MINUTES OF THE INFORMAL MEETING OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
FEBRUARY 9 AND 11, 1999
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chairperson Jordahl called the Johnson County Board of Supervisors to order in the Johnson County Administration Building at 9:00 a.m. Members present were: Jonathan Jordahl, Mike Lehman, Sally Stutsman, and Carol Thompson; absent: Charles Duffy.
Jordahl: Calling to order the informal meeting of the Johnson County Board of Supervisors for Tuesday February 9th, 1999. Review of the formal minutes of February 4th. If you haven't had a chance to look at those, they are on the I drive or can be printed out if need be.
ATTORNEY BOB MICHAEL: REDUCTION/WAIVER OF JOHNSON COUNTY FAIR GROUNDS REZONING FEE
Jordahl: Item 3 on the agenda, business from Bob Michael regarding reduction or waiver of Johnson County fairgrounds rezoning fee. Rick, do you want to present this or Bob?
Planning and Zoning Administrator Rick Dvorak: I'll let Bob go ahead and (inaudible)...
Jordahl: Come on up Bob.
Attorney Bob Michael: Morning.
Stutsman: Morning.
Jordahl: Morning.
Michael: As you recall, last week you approved of a new zoning classification for fairgrounds and now the Fair Board would like to rezone the fairgrounds to fit under that classification. We're getting the application ready to be filed this coming Thursday with your zoning department and the fee for the application under your current guidelines would be approximately $2,300 based upon a little over 50 acres. And what we're here to request today, since this is an organization supported by the County, is either a waiver or a reduction in the fee amount to be required to be paid with the application.
Jordahl: Rick, I talked to Mike, or Bob rather, earlier about this and suggested that he work with you to establish what our cost of working with this might be, recognizing that they're complying with our wishes in changing to a new zoning classification so that everything would be in order. So I assume some sort of compromise figure has resulted. Is that true?
Dvorak: We haven't discussed it at any length. I've thought about it a little bit. A lot of information was actually done by their engineering firm, and that would eliminate a lot of staff time. But basically it's like $250 I think isn't it? 3 dollars 3 (inaudible). It's up to the Board. I can live with basically...
Jordahl: $250.
Dvorak: ...$250. I can live with nothing, don't get me wrong. If you felt uncomfortable just waiving the whole fee, a $250 base fee I think would be more than adequate for our staff that didn't work.
Jordahl: Sally?
Stutsman: I was just going to say I don't have a problem with waiving the fee. This is a non-profit organization that we do a lot of cooperation with one another with the fairgrounds. I think we've had a number of meetings at Montgomery Hall and have never been charged, being that we are a governmental agency for use of that facility. I guess I see this as a benefit for the whole community. The fairgrounds, the facilities and what we're doing here with rezoning. So based on that, I don't have a problem with waiving the fee. But that's one Board member, I don't know how everybody else feels.
Jordahl: Your thoughts?
Lehman: I think the long term effect was to cut down your time and ours when you had to come in and as ask for a special... So I think it will come in and pay itself off too.
Michael: Yes, I think it benefits both the County and the Fair Board.
Jordahl: (inaudible) permitting the range of things that you've been doing and in many cases have had to come in for individual permits for us.
Michael: Right.
Jordahl: Carol do you have any (inaudible)?
Thompson: I agree, I think we should waive it.
Jordahl: Boy it sounds like I would be an odd and lonely duck out here if I wanted to try to charge you guys for this. I agree with what's been said and appreciate your benefit to the community and your cooperation with the Board not only in the many instances of allowing us to use the facility but getting this zoning classification straightened around. I think it may address other situations as well as your own. So I guess I'd be 4 for that. I can't but imagine that Charlie would agree with this if he were here. And so since we aren't actually voting today, maybe he'll get a chance to vote on it Thursday.
Michael: That would be on your agenda for what time? For Thursday?
Jordahl: We're meeting in the evening this week so 5:30.
Michael: 5:30? OK.
Dvorak: Yes and I'm already on the agenda for a couple of things that really (inaudible).
Jordahl: I do not think it would be required for you to attend the meeting unless you have other reasons to be there.
Michael: Nope. That would be fine. Thank-you very much.
Jordahl: Let's see here. Angela Williams?
Stutsman: I don't see Angela.
Thompson: (inaudible) a little later.
Jordahl: Mary, is Angela Williams going to be down? Do you know?
East Central Iowa Council of Governments Transportation Planner Mary Rump: So far as I know.
Jordahl: Are you and she not in the same car?
Rump: No.
Jordahl: All right.
Thompson: I don't see Cliff.
DISCUSSION: DISPOSITION OF OBSOLETE EQUIPMENT FROM HUMAN SERVICES
Jordahl: Let's see, Cliff is not here either. Moving right along. Business from the Board of Supervisors, disposition of obsolete equipment from human services.
Administrative Assistant Carol Peters: This is a request from Cheryl Whitney. Actually there's 2 different lists but one is obsolete. What it is computer related equipment that is obsolete and she's asking permission to have it taken to the auction. The second list is still circulating on the different departments.
Stutsman: Oh so we did... It sounded from this memo that it was going to go to local service, human services agencies first of all.
Peters: They have already checked.
Stutsman: OK.
Peters: It's obsolete.
Stutsman: OK.
Jordahl: So the second paragraph of this has already been accomplished. This is all then obsolete.
Peters: No.
Stutsman: You're talking that the computer stuff is obsolete. All right. The second list, the office equipment and furniture, has that been circulated within...
Peters: That is circulating.
Stutsman: OK. All right.
Peters: In fact we were the benefactors of one of them.
Jordahl: We have the best furniture around here.
Peters: You bet.
Stutsman: So then we just need to declare Thursday these things surplus so that they can be disposed of.
Jordahl: OK. Supervisor Stutsman. You have placed an item on the agenda.
Stutsman: Right. I wanted the Board to consider maybe not meeting the week of March 14th, that's spring break, and I know I for one will not be here. And I don't know what plans are of other Supervisors.
Thompson: I'll plan.
Jordahl: This is ISAC spring school of instructions on March 17th, 18th and 19th so Thursday anyway we wouldn't be here. So I guess I would be in favor of canceling meetings that week.
Stutsman: We don't cancel meetings very often. Of a matter of fact rarely. And we are one of the few governmental boards that meets on a weekly basis, twice a week, so I don't think it will create too much of a hardship if we don't meet that week.
Peters: You're going to (inaudible) May 19th. Twice, 3 times a year you reschedule some.
Jordahl: We should send department heads a memorandum I think indicating that we won't be meeting that week so that they can make preparations for whatever things they might need to get through here.
Stutsman: And that's why I think it's always good to let departments and the public know as far ahead as possible. If we could...
Jordahl: If we could get that up on the web too. I suppose we have to... Can we just informally decide this at this point? Or do we have to actually formally act on Thursday?
Peters: We don't need to formally act.
Jordahl: Once we've done that we need to put that up on the tentative agendas for the future so people will, again, be able to make plans.
Stutsman: Wow Jonathan, you're just moving right along.
Jordahl: Zipping right along the old agenda here. Discussion regarding process for hiring Mental Health Developmental Disabilities Director.
Stutsman: Oh there's Angela.
Jordahl: Uh-oh, back up. Here we are. Angela hi. Catching her breath.
Stutsman: We're running a little ahead Angela. You're right on time so no problem.
Jordahl: Right precisely on time. Business from Angela Williams, Housing Planner for East Central Iowa Council of Governments regarding the Johnson County Housing Needs Assessment, which I have seen but believe it or not, failed to completely read as yet.
East Central Council of Governments Housing Planner Angela Williams: Just stand back a minute.
Jordahl: Yes, do you want to tell us about that.
Williams: Sure. I also had a brief summary of about 3 pages, which is probably about as brief as I could make it. As you all know I've been working on the Johnson County housing needs assessment for about the past 8 months. I not only assessed the rural cities, also I assessed the unincorporated areas as well. Sorry, this stuffs too fast. I guess the most striking findings were, not striking but, that the county is aging, the rural population is aging. In most of the cities, the senior and adult population, and older adult populations are increasing while the young adult ages are decreasing. And that's true even in the township areas as well. I did windshield surveys in all the cities and also in a lot of the unincorporated towns. And I found that roughly about 40% or so of the housing structures were in need of serious repair. Compared with other counties, Johnson County's housing is in better shape. Linn County, for example, about 50 to 60% of their homes were in need of major and minor repairs so Johnson County's housing is in relatively good shape although it could use repairs.
Stutsman: Angela, when you say need repair, what are you referring to? Paint?
Williams: We rated them on a scale from 1 to 5 with excellent, good, fair which is major deficiency, and deteriorating which is a little bit more than major, and that includes significant surface wear, the structure itself being slightly out of plum with cracks, holes, breaks in walls, foundation problems, roof problems, blistered paint, windows that they are seeping in. We didn't get out and walk around each house. In a windshield survey you don't actually get out of your car but we did drive through all of the cities and we went down every single street and stopped and rated each and every house just based on the criteria.
Lehman: Was this before, after, during the storm?
Williams: After the storm which actually makes Johnson County's housing look really good because we went out in September so the damages from the storm were really evident still.
Lehman: I wanted to make sure that was factored into that.
Williams: Oh it was, I noted it in each section.
Jordahl: Some of those roofs were new though.
Williams: Yes, that were gone. I noted it, and especially Oxford I think which had the overall worst rating from my assessment and a lot of that was blatantly due to the storm damage. A lot of my recommendations, at least for the unincorporated areas which I'm assuming is what the Board of Supervisors would be most interested in, were improving the condition and appearance of the existing housing units. This can be done in several ways, the USDA Rural Development Agency offers programs directly that would assist rural families with home repairs and weatherization. I recommended that the Board of Supervisors establish a countywide housing task force to help coordinate the efforts. And basically would be just getting the word out about different programs that are available to homeowners. There's also a program through the Federal Home Loan Bank and it's called the Affordable Housing Program, and that offers direct grants to homeowners to help with repairs as well. And then an additional recommendation that I made was to provide a tax abatement for residential property improvements.
Jordahl: How would that work?
Williams: First of all Johnson County would need to adopt some sort of urban revitalization plan that would factor in the unincorporated areas. Then the improvements to the residential real estate, and those unincorporated areas could receive either partial or total exemption from increased property taxes for some specified number of years. And you all would be determining the tax abatement schedule plan and the intent of that would be to encourage private investment by reducing the tax increase that would normally result when people make improvements to their properties.
Stutsman: Are these programs available to homeowners as well as rental properties? How does this work?
Williams: The tax abatement for residential property, you could write it in that it could be available. The USDA Rural Development Grants are specifically for homeowners, the FHLB program, it can be used for residential and commercial properties, it could be apartment and rental units as well.
Stutsman: When you said the 40 serious repair, were those in the cities or were those in the unincorporated areas?
Williams: The actual cities, the number of fair, deteriorating and unsound was about 41% overall. The actual cities, 40 exactly, and the unincorporated areas that I surveyed were Cosgrove, Joetown, Morse, Oasis, River Junction, Sharon Center, and Williamstown and those houses were approximately a little over 50% of those houses. Another finding that I...
Jordahl: We developed those.
Williams: Another finding was that there was a great deal of cost burdened households in Johnson County and the non-metro cities, about 11% of homeowners were burdened with housing costs. This means that they're paying over 30% of their income for housing related such as mortgage and taxes. And about 23% of renters were cost burdened in the cities. In the unincorporated areas, about 15% of renters were cost burdened and that's roughly 167 houses in the Johnson County area were renting property and paying more than 30% of their income toward housing costs.
Stutsman: So that now we have this housing needs assessment done, the next step would be to... We have to have this done in order to apply for grants or get these other programs in place.
Williams: Exactly. Uh-huh.
Stutsman: And so your suggestion then is to form a taskforce that can begin taking this information and informing the public about what's available.
Williams: Exactly.
Jordahl: The survey includes the cities. You've driven outside of Iowa City and Coralville I assume.
Williams: Exactly.
Jordahl: But it does include North Liberty, Solon...
Williams: It includes Solon, not North Liberty. North Liberty had their own needs assessment.
Jordahl: And Tiffin?
Williams: It includes Tiffin.
Jordahl: So everything except North Liberty, Iowa City, Coralville.
Williams: Exactly.
Jordahl: OK. This taskforce then, I assume, has sort of like... I don't know. There's 2 implications. There's a rural taskforce which would be one set of concerns and then there's other, maybe 3, other small towns and then unincorporated towns. I don't know if unincorporated towns fit with rural or if one taskforce does the whole thing. Are the concerns sufficiently different? What's your sense of that?
Williams: I recommended, I have a different set of action plans for each incorporated city as far as the unincorporated towns and then in just the general rural unincorporated areas I recommend one task force. Because even though the unincorporated towns are... Because a lot of the unincorporated towns lack infrastructure that would be needed to apply for certain funds to apply for from the Iowa Department of Economic Development, they would basically be treated as rural areas.
Stutsman: So one task force for the whole county, excluding Iowa City, Coralville, the cities would suffice then. Is that what you're saying?
Williams: One taskforce for the unincorporated areas.
Stutsman: So then like Hills would have a taskforce, and Lone Tree would have a taskforce.
Jordahl: Or they would do whatever.
Williams: Exactly.
Jordahl: The City Council might do something or they could each choose a different approach. But we would put the unincorporated towns together with the rural areas.
Williams: Exactly.
Stutsman: OK.
Jordahl: OK.
Stutsman: Would you work with the taskforces?
Williams: I would be glad to.
Jordahl: Well we should probably have a better sense of what's in this document I think before we establish that taskforce. Is 2 weeks enough time? Can we get that done before we go on, before we take a break on the 14th?
Thompson: March 14th.
Jordahl: Of March? So could we get maybe, look toward... Do we want to take applications? How about if we at least define what type of people, what categories of people we want on a taskforce by the second week of March. Is that too long a time?
Thompson: Well since I'm the new one and I have less work then most of you do I would be willing to study that and make a report in 2 weeks.
Jordahl: OK.
Stutsman: That sounds great.
Jordahl: That's wonderful.
Stutsman: Really.
Thompson: And I'll need a copy of your report please.
Williams: OK.
Stutsman: Do we have one already?
Jordahl: I have one in my basket, so that maybe the Board's circulating copy and I'll give it to Carol. Today is the 9th, so 2 weeks, you're talking about the 23rd I guess as the target date for that. That would be great. Then we can decide how to proceed from there.
Williams: So is it my understanding after you all review it on the... It needs to be adopted? Do we want to wait until the 23rd to do that?
Jordahl: Probably the 25th then for that formal meeting following the discussion of it on the 23rd.
Stutsman: Is there a problem with waiting until then?
Williams: Only that it was written into the grant that it needed to be written by the 15th but I can ask for an extension and I don't think that that would be a problem.
Stutsman: 15th of?
Jordahl: February.
Stutsman: Which is Monday.
Williams: Yes.
Stutsman: OK.
Jordahl: I really don't think that we can reliably read it and assess it before Thursday.
Thompson: That makes sense.
Williams: I can write a letter to the department of economic development and fax it and one of you can sign it and we can send it off.
Jordahl: Uh-huh. Yes. So we would have to sign off on that as well.
Williams: Exactly.
Stutsman: So we're looking to approve that on the 25th, and Carol you will report?
Thompson: Uh-huh.
Stutsman: OK. All right. Outlining what we want then for the taskforce, who to serve on it and the charge and what not? OK.
Jordahl: All right. Carol will you put those things on the agenda for those days please? Thank-you. All right, so we should have...
Stutsman: Oh I had one other question Angela. I was looking through some things that had come through about legislative issues, and talking about housing appropriations. Would that tie in to what we're eligible to get by having this housing needs assessment?
Williams: Exactly. Uh-huh.
Stutsman: OK. I don't know Carol if you saw that, the newsletter from ISAC and stuff talking about the legislation that's pending and more funds going into rehabilitation for funds for houses and stuff.
Williams: Exactly. That's what this is mainly used for.
Stutsman: All right. Well good.
Jordahl: All right. Well thank-you in advance for what I assume is a very valuable document and we're really glad to be taking this step and help make funds available to people for upgrading their homes.
Williams: I think we can do a lot with this actually.
CLIFFORD HOWE: SELECTION OF MENTAL HEALTH/DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES DIRECTOR
Jordahl: Thank-you. OK. Now then. Mr. Howe?
Clifford Howe: Yes?
Jordahl: Clifford Howe has requested he be placed on the agenda for discussing issues surrounding the selection of the Mental Health Developmental Disabilities Director. Good morning.
Howe: Good morning. Thank-you very much. I organized this meeting, there are a few people here and they have in common that each has a son or daughter whose chronically mentally ill and as do we. Our interest is in the selection of the new CPC that it be someone whose more supportive maybe of more restricted housing like Chatham Oaks. We agree that lots of people can live in apartments and do well in those kinds of settings with minimal kinds of help. But for some of these children, like ours, they're adults, they just aren't able to handle it. They need more structure and supervision and that's the purpose for our being here. I knew Craig Mosher and liked him but he wasn't that supportive of Chatham Oaks as a setting. And the other thing that we have tried to do over a period of years is maybe talk with you about the possibility of some other housing, like apartment housing near Chatham Oaks which would be less restrictive than Chatham Oaks but would provide more supervision and could use the staff from Chatham Oaks that are currently there. But Craig never supported that so nothing ever came of it. So that's our plea, that when you hire a new person that you look at someone who sees the needs of this minority of people who are very chronically mentally ill and frankly aren't going to recover. I think the research pretty much shows that from the University hospitals follow-up studies. I'm talking about schizophrenics or severely mentally ill and they tend to continue to need some structure. So that's all I have unless some other people would have some comments.
Jordahl: Would anyone else like to say something?
Rosemary Friedrich: I'm Rosemary Friedrich, and I have a daughter who has schizophrenia and I am also on the faculty of the University of Iowa College of Nursing and I work on the schizophrenic unit which has people with schizophrenia every week. And what I really notice that, not only for my own daughter, but for people who are severely ill is often times when they live by themselves, even when they have people come in to help them, that they don't do very well. They often times don't take their medication, their physical health deteriorates and they become increasingly mentally ill and over time just deteriorate to the point where they need a higher level of care, hospice care. They revolve in and out of the hospitals, they revolve in and out of the jails. In fact when I noticed the other day in "The Press Citizen" about a jail study that you're going to do, I couldn't help but wonder if you've taken a look at how many people are in the Johnson County jail truly have mental illness. And if they were in a structured setting such as Chatham Oaks or other state housing that was highly structured, if they would be able to stay out of jail. And I now it's a problem all over the state and all over the county so I have a hunch maybe it's so here too. And what we've been working for, many of us in our alliance for the mentally ill, is to promote more housing care in Johnson County that is group homes or in apartment building for those with severe mental illness perhaps have someone on site who can monitor people and also provide them with daily structure. But sometimes I believe that the decision makers really don't understand the high need for structure. And I think we've swung to far in the pendulum in independent living and freedom. Most people can do well with that but there are some that need on-going structure such as Chatham Oaks.
Stutsman: You're exactly right Rosemary, that has come up in the jail discussions about the change in the population and a lot of that population is due to mental illness and how they're equipped to handle those problems.
Friedrich: Right, and if we could keep them out of jail, my hunch is that if we could keep them out of the jails we could do it with more structured housing, not having people out of Chatham Oaks who are not ready to move out of Chatham Oaks. And we could keep the cost down in terms of jails, emergency rooms and so forth. One day in the hospital for example costs $1,000 here in Iowa City. One day at Chatham Oaks for example costs about $63. I'm glad you're looking at that.
Stutsman: Right, we're doing a real analysis of the population and whose being placed in jail. That will all come up.
Howe: Have you looked at those that you do find, do they get any treatment? Do they have any?
Stutsman: Not while they're...
Howe: (inaudible) that these people could use some treatment.
Stutsman: I can't speak to that definitely but I don't think that there is programming for these people once they're in jail to deal with their mental illness.
Howe: (inaudible) because without medication and so forth...
Stutsman: I'm sure they're getting their medications and things because they're very good about that but as far as getting any therapy or counseling though, it's just...
Howe: Number one it would be medication but (inaudible).
Jordahl: Yes Reverend Welsh.
Reverend Bob Welsh: If I might. It seems to me that there exists for Mr. Howe and others to be reminded that there's a public hearing on the mental health plan that's on Wednesday night, February the 10th and Thursday morning February the 11th. And at least to my knowledge this has not been discussed with the Planning Council, the concerns raised here. But that should sure be raised, become a part of what seems to me, planning that Johnson County develops. And to have that concern mentioned at that point and written into the plan, we could go a long ways, it seems to me, to satisfy these persons (inaudible). But I assume that we worked as hard, the CPC would have one of their responsibilities to carry out the plan.
Stutsman: Definitely.
Welsh: So getting it into the plan would be an important key and that opportunity comes up with Wednesday and Thursday and I'd really say to tell all of the members of the Board of Supervisors and members of the Planning Council as well as the Supervisors that they have 2 cracks at the plan.
Howe: Do you have the start up times of those meetings?
Welsh: I only have the start up times on the Thursday morning, and that's from 9:00 to 11:00. The reason why I don't have the evening meeting on the 10th is that's the Minnesota basketball game is at home.
Stutsman: I don't have it down either on Wednesday I think.
Welsh: My guess is it would be around 7:00.
Stutsman: I'll call Deb Conger and see if she would know.
Welsh: But I do think that's a proper step.
Jordahl: When is the next Planning Council meeting? Is that coming up after then this public hearing?
Stutsman: Uh-huh.
Jordahl: It should be the 23rd?
Stutsman: The 16th.
Jordahl: The 16th.
Stutsman: I've got it down as the 16th.
Thompson: I do too. At 4:00 p.m.?
Stutsman: Uh-huh. 4:30.
Thompson: 4:30 here?
Stutsman: Uh-huh. It's usually at 4:30 isn't it?
Jordahl: Uh-huh.
Stutsman: Yes.
Howe: Lowell Lumen was going to be here this morning but I don't see him.
Stutsman: Yes, he's here.
Howe: Is he? And he is on that Planning...
Jordahl: Dr. Lumen would you like to speak?
Stutsman: The Planning Council, right.
Planning Council Member Lowell Lumen: I did propose adding one sentence at least, or a small statement to the care of the patients that we consider residential care as an essential element in the care of these patients. Some of them are just not going to improve, they need to be on that. I don't know in our change whether that statement got into the plan or not, it should be made stronger than that, but other thoughts in mind that other housing be looked at. My idea, particularly from being on the Planning Council, is that we need an open minded person with a lot of talent too. Because it's a complex system the way I see it in my short time being on the Planning Council. We need someone with a lot of ability to evaluate quality of care with all the various organizations giving it and we continually strive to improve care in making sure that the proper citizens are being obtained and that these are quality... To take care of them. We'd all love to see these people get better but some of them just don't improve enough that we need a full latitude of care available. That's important, the quality of life is the right care. Quality of care is extremely difficult to evaluate and I think we need to keep looking at how we can evaluate this and keep getting better.
Thompson: Later on we'll be discussing the questions that we'll be asking and how we'll be interviewing the candidates. And what I've written down here that would be your concerns are that the person be supportive of the more restrictive end of the continuum of services, that he or she be willing to consider your goal of apartment living near Chatham Oaks. That the person understand housing needs of people with disabilities and be able to balance the needs of various parts of the constituency, and that the person possess the ability to evaluate the quality of care and effectively maintain high quality that's... I've translated that into bureaucracies of course.
Howe: That's very good.
Jordahl: Yes ma'am.
Ethel Howe: I have one concern, one of your ...
Jordahl: Would you please identify yourself for the Auditor's Office?
Ethel Howe: Oh I'm sorry, I'm Ethel Howe.
Jordahl: Thank-you.
Ethel Howe: I have one concern about your wording there. You said higher level or more restrictive care. I think instead of restrictive we should use some other word (inaudible) ...
Thompson: Structured?
Jordahl: Structured.
Thompson: Supportive that's a good one.
Ethel Howe: ...(inaudible) or intensive or something like... Because that's not the purpose of this is business. The purpose is more care.
Jordahl: Yes, the goal would be something more like freedom but it's sort of freedom within structure.
Howe: That's right.
Thompson: Thank-you.
Jordahl: Thank-you.
Stutsman: This has been helpful because like Carol said we are going to begin talking today about the process for hiring a new CPC and know that there's a lot of interest and a lot of facets of this job that need to be covered. So any input we can get in asking questions and making sure that we have the right person in that place. We're very interested in getting that accomplished.
Howe: I think the risk you run, and it happened to us several years ago, our daughter was put in a less restrictive environment and went through the Hillcrest and the supported apartment living and all that and then didn't do well and went off her medication. Lost her job, she finally tried to kill herself and is back in the hospital and then the whole thing starts over again. The recovery model in mental business is good idea for most people but it doesn't happen to everybody and I think that's what we're trying to say is that we've got to accept that.
Stutsman: We have to have a variety of options available to suit each individual.
Howe: That's exactly right. But everybody cant' live in an apartment unsupervised.
Jordahl: Well I think you've made that point very well.
Howe: Thank-you again.
Jordahl: Thank-you.
Administrative Assistant Carol Peters: The time for those hearings, on the 10th it's 7:00 in the evening at the public library room A and then the 11th at 9:00 in room (inaudible). I'll write it down for you.
Jordahl: All right so 7:00 in the evening on Wednesday so MH/DD Services Management Plan public hearing room A 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday. I have a request and I think it's not a bad idea that we take a brief break. Let's say 5 minutes. Meet back here at, what would that be? 18 ‘till? And we'll recommence the discussion with, what are we going to be doing when we get back here? I guess we'll visit the issue of...
Stutsman: Hiring mental health?
Jordahl: Hiring a mental health director which we're currently discussing from the perspective of more structured care environments and go to the question of our Board process for selecting that director. What about... Yes, then we have ECICOG also on the agenda, so we'll continue with this topic in 5 minutes.
Recessed at 9:43; reconvened 9:48 a.m.