Bolkcom: Jonathan?

Jordahl: I think that's an excellent point, Steve, about welfare reform. People are thinking welfare reform is getting people off of welfare roles. Where are the cost savings? We need to be able to...

Lacina: But you do have to train them and there are expenses. Joe's right in the short term it may be more expensive, but we need to know.

Jordahl: It's part of this whole budgeting thing that we're trying to do is to get some facts out on the table so people can understand what's going on.

Lacina: Right.

Jordahl: I attended, last night... I'll tell you some committees are sort of like a burden. You go there it's late at night and you don't get any food, you haven't had dinner... Oh, boy, Clear Creek Watershed Leadership Team, thank you for appointing me to this one.

Stutsman: It's a good one?

Jordahl: Boy, did we eat in there. Yes. This is funded by the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture and we're sustaining some agriculture in there all right. We've got... last night there was organically grown roast beef from a fellow over in Bellevue, Iowa that has a grant...

Duffy: Oh, I know him, he's a friend of mine.

Jordahl: ... from the Department of Economic Development. We had... everything was from Iowa. This is the second month in a row we've had an all Iowa dinner with beets, unbelievable green tomato compote, and liver pâté, cabbage... The woman that cooks this, I wish I could remember her last name, her first name is Carol...

Stutsman: Carol? What is her... She cooked for that Land Use forum that we had...

Jordahl: Yes, yes.

Stutsman: ... and it's just marvelous food.

Jordahl: It's just amazing. And this isn't really recipes either. She just kind of does it until it's right.

Lacina: Sounds like we should rotate this one.

Stutsman: Yes. I'm thinking about the 299 thing.

Jordahl: No, this is... It's offered to everyone who goes to the thing.

Bolkcom: (Inaudible) Iowan, all Iowa food do you have to be an Iowan to...

Jordahl: She's actually from California...

Bolkcom: OK.

Jordahl: ... the lady that does the cooking. But aside from glorying in the food and the baked apples with heavy cream. Did I mention that?

Stutsman: Did you talk about anything Jonathan?

Jordahl: I don't remember I was so logy from the food. One of the things we talked about was ways of promoting that idea of Iowa food in a variety of circumstances. They're talking about trying to get institutions to use Iowa food, but there's a problem that there's some main distributors of food that are national and that have sort of the institutional contracts. So trying to get your foot in the door... rather than trying to compete directly with them, they're trying to persuade them to use Iowa products and to sort of promote that as part of their services within the state. I came up with some ideas... and we might want to toss this around in terms of economic development in conjunction with bike trails because it's one of the things we're discussing on the Watershed Committee. Although last night was dominantly about flood control. But to promote... like RAGBRAI, people go across the state riding bicycles and they get all of these local foods. Why not promote a variety of things? The train trip, the old car thing, Motor Ioway we had last week. And to do in conjunction with that an emphasis on all Iowa product food. So that's a positive thing that came out of that. They're looking toward forming a Watershed Committee that would do some public education. I had some questions about that in terms of the function of NRCS, Soil and Water Conservation District. We've got a lot of hands dealing with this and the question is do we need another committee do deal with the same thing. Maybe we do, maybe there's a utility of having citizen involvement that is sort of more ad hoc, but that remains a question for me. Tonight I have the Diverse Cities meeting at 7 o'clock at the Iowa City Council chambers talking about issues of people from different cultural backgrounds getting along with one another. I will be interested in seeing what that's all about. I have not yet attended one of those meetings due to schedule conflicts. Tomorrow afternoon, are we all aware that there's some kind of a seminar being offered on utility tax replacement at the Holiday Inn at 2 o'clock, downtown.

Stutsman: Who was going to that?

Bolkcom: I am.

Stutsman: OK.

Lacina: Good.

Jordahl: OK.

Bolkcom: Everybody's welcome I think.

Jordahl: Remind everybody that the Crisis Center grand opening is coming up on Thursday at 4 o'clock. There's kind of like a reception thing there. Is that right?

Bolkcom: I thought it was tonight.

Stutsman: Yes, I did too.

Bolkcom: CDBG is Thursday.

Lacina: They're hosting (inaudible)

Jordahl: Oh, all of those T's have got me confused. Tuesday, Thursday.

Duffy: When is it?

?: It's this afternoon.

Jordahl: This afternoon.

Duffy: Is it? I've got that down wrong myself.

?: From 5 to 7.

Stutsman: Five to 7. I have something else down for CDBG.

Jordahl: I've got 4 to 6.

Bolkcom: Thursday CDBG.

Lacina: I bet what Sue is talking about is for the volunteers.

?: Yes, you might be right. There's (inaudible)...

Lacina: Yes. And what this is, the Crisis Center is hosting the CDBG appreciation donor thing.

Bolkcom: Right.

Lacina: Yes. They're 2 separate events.

?: Yes. This is the volunteers and (inaudible)

Duffy: OK. What do I have down for Thursday? I've got Crisis Center open house.

Lacina: Right. For the CDBG hosting.

Duffy: That'd be us.

Lacina: That's us.

Duffy: All right. I'll cross this off.

Jordahl: Oh.

Lacina: Tonight I think is just for those that actually...

Bolkcom: I think anybody can go to either event.

Lacina: (Inaudible)

Bolkcom: Yes.

Jordahl: That tonight, is it 5:30?

?: 5:45 is the program.

Bolkcom: 5 to 7 is the...

?: It starts at 5, from 5 to7.

Jordahl: OK.

Stutsman: Are you done Jonathan?

Jordahl: No. One last thing. We got yesterday the final draft of our Comprehensive Plan work from Karen Countryman. In reading over that she had incorporated Tom Carsner's from the meeting that we had jointly with the Zoning Commission. And had put the ideas into a kind of a prefatory material to the Plan and not really in the Plan itself. Then it pulled a couple of points out and put them in the Implementation Calendar. But they were not all present in the actual Strategies section of the document. I suggested to her that she put them there in addition to or instead of or whatever, putting it in the preface and forwarded to her this draft of what I thought a decent distribution of them would be. I think this probably is not in time, as I've looked at the copy that I got in my box this morning, has not been incorporated into the draft that's going to the Zoning Commission. Has it Deanna? You raised your hand.

Pillard: No, it has not. The paper copy she turned in yesterday is what she submitted...

Jordahl: Is the original.

Pillard: ... and the changes that you suggested, she informed me that she has e-mailed, that I believe to me or Joe or the guys at the Planning and Zoning. But I gave back to her the original disk and told her just to... because it's going to change the (inaudible). So she has the disk and she's supposed to be bringing that in later (inaudible)

Jordahl: But my effort here is not to change the essential content of what she got from Tom Carsner and had incorporated. But really more to change where it is in the plan. So if you look on page 4...

Bolkcom: Well...

Lacina: Before we go any further...

Bolkcom: We're not...

Lacina: ... procedurally, why did she do that?

Jordahl: Do what?

Lacina: Did she incorporate Cole Chase's comments and anybody else that spoke from the audience? Did she talk to 3 of you to...

Jordahl: No, we were all in the meeting together and...

Lacina: But he spoke from the audience. I didn't realize that we were rewriting the plan to incorporate...

Bolkcom: I think that the ideas have some support as study ideas. The idea of studying the question of conservation...

Lacina: Well, if 3 of you told her that that's what you wanted, this is just news to me. I thought he spoke from the public. Didn't realize that Cole was being ignored and Tom was rewriting the plan.

Bolkcom: I think these were items that have come up through the course of this and just didn't get put in. They're there now, they can certainly be... They're being suggested as additions, they can certainly be pulled out at a point in the future. I hesitate to get into a long debate about this under reports. If we want to put this on for Thursday and talk about it, it would probably be appropriate to.

Duffy: Well, maybe we should.

Lacina: I'm just surprised it's in there.

Bolkcom: Yes.

Jordahl: As to how...

Stutsman: Well...

Bolkcom: We can have a more thorough discussion about it because I think we need to lay this out.

Stutsman: I think we need to because I'm really confused...

Lacina: Maybe Karen should be in because...

Stutsman: ... as to what we're doing here.

Bolkcom: Right.

Lacina: ... I would like to know too, why she did this. So let's have her in.

Bolkcom: Right.

Stutsman: I have some concerns too. I know there's maybe consensus what Tom Carsner said. I can't, to be honest, even remember what exactly what he said. But I guess I was confused, that wasn't a public hearing that we had the other night and so I don't know what the process is to take people's comments outside the public hearing. If there are 3 votes to go ahead and include this, I don't have a problem with that, but I guess I need to be a little bit clear about what we're talking about too. I've heard different things, but...

Bolkcom: Yes.

Stutsman: Yes. But I've not seen a written document to respond to.

Duffy: We can put it on. It surprised me that was changed.

Bolkcom: We can put it on Thursday if you'd like to have a more...

Duffy: You know, there's other people...

Bolkcom: ... thorough discussion about it.

Lacina: If she could come in that's fine.

Stutsman: Planning and Zoning is reviewing it...

Bolkcom: Right.

Stutsman: ... Wednesday night. So what does that...

Bolkcom: They're going to take a look at these things.

Stutsman: These things here?

Bolkcom: Yes. They're going to take a look at everything that's been suggested to... They're going to comment on everything I assume.

Pillard: But they don't have the changes that (inaudible)...

Jordahl: Karen told me...

Pillard: ... (inaudible) so we're clear on that.

Jordahl: ... in response, when I talked to Karen last night, about this suggesting that these things would be more appropriate in the Strategies than in this preamble. She said that in her cover letter in doing anything with these at all she would clearly highlight and present this, I believe, as a separate item and would designate this as saying that this is something that Jonathan asked me to do in response to the preamble and just it was more of an editorial change rather than a content change. And designate it as not something that was present in the plan when we all discussed it in this form, but rather something that I suggested in response to just the way she had done it. It's more a question of where it is rather than of what it is. These ideas are in the preface.

Lacina: I think it's what it is. For example, item 4, you're discussing infringing upon people's freedom to choose where they want to live.

Jordahl: That was her language, number 4 was her words.

Bolkcom: I don't want to get into a discussion about... This is a report and not a deliberative time. We can put this on for Thursday. I think your question is a good one, Steve. I don't mean to cut off...

Stutsman: But the point is that this is going to the draft...

Bolkcom: That's right. That's right.

Stutsman: ...and I don't know that there's agreement that that should be included.

Duffy: To the draft on Wednesday?

Lacina: I don't think it should be.

Jordahl: That wasn't what we had discussed at the end. Her conclusion to me yesterday afternoon was that this would be separate and that it would be noted as exactly what it was. That it was my response to where she had put it in the plan.

Bolkcom: The other problem we have is a timing problem. If the Board is interested in any of these things, and I think there is support for some of these things. Most of them are study items. We should get some feedback from the Planning and Zoning Commission. They're meeting tomorrow night. They may say all of these don't make any sense and recommend that we don't add any of them. I would like that kind of input from them.

Lacina: We passed a document to the Zoning Commission for their review. Now we're rewriting it.

Bolkcom: I think these are some minor suggested additions that can be stricken out.

Lacina: I still think the document that they received is what we have to deal with. We approve that document, and the Board later on decides you want to have studies on these fine. But we're rewriting that document and it shouldn't have gone forth and it would've gone forth even with spelling errors. We're ramming this thing through so fast we're going to have, in my opinion a document that is not going to be in the best interests of Johnson County. We need to stop a little bit. We gave the Zoning Department a document. Again, this other stuff, one member of the public makes some comments and we're doing a rewrite, and ignoring the other member of the public that spoke to the issues.

Bolkcom: I don't remember any specific thing.

Lacina: Cole specifically said he did not see in there anything about property owners rights. Was there...

Bolkcom: I think that got added.

Lacina: Where?

Bolkcom: I don't know.

Lacina: OK, I need to know that, too, because I thought the document we sent to the Zoning Commission was intact. So where is Cole's comments? I didn't know that was changed.

Bolkcom: I thought that got added but I may be wrong about that. Let's put this on for Thursday and talk about it.

Stutsman: But we need to deal with the issue of does this go to the Planning and Zoning Wednesday.

Bolkcom: I don't have any problem if it does because I'm going to advocate for all of these things when it comes back to us.

Duffy: Well, you see what we're getting in here is special interest groups.

Bolkcom: I am going to get 3 votes for every one of these items. I just like to have their feedback on it. We've been working on this for 3 years, these are items that have been talked about on any number of occasions in this room by members of the public and this Board, LESA, infill, some of these other things. Most of this stuff is basically study possible strategies to do these things right?

Lacina: It bypasses the public process. I see that.

Bolkcom: Members of the public brought these things to us. LESA is something that we've talked about for weeks.

Lacina: Well...

Bolkcom: Here it is in there, consider the use of LESA. I mean there's nothing revolutionary here.

Jordahl: Regarding...

Lacina: Leave it out is my vote.

Duffy: I'm for leaving it out too. You're going to have special interest groups.

Stutsman: We're not even supposed to be discussing this.

Lacina: Do we put this in or do we not? I say we don't.

Duffy: Take it out. You have to take it out before the hearing.

Bolkcom: I don't know why we wouldn't want as much feedback on these concepts as possible.

Stutsman: Well, and I agree Joe, the problem is the process and the way it appears and the perception and...

Bolkcom: Then we'll take these up when it comes to the Board's public hearing and we won't seek the Zoning Commission's input on these items. That's what the flip side of this is.

Lacina: No, it isn't.

Bolkcom: Because these are going to come back and these are going to be advocated for once we get the document back from Planning and Zoning.

Lacina: If these have value the Board needs to discuss them. But are they a component of the plan? No.

Bolkcom: Depends on if we have 3 votes or not.

Lacina: That is correct and it may only pass with 3 votes. You need to weight that. What I'm saying is right now I'm not impressed with what's going on and I want to talk to Karen. Either Thursday or next Tuesday we need to figure out what the hell is going on here.

Stutsman: These obviously...

Bolkcom: I think there is a bit of overreaction here, but...

Duffy: I don't think there is Joe because...

Lacina: We're picking and choosing who has input on this plan.

Bolkcom: There's nothing new here.

Duffy: I suggest asking for Johnson County Cattlemen, Johnson County Hog Producers, Johnson County Sheep Producers, the Farm Bureau, and there's other organizations. Now if you want input from organizations, but you see what's happening here, like Steve says, they all ready have this what they're supposed to discuss tomorrow night, so bang it was changed yesterday. That's what I've heard.

Lacina: Well, I haven't seen this. How many of us, let's see a show of hands. How many of us have read all of this and know what's in there that we're passing onto the Zoning Commission? I haven't.

Bolkcom: There is only about 100 words here.

Lacina: How many? One? Jonathan?

Jordahl: I saw it. I...

Bolkcom: I just read it, there's nothing to it. Basic stuff.

Lacina: OK, then the rest of this, at least 3 of us, haven't had time to study it.

Duffy: Who got the memo? Who was it that send it, who didn't?

Jordahl: Let me recount the history of this a little bit.

Bolkcom: It's right there in front of you, Steve. Why don't you take 30 seconds and look at it.

Lacina: I'm talking about the process.

Jordahl: Rather than...

Stutsman: (Inaudible).

Jordahl: And so am I. OK, let me talk about the process.

Stutsman: It's not on the agenda, we haven't had a time...

Lacina: Sally's right.

Bolkcom: Let's put it on Thursday and we'll figure out what's here and what's not Thursday. I'm for continuing to have work sessions on this to ensure that more than the 3 years that we've worked on this, I'm not interested in coming down to the last month and realize that we've left some fairly important things out to continue to look at. That's what I'm hearing you say. We're done, we don't need any more ideas, great. I'm not of that mind.

Lacina: You didn't hear correctly.

Bolkcom: I understand your concern about process. We'll put it on for Thursday or next Tuesday and we'll talk about these things. But I'm not willing to let just let these things fall to the side because some people think we're done.

Lacina: Well, as it was said earlier, some of these issues may have been brought up before and dropped and yes, you probably aren't letting them fall by the side. We're going to see them, see them and see them. Point is number 1, we haven't seen them. We haven't even had a chance to look at the stuff. It was just given to us.

Bolkcom: I give you that. Let's put it on for next week.

Lacina: We, the Board, need to see that. Number 2, we bypassed the process. Number 3, one individual gets this stuff in here and others that spoke were ignored. That is not right.

Bolkcom: Would the Board be willing to put this on next Tuesday and talk about it.

Stutsman: I think...

Duffy: No. It shouldn't be discussed.

Bolkcom: OK. Let's do that.

Duffy: Now wait a minute...

Bolkcom: Deana could you put that on Tuesday? I would like to, I know we've talked probably too much here. We're not going to decide anything here. We'll put everything on hold until next Tuesday and talk about it.

Jordahl: Just as a matter of public record...

Duffy: What are they going to do tomorrow night.

Bolkcom: They can do whatever they want to do tomorrow.

Jordahl: I would like to rehearse briefly how this came to be.

Duffy: Now Joe, the memo was sent to you?

Bolkcom: Charlie, Jonathan is talking.

Duffy: Not the rest of us.

Jordahl: Just briefly, how this came to be, without discussing it's content.

Bolkcom: I'd like to say...

Jordahl: And that is that during out joint meeting, this was a public meeting with the Zoning Commission, Tom Carsner asked why certain ideas that were part of the discussion leading up to the Plan had not been included. It was my response that gee, that's an oversight. Rick said yes, I will bring those ideas to the Zoning Commission, because he thought it was an oversight, too. I think there was some agreement on the Board that this was an oversight and it was appropriate for Rick to do that. So my understanding was that Rick was going to take those comments and bring them to the Zoning Commission for their consideration as sort of a separate thing. That Karen took that and inserted it into the Plan is, well, where I think a question can be raised and so we should be talking about it. I think you raised a fair question; we approved a plan in one form, an idea was raised. All I want to see is that that idea be considered in conjunction with the Plan as we discussed. We were in a meeting. It wasn't like this happened behind closed doors or one or 2 people thought this up. We were all here, the whole Zoning Commission, or those that were here and Karen and Rick. This was very public and it was stated that this would be brought forward. This is not a surprise to anyone.

Lacina: It's news to me.

Duffy: It's news to me, too.

Lacina: Brought forward and incorporated into the Plan are 2 different things.

Jordahl: They are.

Lacina: . This bypassed...

Bolkcom: Rick was directed to work with Karen on this.

Lacina: By one member of the Board.

Bolkcom: No, by the bodies as we sat here.

Duffy: No. By 2 supervisors, Joe.

Bolkcom: I think we... We'll review the record. We'll review the record.

Lacina: Tuesday?

Bolkcom: Put it on for Tuesday and talk about it.

Lacina: . Yes. Go down and I want to see (inaudible) the Board

Bolkcom: Maybe we should invite Rick in Tuesday and give us an update.

Duffy: But they're going to discuss it tomorrow night.

Lacina: They will discuss the original plan tomorrow night. Is that correct?

Bolkcom: I guess, maybe we need to take a break and query Rick about his memory and what he forwarded to the Zoning Commission.

Pillard: The only thing that Rick has is what was originally given... He doesn't have any of the proposed changes because I just (inaudible) last night.

Jordahl: I think that's incorrect. I was at Rick's office when the proposed changes came.

Pillard: So he has them or he doesn't?

Jordahl: Yes, simultaneously he got a copy and Joe got a copy.

Pillard: OK. That is not the changes. As I understand it that is not the changes that you just presented to the Board now.

Jordahl: No, not these changes. No. And I didn't really propose these as changes so much as that changes that should be considered.

Bolkcom: We should (inaudible).

Stutsman: Well, and obviously because of the discussion, this is something that we should've had a regular agenda item and discussed this. It's not good to have some people unhappy with this process and we've got to work that out before we can move forward with it.

Lacina: Well, for my own clarification, I will just ask Rick what are they going to discuss tomorrow night. When I find out, I'll share it with the Board.

Bolkcom: All right.

Duffy: See where the memo came from and who it was addressed from.

Lacina: Well, that was Karen, right?

Jordahl: Memo was from Karen.

Duffy: Now who is going to, just the P and Z Board tomorrow night.

Bolkcom: That's correct. OK that's on for Tuesday

Stutsman: I have one more...

Bolkcom: . We'll have it on, if we need to talk about it or not.

Stutsman: ... item if we're done with that.

Bolkcom: Sally?

(Continued in Part 3)