That's what I hear from people. When we talk about special projects, what are we going to enhance for people with this money? One of the things I think of is the whole question of being open more. There's a cost to that, what is that cost? But having the ability to get services past 4 p.m. in County government. I think people are willing to pay for that. I got hit up by 2 people at 4:10 yesterday, hot- I want to talk to an elected official, and you look like one.

Lacina: Well, congratulations.

Duffy: Sorry I missed it.

Stutsman: I got hit by staff walking out the other side of the parking lot.

Bolkcom: On that issue?

Stutsman: Yes.

Bolkcom: They wanted to be open late?

Stutsman: No. No.

Bolkcom: Anyway, selling this to the public what are we going to... People will pay for better services, I think.

Jordahl: I guess I'm not in the posture of selling this to the public. We could use the money, but I'm not eager to sell this to anybody.

Bolkcom: I appreciate that, and I guess I would agree with that.

Lacina: So how do we... Do we make a list of 10 items that we each would like and discuss it with the City at our joint meeting and maybe the school district? For example, the alternative schools are trying to do some restructuring there. If it meant its going out of existence, I could see some support in that area. I think it does a lot of good.

Stutsman: Wouldn't it be just like Linn County, that if they agree to put it on the ballot, that we will have to come to some definite conclusions on what we're going to use that money for. So I think this is just brainstorming and just kind of mulling around and getting our thoughts together about what we think are priorities to spend this money.

Jordahl: That's my point, is that they ought to be our real priorities, they shouldn't be things that we think will sell. They should be what we think is important.

Stutsman: I agree.

Bolkcom: All right. I agree with that.

Stutsman: Then, I think, quite frankly, it'll sell itself. If people think, yes, that if I want better roads or improved roads, then I'm willing to pay for that. Or, if that's not that important to me, then...

Jordahl: If it doesn't sell, then it's like what are we doing here? If we sit down, put our heads together, and decide what's most important and people don't want to pay for that, well then gee, what does that mean?

Bolkcom: And it happens sometimes. So here's the list; I would say tomorrow we're just going to announce our tentative list. It's our first brainstorming list. I don't think we necessarily need Iowa City or the schools' or Coralville's help in deciding how we're going to spend the money that we're going to get. I would like us to continue to talk about our list. So space needs, roads and bridges, this includes everything, seniors, job training, day care, trail system, what else? More hours of service.

Lacina: I still think we should look at some collaboration.

Bolkcom: Collaboration.

Stutsman: Yes.

Jordahl: I agree completely that we should look at collaboration and the trail system would be an instance of that. Our road system is an instance of that. Deer Creek is one of them. I think we're going to be discussing that tomorrow afternoon. It'll be part of what we do.

Stutsman: Well, collaboration...

Bolkcom: The Jail.

Stutsman: Yes, the Jail. The Courthouse.

Bolkcom: Let's collaborate on the Jail.

Jordahl: Maybe they'd like to collaborate some of their local option sales tax dollars over to the Jail. That'd be good.

Lacina: Do we want to look at the idea of purchasing property for expansion?

Stutsman: Well, I think that's part of the space needs.

Bolkcom: Part of the space needs.

Jordahl: That's space needs. Yes.

Stutsman: We know we have space needs, we just haven't viewed an example with the options. OK.

Bolkcom: OK. That's the list so far. When do we want to talk about this again? When do we need to decide this? We need to assign some percentages to these things at some point.

Stutsman: Well, shouldn't we wait until they decide whether they're going to put it on the ballot? Isn't June 23 kind of the watershed? See what Linn County does?

Lacina: Could we have Cole come in and just talk to us about this a little more? Apparently, there's a new publication out that I don't have a copy of on local option. I have the old one.

Bolkcom: Members of the Board are free to put things on the agenda, if you want him to come in.

Lacina: Let's have him come in.

Peters: You will have Opal Current in here May 27 and 28. She is an expert on local option sales tax.

Lacina: Is that going to be part of the discussion?

Stutsman: With the small cities?

Bolkcom: With the small cities.

Lacina: OK, fine.

Bolkcom: Who's going to be there for that meeting? Do we have a couple of people who aren't going to be there for that? It's on the 27th at 6:30.

Stutsman: Yes, I won't be here. I don't think I can make it here for any of it because... Wait a minute...I am. Yes.

Bolkcom: Is everybody going to be here at 6:30?

Lacina: Yes.

Stutsman: Well, you have that forum, don't you? That Democratic forum?

Bolkcom: I don't have a forum. Do I have a forum?

Stutsman: Yes, I think so. Because I think that's where the confusion. My forum for candidates is on the 21st.

Bolkcom: I might not be able to go, then. I need to find out about that.

Stutsman: I think that Democratic forum for the environment is on the 27th.

Jordahl: I've got you being out that night Joe.

Bolkcom: Well, thank you. I'm glad somebody's keeping track of me.

Lacina: I think you're scheduled to talk about environmental issues at the Democratic Party.

Stutsman: Yes. Uh huh.

Lacina: I don't think it's for candidates, I think it's a forum on issues.

Stutsman: Yes, the candidate's forum is on the 21st.

Bolkcom: Those damn issues.

Stutsman: I was confused.

Bolkcom: Thanks for clarifying that.

Duffy: How many are going to be gone? How many can be here?

Bolkcom: 4 out of 5. I'll try and be here.

Lacina: 6:30 here?

Bolkcom: 6:30 here. Small cities.

Stutsman: I will be here.

Bolkcom: All right. Anything else on option sales tax?

Jordahl: Well, what's... Speaking of collaboration, and we're talking about Iowa City and Coralville, small towns at that very meeting, there probably should be some talk about collaboration. I mean, what is a meeting if not some form of collaboration, and we're talking about local option sales tax. We're also talking about rural water. That is a key element of collaboration; we might assist them with grant planning and so forth. Carol, do I still need to contact Ruth Wagner, or do we have a date? Was she definitely going to come on the 27th or 26th? Which?

Peters: In my conversations with people that I have had contact with, she will be attending the 27th meeting, and she will be here with John Arthur and Mr. Stoltek. His first name escapes me right now.

Stutsman: So, which meeting is that? Is that the small cities?

Peters: Right.

Jordahl: So, the small towns meeting. It's not only local option sales tax, but also rural water.

Peters: It's not rural water per se. What they're going to do is present the programs they handle in their office that would assist smaller towns in the rural areas. And rural water is one of those programs.

Jordahl: What's significant from the point of view of collaboration is that the County could in a number of ways take leadership on that.

Stutsman: So that's on the 27th with the small towns and cities, is where we're going to hear about sales tax and rural water.

Bolkcom: That's correct.

Peters: Among other things, Sally. It's not going to be just devoted to rural water.

Stutsman: And then the sales option tax plus other agenda items.

Peters: Opal Current is scheduled first at 6:30. And then Roger Stoakes and John Arthur is scheduled after.

Duffy: And they're from Brooklyn now?

Peters: No, John Arthur is from Linn County.

Duffy: What makes you think we need rural water, Jon?

Stutsman: I think this is just information sharing.

Jordahl: They came to us, Charlie. They talked to Mike Cash and we've been talking about possibly redeveloping rural villages, and if we wanted to do that, I would be in favor only if they had some infrastructure in place, so rural water provides an option for doing that. So, it seems like a way of resolving some questions.

Bolkcom: All right. Let's not get into a discussion of rural water today.

Stutsman: Are we talking about agenda items for small towns?

Bolkcom: Is that done? Is that agenda done?

Stutsman: Did you talk about collaboration?

Jordahl: Well, I was trying to. To throw it out.

Bolkcom: Collaboration.

Peters: OK. I have not received any items back from the cities yet.

Stutsman: We have another week or so to put that together.

Peters: Actually, we don't have... We need to get it out because the problem is when you're dealing with that many Councilors from smaller cities, we have to get it to the City Clerk and the City Clerk has to get it out to them.

Stutsman: You know, I almost think that's enough items on that agenda.

Bolkcom: I do too.

Peters: You don't want to get it too long, because with Opal Current...

Stutsman: She has a lot of information to share. I'm sure these rural water people have a lot of information.

Peters: Well, I think probably that local option sales tax discussion, if you remember the last time, it took up quite a bit of time because people needed clarification. She was excellent at getting it to them.

Stutsman: She was.

Bolkcom: What do you want to do here, Board? A couple more agenda items here, or do you want to call it a day?

Stutsman: Let's talk about Iowa State Association of Counties Legislative...

Peters: The Legislative Workshops are coming up. They're scheduled on Wednesday, Thursday, and Tuesday. The one in this area is on Tuesday, June 16. Do you want to schedule that meeting?

Stutsman: Yes.

Bolkcom: That's Sixth District? How do we reschedule that?

Peters: You could reschedule it to the 18th. Or the 15th.

Bolkcom: Let's make it the 18th. Double meeting on the 18th?

Duffy: What are talking about? May or June?

Peters: June. June 18th.

Duffy: And what's it about?

Peters: June 16th is the Sixth District Legislative Workshop.

Bolkcom: Where is that?

Peters: Four Points Hotel, formerly the Sheraton.

Stutsman: Carol, I will not be going to that meeting on the 16th. I'll have to see if I can go one of those other times.

Lacina: When does that start, is that 9:00?

Peters: That's usually the time. I don't have the time right here.

Lacina: I wasn't sure.

Bolkcom: Anything else, Carol, on that item?

Peters: Yes, I have a couple of other items actually. We had their consultant come in to share with you the results of the salary survey that he did and he also wants from you direction from the Board as to where you want him to go with the salaries. With the whole compensation plan, now that the survey's been completed. When do you want to meet with him? Not as a whole Board, but 2 on 2.

Jordahl: Thursday morning.

Bolkcom: Thursday morning.

Stutsman: I could meet with him Thursday morning, but only at 10 o'clock.

Jordahl: Me too. Sally and I are going to Des Moines.

Bolkcom: I can meet later.

Stutsman: What time could he come here Thursday morning?

Peters: He said he'd try to get here at 10:00.

Stutsman: OK. I couldn't meet with him any later than 10:00.

Duffy: Is this that...

Bolkcom: I could meet with him after they're done. How much time does he need? Like a half hour, or an hour with you?

Peters: His time is your time.

Bolkcom: How much per team?

Peters: However much time you want to take.

Bolkcom: When do you have to leave for Des Moines?

Stutsman: We should by 11:00.

Jordahl: 11:00 should be pretty much it.

Bolkcom: I'm free at 11:00.

Duffy: Now what Thursday are we talking about?

Bolkcom: The 14th.

Duffy: I got down at 10:30.

Bolkcom: It just moved.

Peters: It just moved to 10...

Jordahl: To 11:00.

Lacina: I've got to be in Bettendorf at 9:30 for that Mid-America tax meeting.

Bolkcom: Charlie, you and I will meet with him at 11. And Steve, when will Steve meet with him, Carol?

Lacina: Friday? Thursday's going to be...

Peters: He can come back the week of the 18th. However, Lora will not be here to sit in on the conversation.

Jordahl: Is Friday a possibility?

Peters: Or he can come back on...

Bolkcom: How about 5:00? Will you be back from the meeting?

Lacina: Yes, I'll be back from the meeting. If he can be here at 5:00, I can do that.

Bolkcom: Maybe he could just hang around. He could work here, we could give him some space here that day, I don't know. It'd be nice to get it done.

Stutsman: That meeting in Davenport just lasts until 2:30, doesn't it Steve?

Lacina: I've got one other contact I need to make, but I'll be back here by 5.

Bolkcom: All right. That might be good. It's good to keep this on track, Board. Good job. Anything else, Carolyn? All right. We talked about the Senior Center agenda.

Peters: We've done that. We talked about the Urban Planning Conference.

Stutsman: We talked about the rural water work session. Right, Joe?

Jordahl: We talked about having a work session. I don't believe that has been set.

Stutsman: Why don't we have the discussion with this group at the small cities meeting?

Jordahl: I was thinking to have us talk about rather than...

Stutsman: Oh, I thought this was... Would that be redundant?

Jordahl: It might be. It'd be nice if we knew what the whole situation was and had a chance to ponder it before the small cities meeting. But we could also hear the information there first and ponder it later.

Bolkcom: All right. Let's do that, they're already coming here. We've already scheduled time to do it. We're down to discussion item F, Board of Supervisor's office hours.

Bolkcom: I put this on in relationship to the fact that more of us are spending time here after 4:00 these days, and the phone rings frequently after 4:00. I guess I'm wondering whether we need to talk about that question about whether our office should be open until 5. So I put it on. I'm not prepared to say we ought to do that, maybe we ought to have a couple of Board members visit with our staff and make a pros and cons list of that issue and bring it back.

Duffy: On the other side of that coin, if you get here at 7:30 in the morning, you get a lot of phone calls.

Bolkcom: I'm sure.

Duffy: I don't know. I have mixed emotions... I get quite a few at home, and I guess you hear the same.

Jordahl: 7:30 to 5:30. Maybe we could talk about a variety of different things.

Duffy: We'd be better to get out around the county. All your work is not here, either.

Jordahl: You wouldn't necessarily need to have, I mean we don't now, have 5 Supervisors sitting here until 4 p.m. People come and go, they do get out.

Stutsman: Are you suggesting a smaller committee look into this?

Bolkcom: We may have a couple of members of the Board meet with staff and do a pros and cons list, and what the issues would be and whether we could do it.

Stutsman: That sounds good.

Bolkcom: That's what I'd like to see.

Stutsman: OK.

Duffy: Couldn't we do something like having a half-hour noon hour? And we've got one union representative yet to talk to the union.

Bolkcom: Right.

Stutsman: I'd be willing to talk to staff and to see.

Bolkcom: I'd be on that committee too, if you want a helper.

Stutsman: OK. I would want a helper, so if your willing to help, and then we'll bring a report back.

Bolkcom: OK. We had a bunch of minutes and then we had reports. And we had other. Does anyone want to make a report today? If you don't, I think we'll survive.

Jordahl: One thing I should do, well, I'll wait until Thursday.

Bolkcom: Thank you. And then we had item number 9, and that's a work session for the SEATS paratransit service. We need to schedule some time to discuss the charge of that committee and the beginning of advertising and all that.

Stutsman: Was the whole Board going to work on that, or were we going to have just a couple of people work on that and bring it back to the Board.

Peters: It was my understanding that the Board was going to have a work session. But that doesn't mean it can't change.

Duffy: Let's get the ball rolling. I had a call the other night which was kind of concerned you don't have this thing wrapped up yet. I just hate to worry people, it's been going on so long.

Bolkcom: I think we've got it all wrapped up.

Duffy: Well, not exactly, no. There's a few things that we don't. Let's get a Director in here and get moving.

Stutsman: Oh yes, but I think part of what we wanted to do was have the Director hired before we started the Advisory Committee. I think the Director, he or she, needs to be involved in that from the very beginning.

Peters: The last time you did hear about it was (inaudible) to develop, and this was the mission statement for this Advisory Committee.

Bolkcom: I would like to suggest that we try and meet Thursday the 21st immediately following our formal session. Since we're here, maybe take a half hour in informal session... I don't think it's going to take very long to do this. That's a time... We already have a work session on Tuesday on the roads at 10.

Lacina: I wonder if Mary Rump would have a template from some other SEATS program similar in vision or just a document that we could start working on.

Bolkcom: That'd be fine.

Lacina: That would expedite things.

Bolkcom: We'll see. We're doing OK time-wise, but it would be nice to get it done. The paratransit folks did meet last Thursday afternoon, and do have some suggestions on it, fairly general charts that everyone might be interested in looking at. I think everyone got a copy.

Jordahl: I did speak with Pat White about the work session on Secondary Roads on the 19th and he will be able to be here for that to help address questions of liability.

Bolkcom: On the roads?

Jordahl: Yes.

Bolkcom: Very good. Anything else? Anything from the public?

League of Women Voters Representative Pat Jensen: Would you give us 5 minutes on your agenda on the formal meeting of the 21st?

Bolkcom: I don't see why not.

Jensen: All right. We'd like to fill you in on what we're up to.

Bolkcom: That's Pat Jensen for the minutes.

Duffy: Somebody better put her on...

Bolkcom: The topic would be?

Jensen: Just an update on the League's County activities.

Bolkcom: Great, thank you, good. Anything else? We'll recess until Thursday.

Recessed at 3:50 p.m.; reconvened on May 14, 1998 at 8:23 p.m.

(Continued in Part 7)