Bolkcom: Item number 5, business from Paul Bonnett regarding rumble strips on North Liberty Road, discussion. Good morning, Paul. Do you want to come up?

Paul Bonnett: Pardon?

Bolkcom: Do you want to come up to the front table and...

Bonnett: Yes sure. Frank (inaudible) I'm the one...

Bolkcom: Sorry we're a little late this morning.

Bonnett: That's OK I was taking a nap.

Stutsman: Does that mean that...

Bonnett: (Inaudible).

Bolkcom: Go ahead.

Bonnett: These rumble strips, the reason I got a little upset is North Liberty covered their strips up and I got a lot of ballyhoos that it's impossible to do that, but they got it done. So I even called the mayor of North Liberty and asked how he got it done. He said what he did was got all of the Council members which I'd like you guys to do, is come out at rush hour on North Liberty Road and stand there from 4 o'clock to 5. I'll grant you you'd either want to narrow them or pave over them. Ask Frank there, he knows. He's my neighbor. What I'd like to know though is why they covered those up at Casey's place... I know why, because they built apartment buildings there and they couldn't rent them. Because all people would have to do is come there when you're trying to rent an apartment and listen to that noise. Oh no, no way. Also there on Mehaffey Road, coming in from Mehaffey Bridge, they also covered those up. Why? 2 new apartments. When there was just a house there, they didn't give a damn about that. So when they built the apartments, naturally the apartment owners couldn't rent them. They couldn't stand the noise if you had your window open you really couldn't. They are terrible. They made them... I don't know why they didn't make them 2 inches wide instead of 4. That one I can't understand because out around Kalona there are several of them that have 2 inch strips. They shake the car enough to wake you up and they don't sound off as bad.

Bolkcom: All right.

Bonnett: As far as the rumbles doing the job, I don't know for sure whether it has or not, but there has... I don't know, I think there were a couple of accidents there since the rumble strips were put in. But they... I guess the big conversation was... I think Mr. Duffy was in on that, was the expense of putting up a light instead of the rumbles because you knew there were residents right by there and they know without a doubt they've put them in before. They also knew they made an awful noise. I'd like for you folks to come out, 4 to 5 and listen to them. That's what Chuck Hippy said that they did. They got squawks on it naturally and they had the Council people come out and stand there. They said they couldn't stand it. They covered them right now.

Bolkcom: Uh-huh. All right.

Bonnett: I mean that's... What I'm getting at is, I understand your process. There were a couple people killed there and all that, but what's new. You know all over the state. I mean don't get me wrong I'm not being sarcastic about it, but there's more and more cars coming down that road. They hit the throttle as soon as they start going by my place.

Bolkcom: OK.

Bonnett: I'm not squawking about the road, it's a beautiful road. But I'm squawking about the noise.

Bolkcom: All right. Frank did you...

Bonnett: Why did North Liberty cover theirs up and that.

Bolkcom: Sure.

Bonnett: They must of done that with the DOT assurance because it's right on 965.

Bolkcom: I think they took over that segment of 965.

Bonnett: North Liberty did? Yes.

Bolkcom: Frank did you... Could you identify yourself.

Frank Fleming: No. I sure support Paul, I'd like to see them not there, but obviously you put them there for a reason. There's several preparations made both for concrete and asphalt. One of which the Illinois IDOT uses which is called slurry seal for pavement and that apparently stops the noise by about 50% and actually lengthens the useful life of the strip by cutting down on winter damage. So they've used that in a number of intersections in Chicago and had good luck. Neighbors are very fond of it and apparently it just sits right in the bottom and allows the vibrations to still drivers awake, but it cuts down on the sound that's actually generated. That might be something that helps out both Paul and I, in terms of the noise, and doesn't alter the safety factors of the reasons you put those in for. I looked, they have different preparations for concrete and asphalt, but a couple of different options for each one of those, how long it takes to put in, expense wise, and everything. It seems like a compromise.

Bolkcom: OK. Mike Gardner is here, our Secondary Roads Engineer. Mike do you want to talk, just review for the Board the standards that are used to put these rumble strips in?

County Engineer Mike Gardner: Yes. What was (inaudible) out there, there is a road standards form, width of the groove, depth of the groove, the centering of the groove, the length of the panel, the width of the panel, spacing of the panel, and so forth. That's what we used to put those in.

Bonnett: How about 2 inch strips, Mike?

Gardner: That's not in the standard...

Bonnett: I don't care about standards.

Gardner: The standard is...

Bonnett: Why can't that be done?

Gardner: Well, if you...

Bonnett: If it prevents noise is what I'm getting at, Mike.

Gardner: If you stray from the standard then you have to have some kind of a reason to do it or...

Bonnett: Well there's a good reason, is the noise.

Bolkcom: Right. At this...

Bonnett: That's the problem with that.

Bolkcom: Paul. Paul.

Bonnett: Pardon?

Bolkcom: At this point the Board of a mind to enforce and follow the standards. Now it's been noted, maybe there's some material we could look at as a possible issue to resolve some of the noise question. Mike, do you want to address that at all?

Gardner: I'd like to yes, visit with this gentleman and find out where he got his information...

Bolkcom: OK.

Gardner: ... so we can follow up on it and check into it.

Jordahl: Uh-huh. Driving over those things in North Liberty where they've been filled in, I get the impression that they're not completely filled in. There's this...

Bonnett: Yes.

Jordahl: ...a dish there and it still has the effect of saying there's something happening be alert to what's going on, but it... I don't suppose it would necessarily wake me up. I think if you were asleep at the wheel it probably wouldn't get you out of bed. But if you're driving and you're awake it'll say hey there's a stop sign. Which is not to say we should change the standard only that it seems that what North Liberty has done still has something of the effect of a rumble strip.

Bonnett: Around Kalona there's a lot of 2 inch strips that don't make half as much noise and it does the job, Joe.

Bolkcom: Yes. It sounds like there's something worth investigating here. I think we want to have the effectiveness we've experienced with the strips and work to try and reduce the noise if that's possible. I'd be open to investigating what this material is you put in the rumble strips to quiet them down.

Bonnett: One more thing I'd like to bring up, of course I'm probably wasting my time, but the 4 way stop up there at that corner...

Bolkcom: Mike would you...

Bonnett: ...it's getting to be... There's so much traffic coming down that North Liberty Road there that it would probably prevent a lot of accidents coming from the Coralville Lake too, Joe.

Bolkcom: It sounds like in talking to Mike that we don't have the volume at this intersection that would warrant it.

Bonnett: Yes, yes.

Bolkcom: Mike, would do you want to comment on what the standard is and how that's determined?

Gardner: Yes. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices has warrants for 4 way stop signs. Part of it is it's fairly equal traffic on each leg of the intersection, as well as a lot higher volumes than what we're dealing with out there, especially on the North Liberty leg.

Lacina: So the gravel section running north probably drops the numbers way down?

Gardner: Right.

Bonnett: Come on out about 4 o'clock Mike, 4 or 5 o'clock.

Gardner: I've been out there.

Bonnett: I'll give you a dose of noise.

Bolkcom: The standard is, I believe, 500 cars per hour at each of those... coming in each direction for roughly an 8 hour period which is fairly substantial kind of traffic.

Duffy: Do you think it'd be that many...

Bolkcom: I don't think it would...

Duffy: ...for an 8 hour period?

Bolkcom: I don't think it would be, Charlie.

Duffy: I just doubt that, but there's times it'd probably be more than that.

Stutsman: Uh-huh.

Bolkcom: So is the Board interested in having Mike pursue looking at possible products that could be used...

Stutsman: Sure.

Bolkcom: ...to investigate this question.

Lacina: Sure. Check with DOT in Illinois to see if it's...

Stutsman: It doesn't hurt to...

Lacina: But whatever we do we need to make sure it's compatible with Iowa IDOT. The other thing we need to check, it's possible that a municipality has a different set of standards for their strips based on the speed that may allow... I know that when we initially installed those up there. I think (inaudible) came in and the guy that we had contracted with to install them, they made us rip them back out because it wasn't... He didn't put them in correctly and we had to carefully measure and redo it. So I know they held our feet to the fire on that, but we could check and see.

Bonnett: They made a mistake. They mis-measured, they put in one too many.

Lacina: I thought they had the spacing. (Inaudible) they have to move it back from the stop sign. But if you've got the name of that stuff we can make a call and see.

Fleming: Yes. We'll spend a minute (inaudible).

Lacina: Appreciate it.

Bolkcom: Good. Maybe you can get back to us in the next week, Mike so we can get back to these gentleman about what we might try and experiment with here.

Gardner: Sure.

Bolkcom: Or as soon as you're able to do that. Any other questions or comments?

Bonnett: I'd like for you folks to come out though at 4 and 5 o'clock.

Bolkcom: OK.

Bonnett: Some day. Really. I'll treat you to tomatoes. I've got tomatoes...

Lacina: I've actually walked that from that curb (inaudible).

Bolkcom: What'd you say your address was?

Bonnett: (Inaudible) throw in my commercial.

Bolkcom: Paul, what's your address?

Bonnett: 2778 North Liberty Road.

Bolkcom: I'm going to be in North Liberty at 5:30 tomorrow night. I'll stop out before then.

Bonnett: OK. Do that, Joe please. Yes. I want you to.

Duffy: I've been out there, Paul.

Bonnett: Thanks much.

???: Can people from the public come out there too?

Bonnett: Sure.

Bolkcom: Thanks Paul.

Duffy: I've been out there several times.

Stutsman: Can we take a short break? Sorry.

Recessed at 10:35 a.m.; reconvened at 10:43 a.m.

Bolkcom: Item 6, business from the County Attorney, a) discussion regarding the FY 1999 Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grant Program Contract and Subcontracts. We have... Jim Swaim and Danelle are here. Do you want to visit with us about this?

United Action for Youth Director Jim Swaim: I don't know if you want... Do you want me to visit?

Bolkcom: You've been here all morning now you've go to... It's time to get to work.

Stutsman: I told Sally I was so curious about rumble strips were and Danelle said, don't you know what they were. I said I thought it was something (inaudible)

Lacina: It's where everybody get out and fights right?

Duffy: You want some in front of your house?

Lacina: We could make you a deal.

Swaim: I really don't what you want me to say. This is our renewal of our Juvenile Crime Prevention Grant which was awarded, the new grant is in place from July 1st of this year to June 30th of next year. I believe we will have one additional year's eligibility after this unless the legislation changes. So Pat had prepared the subcontracts, again for the public record, this involves 6 different agencies, Big Brother/Big Sister, MECCA, Mayor's Youth, United Action for Youth, Youth Homes, and Neighborhood Centers. Along with the Iowa City Community School District.

Bolkcom: All right.

Stutsman: No major changes with contracts?

Swaim: No major changes whatsoever. Youth Homes is going to be talking with us, they want to change the staffing, but the essential program that they are going to be providing remains the same and that's true for all of this. Other funding that we get that helps the project has varied all over the map, but no the program remains essentially the same. We have begun discussions with Coral Ridge Mall and they've agreed to let us use the mall meeting room on a regular basis. So we're going to try and follow up with them on that.

Bolkcom: All right. So the legislation currently calls for the program to be eliminated after one more year of funding?

Swaim: No. The legislation is looking fairly good in terms of general bipartisan support for the notion of Community Crime Prevention Grants. Where we may run into a glitch is the notion of getting this funding every year for the same communities. They are either going to have to increase the amount that they allocate which would allow a longer continuation for programs. Which I think there's some building support to do that. There're about 27 communities now that get this money and obviously communities that get it would like to have some help with it. But to have some formula that it would allow an increasing commitment locally, but not a total takeover of the projects locally.

Lacina: Which with the competition we did a little bit this year with increasing our match, but it was very minor in regards to...

Swaim: What we've done every year is we've decreased the amount that we've asked for. Both the total amount and the percentage have gone down from the State and the total amount of dollars and the total percentage have gone up locally. I'm hopeful that we could work with perhaps, some of the new legislators when they get there on how do get that formula. A similar formula, but that would last for several years.

Lacina: This is 492 this year, the new one? Or was that last... Last year's was 492, did we...

Swaim: Honestly I didn't bring the grant down. Carol has a copy in there.

Lacina: The other question for Janet or Danelle, as we are the fiscal officer, are there any procedural changes we need to make. As far as a clearinghouse when the claims come through; everything's flowing and so we're in good shape on that.

Managing Secretary Danelle Essing: It's more or less flowing.

Lacina: It's flowing. OK, good. That's all I needed to know.

Swaim: One thing I want to...

Lacina: I've got a (inaudible) ...

Swaim: ...publicly acknowledge. Danelle does incredible work. This is one of the most complicated grants you can encounter in the State. She is literally coordinating 7 different entities and about 11 different funding sources that have to all be tracked for this. So I just wanted to publicly acknowledge Danelle's work. She has a spreadsheet about the size of this table and the work that she does makes it reasonably effortless for the agencies to do this. The other person I want to acknowledge this year is Rosemary Stratton. At the end of the year, again we work with the Auditor's Office and the complexity of this grant is inevitably going to result in glitches along the way. She was very helpful and again in a matter of an hour of meeting with her we were able to tie up some lose ends that might otherwise have taken a couple days with some other folks.

Lacina: That was nice of her. Thank you.

Bolkcom: Great. Thank you, Jim. Any questions?

Duffy: Congratulations again.

Stutsman: I should publicly acknowledge Jim's work on this. I think we are successful with this grant every year in large part because of Jim's work on this.

Swaim: Thanks.

Stutsman: I think he deserves a lot of recognition...

Swaim: I look forward to doing it again.

Stutsman: ...for that and the respect he has on the State level too.

Swaim: Do you want me to back at the formal meeting on Thursday?

Lacina: I don't think it's necessary.

Swaim: OK. Thank you again.

Bolkcom: Great. Thanks, Jim. Thanks, Danelle.

Bolkcom: We're going to hold off on the executive session for a minute. We'll go back to item 3, business from the Board of Supervisors, c) discussion regarding accepting Charlie Duffy's resignation from the Nutrition Advisory Board. We talked about this last Thursday and put it on for today to get a little bit more clarification. According to the Nutrition Advisory Board, not by-laws, but basically the document that establishes... it indicates that one member of the Advisory Board shall be composed... one member shall be of the Board of Supervisors of its 7 members. So if we're going to accept Charlie's resignation which I would argue we shouldn't, we need to choose another member of the Board to serve on this committee.

Jordahl: Uh-huh.

Duffy: We could probably change the by-laws, Joe. But I didn't think it'd be this big deal. All I'm saying is that Harold Staeger and Frieda Shannon both applied when I applied and they're 2 real good people. Nothing will change because I'm up there quite a bit of the time. I was up there last Sunday to check on the mail on Sunday. If you want me to stay on, fine I just... If that's the case, but I think that we should send a memo to Frieda Shannon and tell her...

Stutsman: Uh-huh.

Jordahl: Uh-huh.

Duffy: Because she's a very knowledgeable woman and I still think that... This Board used to meet at one o'clock and now it's 4 or a little later than that. That meant that you could... the Board could go and eat dinner or lunch with those folks up there and pay for it.

Bolkcom: Sure. Go eat (inaudible)

Duffy: I've been doing that for years. You get a lot of input, but that isn't the whole story. So if it's that big of a deal, I'd be happy to stay on until somebody else wants it.

Jordahl: What I would suggest, I would like to ask Charlie is if you would be willing to stay on perhaps until January when we have some new Board members coming on. We could maybe redistribute duties at that time because I don't feel like I can take on more stuff now.

Duffy: (Inaudible).

Jordahl: I realize the meeting time... I agree with you it makes to have the meeting time when people could visit at lunch. Even beyond one o'clock, why not have it an noon.

Duffy: Yes. We could do that.

Jordahl: To actually visit with people was part of the meeting.

Lacina: That was very kind of Charlie to try to step in and offer the position to 2 people that applied.

Jordahl: Yes.

Bolkcom: Sure.

Lacina: It was nice of you to do that.

Stutsman: I would support keeping Charlie on as our representative on the Nutrition Advisory Board.

Jordahl: The other thing is because you are there. Who knows it better? Distributing the education around to all of the members of the Board makes some sense, but having somebody who knows what he's talking about is worth something too.

Duffy: Thank you, Jonathan. I hope you're talking about me.

Bolkcom: That all makes sense to me.

Jordahl: I think it's you I'm talking about, yes.

Bolkcom: I agree with all of that. I think we've successfully talked Charlie out of submitting his resignation at this point. Thanks.

Stutsman: Then I think we should send a letter to Frieda.

Bolkcom: OK.

Lacina: Then after you get the tomatoes can we all go to lunch up there too?

Nutrition Committee Member Bob Welsh: I have a question about the letter to Frieda.

Bolkcom: Go ahead.

Welsh: You had 3 persons who applied and you did send all of those letters and I thank you. So I don't know why you would want to send another letter to Frieda and not to the other 2.

Duffy: The reason why I suggest Frieda or else give her a phone call or something.

Bolkcom: Have you talked to Frieda Charlie? Yes.

Duffy: When I run into her, yes I talk to her. Yes.

Bolkcom: Would it be appropriate for you just to get in touch with her and say that given...

Duffy: All right. I'll get in touch with her, but I think we should get in touch with her and explain...

Bolkcom: It'd probably be easier to explain in a conversation rather than in a letter...

Duffy: All right. OK.

Bolkcom: ...about changing course here and keeping you on. Is that all right? All right. Thank you, Charlie.

Bolkcom: We're going to go back over to item 7, discussion from members of the public. Is there anybody that would wish to address the Board this morning?

Welsh: Joe just one thing on the budget thing. A lot of the confusions has been on the zero increase in budgeting as to whether or not that is zero increase as far as County tax dollars are concerned or if it is zero budget.

Jordahl: That's a good point.

Welsh: Because if a person generates income from a grant or some other methods, I think what you're interested in is the zero tax increase question.

Lacina: Actually not. Years ago we...

Welsh: You're not?

Lacina: ...discussed this with the departments and we want to see where the dollars are spent because there may be sources of revenue that we'll allocate other places. Correct me if you want to change direction, but historically we want to know where all of the dollars are coming from.

Welsh: Oh, I understand.

Lacina: We'll figure the tax asking after we balance other sources of revenue and there may be times when we do go into reserves for a one time expenditure that's not a tax asking. But did you say...

Stutsman: Yes, yes.

Lacina: ...that every department should go out and generate revenues it was felt that some would. Some would just aggressively go out and say well this is my money, and in fact we may need those revenues in other areas.

Stutsman: Yes. I think we want the total picture not just...

Lacina: Right.

Bolkcom: But I think it points out a point Steve raised earlier in Bob's comment here is that on a separate sheet departments should be defining what revenues... if they're new... We're saying what are your new expenditures over last year, how are you moving money around, but what are the new... if you are getting a new grant what is it, and lay it out on a separate cover, separate sheet. Here's the new revenue and here's the grants we're losing, here are ones we may be getting, here are ones we know are going away; that those are defined.

Stutsman: That's one of the goals that I think we are going to try to work on.

Lacina: An example is the Juvenile Crime Prevention Grant, about $490,000 which we all supported and has been a great program over the years, but as competition increases if we lose say 50% of that funding, we then have to make the decision whether to transfer that onto the tax payers or to do an evaluation and see what components we drop off. We'd have to look at the total picture.

Stutsman: Uh-huh.

Bolkcom: All right. Any other...

Jordahl: But we don't want to have a disincentive to departments for going after grant money either. We don't want to make it sort of a general policy that we will hold your budget at zero even if you get more money we'll put the money some place else. They've got to have some reason to do all of that work. I think it's OK to start with this idea that here's zero, but within in that they could include the notion that we're getting these enhanced revenues and we'll make sure that we do something reasonable and even handed.

Welsh: All I'm saying is I think through the years there has been confusion on that point.

Bolkcom: Right.

Welsh: From your message to (inaudible).

Bolkcom: I think we need to add some language here about additional revenues and noting those because I think we do want people to go after grants and not be penalized for it. If we get a grant we need to be able to expend it right.

Lacina: There was a law enforcement grant based on the recommendation of the Sheriff we did not go after it because we knew it was a short lived situation. We'd either be laying people off or... But again very few times do we ever turn down a revenue.

Stutsman: Uh-huh.

Welsh: I heard the Recorder last time saying to you all, we are generating this additional income. That would not increase the tax asking. I realize that you need to look at the total picture, but I think that the message that you give needs to be very clear.

Bolkcom: I agree. Thanks for pointing that out, Bob. Any other members of the public wish to address the Board?

Lacina: Quickly before we go into executive session, Steve or Mike could you just give us a brief update on... This morning we started the new program with the University and I think it's good to just have it in the minutes that... Give us a 2 or 3 minute thumbnail sketch.

Ambulance Director Mike Sullivan: Do you want us to come up there?

Bolkcom: Sure.

Lacina: I think the Ambulance Department has really been creative in the services offered and in projects to keep our employees state of the art, in terms of procedures and learning and assisting. You don't get enough credit so that's why I wanted to drag you up here and have you talk about it.

Sullivan: Thanks. Some of what we'll talk about in executive session has to deal with this directly, but this morning we started a program in affiliation with the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics to provide driver staffing for their Mobile Critical Care units. In addition to that we are assuming responsibility of their vehicle or fleet maintenance oversight. Since the University was looking toward achieving an operational on economies of scale as we were. We also have expertise in fleet management. We had discussions over the past few months about this and the Ambulance Service worked out an arrangement with the University to be able to provide that service. It's a revenue generating aspect and it's a good thing for the Ambulance Service. It helps us achieve our operational economies of scale in a small market area too. So it's good for the Ambulance Service and it's good for the University.

Bolkcom: Great.

Assistant Ambulance Director Steve Spenler: I don't know if you are familiar with the Mobile Care Service. They for the most part transport a neonate team out of the Neonatal Intensive Care unit at the University, around mostly regional eastern Iowa to get neonate, basically premature babies and bring them back to the University for their critical care. Then they also return them after they've been stabilized. We're providing one EMT Basic on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to be available within 30 minutes to respond to the University and drive their Mobile Care unit. Then also on a 24 hour basis if they have some scheduled trips that they need to make. We've hired some additional staff for this and it just bolsters our staff and our availability for other transfer services. Basic transfers that we'll do around the state which in the last 2 or 3 weeks we've had a hard time keeping up with it, we've been very busy. I think it's an excellent thing for the Service.

Bolkcom: Very good.

Stutsman: Great.

Lacina: Just one other question and during the football season we're going to have a vehicle over at the stadium in case there is a problem with the audience or whatever. Given the bridge that's out on 6, and the potential traffic tie up off the interstate at the Coral Ridge Mall, we'll have the vehicle out at Coralville as well? Or how have you prepared for the traffic snarls?

Sullivan: During football, home games. Yes we do that anyway before the game traffic starts. We've had a vehicle out in Coralville area and then during the aftermath and everybody is released from the stadium we have a vehicle out there as well.

Lacina: OK, thanks.

Spenler: But that's the 2 on duty crews, this isn't above and beyond what we normal do.

Bolkcom: All right.

Sullivan: We have quite a staffing regimen on those days.

Bolkcom: I guess.

Stutsman: You want to give us an update about the location of a third ambulance?

Sullivan: Sure. I haven't talked to the Coralville fire chief yet today. They had a meeting last night with the department members. Steve and I did meet with the chief last week and the City Administrator, one city council member and then the officers from the fire department. Everything is fine there's just a few little issues they wanted to talk about with their fire department staff. I anticipate a call from the Coralville Chief today and probably on our deadline in October be able to put an ambulance out in the Coralville station. There's also some talk about the possibilities of inquiring some property out in that area as well. Pat White and I talked about that last night but we haven't gotten into any specific detail. He may be talking about that today in the Elected Officials meeting under this space needs issue. That would be something I think that the County, I would be very interested in having that parcel of land that we talked about last night for a building site for an Ambulance Station. At least initially the City of Coralville fire chief and the City Administrator have expressed initial interest at looking at something jointly in the future to build.

Bolkcom: All right.

Sullivan: That would house a combination of fire and ambulance out there.

Bolkcom: All right. OK. Thank you for that report.

Sullivan: Sure.

Bolkcom: Anything else. I don't want to get into discussion about all of this because it is not on the agenda today.

Jordahl: I just want to note that cooperation seems to be the main thing that Mike Sullivan does in the this operation and it's really fine to see other governments with other hospitals, it's just really great stuff.

Sullivan: I can't do this without Steve and the other managers. I can't do this alone.

Bolkcom: Indeed. Good work you guys.

Recessed at 11:01 a.m.

Motion by Lacina, second by Stutsman/Duffy, to enter Executive Session at 11:01 a.m. to discuss collective bargaining strategy for the Ambulance Department under section 20.17(3), Code of Iowa: "negotiating sessions, strategy meetings of public employees... shall be exempt from the provisions of chapter 21 (Official Meetings Open to the Public)." Roll call: aye: Bolkcom, Jordahl, Stutsman, Lacina, Duffy.

Motion by Lacina, second by Stutsman, to leave Executive Session at 11:20 a.m. Roll call: aye: Bolkcom, Jordahl, Stutsman, Lacina, Duffy.

Recessed at 11:20 a.m.; reconvened at 1:30 p.m. as a meeting of elected County officials.

(Continued in Part 4)