Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRPB_Minutes_October 28, 2020 ApprovedMINUTES APPROVED MPOJC RURAL POLICY BOARD WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2020 – 5:00 PM ZOOM MEETING PLATFORM MEMBERS PRESENT: Hills: Tim Kemp Johnson County: Pat Heiden, Lisa Green-Douglass Shueyville: Micky Coonfare Swisher: Christopher Taylor Lone Tree: Joanne Havel OTHERS PRESENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Kent Ralston, Brad Neumann, Frank Waisath. 1. CALL TO ORDER The remote meeting (pursuant to Iowa Code Section 21.8) was called to order at 5:04 PM by Kemp. a. Recognize alternates No alternates b. Consider approval of meeting minutes Heiden moved for approval, Taylor seconded. The motion carried unanimously. 2. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None 3. DISCUSS AND CONSIDER APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO THE ADOPTED MPO BYLAWS Review of amendments to the current MPO bylaws regarding Johnson County representation on the East Central Iowa Council of Governments Policy Board Ralston began the meeting by explaining that the adopted MPOJC bylaws must be reviewed every 5 years at a minimum, by a committee of five representatives, one of which must belong to the Rural Policy Board. Amendments to the bylaws must be approved by a 2/3 majority vote by the Urban Policy Board and by simple majority vote by the Rural Policy Board. The following members who were appointed to sit on the bylaws committee were as follows: Terry Donahue (North Liberty), Louise From (University Heights), Meghann Foster (Coralville), Pat Heiden (Johnson County Board of Supervisors), and Christopher Taylor (Swisher). The Rural Policy Board was asked to consider (4) recommendations from the committee: The Johnson County Board of Supervisors should appoint a citizen representative to the ECICOG Board with no term limit In this scenario, Ralston explained that the Johnson County Board of Supervisors would appoint the citizen representative to the ECICOG Board with no term limit using a strategic appointment that prioritizes individuals with knowledge of local government practices, social issues, or otherwise. Ralston mentioned that the current citizen representative (Randy Laubscher) felt ineffective at times, due to his unfamiliarity with the processes of local government and ECICOG practices. Taylor asked how citizen representatives were vetted and how the position was advertised. Ralston replied that advertisements are distributed through local media, and that the number of candidates varies. The Urbanized Area Policy Board is then given these applications, and they are chosen based on their qualifications. Ralston continued, explaining that by using a strategic approach the candidate would have some awareness of pertinent issues that relate to Johnson County. Kemp asked if changes to the bylaws happened every five years or if they could happen at any time. Ralston clarified that changes could be made at any time. Heiden moved for approval, Taylor seconded. The motion carried 5-1. Johnson County Board of Supervisors should have one permanent representative on the ECICOG Board with the remaining two appointments on rotation from the five urbanized area communities (Iowa City, Coralville, North Liberty, Tiffin, and University Heights). Rural communities would no longer be a part of this rotation. Ralston explained the current rotation for ECICOG representation. Currently, the two largest entities (Iowa City, Johnson County) rotate every other year. Coralville, North Liberty, and Solon rotate every third year. All other communities rotate, annually, every seven years. Ralston proposed that this current system doesn’t provide consistency with representation and that this may not provide the best representation for Johnson County as a whole. Coonfare expressed that she felt that small cities are being pushed out and don’t have as much of a say in decisions that are made, and that Johnson County does not make enough of an effort to include the rural communities when making decisions. Therefore, rural representation should remain on the ECICOG Board. Taylor agreed, referencing a situation in which the Johnson County Board of Supervisors previously moved forward with a plan without the presence of a small rural community (Swisher). Due to the absence of Swisher’s representative at the meeting, the plan was moved forward without their input. Taylor explained that he felt that though rural communities should be more involved and should participate, the solution was not to forgo membership on the ECICOG Board. Ralston suggested that representation once every seven years at ECICOG may result in ineffective representation. A Johnson County Supervisor speaking on behalf of the small communities every year could possibly result in better decision-making. Kemp voiced his concern over the ability of a Johnson County Supervisor to sustain effective representation of rural communities in the future. He explained the importance of keeping rural communities informed of any changes or decisions that are made by the Johnson County Board of Supervisors. Taylor explained that there’s not a dynamic in place that requires supervisors to report changes to the rural communities. Kemp moved for approval, Heiden seconded. The motion failed 6-0. Term limits for ECICOG Board appointees should be increased from one to two years. Ralston clarified that based on the previous vote, rural communities would be represented on the ECICOG board once every 14 years due to Johnson County being restricted to 3 representatives on the ECICOG Board every year, as representation is based on population. Ralston explained that he discussed this change with Karen Kurt (ECICOG Director), who agreed that increasing the term limits to two years was beneficial, but was concerned with the removal of the rural community rotation. Ralston suggested that having a permanent Johnson County Supervisor to represent rural communities may be more effective than one rural representative every 7 or 14 years. Ralston explained that this idea was brought to his attention by Rod Sullivan, who felt that he did not have a long enough term on the board in order to make effective decisions. Coonfare commented that she was on the ECICOG Board for one year and felt that she was ignored. Taylor asked whether it would be possible to send an alternate representative to ECICOG Board meetings if a community representative was not able to attend. Ralston clarified that under the bylaws, it is possible to send an alternate from another community or substitute an elected official to represent the rural community. Heiden moved for approval, Taylor seconded. The motion failed 6-0. Review of amendments to the current MPO bylaws regarding elimination of the Rural Policy Board. Ralston explained that the Rural Policy Board meets only once each year to approve the budget and receive updates. If dissolution was approved, the County would then absorb the assessments from small rural communities. The availability of MPOJC services for rural communities would not be affected. Taylor commented that he felt the Rural Policy Board was important, and that it showed that the smaller communities were being heard and able to voice their concerns. He also pointed out that rural communities have different needs and that if there is to be dependence on ECICOG for grant opportunities, there should subsequently be representation of rural communities on the ECICOG Board. Taylor also mentioned that the elimination of ‘rural communities’ votes would not result in effective representation. There should be question as to whether all the small cities feel represented on ECICOG, and what their opinions are concerning representation in the future. Taylor further expressed concern that the dissolution of the Rural Policy Board may make it difficult to reestablish the Board in the future. Ralston clarified that dissolution at this point would not affect the formation of a Rural Policy Board in the future, but agreed it could be difficult. Taylor also expressed concern for fair representation of rural communities if left to one Johnson County Supervisor. Kemp asked whether there were other options that did not involve dissolution. Ralston explained that dissolution is not necessary but expressed difficulty in securing a quorum for the Rural Policy Board meetings. Kemp asked if the changes would be taken to the Urbanized Area Policy Board if none of the motions were passed. Ralston clarified that a majority vote from the Rural Policy Board was required in order to bring any changes to the Urbanized Area Policy Board. Havel felt that the Rural Policy Board should not dissolve because she feels that she doesn’t have enough experience with the Board to decide either way. Kemp suggested discussions should be made to find options that increase Rural Policy Board effectiveness. Taylor drew attention to the fact that access to services of the MPO were appreciated even if the Rural Policy Board was dissolved. Kemp asked about the halting of the budget if dissolution was approved. Ralston explained that without a Board to approve a budget, it would not seem appropriate charging rural communities. No motion was made to approve. 4. OTHER BUSINESS None 5. ADJOURNMENT Coonfare moved to adjourn, Green-Douglass seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 6:02 PM.