Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-04-10 Council minutes JOINT MEETING JOHNSON COUNTY SUPERVISORS IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT CITY OF IOWA CITY CITY OF CORALVILLE CITY OF NORTH LIBERTY WEDNESDAY, APRIL 10, 2002 HARVAT HALL, IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER, IOWA CITY Government bodies were represented by the following: City of Coralville: Herwig, Jacoby, Fausett, Gill City of North Liberty: Soukup, Dorst, Mekota, Bahl City of Iowa City: O'Donnell, Champion, Lehman, Wilburn, Kanner, Vanderhoef Johnson Co. Board of Supervisors: Stutsman, Thompson, Harney, Neuzil, Lehman Iowa City School Board: Goodlaxson, Left, Franker, Reece Tape-recorded: 02-37, Both sides Mayor Lehman called the meeting to order at 4:06PM. Mayor Lehman began by congratulating the Mayor Mekota on passing the recent bond issue by a large margin. MUNICIPAL POWER STUDY (IOWA CITY) Council Member Wilburn, of Iowa City, produced a list of presentations by interested parties (MidAmerica, local citizens, etc.) that have been made before the Iowa City Council. In two weeks, the Council will discuss exploring the possibility of a municipal utility for the community. If pursued, Iowa City would be interested in working with other communities and governmental bodies on integrating them. As a point of information, an exploratory study is going to get underway to see of there would be any potential savings for the community in terms of electricity and power, if this reute were taken. Jacoby asked how much the study would be. It depends on how extensive it is. This has not been discusses by the Iowa City Council yet. Mayor Lehman said that it is likely that a preliminary study would be undertaken to see if an in-depth study was warranted, and said ConsuItant Bob Latham reported back in September of 2001 that an in depth study could run as much as half a million dollars and take three years. Mayor Lehman noted the City of Sheldon spent approximately $420,000 on their study. Kanner said that the figures are closer to $20,000 to $75,000 and that the costs mentioned by the Mayor included litigation. There are a number of communities around the state that are looking at this option at this time. Since this is the case, it would be nice to economize on a study by pooling resources since community issues are very similar throughout Iowa. However, there are always unique situations that must be provided for. If any of the bodies present are interested in hearing a presentation on municipal power and its potential benefits, or are interested in participating in a preliminary study, please contact the Iowa City Manager's Office. In addition, pertinent minutes from past meetings and work sessions of the Iowa City Council can be found on the web. County Supervisor Stutsman asked if there was a role for the county in municipal power or was it only for incorporated areas. Wilburn said that if the City ended up buying power wholesale, they would have to look into whether the County had any contractual agreements with MidAmerica for power on site. For further information, interested parties should contact MidAmerica. Council Member Gill asked if this was being done through MidAmerica solely since Joint Meeting Minutes April 10, 2002 Page 2 half of Coralville is MidAmerica and half is REC. Council Member Champion said that it does not matter who your utility provider is. Council Member Dorst said that he would see that the matter gets on the agenda for the next JC meeting. Council Member Kanner distributed background information on what Wilburn had been speaking about. Mayor Lehman said that the whole matter is very complicated, but worthwhile to look into. Iowa City will keep its fellow communities apprised of the situation. BOUNDARIES/EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES (SCHOOL DISTRICT) School Board Member Franker began the discussion by saying that there was a report last night of a facility study that addressed the intermediate and long-term possibilities at the three high schools, City, West, and the Senior High Alternative Center. This report disseminated two kinds of information. The first was a kind of preliminary phase fix-up of safety, accessibility, immediate space needs (particularly at West and City). Unfortunately, the number was a bit higher than the earliest estimates, but Superintendent Plugge and Assistant Superintendent Palmer had suggested early on that seven and three million dollar estimates for City and West, respectively, were probably going to be a little on the Iow side. So the number that came in was $16 million rather than $10 million, so this needs to be looked at. This would drive the initial package up to about $37 or $38 million dollars. School Board Member Franker said that it is important not to lose sight of the pressing needs at the elementary and junior high levels throughout the district. Immediate needs should be taken care of before more "dream-house" notions. The Alternative High School committee has suggested with respect to costs, a go-slow incremental type of expansion is favorable. The program will be gradually expanded at the current location, which is consistent with what the committee has recommended (estimated cost at $3.5 million to $4.5 million---renovation costs are similar to cost for a new building). In terms of funding, four years ago, the State Legislature introduced a local option sales tax (of all the counties, only Linn and Johnson don't have it for schools). It is introduced inequity within the state and has pitted communities against one another at the K-12 level. Currently 26 counties have the local option sales tax in place. Last week, a little over twelve school districts flied a lawsuit to challenge the legality of the local option sales tax for schools, facilities, and infrastructure. They have not suggested that they will try to recoup funds that have already been distributed, but they reserve the right to do that (the suit is worded so that it would sunset in ten years). In this environment, participation in what has become an inequity issue and would invite litigation were we to go down that road right now. One possible way to look at this would be to see what the state does in the next twelve months. The possibility of a third large traditional high school must be considered, as well. Local legislators are in favor of an equitable statewide sales tax. Overall, things are in good shape. Plans have been made for the next two years and things are close to getting ready to go. School Board Member Goodlaxson said that there are different aspects to this package. Last night, the Iowa City School Board received information from a facility study aspect of what is required in the district at the secondary level and the package estimates ranged from $35 million dollars to $74 million dollars (for a junior high, new elementary, additions to six different elementaries, and work at the senior high level) in one night. However, some of these numbers are going to change again as the Board moves forward, though the mid to high thirties seems a happy medium. Joint Meeting Minutes April 10, 2002 Page 3 The Board feels very comfortable with the plan in place for the secondary level. At the senior high ~evel, however, questions arise. The Board will meet next week (April 16) to discuss senior high level plans, how to handle funding, etc. It is currently unknown what will be done with the Board's central administrative offices. PROPOSED FUNDING FOR SCHOOL CAPITAL PROJECTS---SALES TAX/BONDING (IOWA CITY) Since the issue was a~luded to briefly, Mayor Lehman asked to address the fourth item on the agenda out of order. Mayor Lehman said that there has at least been some discussion among the Board members about this topic. School Board Member Goodlaxson added that it is a very decisive issue. He commented that his sources are split, but a few more have said that they would oppose the sales tax and only one has said that they would oppose a bond issue. Other than that, the Board is still not certain what direction to go either. The unanimous feeling is that the community must move forward with this. The difference between bonding and a sales tax would affect the time frame (there are time constraints on a bond). The projects cannot be put off because the Board is already behind in improvements. If nothing is done, it is estimated that at least ten to twelve temporaries would be needed at West High alone, just to make do (seven temporaries are already in place there). In August of 2001, the School Board went on record as being philosophically opposed to the sales tax. However, they would be more supportive of an equitably distributed statewide tax (the inequity was the issue that caused concern). In addition, they issued a statement of support for the group that is involved in the lawsuits. School Board Member Left spoke in favor of the local option sales tax because she said it gives the community the flexibility to change things in the next ten years as they see them happening. She made it clear that the School Board is not asking for luxury items; the money will be spent on gross necessities. The renovation budget could be pared down and put into a bond issue, but then the process would have to be repeated in another few years. School Board Member Franker disagreed on this last point, but added that it would all be part of the discussion at the April 16 School Board meeting. JAIL UPDATE (COUNTY) County Supervisor Thompson spoke regarding this issue. She began by saying that there is good news and bad news. The good news is that community leaders granted the Board of Supervisors request for help on increasing intakes at the jail. This led to a 7.2% decrease in the number of in-coming inmates in the years 2000 to 2001. It is unclear how exactly this was accomplished. Perhaps, the decrease is due to officers making decisions on the street or publicity about the drinking laws, etc. Whatever the cause, it has made things much more orderly and smooth at the jail. In addition, space was created for intakes waiting to be assigned a cell. The bad news is that because of classification, the jail is still very tight in the maximum-security cells. By classification, Thompson explained, she means that you can't put men and women in the same cell, people with communicable diseases or are sexual predators in cells by themselves, etc. All of the cells are two-person cells, so anyone who has to be alone takes up two beds. Also, the smallest sub-block, which is for eight persons, has only one female resident, taking up all eight beds. Fortunately, inmates who need isolation can sometimes be sent to Linn County because they have some single ceils. However, it is important not to get into the situation where Johnson is sending Linn all of their difficult cases. Currently, Johnson County sends about twenty to thirty prisoners a month to Linn County Jail. If Linn becomes full for some reason, it is unclear where Johnson would take their excess inmates. Still, it is important to keep Joint Meeting Minutes April 10, 2002 Page 4 in mind that this situation, though it has worked well so far, is only a short-term band-aid, not a permanent fix. For the fiscal year 2002, approximately $400,000 is budgeted for prisoner transfer. Another $400,000 is expected for the following fiscal year. In comparison to a bond issue for a new jail, this budget is less expensive the first year, but then increases, ultimately intersecting with the costs of a new jail. This estimate takes into account projected population growth, among other factors. Therefore, the upshot, County Supervisor Thompson said, is that ten years out, Johnson County will be paying a huge bill, but will have no new building to show for it. There is no real possibility of adding a minimum-security wing or isolation cells (one double cell has been re-modeled into an isolation cell) to the present jail because of space issues. The current structure is not designed to build upward and the BOS cannot get land from the University to build in any direction. Another problem is that once re-modeling begins, the jail may lose double bunking, which was grandfathered in. This means that the jail would have to double in size to even get equal to where it is now. There has been some discussion on how to broach this issue with the public. County Supervisor Thompson assured the members that they will not be approaching a public policy group, but rather will be figuring it out on their own. COUNCIL TIME County Supervisor Thompson raised the issue of construction of #965 and asked whether anyone had this in his or her 5-year horizon. There currently are no solid plans to move forward with this. She suggested that all communities add this for next year. Mayor Lehman commented that it is probably in the plan for unfunded years for everybody, but there is no funding set aside for 965 at this point. He added that, at least in the case of Iowa City, it depends largely on whether or not they are able to get federal funding on the bridge. County Supervisor Neuzil remarked that it is a bit of a catch-22 situation; the federal government says that it must be in the 5-year road plan before they even consider it, but all the communities are waiting until after the bridge to consider the issue. It must be identified in the state's list before it can be deliberated on. Mayor Fausett took the opportunity to clarify the situation surrounding the auditing of the City of Coralville. The City was audited by the State Auditor following allegations that it had engaged in inappropriate debt spending. The City has since heard back that these allegations were false and Coralville complies with the law. SCHEDULE MEETING It was agreed that the City of North Liberty would host the next meeting on Wednesday, June 19, at 4:00PM. Mayor Lehman adjourned the meeting at 5:53PM. Submitted by City of Iowa City. clerldr~nlpo~rstudyjointmtg04-10-02.doc