Reconvened at 10:37 a.m.

Jordahl: I want to take another item from the agenda a little bit out of sequence and go to the business from the Board of Supervisors. Under other I know we have folks that are here to discuss a situation that has occurred in this last week regarding a wolf that got loose in the county. And this is Angie and Tim Madsen. Perhaps you'd like to come up to the microphone.

Stutsman: Jonathan before they get started, no you're fine. Clarify that because this isn't on the agenda we really can't enter into a lot of discussion about this issue. Maybe that just needs to be clarified.

Jordahl: Yes. We can't deliberate today but I understand that you've asked to be put on the agenda for Thursday so what we can do here today is basically hear what you have to say, your presentation. And there are others here who have maybe some information to shed light on the situation. But the Board will have to deliberate, taking any action on this, at a later time, probably Thursday.

Tim Madsen: I understand. I appreciate the opportunity to talk to you. My name is Tim Madsen, and I live at 3126 Rohret Road. I live approximately a mile-and-a-half from Weber School. There have been 2 full blooded hybrid wolf dogs kenneled on a vacant property approximately nine-tenths of a mile from Weber School. This past Saturday at approximately 2:30 as I go home to my house, I see that there is a wolf-dog...

Angie Madsen: It's not a dog.

Tim Madsen: Or a wolf, an actual wolf. Sorry about the dog part. There's a wolf killing my dog 8 feet from the front door of our house. He did not seem reluctant to move. It looked pretty much, just from what I'm catching, I'm in shock that my dog was dead at that time, but I start honking my horn. The wolf didn't do anything. I drive up into the yard. The wolf circles around the house so I follow around the house with my car chasing the wolf. As I get back to the front yard there's a wolf with his mouth around my dog's neck trying to still remove him from the lawn. So I pull up beside the wolf with my horn blaring when he finally moves away and starts to walk down the driveway a little bit to where a point that I can't see him. He still is not like, when you come upon a wild animal or a deer or anything where they just see you and take off. He seemed very comfortable with what he was doing. I can't stress how this just seemed like a very vicious attack. Either the wolf was hungry or that's just the wolf's nature. But that close to the house, 8 feet, was very traumatizing to us and our family. At that point though I got out of my car and went in and called my neighbor who is Kathy Thompson. They called the County Sheriff for me, I go back outside. I look at my dog hoping that he'll possibly still be alive. He's not but as I look up I see the wolf starting to approach me and at that point I felt fearful, got back into my car and just blared the horn until finally the wolf walked down the driveway. We have 2 children. I have a 9 year old who is afraid to go outside. There's still another wolf that lives at that property and this is what concerns us. There have been numerous complaints about these wolves over the past 2 or 3 years. The week before Sergeant Slaughter was at my house. He was asking me if I'd seen this wolf because he had gotten lose. So this is not the first time these wolves have gotten lose. This is not the first complaint. It just happened that he was comfortable enough to come to my house, at 8 feet from my house, kill our dog. You could tell by the teeth marks on the dog that he tried to get away and it just wasn't possible.

Angie Madsen: I have documentation to that effect and pictures for each of you after I speak if I can give that to you for preparation for Thursday. The dogs, the wolves, have been kept for many years at a vacant property. It's the one-room old broken down one-room schoolhouse out on Rohret Road. Nobody lives there, he just kennels his wolves there. Throughout the last several years I've spoken with a volunteer from the Johnson County Humane Society who said she knew immediately what I was talking about, where the location was, as they've gone out to the location and checked it out with complaints they've received over the years. And they're attempting to find all of that documentation from those calls and get that together for me. The Public Health was well aware of the situation as they've had numerous complaints also. And the owner of the property lives in North Liberty. It's a woman. Her son is the one who actually has these dogs. The son lives in Shellsburg, Iowa. And he just kennels the dogs here. The complaints over the years have ranged from neglect to loose wolves. He insists, every time he's checked out for neglect, he insists that he has somebody out there every day to check the wolves. It's not true. We live there, and we're back and forth quite often with kids and activities and work so forth. I've seen somebody out there maybe twice in the last 4 years. I'm not saying he's not out there on weekends or whatever but I've seen him twice in the last 3 or 4 years. So I don't know. And the fact that there's been a history of numerous complaints about neglect and so forth. The wolves have, there's a male and a female. Apparently the female was getting out of the cage the last few weeks. There's been numerous complaints which I have documentation in these packets from the County Sheriff's Department. And unfortunately when the wolf got out again, whether it was Saturday or whenever, he happened to choose my house to go to and attack and kill our dog. I followed up with a phone call. The Sheriffs were very helpful, Ockenfels and Slaughter, and they gave me the number of the owner, I'm sorry, not the owner of the property but the owner of the dogs. So I called the owner of the wolves and his answering machine was on. And I left a message, he did return my call. He apologized when he found out what happened. In the meantime his wolf had been shot. After the wolf left our property, Slaughter and Ockenfels were attempting to look for the wolf but didn't really know where. So the wolf was spotted on the end of our driveway right off of Rohret Road and the wolf then was shot. I believe what might have factored into it from what I understand, but the Sheriff's Department would know this, is there was a jogger coming down the hill that was in close proximity. Rohret Road, I don't know if you know, is heavily populated with biking groups and joggers and walkers and people with dogs, kids on bikes. It's just heavily populated. It's a beautiful route that way so it's heavily populated and so the dog was shot. When I initially spoke with the owner he was extremely apologetic and I let him know that I felt that his apology was sincere. And I wasn't disputing that but he needed to get the other wolf off of the property. He said he couldn't do that, he just couldn't. So I tried to explore options with him and let him know that I was going to explore options with him and I said certainly you have a mom or a dad or a brother or sister, you belong to wolf organizations, somebody can take your animal, a friend. Just take him away. Now, now there's really nobody I can take that wolf to. I said well I'm going to insist that you get that wolf off. He said I've been trying to, I'm buying this property. The abstracts in the court system right now. Something's going to work out here. I said great, give me a timeline. He was put off guard, he didn't realize somebody was going to pinpoint him and he goes well all right a couple of weeks it should be done with the court system, a week or 2. I said so it sounds like a week from tomorrow, which was this Sunday. This happened this Saturday. So I said it sounds like a week from tomorrow that you'll have that wolf removed. No, no don't hold me to that I can't. So I said OK, so it sounds like you don't know when you're getting the animal off. Well, yes, yes. And he apologized again and we left on good terms. It was somewhat pleasant, it was a pleasant conversation. I was pinpointing him trying to hold him accountable for when he's going to get the dog off but I did it very pleasantly and we left very pleasantly. 6-and-a-half hours later I leave another message for him. After thinking it over, after my child is very fearful, in determining I need to let him know that that's my next expectation. The dog will be off. This time when he returned my message, which he did return my message, he was extremely upset. He had come down to Johnson County from Shellsburg. He had found his dog on the side of the road. The Sheriff's Department left the dog on the side of the road which was OK to do since the didn't come into contact with people. I guess he didn't have to take the dog into custody and then do tests and so forth. So he was extremely upset. He was mostly upset the fact that his female dog was pleasant and did I know that she was pregnant and did I know they shot 4 slugs in her. And he's going to sue me and he's going to sue the Johnson County Sheriff's men. So he became extremely irrational and I was thinking this dudes been drinking or something is my thought. He became irrational. I said we really have to end this conversation. I hung up the phone and throughout the day I've been documenting, I work at a place where documentation is very important so I've been documenting very well. I decided on Sunday, the following day, he didn't come and get the wolf so I made phone calls to find out what route I needed to pursue. And with the help of information from the Sheriff's Department and other folks, the Department of Public Health they told me and the Board of Supervisors which is why we are here now. I know, from what I understand with all of the stops I made to all the different places, I understand that there's not an exotic pet law and even if there was wolves may not be part of that. It just differs from county to county. I can let you know where he lives, in Shellsburg Benton County, there is no exotic pet law. He can have wolves where he lives so he can easily, at any time, come get a cage, load up his wolf and take it from Johnson County. There is nothing preventing him. Certainly he has a mother, brother or somebody, a buddy in his wolf organization can take this animal so why he is so steadfast that he is not going to take the animal off until this property is bought and purchased and so forth, I don't know. So yesterday my follow-up was of course coming here and Public Health and so forth. And also I went to the school because the location of the wolves is nine-tenths a mile from Weber. I talked to Celia Berger the principal at Weber and just wanted her to know this information. She said we need to let our block parents know this. So I then distributed a flier to the block parents who then did their telephone tree to their neighborhoods. I feel that numerous phone calls last night and this morning from extremely unhappy neighbors as you can all imagine. And I would assume part of it has to do with a lot of these folks bike and walk and job and walk their dogs and so forth out on Rohret Road, heavily populated. So I would assume that's a concern to them.

Tim Madsen: The safety of their kids being so close to the school.

Angie Madsen: The safety of the kids. The owner of the wolves has said time and time again, reiterates to me there has never been a documented case of a wolf attacking a human in Iowa. That's no comfort to me and that doesn't mean anything to me because what's the difference between a toddler and my dog stood this high, an 18 month old toddler running away in fear? I don't know. I don't think there's much of a difference when a wolf is hungry or when he's just kind of in attack mode because that's his natural instinct. I have talked with a co-worker of mine whose an animal activist with Johnson County Humane Society. As she did say I would receive support from them, and I think that has something to do with they probably feel that wolves should not be confined and so forth. These wolves are being raised for profit. He did mention to the Johnson County Sheriff's Office that you killed a $1,700 wolf. He was extremely upset that she was pregnant and I would think that has everything to do with that that's going to effect his salary in however many months and so forth. But they are being raised for profit and they're sold for large sums of money. What I would like today, and I know whether it happens today or not or on Thursday, but what I am asking, what I have gone back and asked this owner of the wolves, is I want the wolf off the property. I don't care how it gets done but I want the wolf off the property. Major Lewis, the owner of the dogs called Major Lewis yesterday and talked with him and said he would like to meet with us in a kind of mediation setting at the Sheriff's Office to talk about restitution for our animal. And I let Major Lewis know this morning I can't even talk restitution until I get the animal off of the property, that's my main concern so I can't even go there with mediation with this man. My goal, my concern is getting the animal off of the property and I would assume, all of those neighbors around Weber School, that would be their goal too. I can let you know that I have time and energy and would be very active in this. And that's my expectation of you as a Board that you will, I know there's not an exotic pet law and I know there's nothing because he hasn't bitten a human as the Public Health told me, the animal has to bite a human before they can be carted off. I'm not asking for the dog to be put to sleep or dead, I'm asking for the dog to get out of Johnson County. And I'm asking you to do that. And I know it's going to be difficult because you don't have a law to allow you to do that but I'm asking you to find someway to get the animal off because he's not cooperating.

Jordahl: OK.

Thompson: Can I ask a question?

Tim Madsen: Yes.

Thompson: How far is your house from the place where the wolf was kenneled.

Angie Madsen: Half-a-mile.

Thompson: So that's how far they go?

Angie Madsen: Just right down the road. Yes but the wolf's been spotted. There's calls to the Sheriff's Department. The wolf's been all over the area by the different folks who've called and so forth.

Tim Madsen: And wolves travel. And just a quarter of a mile from our house is another housing, a whole group of homes on Rohret Road.

Stutsman: Is he supposed to be confined or tied up or is he just given free reign of this property?

Tim Madsen: He's supposed to be confined.

Angie Madsen: In a pen.

Tim Madsen: But a wolf is big and powerful and they...

Angie Madsen: They will find a way to get out of cage. The information I'm reading off the internet, which is really pro-wolf, a lot of pro-wolf stuff, but the information I'm receiving and then also from animal rights activists is they're not meant to be confined and they're going to find a way. Usually they tunnel out underneath the fences is what happens. This guy is claiming that somebody's opening up the gate and letting the wolf out.

Jordahl: I wouldn't do that.

Angie Madsen: Whose going to do that first of all? But second of all if you lived on the property perhaps you would know that your wolf is out rather than just kenneling your property there. When I was in at the Board of Supervisors office yesterday R.J. Moore was in and had said I'll check into it and see if he's kenneling without a permit or something so I don't know how that's come.

Jordahl: R.J.'s right behind you.

Moore: That didn't come out very well. Rick and I looked and according to our definition of kenneling we don't think we could apply that as a kennel and make the person come through a process here for your approval to do that. There's nothing that prevents somebody from having property and keeping their own animals on it. Kenneling involves boarding other animals and training that's just not the...

Lehman: How about raising for resale? Is that something that enters into this, for raising?

Moore: Not for just 2 animals. It depends on how you interpret our definitions. Rick and I both felt that we couldn't apply our zoning ordinance to it.

Dvorak: We could defer to Pat if we were misinterpreting it but I...

Stutsman: Well I guess I would like to hear Pat's comments about the whole exotic animal.

County Attorney Pat White: I don't have anything. These are the first facts I've heard. We don't an exotic animal ordinance. The Board has considered it at least a couple of times over the last 10 or 15 years and decided not to do it. Whether there's anything that could be done in this particular case would just be premature for me to comment on.

Tim Madsen: I can certainly say that the male wolf that's there. Well before you've never seen a whole lot of them, but this wolf, he is very agitated now. He's howling. You can hear him from our house. He was howling last night. You can see him pacing back and around the cage because the females hasn't come back.

Angie Madsen: He's upset. The male that's left is extremely upset.

Tim Madsen: Yes.

Angie Madsen: I'm concerned that maybe he might get more aggressive. But I just want the wolf off the property, that's what it comes down to. It was a horrendous site to have to come up and see our pet and I don't want a kid to get hurt before any action is taken. If the owner of the wolves would just do the right thing and remove the wolf, we're OK.

Tim Madsen: I don't think my daughter. My 9 year old daughter should want to hold my hand just to go outside to walk to the car. She should not have to feel that way. And who knows how long this going to last. It's just so traumatic.

Angie Madsen: And numerous parents who have called me last night and this morning from the Weber district have mentioned that they're not having their kids walk to school. That's a shame that that has happened. And I am not an inflammatory person at all, by any means but when I approached Dr. Berger, the principal at Weber about this information she said this absolutely needs to go out to the block parents. I questioned that and she said it was the right thing to do, better safe than sorry. I also thought about doing the leaflets on the doors but again, I didn't want to upset kids or make the situation appear worse than what it is. I want them to be very realistic about what we're facing here.

Thompson: I noticed Duane Lewis is here. Maybe we could here from him. You have a paper there. I assume that's a report.

Sheriff's Department Captain Duane Lewis: Well it's just the incident to report. That it happened in the first place. And I came basically because I talked to the Madsens and said that I would be here if there were any questions from the Board, from our perspective, from our involvement in this particular situation.

Jordahl: I think the involvement with the wolf that is already dead is probably, I don't think we need to explore that any further right now. I think the question they're asking is do we have a policy, a way of acting with regard to the remaining wolf. Short of any action the Board might decide to take on Thursday.

Lewis: Well like Pat had indicated before that different boards, I know that in the last years it's been researched before as far as they want to. They want to get into researching some kind of an ordinance actually separate from this incident here. The only thing that I can add is that when Mr. Gray came in yesterday he indicated he wouldn't be comfortable. I ended up talking to Mrs. Madsen at that time so I didn't know that the timeframe was an issue and I'm trying to get the 2 of them together on that so I can't speak any further because I haven't been able to contact him this morning. But if that is our main issue and if I can believe him, I think I could probably facilitate that. I can't speak any further than that. But I had that response from him that he would accept responsibility and would like to facilitate taking care of that. But he was actively, and is actively in moving the wolf. I think probably some additional pressure could be put as to, as far as the timeframe but I (inaudible) repeat what he said at this point and then try to follow up on that.

Jordahl: OK. Thank-you.

Tim Madsen: I guess just to add one thing. As I look back on the numerous time he's been out over the years the records speak for themselves, and earlier the week before. I'm really going to question that sincerity. I'd say if he set a timeline. If he'd come to you today and said I guarantee you in 2 weeks that will be gone I'd accept that, but I don't think he'll do that.

Angie Madsen: And 2 weeks isn't good enough for me. I have an athlete, my daughter's an athlete in high school. She uses our quarter mile lane as a tool for running and so forth. I should not keep my kids inside. I'm not satisfied with 2 weeks before that wolf is out of there. My kids need to play outside. I need to do my own walking on Rohret Road so I'm not satisfied with 2 weeks if he would even be opined down to 2 weeks which it didn't sound like he would to me. I do think with pressure, I think with pressure and with an expectation from the Sheriff's Department, from the Board of Supervisors that you have 2 days to get this animal off the property, guess what? Friends magically appear to take the animal. He could take their animal back to his trailer in Shellsburg today. There's nothing preventing. There's no ordinance in Benton County or the town of Shellsburg preventing him from taking that dog. That dog can go in his living room. There are options for him. He's not going to do it until he's pushed.

Lewis: He has not been pushed from my perspective. I don't know what your conversation was. He was agreeable, whether it was sincere it or not I can't speak to that. But he was agreeable when I talked to him. We didn't set a timeline because I didn't now a timeline was what our main issue was. So I'd be glad to follow that up and see if we can get some kind of agreement going. We've had one previous complaint that we have on record and that was a week ago with the wolf being loose. And he responded to me by putting the wolf back in. But we have had previous calls on whether they should be there, whether they're properly cared for. (inaudible) the organization animal.

Lehman: Humane?

Lewis: Humane society had been active several times and I think contacted him but at that point they were being take care of, they weren't being abused. (Inaudible) I'd be glad to follow-up and try to facilitate some kind of a meeting. But I can't speak for him because I have nothing to force that issue on.

Tim Madsen: Yes. And I'd go back to, and I don't mean to be rude or anything by any means, and I know where you say his conversation was agreeable, and I know when he called down to the Johnson County's Sheriff I think there's important information. We had a 4:30 birthday party for my daughter that afternoon at my aunt's house. My wife had talked to him the first time on the phone and then again at 10:00, he proceeded to call Sergeant Slaughter and say that my wife was harassing him and he called 8 times. Now that is not true. The phone record will speak for itself. Shellsburg is long distance. She called him twice. It would be on record. So here, he went from being, sure Mr. Nice is going to do whatever you want to hear to get by today but then he turned the second time and lied so there could be a pattern there.

Angie Madsen: I have to question his honesty and sincerity.

Tim Madsen: So there could be a pattern there. I just don't feel comfortable with going on here.

Angie Madsen: Yes, yes. And I won't be comfortable until the wolf is removed and that he is given a strict timeline. If you were going to facilitate a timeline with him I'd really be a part of the process because I don't feel a 2 week timeline is good enough. So I think you can facilitate something quicker than that.

Lewis: Well the only issue that I have to tell you so the Supervisors know is I have no charges against this man. Of course getting through anything. Now if I can facilitate this so we get that wolf out of the area, the issue may not be the difference between 6 hours and 2 days it may be that I get rid of the wolf. And I'll do the very best I can to do that to everybody's satisfaction. But at the same time I do not have hammer to say that he will do that within my 2 hour limit or I wouldn't (inaudible) so that has to be clear.

Jordahl: I think you're in the realm of persuasion.

Lewis: That's right. I'm trying to facilitate this to satisfy this instant for everybody and I'll do the best I can.

Angie Madsen: And I think there's going to be a lot of public pressure too within that. So the quicker the better is what it looks like.

Lewis: I can only do what I have to do with under law and I'll do the best I can with that persuasion.

Jordahl: Thank-you. All right we have this item on the agenda for Thursday and any discussion I think of whether we want to explore an exotic animal ordinance for Johnson County or take any particular action as a Board with regard this situation is going to have to wait until Thursday so perhaps as you peruse those contacts you keep the Board updated and we'll try to keep everybody informed about what's going on here. We'll see how the situation develops by Thursday. As Pat said, research was done in the past about exotic animal ordinances, they do exist elsewhere. So it remains a question as to whether this Board wants to look into doing that.

Angie Madsen: And we're not asking for an exotic animal ord, ord...

Tim Madsen: Ordinance.

Angie Madsen: I've said it too many times the last couple days. Because that could entail wolfs and (inaudible) whatever. That's not my issue at all. I have absolutely no interest in that issue. My issue is simply removing the wolf for the safety.

Jordahl: Yes, I understand.

Angie Madsen: I wanted to make that clear because people keep bringing that up to me. Well mentioning an exotic pet ordinance.

Tim Madsen: I just want to say I appreciate the Board hearing us so quickly and I do appreciate your time working on it too. Thank-you very much and thanks for hearing us out.

Jordahl: Real sorry for what experience you had with coming home and being confronted by a wolf on your driveway. I certainly wouldn't want to face that myself.

Angie Madsen: Thank-you.

Tim Madsen: Thank-you very much. Good day.

Stutsman: Thanks.

Jordahl: Yes Reverend Welsh?

Welsh: Is there anything else in the safety issue. At least I view this as a real question about safety.

Lehman: Public nuisance type thing or...

Welsh: What?

Lehman: I wonder if it would fall under a public nuisance type...

Jordahl: Kot seems to have a hand up. Kot Flora, Department of Health.

Disease Prevention Manager Kot Flora: I was wondering about our public health nuisance regulation. And I guess I think that maybe Pat needs to advise us as to whether that would be a political instance. It's a pretty broadly written regulation and I don't know, we would not apply it to a situation like this in the past but I think...

Jordahl: Pat?

Thompson: Well he's thinking about it.

White: I'd need to see it.

Thompson: By Thursday I bet he has an answer.

Jordahl: I'll bet he knows by Thursday, yes.

Thompson: Thank-you.

Jordahl: Well perhaps you 2 could confer about that between now and Thursday. And I certainly would be interested in seeing any information. I know that Rick has a file pertaining to this area of concern. Sally gave me something on it this morning. So at least I'll have some information for Thursday.

Flora: I have a concern about if we only were able to order the animal out of Johnson County where you order it to and then what happens after that. Without any sort of animal control in the county. Certainly this is a pretty extreme situation. It's scary, it's a bad situation. But long term we don't control the dogs in the county period. There's a development out there that you didn't probably (inaudible).

Stutsman: And can we order an animal out without an ordinance or a law?

Flora: Well that would be something that Kot would need to help us with the public health nuisance regulation.

Stutsman: Well then you always get in the issue, well then can somebody else... This is pretty cut and dried but then the neighbor's dog is barking, keeping me up at night, can I order that dog to be... There's a lot of issues. Like so many things we deal with it's just not black and white. This probably borders more on more clear cut but there's always other things you have to take into consideration when you start ordering animals out or whatever.

Flora: And if this wolf is still caged isn't the attack, isn't a dangerous situation because of the type of animal that it is. That's a question that I ask. I was sitting here listening.

Jordahl: Well we'll have to review your ordinance in that light. I'll trust we will be advised by Pat on how that may apply. Boy, I hope that your efforts bare fruit today.

Lewis: I'm optimistic. I may be (inaudible). And they were correct about, he went through a period of time when he was awful upset about shooting his wolf and he went through that with us also. But when I talked to him the next day he was back. He did accept responsibility and I have no reason to think that we can't the (inaudible) out there. I may be wrong though. I haven't dealt with the man before.

Jordahl: Well that's our first hope. I'm in another meeting Thursday and I look forward to hearing the results of your next conversation with him.

Duffy: Jonathan can I say something? Mary Christiansen is a hundred years old today and I sent something. And I would like to leave here about a quarter of 12:00...

Jordahl: Sure.

Duffy: ...and I can present that to her. Thanks Bob.

Stutsman: I think there's 3 Supervisors so you may have other commitments at noon.

Lewis: That's all then?

Jordahl: Yes, I think so Duane. Thank-you very much for being here. OK. We are under the other section to deal with that particular issue. Is there anyone else here with an item that they want to raise under other?

Jordahl: If not then we'll back up to voluntary annexations from the City of Tiffin. Rick and R.J. you wanted to say something about that?

Dvorak: Well obviously you're aware of it and you've had some concerns with some things that have been done by Coralville. And we wanted to make sure that the Board has been presented with that information. I did send a letter to the mayor of Tiffin about 3 weeks ago. I requested that he respond to the letter to either Jonathan and to Mike. I'm not sure they ever have. Our concern at that time was, and we discussed it briefly, was Tiffin is annexing north of Highway 6 to Forever Green Road including James Avenue and it's now south and east all the way to the interstate I believe it is.

Jordahl: To the center line of the interstate?

Dvorak: Right. And our main concern, obviously they have no plan for the area other than they would drain space, what they're telling us. The other concern is maintenance on that road and to the landowners on that road. My letter basically requested what service they did provide now? You've annexed it all, you've got tax dollar, now what are you going to buy for the people that live out there?

Jordahl: He's speaking about Jasper Avenue which is actually what my address is.

Dvorak: Right. (inaudible) And their response, verbally anyway, was that we'll just hire the county to make in those roads. Well there's never been any correspondence to that effect. I think we've had problems with Coralville annexation and I'm not sure how to resolve these issues without bringing them in front of you folks. With the way I understand annexation laws now about all they'd have to do is notify us, and in our fringe agreement that's cooperating.

Stutsman: Well then on a smaller level this has been an issue with Hills when we started talking about the quarry down there and that little bit of roadway that's not the County's responsibility. And yet Hills has come forward to say that they're going to maintain between the railroad tracks and I don't remember what, and the highway, that little section. And yet I think these cities annex but they don't always think through the responsibilities they just assume that somebody's going to maintain the roads or what not. And I guess I want them to know that there are responsibilities that go along with this annexation. That there are services that need to be provided. And I think they need to think through all of that before they just send these requests on to the State.

Dvorak: Well I'm just assuming that we will automatically continue to do the maintenance on the road. I don't think there's a fair assumption. That's why I wrote the letter requesting them to respond concerning (inaudible). A similar question came up in Coralville which I think you folks have been addressing. We wrote a letter for the Board to send to the City of Coralville. They had this pleasure basically because they annexed up to the road, up to the right of way, and that was it. And then that wasn't real bad at the time because we were of the opinion in one part of it, there were maybe 6 residential lots that we had plotted, and the County was nearly satisfied with that. Now they're in the process of rezoning that but they're not obligated to notify us of that, we've actually heard about that.

Jordahl: I think we're kind of off the agenda here.

Dvorak: OK I'm sorry. You're right. But I was referring to maybe some of the problems that are associated with annexation in Tiffin, which is another one. I have more information than anything else, and the fact that we have been trying to do some correspondence to resolve some of these questions.

Stutsman: Well the only positive thing is, hopefully at the legislature they will do some changes of the laws. If the City does annex, I know one of the things in that law is that they have to provide services within a certain length of time.

Dvorak: No. My understanding of voluntary annexation is wrong.

Stutsman: But I think they're changing the law. That's one of the proposals.

Jordahl: Yes the draft of the new law is impressive.

Dvorak: I'm sorry I didn't...

Stutsman: Yes, and that's what I was referring to. That that's one glimmer of hope so that we can get some of these things well thought through.

Dvorak: Well until then we are revisiting fringe area agreements. We're putting in fringe area agreements. And I would hope that through the fringe area agreements things like this would also produce (inaudible). But again I've got a (inaudible).

Stutsman: How many acres is this?

Dvorak: Jonathan? A hundred and...

Jordahl: Lots.

Dvorak: I don't know. There is a map outlining it. I think you have a copy of that.

Jordahl: It's...

Dvorak: 2 sections.

Jordahl: It's a 1,000 acres. Yes, I think.

Duffy: 1,000 acres?

Dvorak: Yes at least.

Stutsman: 1,000 acres?

Duffy: Holy cow.

Dvorak: No, no, no. It's 2 sections. Section 640 wasn't it? I'd say around that.

Stutsman: Well what do they plan to do for law enforcement?

Dvorak: Nothing. (Inaudible) they're not telling us they're providing any services right now.

Stutsman: Because if they annex then that means they do the zoning. So if they start putting in all kinds of housing developments out there.

Jordahl: Their intentions is their spoken intention to me is that they're kind of wanting a greenbelt buffer between themselves and Coralville. This is what I've been told. So I don't think they intend to do a lot of development at least in some area between them and Coralville.

Stutsman: But the potential is there to develop 1000 acres.

Moore: (Inaudible) a change in...

Jordahl: Oh well yes. Clearly they knew housing growth from Tiffin has been going out to the East in the same direction as this annexation.

Dvorak: What I think a lot of it is towns can't speak for towns. (Inaudible) towns are riding this land so the other towns don't get it.

Stutsman: Exactly.

Duffy: That's right.

Jordahl: Uh-huh.

Dvorak: That to me is not a really good planning process.

Jordahl: I was asked by a City Council person whether we were going to oppose that annexation at the City Development Board. That's not something that, in my memory or understanding, the Board of Supervisors has been active in doing.

White: But that's your opportunity.

Jordahl: Right.

White: It doesn't do you any good to complain after the fact. That's why you get notices of those pending annexations. I've been arguing for 5 years that were not paying much attention to the annexations. Every one that comes through, you get a notice of and you've got an opportunity to screen it, to react to it. If there's anything in it that you disagree with, to take a position before the City Development Board and you will be heard there. You also, with Tiffin, negotiated a Fringe Area Agreement and to whatever extent annexation was an issue that we had a concern about, that was an opportunity for us to tell Tiffin that we wanted a larger role and we didn't do it. It's not really fair to jump down their throat when we've got at least 2 vehicles for raising these questions that we've passed up. Now that's not to say that a specific annexation that's pending shouldn't still be critiqued but the time to do it is when we get the notice. You ought to look at it. Your planning staff ought to look at it. Your Engineer ought to look at it and if you have any concerns, we ought to dial them up and tell them and take a position before the City Development Board before it gets approved.

Stutsman: Whose the City Development Board? Is that in Des Moines?

White: Yes, it's a State agency that has to review the annexations. When the application is filed, then they send us a notice. You actually get a notice of every single proposed annexation in Johnson County. You do that because the State law envisions that you may have some opinion that you want to express about it before it gets done.

Stutsman: I guess I would agree with Pat. We just need to be much more proactive about these in a constructive way. I'm not there to stop every annexation but I think we need to tell Cities that there are responsibilities with annexation. That has to be spelled out at the beginning so there are no problems later on, as we're experiencing with Coralville.

Dvorak: I concur with exactly what Pat said. We did make inquiries to find out more specifics. Tiffin, again, and I had no problem with Tiffin annexation, it was in our Fringe Area Agreement that that would be an area they would be annexing in the future. The only reason I got balled is I just wanted to find out, for the Board and I was kind of the voice that was being used, whose going to maintain (Inaudible) Avenue. Question... not beating them up or anything. I agree that that's a good area for them to annex. It's their growth area. Coralville is a little bit different in that when that came through that was a 6 lot residential subdivision. Mike Gardner issued the driveway permit based on that. Now it's annexed. Now they're coming back and rezoning it. I don't have... nothing I know we can do about zoning. The annexation was fine.

White: Yes, but again, we negotiated a Fringe Area Agreement. If we wanted a voice in their zonings, that was an opportunity for us to say so.

Dvorak: Yes, and the zoning that they are using is acceptable zoning. It's a residential zoning class. The only thing is in... their residential allows, the same as ours, churches. Yes, we do have a right to voice that. I think we were.

Stutsman: Can we set in a process now so that we can carefully evaluate these and if there's some concerns that we go through the proper channels to address those?

Dvorak: Yes, again, the Fringe Area Agreement is a tool. I gave Pat a copy of that 2 weeks ago and it's coming before the Zoning Commission Monday night for Coralville.

Stutsman: I guess these annexations, and just like we're doing today, putting them on the agenda, because we get so much stuff that comes up here. I know...

White: That was the other thing I was going to say. This like so much else that comes across your desk is a question of priorities. Rick and R.J. have heard me time after time after time say we're taking on too much. They're spread too thin. At the point at which quality in some area suffers because you're spread too thin, I really think you need to assess how much you're doing. If reviewing these proposed annexations is a higher priority than it has been, they need to be told that and you need to have some discussion with them about what gets given a lower priority, what doesn't get done that they're now working on to elevate the time that it would take to screen all of these annexations. I think one of the things that is clear, and I have said this for a year now, actually I've now said I really underestimated what even I thought was going to happen. Coral Ridge Mall has set off a veritable prairie fire of development issues. It's driving land costs. It's driving developments There's going to be a lot of zoning and annexation going on in that area over the next 2, 3, 4 years that's going to be very critical. If we want to have a voice in it, we just need to find the time to do it. One other thing, while I'm talking, I think people too readily assume that the best annexation answer is to the center of the road. I keep arguing some times it is, some times it's not. You really have to look at each situation to decide what would be best. An example would be Mormon Trek south of Highway 6, where part of it's in Iowa City, part of it's in Coralville. A classic case was we had a County bus go into a skid on the ice on one side of the road, collide with a vehicle on the other side of the road and we end up with all 3 entities in litigation because the ownership of that right of way is divided. So there will be some times when maybe it makes more sense to leave the right of way... The annexation not to the center of the road, but to keep one jurisdiction with road authority. But again, that's something you really look at case by case, rather than automatically assume that the center of the road is what you want every time. Some times it will be and some times it won't be. Conventional wisdom for wanting the center of the road is if the City is going to get the taxes from what adjoins it, you ought to make them share in the maintenance responsibility. Some times maybe the best solution would be to go all the way across the right of way so that they truly have all of it, instead of then having to negotiate a maintenance agreement for a road that's in 2 jurisdictions.

Jordahl: Uh-huh.

Thompson: Could I ask a question? Where are we with this annexation now? It says it was submitted on February 17th. Have we been notified that it was submitted by that official body that Pat was talking about?

Jordahl: Yes.

Dvorak: Yes, we have had probably 10 annexations in the last 2 months. It's hard to remember specifics.

White: Yes I would say...

Thompson: Are we passed the deadline for making comments?

White: That would be a good illustration of the potential work load on the pace that things are happening now between North Liberty, Coralville and Tiffin. To do those carefully, you're talking about maybe a half a day's staff time per application, to double check the legal description, literally foot by foot, road by road. It's a big project. It'd be different in a location where you see one every 3 or 4 months.

Dvorak: That's what it used to be.

White: Yes.

Dvorak: One thing I do, and I would probably recommend to the Board when we come up with these Fringe Area Agreements that there was one thing to add to them. It hasn't been done very often but in Iowa City's Fringe Area Agreement, they send a representative to you to discuss the annexations. That, I think, is a very good vehicle to get the doors open so we can... as you said, we may miss one because we look at the plans and some squares is all it is. It doesn't tell us a whole lot. It doesn't show (inaudible). One thing that we could do, if you agree, is amend those agreements or put in any agreements that they come to you and tell you what they want to do and set up some type of other language about the rezoning of the lands with that.

White: That could even be done informally without necessarily waiting for the Fringe Area Agreements to be amended. When you get one of these notices, you could put it on your agenda, designate Rick or Mike to be the lead person, make contact with the City proposing the annexation, and invite them to come to a meeting to explain what their doing so you get some public hearing of this. Again, that's going to be consumptive of staff time.

Thompson: What's the time frame? Would we have time to do all of that?

White: Oh yes. Yes.

Thompson: My question was are we passed the time frame for this one? Can we still make comments?

Dvorak: The Coralville one or the Tiffin one?

Thompson: No, the Tiffin one.

Dvorak: I would have to research or review that. I think it's still in the process. I think...

Thompson: So we could still write a letter?

Dvorak: What's that?

Thompson: We could still write a letter to... what's the review board?

White: City Development Group.

Thompson: ...City Development Board and raise these questions?

Dvorak: (Inaudible). I can get them to send a representative here too. Mike Singer is authorized to speak here.

Stutsman: I think we should. I think this involves enough acres that I think it's entirely appropriate to have them come in and tell us what their plans are, what they're going to be doing and share our concerns. I think it's a good time to start the process.

Thompson: I agree.

Jordahl: Yes, I like the idea very much.

Dvorak: Well it's working well with Iowa City. They're the only ones that we... An example, with Iowa City too, I don't know if you were aware of this, but they had a volunteer annexation around Dane Road going down...

Stutsman: Uh-huh.

Dvorak: Well I sent them a letter right when we were notified and they sent us a letter back saying oops. We just jumped too fast. We're not ready to do this annexation because R.J. and I had a bunch of questions that they couldn't answer. So they basically backed off that annexation. We have tried to keep on track with some of these but the numbers are getting overwhelming actually.

Stutsman: Well can we put this on for next Tuesday, to have them come in and just fill us in?

Dvorak: If you want... Let me check and see what the status is first.

Stutsman: OK.

Jordahl: Regarding Carol's question on the time frame, it might be that it would be better to have them in on Thursday if that would be time enough for Mike to arrange his schedule to be here.

Dvorak: I don't know if we can get on the agenda yet. By the time I get in touch with the City, the Mayor and Mike Singer, (inaudible) the agenda. Do you need to know today? Noon?

White: They could give you a little slack today.

Peters: That would be nice but hey, we can...

White: You could put in on regardless.

Gardner: You can put it on at the (inaudible).

Stutsman: Oh yes, that's right.

White: You could report to the Board what the status is and if Mike isn't able to be here, you could do a follow up.

Gardner: Is your agenda pretty heavy? (Inaudible). Thank you.

Jordahl: OK. Well...

Stutsman: Thank you.

(Continued in Part 4)