[0:04] Good morning. Like to begin the regular

[0:07] session of the Blackhawk County Board of

[0:09] Supervisors this morning for October 13,

[0:11] 2026. Roll call, please. Miss Shaw

[0:13] Walker

[0:14] » Schwarz

[0:15] » Here.

[0:15] » Hall

[0:16] » Here.

[0:16] » Grant

[0:17] » Here.

[0:17] » Curtinbach

[0:18] » Here.

[0:18] » Leland

[0:19] » Here. Would everyone please join us for

[0:21] a moment of silence as we reflect on our

[0:23] actions this morning.

[0:38] Thank you. Please join us for the pledge

[0:39] of

[0:39] » Allegiance

[0:44] to the flag of the United States of

[0:47] America and to the republic for which it

[0:50] stands, one nation under God,

[0:53] indivisible, with liberty and justice

[0:55] for all.

[0:58] » [clears throat]

[1:01] » Item one, agenda received as proposed or

[1:03] as amended.

[1:03] » So moved. Second.

[1:05] » All in favor say I.

[1:07] » I.

[1:09] » Same sign. Agenda is received. Item two

[1:11] is public comments. Is there anyone in

[1:12] the audience today with public comments

[1:14] that would like to speak on something

[1:15] not on today's agenda?

[1:20] Anyone online?

[1:23] All right. We move on to item three,

[1:24] claims and payments. Resolution that the

[1:26] board of supervisors approve

[1:28] expenditures and that the county auditor

[1:29] be authorized and directed to issue

[1:31] payments against the various settlement

[1:32] of such claims as allowed.

[1:34] » So moved. Second.

[1:36] » Moved and seconded. Miss Wner. Good

[1:39] morning board. Our total bill payment

[1:41] today is $490,52.93.

[1:47] And from that the sheriff's 6040 fund we

[1:50] are paying $4,263.

[1:55] Other than that

[1:58] were a couple

[2:01] things I thought I would

[2:05] mention

[2:08] if I can find them. Oh, maybe that was

[2:10] last week. Yeah, I guess nothing

[2:11] significant today. So

[2:14] everything appears to be in order unless

[2:16] you have questions for me.

[2:18] » Michelle, looking at the bills for

[2:20] payment, I was looking at the payments

[2:22] for the fuel and diesel. Are we

[2:25] monitoring how much impact we're having

[2:27] compared to what we budgeted at this

[2:29] point? Any of those

[2:30] » We are and roads is definitely I'm sure

[2:33] Kathy can speak to you about that. Um

[2:36] expecting to that budget will be over

[2:39] spent this year compared to prior years.

[2:41] The prices are just up. So,

[2:44] » Okay. Thank you.

[2:47] » The resolution, please answer. Your name

[2:49] is called.

[2:49] » Brandon,

[2:50] » Yes.

[2:51] » Hall,

[2:51] » Yes.

[2:52] » Schwarz,

[2:53] » Yes.

[2:53] » Curtainbach,

[2:54] » Yes.

[2:54] » Leland,

[2:55] » Yes.

[2:56] » Item four, receive project updates from

[2:58] department heads and elected officials.

[3:02] » Good morning, board. Kathy Nicholas,

[3:03] engineer. Brief roads update. All mile

[3:07] rock is now placed throughout the

[3:08] county. Uh we are beginning to prepare

[3:11] uh the roads for colder weather. That

[3:12] means placing spot racking locations,

[3:14] just getting the profile reestablished

[3:17] for those uh colder winter months. Uh we

[3:20] have begun our ditch cleanout process

[3:22] around the county now. Uh we we've got a

[3:25] mostly full list, but if people are

[3:27] still in need of ditch cleanouts, they

[3:28] can certainly call the office and if we

[3:30] can't get to you this year, you can

[3:32] certainly be on our list for next year.

[3:35] uh Taylor Construction or project up on

[3:38] the wind on Winslow Road. Uh as you

[3:40] know, they are replacing that structure

[3:41] up there. They uh poured the the barrier

[3:45] last week uh late last week, the barrier

[3:48] rail. So they are nearing completion on

[3:50] the structure itself and of course they

[3:53] do have uh work to install the approach

[3:55] structures and then the final uh grading

[3:57] and paving and that type of thing. So

[3:59] it'll be a few more weeks yet before

[4:00] that road is reopened. And

[4:02] [clears throat] then lastly, we are

[4:03] taking a look at our architectural RFPs

[4:05] for our new shop facility and we'll be

[4:08] um making the decision on that hopefully

[4:10] in the next few weeks and we'll keep you

[4:12] um posted on the outcome of that. Can I

[4:15] answer any questions at this time?

[4:17] [clears throat]

[4:17] » How many RFPs? And you said you got some

[4:19] back then. Some proposals.

[4:20] » We did. We received six of them.

[4:23] » Thank you. Thanks very much.

[4:30] » Good morning board. Mike Henderson,

[4:31] director of county conservation. Just a

[4:33] couple of things. Um, first of all, uh,

[4:36] in a couple of weeks, our our first fall

[4:38] fundraiser under the harvest moon will

[4:40] take place on Friday, the October the

[4:41] 30th. We still have tickets available.

[4:43] We would love to see everybody there. We

[4:45] got great prizes, great auction items.

[4:47] Um, we've really put together a good

[4:48] show, I think. And um, but uh, got some

[4:52] tickets. We'd like to sell that thing

[4:53] out. And um, so keep that in mind. Pass

[4:56] that on to friends. Uh if you have

[4:58] trouble finding a way to buy tickets, um

[5:00] our staff is happy to help. Just call

[5:02] the office. We will get those tickets in

[5:04] your hand. I promise you. Um secondly,

[5:07] uh tomorrow at 10:00, um funding the

[5:10] trust. We're doing a presentation.

[5:12] Again, [snorts] this is uh this is

[5:14] county conservation uh coming together

[5:17] uh to act across the state. Um we are

[5:20] going to beat that drum really hard. Um,

[5:22] we've done it for a lot of years and um,

[5:25] we want it back uh, on the table down in

[5:27] De Moines and we want it passed and both

[5:30] governor candidates have said that if it

[5:32] gets to their desk they would sign it.

[5:33] It will change natural resources forever

[5:36] [snorts] in the state of Iowa. Um, the

[5:38] amount of money that that 38 of a cent

[5:40] will generate is uh, is quite large and

[5:44] um, we need it. We all know why. Um, I

[5:46] don't have to tell that story. We all

[5:48] know if we live in Iowa why we need

[5:49] that. And so tomorrow Dan Cohen will do

[5:52] that presentation. He is excellent. He

[5:54] was uh assigned by the governor to that

[5:56] committee in 2006 when that was even

[5:58] being considered and he has been with

[6:01] that that process all the way through.

[6:03] So he does a wonderful job of presenting

[6:06] and educating and [snorts]

[6:08] um we hope to fill that Rotary building.

[6:09] We sent out well over 300 invitations. I

[6:13] think every uh uh political candidate

[6:16] has been invited and uh we would

[6:18] certainly hope to fill that building.

[6:20] So, love to see all of you there at

[6:21] 10:00 tomorrow and um it'll be a great

[6:24] presentation. Any questions at all for

[6:26] conservation?

[6:28] » Thank you.

[6:28] » Thank you,

[6:33] board. Amanda Fazame, human resources

[6:35] director. Um I just wanted to note that

[6:37] I had sent the board and just asked if

[6:39] there's any questions about what I laid

[6:41] out for the VA. uh director uh

[6:43] recruitment and selection process. Um so

[6:46] I'd sent you last time when we did this

[6:48] in 2019, it was about a six to seven

[6:50] week process. Um and just reminding the

[6:52] board that uh the way the Iowa code

[6:55] works with this is that the commission

[6:56] recommends um the director

[6:59] [clears throat] candidate or appointment

[7:00] which then the board actually approves.

[7:02] Therefore, the board needs to approve um

[7:05] the uh requisition for us to actually

[7:07] begin the posting. I did meet with uh

[7:10] Yolando Loveless yesterday and um Henry

[7:12] Corp of the VA commission just to have

[7:14] some discussions about that. Um so they

[7:16] may be reaching out um if they haven't

[7:18] already had questions. But um do you

[7:20] have any questions for me on this

[7:22] process?

[7:23] » After your conversation with them, I

[7:24] guess were they hopeful that we [snorts]

[7:26] could get something on the agenda for

[7:27] next week, do you think? um some there's

[7:30] been some discussion about the job

[7:32] description with the commission about um

[7:35] a few things with like a VA

[7:36] administrator as well as a VA director.

[7:38] So, uh [clears throat] that's um kind of

[7:43] a discussion right now with the

[7:45] commission that may happen prior to it

[7:46] coming to the board. Um but that would

[7:48] be something that you all would want to

[7:50] be in tune with as well. So, it could go

[7:52] on next week if it has no revisions to

[7:55] the job description and remains as it is

[7:57] right now. Um otherwise it could get

[8:00] bumped out if there are permissions

[8:03] [snorts] which I think both commission

[8:04] [clears throat] and the board should be

[8:05] discussing.

[8:07] » Yeah. Well, keep in close touch with

[8:08] them I guess just to make sure they they

[8:10] could have maybe a special meeting or

[8:12] session I guess with their whole board

[8:14] if they needed to before then.

[8:15] » Well, that was a question came up at the

[8:17] board meeting last week. I don't know if

[8:18] Amanda know this in the last opening.

[8:20] Did we have an interim director? They

[8:23] chose someone.

[8:24] » Uh that's a great question. I don't

[8:25] believe we did. And at that time in

[8:27] 2019, we weren't really using the

[8:29] interim director a whole lot. We've used

[8:31] it a lot more in in other director

[8:33] roles. So, um I talked with a little bit

[8:36] with Yolando about that as an option as

[8:38] well too. Um and that typically it goes

[8:40] to a non-bargaining staff member because

[8:42] it's under the non-bargaining policy. Um

[8:45] and so if that was something that you

[8:47] wish to appoint an interim simply

[8:49] because there is just work that does

[8:51] continue um Yolando in the director

[8:54] being a VSO that veteran service officer

[8:56] that workload obviously still has to get

[8:58] done. Uh so you could uh explore having

[9:01] that um just to keep things moving and

[9:04] of course for the workload that those

[9:07] individuals are taking we do have the

[9:08] ability to put them into a temporary

[9:10] assignment. I do think non-bargaining

[9:11] though says it has to be more expected

[9:13] to last like 60 days. Um and this is a

[9:17] pretty short at least in our previous

[9:19] recruitment it was [snorts]

[9:21] uh we were able to replace um the

[9:23] position uh more quickly than say for

[9:25] example like our public health director

[9:27] which went [clears throat] on for nearly

[9:28] a year right and so Caitlyn at that time

[9:31] was interim um because it was a a longer

[9:34] standing vacancy that we had expected um

[9:36] because we'd been using that executive

[9:39] search committee that external search

[9:40] committee um so anyways uh that is an

[9:44] option but I believe The policy says

[9:46] it's expected that it would be for a

[9:48] period of 60 days or more. So,

[9:50] » Yeah, and I met with Yolando as well and

[9:53] talked with Henry um just to let

[9:54] everyone know too, but I I don't think

[9:56] there Yolanda was going to be thinking

[9:58] about that, but I think he thought the

[10:00] office would probably function very

[10:01] well, but with the assistance probably

[10:03] of some of the board members coming in

[10:05] to sign checks and approve things and

[10:06] that type of thing. So yeah, I guess we

[10:09] have a quick timeline, you know, would

[10:11] help too. But [snorts]

[10:12] » If it if we don't if the posting gets,

[10:14] you know, further out, then you would

[10:16] expect that's going to be a longer lead

[10:18] time where it would make sense to fall

[10:20] under to have that um appointment. But

[10:22] if it's going to, you know, happen in

[10:24] the next week or two, uh I would expect

[10:26] that we would be able to get the job

[10:28] posted. The last posting, as I shared

[10:30] with you, we had a 30-day posting, but

[10:32] we put a preference date of two weeks

[10:34] that met that veteran preference um

[10:36] requirement, and we did have plenty of

[10:38] candidates that were qualified and began

[10:40] that interview process with the search

[10:42] committee. Um the search committee, I

[10:44] didn't find any formal action um in a

[10:47] board meeting or minutes, but it

[10:49] essentially it's always been some kind

[10:51] of partnership between the board of

[10:52] supervisors, the VA commission as the VA

[10:55] recommends, the board approves, and then

[10:57] it's included HR. So, we're just

[10:58] recommending to continue that um

[11:01] process, but we could explore just HR

[11:04] and VA. Um, but I think it works well to

[11:07] have

[11:09] multiple.

[11:10] » It did. It did. When we hired Yolando,

[11:12] we thought it was a great process in

[11:13] place and it had the couple of the board

[11:15] members or their commissioners and then

[11:17] a board member and then HR involved. So,

[11:20] » Okay.

[11:21] » So, that's a lot of what we're focused

[11:23] on right now. Um, any other questions on

[11:26] uh that process?

[11:28] » No, I appreciate it.

[11:28] » Just [clears throat] just a quick one on

[11:30] the

[11:31] two week versus 30-day.

[11:34] Are we allowed under state code to just

[11:36] post it for 2 weeks or 15 days or does

[11:39] it have to be 30 and have that?

[11:42] » It has at a minimum it has to be 10

[11:44] days. Okay,

[11:44] » That's any position here at the county.

[11:46] We all are subject to veterans

[11:48] preference um law. So at a minimum any

[11:51] county position has to be posted uh for

[11:53] 10 days outside of course internal

[11:55] bidding. It's just whenever that vacancy

[11:57] comes if you post externally. So no you

[11:59] don't have to do 30 days. Okay.

[12:00] » You could just shorten it to the 10 days

[12:03] or two weeks.

[12:04] » Um

[12:05] » And yeah.

[12:06] » So

[12:07] » Um

[12:08] » I think and we've kept some open like

[12:09] until the positions filled depending on

[12:11] how many applicants you get. But I sure

[12:13] » Think we've all felt there might be some

[12:14] really excellent [snorts] applicants.

[12:16] Plenty of them like there were before.

[12:18] We'll see.

[12:21] » Big shoes to fill. We said everybody.

[12:23] » Yes.

[12:24] » Yeah. Thank you. Thanks so much.

[12:25] » We'll be just following up with both the

[12:27] board and the VA commission throughout

[12:29] the next, [snorts] you know, week just

[12:30] to kind of continue to move this along,

[12:31] but it does need to come before the

[12:33] board um to authorize the posting. So,

[12:35] if you have any questions for me outside

[12:36] of that, um feel free to reach out. Um

[12:38] otherwise, uh HR has been busy, uh we

[12:42] just finished up a coaching series with

[12:44] an executive coach, um out of Cedar

[12:46] Rapids. Her name's Jackie Paland. It was

[12:47] a really um excellent coaching series

[12:50] and we're recommending that for um other

[12:53] managers throughout the county and

[12:54] elected officials and department heads.

[12:56] So, we are planning to budget for that

[12:58] to have six coaches go through a very

[13:00] similar series. It's a more in-depth

[13:02] learning process when it comes to

[13:04] coaching um uh your workforce. And so,

[13:07] uh highly recommend that. And she's

[13:09] actually back here to work with the

[13:11] sheriff's office. She'll be presenting

[13:12] to their teams about healthy team

[13:15] members and what a healthy team looks

[13:16] like. and that will be at all three

[13:18] sessions of their training in November.

[13:20] Um so we you will see in our budget

[13:22] we're kind of burning through our

[13:24] training budget um with we had

[13:25] leadership university um and uh a few

[13:29] and again like this executive coaching

[13:30] series that the HR team did which is in

[13:32] place of the national conference. So we

[13:34] will not be attending a national

[13:36] conference um this year. So it was a

[13:38] little bit

[13:38] » We have one more session with TED as

[13:40] well in December do we not?

[13:42] » That's a great question. So yeah, so

[13:44] that's part of the um strategic planning

[13:46] kind of reviewing at that that there

[13:48] should I haven't confirmed yet a date

[13:51] but um bringing in those champions and

[13:53] the department heads ones and twos and

[13:55] the board um sometime in December to

[13:58] just kind of have a a session on

[14:02] strategic plan year one, what was

[14:04] accomplished and then of course we have

[14:05] the next priorities, right? and making

[14:07] [clears throat] sure that the champions

[14:08] are assigned for the next uh four items

[14:11] which um if you look at our plan I

[14:13] believe it's employee engagement work

[14:16] life balance is one strategic reserves

[14:19] is another uh there's one about the

[14:21] criminal [snorts] justice system and

[14:22] then I want to say there's one about

[14:23] revenue so yes [snorts] that would be

[14:26] what that December meeting would be uh

[14:28] would to just uh kind of realign and and

[14:31] set the next stage for those champions

[14:34] to do the same work that uh the first

[14:36] round of champions did um in arriving at

[14:39] plans.

[14:41] So,

[14:42] » I've been wondering about that as well

[14:44] coming up in December if that would be u

[14:47] a date where we should also look at

[14:49] maybe the new elected uh supervisors

[14:52] and currently meeting with Ted to

[14:56] continue that what we got started. Try

[14:59] and make sure they understand where

[15:00] we've been on this and moving it

[15:03] forward. Yeah, I maybe that one I don't

[15:05] know. But I was going to say that's one

[15:06] of the things after the election

[15:07] sometimes we've usually tried to do is

[15:09] include them or invite them to some of

[15:10] the sessions that we know would be

[15:11] helpful to them as well as some of the

[15:14] things that we do like the legislative

[15:15] priorities and that type of thing when

[15:17] we do it. So

[15:18] » I just don't want to lose what we the

[15:20] momentum we got going with this new

[15:22] strategic plan and all we've been doing

[15:24] with staff.

[15:25] » Uh I know we're going to have a big

[15:26] change over here, but I I don't want to

[15:28] lose that momentum that we've put in

[15:30] motion. I will uh I know Ted and I have

[15:33] talked about that as well. I think it

[15:34] makes sense to invite um and yeah that

[15:37] that we can have that after of course

[15:41] December be after the election and I

[15:43] think that would be an opportunity to

[15:45] help bridge that. Um but then of course

[15:47] there may come January, February, even

[15:50] just getting the uh other board members

[15:52] oriented with our strategic plan,

[15:54] there'll be probably a bit of a lift

[15:56] with that as well. Um but I think that's

[15:57] a good idea. And um I know we talked

[16:00] about kind of planning it that way. So

[16:04] um the other thing I just want to

[16:05] mention, we're our office [cough] has

[16:06] already received notification for

[16:07] collective bargaining um from our

[16:09] unions. We have wage reopeners um as you

[16:12] recall for um the last two years of the

[16:14] existing um contracts. And so, uh, I

[16:19] have been in talks with, uh, our

[16:21] attorney out of Allers and Cooney, Mike

[16:23] Galloway, and he just encouraged that I

[16:25] reach out to you all about, um, setting

[16:27] up a time to discuss that, and I will be

[16:29] probably putting that out as a close

[16:31] session for this board. But, of course,

[16:33] the same thing, thinking about, um, with

[16:35] the election that we'll have other board

[16:37] members. So, um, but I do plan to just

[16:39] talk with this board about that. So,

[16:41] just if there is a date that, um, does

[16:44] not work for all five of you, uh, please

[16:46] let me know. If there's something in um

[16:49] probably November that doesn't work,

[16:50] just let me know. But we'll be uh

[16:53] starting that process. So, any questions

[16:56] on collective bargaining? Just wage

[16:58] reopeners with the exception of the two

[17:00] public safety unions, they'll also have

[17:01] benefits open. So, but otherwise, all

[17:04] other contract language stays the same.

[17:11] » All right.

[17:12] » Thank you very much.

[17:13] » Thank you.

[17:14] » I have an update. Speaking of an

[17:16] election coming up, uh ballots are

[17:19] available tomorrow. So, if you have

[17:21] requested to have a ballot meal to you,

[17:23] those will be sent over to the post

[17:24] office tomorrow. It also means that

[17:27] voting here at the courthouse will also

[17:29] begin tomorrow. Um, and that will be

[17:31] down in the basement. For larger

[17:33] elections, we do that in the basement.

[17:35] Otherwise, I'm sure my colleagues on the

[17:39] second floor appreciate that we've moved

[17:40] that down to the basement since we take

[17:42] up the whole floor. So, we did that for

[17:44] the first time in 2024 and it worked

[17:46] really well. Um, because and I hope that

[17:51] this is the same for 26, but in 24 we

[17:53] were seeing 1,000 people a day, so it

[17:56] works really well to do that down in the

[17:57] basement. [clears throat]

[17:58] » We also have seven different satellite

[18:01] voting locations. All of that can be

[18:03] found on our website. Um, starting

[18:06] tomorrow, essentially, there would be a

[18:08] voting opportunity every day starting

[18:10] tomorrow with the exception of Sunday.

[18:12] uh leading up to election day. So, here

[18:15] we are.

[18:16] » For sure. I heard something on the news

[18:18] today, too. So, they're starting to get

[18:20] the word out, too, for you.

[18:22] » No wonder we can't use a conference room

[18:24] no more. [snorts]

[18:25] » Yeah, that'll be Yeah, it's off already.

[18:27] Clinics and everything else. So, yeah,

[18:29] just continue. Thank you.

[18:33] Anyone online that has an update?

[18:37] Great. Move on to item five. Minutes

[18:39] approved for the regular and the work

[18:40] session held on October 6, 2026.

[18:44] » So moved.

[18:45] » Second.

[18:46] » All in favor say I.

[18:47] » I.

[18:48] » I. [clears throat]

[18:50] » All same sign. Minutes are approved.

[18:52] Item six, the consent agenda. The

[18:54] following items are acted upon by a

[18:55] single resolution unless someone wishes

[18:57] to remove one for discussion.

[18:59] » So moved.

[19:00] » Second.

[19:01] » Resolution. Please answer. Your name is

[19:02] called.

[19:03] » Curtenbach.

[19:04] » Yes.

[19:05] » Hall.

[19:05] » Yes.

[19:06] » Schwarz.

[19:07] » Yes.

[19:07] » Grant.

[19:08] » Yes. Leland.

[19:09] » Yes. [clears throat]

[19:10] Item seven, agreements and contracts.

[19:12] This is a resolution that the agreement

[19:13] for purchase of temporary easement

[19:15] between Blackhawk County and the city of

[19:17] Cedar Falls, Iowa, granting a temporary

[19:19] construction easement at 2602 Union Road

[19:22] for the Union Road and West 27th Street

[19:25] intersection improvements project for

[19:27] the consideration of the sum of 0 to be

[19:30] approved and direct the chair to sign

[19:32] for same as recommended by Katherine

[19:33] Nicholas, county engineer.

[19:35] » So moved. Second. Uh good morning again

[19:38] board. I've told you in the past that

[19:40] the city of Sedar Falls would like to

[19:42] build construct a roundabout at this

[19:43] intersection. As you know we continue to

[19:47] the Blackhawk County continues to have a

[19:49] shop at that at that corner. Uh the city

[19:52] of Cedar Falls is asking us just for a

[19:54] temporary easement as they did in 2020

[19:56] when they uh constructed the bicycle

[19:58] lane through that same corridor. Uh this

[20:01] would be a donation. I'm recommending

[20:03] that we just give them this temporary

[20:05] easement. I think it had a value of

[20:07] approximately $3,000, but I'm

[20:09] recommending that we um be good

[20:11] neighbors and just donate this to them.

[20:13] Can I answer any questions?

[20:18] » Kathy, quick question. I know this is

[20:21] the one on Union Road and 27th, but will

[20:24] we be having another one for the

[20:25] roundabout going in at is it Union Road

[20:29] in University or is that

[20:33] that isn't our property there? I I

[20:35] believe that's

[20:37] a little ways out that they're not to

[20:40] this point where they're acquiring right

[20:41] away. We we we are in the know. We have

[20:44] knowledge of that, but we haven't I

[20:46] don't think they're that far along on

[20:47] that roundabout.

[20:50] » Do you know how long that project's

[20:52] going to be for the uh that they'll need

[20:56] the easement cuz then we'll get it back

[20:58] afterwards. Is that right? Yes, they'll

[20:59] they'll remove the easement probably

[21:03] 12 to 18 months is is just a guess. I I

[21:06] haven't talked to them in detail about

[21:08] the construction schedule.

[21:09] » Okay, fair enough.

[21:13] » Thank you.

[21:15] [clears throat and cough] This is the

[21:15] resolution. Please answer your name is

[21:17] called

[21:17] » Hall.

[21:18] » Yes.

[21:18] » Grant,

[21:19] » Yes.

[21:19] » Binbach,

[21:20] » Yes.

[21:21] » Schwarz,

[21:22] » Yes.

[21:22] » Layen,

[21:23] » Yes. Item eight, other business. Motion

[21:26] to direct staff to publicize a vacancy

[21:27] on the board of health effective January

[21:29] 1, 2027, including the qualifications

[21:32] required for interested parties as

[21:34] recommended by Caitlyn Emerick.

[21:35] » So move second.

[21:38] » All in favor say I.

[21:39] » I. [clears throat]

[21:41] » Motion carries. Item B, resolution that

[21:44] the 2026 weed commissioners report be

[21:46] approved and direct the chair to sign

[21:48] for sale as [clears throat] submitted by

[21:49] Griffin Sabala, Blackhawk County Weed

[21:51] Commissioner. So moved.

[21:53] » Second.

[21:55] Good morning board. Griffin Spalker,

[21:57] roadside biologist. Um, weed

[21:59] commissioner. I was Do you have any

[22:01] questions on this? Uh, this year there

[22:04] wasn't really much that changed. We had

[22:07] a pile of rain, so all the weeds grew

[22:09] and all the trees grew. So, we it was a

[22:12] busy year. And um I will say um as

[22:16] effective July 1st um a new noxious weed

[22:20] was added to the list um Japanese

[22:23] notweed which is becoming a problem. Uh

[22:25] we have some spots around the county

[22:27] that we manage under the roads

[22:28] department, but um I sent out letters to

[22:33] um land owners and parcel and parcel

[22:36] numbers throughout the county of quite a

[22:39] few in the city that we found out um

[22:41] [clears throat]

[22:42] just by um just spotting it and working

[22:45] with the city of Wateroo and Cedar

[22:46] Falls. um that just um stating that this

[22:51] law has changed effective um July 1st

[22:54] and that

[22:56] um basically you need to take care of

[22:58] this. Um obviously it's late in the year

[23:00] so I I know how challenging of a weed

[23:04] this is to manage. So um I'm giving them

[23:07] a little more grace, but um it is

[23:09] becoming a problem throughout the the

[23:11] city and and around the county. So, um,

[23:14] if you have any questions about that one

[23:16] specifically,

[23:18] um, I can give you information about

[23:20] when when that was effective and, um,

[23:23] the house file and all that stuff. So,

[23:25] um, if anybody calls in, you'd have that

[23:27] cuz, um, on the weed list, um, in the

[23:31] Iowa code, it doesn't get updated near

[23:34] as fast as what it does when it comes

[23:36] out. So, if you have questions on that

[23:38] or people have contacted you about

[23:40] things,

[23:41] » How many weeds are on that list?

[23:42] [clears throat and cough]

[23:43] » Oh, there's two lists. They're kind of

[23:45] vary, but there's primary and secondary

[23:47] list. That was number

[23:50] 16 or 18 that was added on to the um

[23:53] Iowa code 317, and then there's Iowa

[23:56] Code 58. So, that's also that we had to

[23:59] abide by. So, yes, there's quite a few.

[24:04] Griffin, I was wondering if you could

[24:05] maybe work with Gabby to do a post with

[24:08] some images so people can know what

[24:11] they're looking for. Um I'm a big

[24:12] gardener, but that's not one I'm even

[24:14] familiar with. So,

[24:16] » Sure.

[24:17] » Yeah, we did a field day um a couple of

[24:20] weeks ago with the um at Katakoski Green

[24:24] Belt Park there. Um unfortunately, City

[24:27] of Water has a big old patch right next

[24:29] to their uh pavilion there. So um we

[24:32] have members of conservation um water um

[24:36] city and parks and then um myself and

[24:39] just just a little education piece on it

[24:42] and the law change and how to get rid of

[24:44] it, the life cycle of it, that type of

[24:46] stuff. So yeah, there'll probably be

[24:49] more to more to come with that as it

[24:50] becomes as I send more and more letters

[24:52] out and more I find. So yes,

[24:57] » Any other questions?

[25:00] I'm researching knotweed as we speak.

[25:02] » Yeah, it's um pretty nasty. It can grow

[25:04] through asphalt, so we really don't want

[25:06] that. Foundations of homes, things like

[25:08] that. So, it's very aggressive.

[25:11] » Um it excels

[25:14] » Um by growth of it can even if you mow

[25:18] it, it can grow from plant tissue, seed,

[25:21] and uh riseal structure of its roots.

[25:24] Well, it pretty much is almost an

[25:25] indestructible plant that uh we now have

[25:28] to deal with here in the state. So,

[25:30] » That's fun.

[25:31] » Yes.

[25:31] » Made in a lab. That's what it sounds

[25:33] like.

[25:33] » Oh, yeah. Uh somewhere in uh one of the

[25:37] Asian countries it came from. So, yeah.

[25:40] » Japan probably.

[25:41] » Yeah. Japan. Some some Asian country.

[25:44] Yeah. But, uh

[25:45] » Interesting.

[25:46] » Nope. It was probably planted as

[25:48] ornamental. Everybody thought it looked

[25:49] nice and now we have a problem with it.

[25:51] So,

[25:51] » Oh, no.

[25:52] » Yep. That's how it always goes.

[25:54] » Thanks, Griffin. You bet.

[25:56] » Any other questions?

[25:57] » Any other

[26:00] » Thanks, [clears throat] ma'am.

[26:00] » This is a resolution. Please answer your

[26:02] name as caller.

[26:03] » Curtain box.

[26:03] » Yes.

[26:04] » Paul,

[26:05] » Yes.

[26:05] » Briant,

[26:06] » Yes.

[26:06] » Wartz,

[26:07] » Yes.

[26:08] » Leilen,

[26:09] » Yes. Item C, resolution that the

[26:12] appointment of Griffin, I believe it's

[26:14] Kabala, correct? I think Sabulka is what

[26:17] I go back and forth. As the 2027

[26:20] Blackout County Weed Commissioner be

[26:22] approved as recommended by Kathy

[26:23] Nichols, yeah, county engineer.

[26:26] » So moved. Second.

[26:28] » Good morning again, board. So per the

[26:29] Iowa code in this county, the engineer

[26:32] recommends the read commissioner for the

[26:34] duty every year. So I'm recommending

[26:37] Griffin. He's been doing a nice job. I

[26:39] will say that this is a countywide job.

[26:42] It's not just out in the county. it's in

[26:44] the cities, the incorporated areas as

[26:46] well. So, like uh Griffin was telling

[26:48] you, he is corresponding with people in

[26:51] inside the city limits of various

[26:53] communities where he's seeing these

[26:55] obnoxious weeds on the the state list.

[26:58] So, I would like to recommend Griffin

[27:00] again for the ne the upcoming year in

[27:02] this position.

[27:05] » This is a resolution. Please answer your

[27:06] name is called.

[27:07] » Bryant,

[27:08] » Yes.

[27:08] » Schwarz,

[27:09] » Yes.

[27:10] » Paul,

[27:10] » Yes.

[27:11] » Curtinbach,

[27:12] » Yes.

[27:12] » Leilen,

[27:13] » Yes.

[27:14] Item D, motion to approve the personnel

[27:15] requisition submitted for a heavy

[27:17] equipment mechanic full-time replacement

[27:20] as recommended by Katherine Nicholas,

[27:22] county engineer.

[27:23] » So move second.

[27:25] » Uh this uh position is becoming vacant

[27:28] due to a resignation from one of our uh

[27:32] heavy equipment mechanics.

[27:34] This is a much needed position for us.

[27:37] uh we are uh starting to get into the

[27:39] winter equipment [clears throat] process

[27:41] of installing the uh of course the

[27:43] plows, taking care of the trucks through

[27:45] the winter. So we're very anxious to

[27:48] fill this position and by um authorizing

[27:50] this this morning that will allow um HR

[27:53] to post it for us and we can begin the

[27:55] process.

[27:57] This would be per the union contract um

[28:00] etc.

[28:03] » All in favor say I. I

[28:04] » I

[28:05] » Post same sign.

[28:07] Motion carries. Item E. This is a

[28:10] resolution that the 55 mileph speed

[28:12] zones [clears throat] for various

[28:13] secondary roads throughout Black County

[28:16] be established in appropriate signs be

[28:18] erected at the designated locations as

[28:20] recommended by Katherine Nicholas,

[28:23] county engineer.

[28:24] » So moved.

[28:24] » Second.

[28:27] » Okay. Board. I wanted to

[28:30] update you on where we where we left uh

[28:33] the speed limit resolution a few weeks

[28:36] ago and I just wanted to show you a few

[28:38] slides that actually came out of the

[28:41] presentation from two weeks ago just to

[28:43] get us all on the same page. Uh review

[28:46] how we got here. So, as you recall,

[28:48] effective uh July 1st of this year, uh

[28:51] Governor Reynolds did sign into law that

[28:54] all primary and secondary roads, the

[28:56] speed limits would become

[28:57] [snorts and clears throat] 60 mph on all

[28:59] concrete and asphalt um secondary and

[29:02] primary roads. If you read the code of

[29:05] Iowa 321.8285, 8285

[29:08] section 4. It does give the county

[29:10] boards of supervisors authority to

[29:12] establish [clears throat]

[29:14] a lower speed where the statu statutory

[29:18] speed limit is greater than reasonable

[29:19] and proper based on an engineering and

[29:22] traffic investigation or study. Uh so at

[29:26] that time I came to you on June 30th

[29:29] with a resolution to just keep this the

[29:32] roads at 55 mph while the engineering

[29:34] department was able to complete some

[29:37] traffic investigations or studies.

[29:40] Uh we did drive all the roads and took a

[29:43] look at took a look at this subject. So

[29:47] that's when I came back to you and two

[29:50] weeks ago based on our preliminary

[29:52] investigations and studies recommending

[29:55] that we keep the speed limit at 55 miles

[29:58] per hour. We also did you also did hear

[30:00] from the sheriff's office. We also spoke

[30:03] with the sheriff's office in um

[30:07] had several meetings with them. We also

[30:09] spoke with the state patrol.

[30:12] After that meeting, I told you we were

[30:14] going to finish up our engineering

[30:16] studies. We we did not finish them

[30:19] before that meeting because there were

[30:20] they were a lot of work and we wanted to

[30:22] make sure that we had your

[30:25] buy in that you were would go along with

[30:27] this uh keeping the roads at 55 mph. So,

[30:31] we have now finished those engineering

[30:34] studies investigations. I believe I sent

[30:37] you a copy of one. We have um all of

[30:40] those available. We can certainly post

[30:41] those engineering um studies on our

[30:45] website.

[30:47] I told you at that time I would be

[30:49] bringing this back to you in a couple

[30:50] weeks

[30:52] and we would come back with some

[30:53] resolutions. We we decided to come back

[30:55] to you with 29 separate speed zones but

[30:58] only in one resolution. We just felt

[31:00] that was a cleaner way to go about this.

[31:04] Uh and then once this has been the

[31:09] resolution has been passed for these

[31:10] speed zones, we will notify our

[31:13] neighboring counties and we

[31:15] [clears throat] will start placing

[31:16] signs.

[31:20] So I apologize for this um the font on

[31:23] this. So since September of 20,

[31:27] excuse me, since September 22nd, we have

[31:30] completed our engineering and traffic

[31:32] investigation studies. They are not

[31:34] exhaustive

[31:36] engineering studies. We did follow the

[31:38] manual and uniform traffic control

[31:40] devices. Uh we looked at the roadway

[31:42] environment, roadway characteristics,

[31:44] the geographical time context. We did

[31:47] look at crash data and we looked at past

[31:50] engineering studies that had been

[31:52] completed on any of these routes.

[31:56] There is a provision in the MUTCD that

[31:59] allows for agencies, cities, and

[32:02] counties

[32:03] that one thing we should study is the

[32:05] 85th percentile of the speed on all

[32:08] these corridors. We did not do that. We

[32:11] are not traffic engineers. We would have

[32:13] to we would most likely have to hire

[32:17] traffic engineers to do these studies.

[32:19] In the past, we have changed speed

[32:21] limits in the county, for example, near

[32:23] smaller communities where we want to

[32:25] lower the speed limit. We have not done

[32:28] traffic studies

[32:29] [clears throat and cough] of the 85th

[32:31] percentile to change those speed limits

[32:33] as well. We have just uh take used our

[32:36] engineering judgment and we were able to

[32:38] change those and pass resolutions for

[32:41] those those areas.

[32:46] We also did not just a moment here. Let

[32:49] me change the font here so you can uh

[32:51] see this.

[32:54] [clears throat]

[33:07] We also did not complete an exhaustive

[33:10] look at the vertical curves, the

[33:12] horizontal curves, the no passing zones

[33:14] on all of our roads. That would have

[33:15] required us to go out most likely with

[33:18] with a GPS, have our survey technician

[33:21] go out with a GPS and run the profile of

[33:24] all these county roads.

[33:28] We would then place that in CAD and we

[33:30] could based on uh the standards that I

[33:33] talked to you about two weeks ago, we

[33:36] could see how these no passing zones,

[33:38] how the vertical curves, how all of our

[33:40] driveways, how they meet the current

[33:42] standards. We know that there are places

[33:45] out in the county where driveways, no

[33:47] passing zones, they do not meet the

[33:49] standard for for 55 miles per hour,

[33:52] maybe not even for 50 m an hour in some

[33:54] locations.

[33:56] This would have taken us many more

[33:57] months to complete this if we had done

[34:00] that exhaustive of a study on all of our

[34:02] routes.

[34:04] So, we used engineering judgment which

[34:07] is allowed by the manual and uniform

[34:08] traffic control device.

[34:11] And

[34:12] uh we discussed this in the engineering

[34:14] studies

[34:16] as well. If you look at each individual

[34:18] study, you'll see a brief discussion of

[34:20] all of these factors.

[34:26] Uh so today as I mentioned we have

[34:29] completed all the studies at this point

[34:31] and there are 29 separate studies or

[34:33] investigations. We would like to

[34:35] establish 29 separate speed zones

[34:39] and we have given that information to

[34:41] Lori and as I understand it those speed

[34:44] zones would be recorded in the minutes.

[34:47] I'm asking you to do this with one

[34:48] resolution.

[34:51] Um and the resolution recommends that

[34:54] all of these secondary roads be 55 miles

[34:58] hour to establish in establish that

[35:01] speed zone. And that would allow us to

[35:03] place the signs at the designated

[35:05] locations. I told you uh two weeks ago

[35:08] that currently we have about 50 speed

[35:12] limit signs out in the county, which is

[35:14] quite a lot by many county standards,

[35:16] but we feel like we need at least 50

[35:18] more signs to be in compliance with

[35:21] MUTCD because we are differing from many

[35:24] of our surrounding counties

[35:26] [clears throat] and then at

[35:27] intersections with DOT routes. So, we

[35:29] would uh we will be establishing more

[35:31] speed limits. We know that that has been

[35:33] a concern from the public that they just

[35:35] don't know what the speed limit is. Um

[35:38] we also heard similar concerns from law

[35:39] enforcement. So, we will be establishing

[35:42] placing numerous additional signs out on

[35:46] the uh secondary road system.

[35:51] » Can I answer any questions at this time?

[35:53] Kathy, we have areas that are around

[35:56] homes and stuff are like 45 and 35 and

[36:00] this does not change any of those. They

[36:03] they remain the same there.

[36:04] » Correct. That's a good point,

[36:06] supervisor, that those existing lower

[36:09] speed limits around smaller communities

[36:11] in particular, they're mainly around

[36:13] smaller counties. Those would be

[36:15] accepted. And if you look at the um the

[36:19] speed zone language that we've included

[36:21] with all the which would be in the

[36:24] minutes, it does say except

[36:27] as otherwise accepted or as otherwise

[36:30] previously established.

[36:35] Kathy, uh do you know anything about um

[36:39] the process by which this information

[36:42] eventually trickles to

[36:44] um like the various um GPS based like

[36:48] mapping like services like Google or or

[36:52] Map Quest or whatever. Um cuz I I

[36:54] definitely notice sometimes

[36:56] the speed limit that it's showing up on

[36:59] there is is wrong. usually in the in the

[37:01] other direction. Usually it's 10 miles

[37:03] under what it actually is, but I'm just

[37:06] » Wondering if you know anything about how

[37:09] the DOT eventually feeds that

[37:11] information into those systems.

[37:13] » So, I know a little bit about that. I

[37:16] don't know exhaustive amounts of

[37:18] information on that. We we have been in

[37:20] contact for example by some uh various

[37:23] trucking companies that want to

[37:25] establish their own speed limits to make

[37:27] sure that their drivers are following

[37:29] the the lawful speed limit. We are going

[37:32] to get back to those companies that we

[37:34] have been contacted with. We do the DOT

[37:37] is asking for updates every year on this

[37:40] type of information. They've again asked

[37:42] us to update our information. Uh the 511

[37:46] system we know gets that data from the

[37:50] information we feed the DOT. I believe

[37:53] that so do

[37:55] Google. So we do rely a lot on the DOT

[37:58] once we provide that information to them

[38:00] that they are um disseminating the

[38:03] information. We do have a few sources

[38:06] like I've said where they've

[38:07] specifically reached out to us where we

[38:09] will get back to them

[38:11] with that information. So we um we are

[38:15] complying with what uh the DOT would

[38:17] like us to as well as a few other um

[38:20] private organizations to get this

[38:23] information out.

[38:25] » Okay. Thank you.

[38:31] Do you know

[38:34] you said you have contacted or been in

[38:36] communication with those counties

[38:37] surrounding

[38:39] » Are any of them and I mean maybe just

[38:41] generally are other counties taking the

[38:43] same approach or are we sort of unique?

[38:48] Uh

[38:51] » Yeah. So,

[38:53] our surrounding counties pretty much

[38:56] have gone to 60 mph. Our immediately

[38:58] surrounding counties, there were a few

[39:00] routes that a few of them told me they

[39:02] wanted to study and possibly

[39:05] keep at 55 miles hour. There are a

[39:08] handful of counties who have done a

[39:10] blanket wide approach that we have and

[39:12] there are some counties that are still

[39:14] studying the issue. Um I was talking

[39:18] with um the Wesi County Engineer

[39:20] yesterday and he wants to take a very

[39:22] exhaustive look at some of their uh

[39:25] corridors just due to the hilly nature

[39:27] of that part of the state. So, I think

[39:31] we're all

[39:34] approaching this from our own from our

[39:36] own county's perspective, but there are

[39:39] some that there are several other

[39:41] counties that have um [clears throat]

[39:45] where the speed limit has remained 55

[39:47] mph.

[39:49] » And and Kathy, in some of those

[39:52] locations where we're crossing from one

[39:54] county to another, of course, you can

[39:56] always tell because the road quality

[39:57] gets better as you enter Blackhawk

[39:59] County. Um but um will we have um speed

[40:05] limit signs at those locations

[40:06] particularly where people are crossing

[40:07] the county line?

[40:09] » Yes, those in particular we know we want

[40:11] to get out there as soon as we can as

[40:14] soon as these resol this resolution has

[40:16] passed and I I believe I haven't checked

[40:20] uh in the past few days if we've gotten

[40:22] all the signs we need from prison

[40:24] industries. I know. I think we were out

[40:26] placing uh doing locates so that we

[40:28] could place the the posts on the ground

[40:31] before it freezes because there the

[40:33] signs were backorded, I believe. So,

[40:35] we're trying to get those up as as soon

[40:37] as possible.

[40:42] » Kathy, I know you mentioned that in the

[40:44] um minutes that would reflect all 29 of

[40:47] those separate

[40:48] » Yes.

[40:49] » Speed zones. Do you want that reflected

[40:51] in the resolution as well rather than

[40:52] just saying for various secondary roads

[40:54] throughout Blackhawk County?

[40:56] » I guess I would defer to Mike on that.

[41:02] » My understanding is that this is a

[41:04] written resolution and it has attached

[41:07] to it all of the

[41:10] um all of the speed zones that are being

[41:12] passed by the single resolution.

[41:15] As long as we have the written

[41:17] resolution and that's what a half a

[41:19] page. I don't have it in front of me

[41:20] right now. [cough] I believe so because

[41:22] I've seen it before. As long [snorts] as

[41:25] that resolution, let's read that into

[41:27] the record and then we should be good as

[41:30] long as it's clear that we've attached

[41:32] all the specific uh speed limits as part

[41:36] of that resolution. Does that make

[41:39] sense?

[41:39] » Are you saying we should agree it all?

[41:41] » I can just add it to the minutes, too.

[41:43] » Yep. I can just add the

[41:45] » I would just say yeah since [snorts]

[41:47] it's 29 separate speed zones numbered

[41:50] 113 to 142 I don't know do that and then

[41:53] » I don't think we need to read through

[41:54] all

[41:56] » No that's all

[41:57] » The the document does state the roads

[41:58] and everything for each one of them

[42:03] » All right with you?

[42:04] » Yep, that's fine.

[42:05] » Okay, great.

[42:07] » Any other questions for Kathy? Well, I

[42:10] just want to tell you guys, I do

[42:10] appreciate the work and time that you

[42:12] guys put in doing this. And

[42:15] uh it's just funny the the mixture of

[42:17] opinions we get from people on this, you

[42:20] know, and

[42:22] so I just wanted to throw out there. Uh

[42:26] a couple things that people told me over

[42:27] the last week or so was the confusion

[42:30] that we've referenced before, whether

[42:32] that be coming out of or into Blackhawk

[42:34] County, and it's 55 or 60 here or there,

[42:37] and then it uh consistency was kind of

[42:40] their their their wish. And so I guess

[42:44] what I wanted to suggest, what I was

[42:46] hoping for was that maybe these longer

[42:48] stretches would be separated from some

[42:50] of the shorter ones, uh, like the CE,

[42:52] for instance, the Cedar Wapsy, uh, from

[42:55] Finchford east to D Buchanan County line

[42:59] being 23 almost 23 and a half miles. Um,

[43:04] would there be any possibility with some

[43:07] of those longer ones keeping those at 60

[43:09] or doing a separate resolution for the

[43:11] longer ones 12 plus miles in length

[43:14] versus the shorter ones

[43:18] » Or does that just overly complicate

[43:20] things?

[43:21] » Well, when you talk about consistency, I

[43:23] think that I see with other counties

[43:25] what you're thinking probably kind of

[43:26] blows the consistency within a county.

[43:29] » Yeah.

[43:30] » Same argument. But I don't know as far

[43:33] as the road stretches

[43:36] answer. I guess

[43:37] » We did talk about that um amongst

[43:40] ourselves in house and with the

[43:41] sheriff's office. I

[43:44] there was some consensus that it it

[43:47] would be

[43:49] safer for drivers, easier for

[43:52] enforcement if we kept we had a uniform

[43:55] speed limit in Blackhawk County. So we

[43:57] we definitely did consider that.

[43:59] » Right. Uh I

[44:03] I showed you uh examples of different

[44:06] situations around the county that uh

[44:12] were do not meet a standards for 60 m

[44:15] hour. There are some stretches on for

[44:17] example Cedar Wapsy Road like you said

[44:19] that's a very long stretch of road.

[44:22] However, in the middle of that we have

[44:24] the intersection at Highway 63 and Cedar

[44:28] Wapsy Road. We have Wagner Road and and

[44:30] Cedar Wapsy Road. We have 218 and and

[44:33] Cedar Wapsy Road. Uh some of those

[44:36] longer

[44:38] roads do have problems concerns

[44:41] themselves throughout the corridor and

[44:44] we were very hesitant to raise and lower

[44:46] the speed limit on that corridor for

[44:48] example in particular just due to some

[44:50] of those more dangerous intersections.

[44:54] uh we feel I feel that it is there is

[44:56] some merit in having a uniform speed

[44:59] limit throughout the county. Uh the

[45:01] public will know that that is the will

[45:04] come to know that that is the speed

[45:06] limit in rural Blackhawk County on the

[45:08] secondary road system.

[45:12] » There was a lot of inconsistency but I

[45:14] know we talked about all the people

[45:16] probably going over the speed limit

[45:19] anyway driving as they do everywhere

[45:20] else in the country. And so that would

[45:23] be consistent with what they'd be doing

[45:25] again. But I said I I had to it wasn't

[45:28] funny really, but the gentleman was very

[45:29] clear when he said, "I went 90 miles an

[45:31] hour before and I'll go 90 miles an

[45:33] [snorts] hour after." So it didn't make

[45:35] any difference. And I think that's

[45:36] probably the mentality for a lot of

[45:39] people. They'll continue doing what

[45:40] they're doing. And I guess if we see it

[45:42] enforced and they get stopped, it's

[45:45] unfortunately we can't sometimes enforce

[45:47] it when it prevents some accidents and

[45:50] injuries and things, but

[45:52] » We can try. I think I appreciate the

[45:55] fact that we're looking out for the

[45:56] safety of the residents quite honestly,

[45:58] but I understand what you

[46:01] » Your point.

[46:03] I I'm not pushing back on you. Like like

[46:06] I legitimately appreciate the time that

[46:07] you guys put in because I know you guys

[46:09] went through talked through a lot of

[46:10] things

[46:11] » And have [clears throat] a lot more

[46:12] experience in that stuff than I do. I

[46:13] just

[46:16] » My estimation like most people probably

[46:19] 90% of of drivers are better probably

[46:22] very consistently do the speed limit or

[46:24] within 3 miles an hour of that. And then

[46:26] you get a a small

[46:29] fraction who were like your speed demons

[46:32] uh who will do 15 over.

[46:35] » I only know that from 17 years of

[46:37] observing traffic. [laughter]

[46:40] Um but so yeah, I I just

[46:44] » But I Yeah, I I'm with you on that. Um

[46:48] so I'm not pushing back trying to make

[46:49] things complicated, nothing like that.

[46:51] So being in several of our counties here

[46:54] in the last couple weeks throughout

[46:56] Iowa, I can tell you I have seen 55 mph

[46:59] speed limits in other counties and the

[47:01] county roads, experienced that

[47:03] firsthand.

[47:05] And um I am concerned about the the

[47:08] problems we have with the intersections.

[47:10] Kathy, I would have again would have

[47:13] brought that issue up if you had um said

[47:16] that we want to move these to 60. And it

[47:18] isite quite confusing when you look

[47:20] going out 291 or some of the state the

[47:23] DOT roads yet that are 60 in Blackhawk

[47:25] County. So

[47:28] I had one I went and asked Kathy about I

[47:30] was like 60 mph. I thought this was our

[47:33] road. I thought this was Blackout County

[47:34] and no that was a state state road. So

[47:37] there is some confusion with that. So,

[47:40] um, I want folks to understand that

[47:43] those are also a lot straighter and not

[47:46] the roads that we have the concerns with

[47:48] the intersections on. So,

[47:51] » And we have good quality roads for the

[47:53] most part, so people are able to speed

[47:56] easier than you do on some of those hard

[47:57] road service ones. As Chris commented,

[47:59] like I said, there's a big difference in

[48:00] many of the county's roads and ours. So,

[48:02] thank you for that.

[48:05] Any other questions for Kathy?

[48:09] Are you ready for a break, Kathy?

[48:12] She's ready for [laughter]

[48:15] » This resolution. Please answer as your

[48:16] name is called.

[48:17] » Hall,

[48:18] » Yes.

[48:19] » Brent,

[48:21] [cough]

[48:21] » Excuse me. Yes. [clears throat]

[48:22] » Bart,

[48:23] » Yes.

[48:25] » Yes.

[48:25] » Leilen,

[48:26] » Yes. Thank you, K, and your team. I know

[48:29] there's a lot of time put into it, so

[48:30] thank you. Item F is discussion and

[48:33] possible board action on Blackot County

[48:34] comprehensive project and scope of work.

[48:37] And as we all know, last week on we had

[48:39] the work session on this very topic and

[48:42] I thought at least to kind of kick it

[48:44] off to the public if we I asked Isaiah

[48:46] if he wouldn't mind just sharing some

[48:47] comments about [snorts] what our

[48:49] discussion had been about and and uh

[48:51] what he they had proposed at that

[48:53] meeting and we can ask questions.

[48:56] » Thank you, Linda. Uh, so my name is

[48:58] Isaiah Corbin with Iowa Northland

[49:00] Regional Council of Governments and like

[49:02] Linda was saying, we had a pretty

[49:05] lengthy work session last week and had a

[49:08] pretty robust conversation mainly around

[49:12] uh land use within the county and the

[49:15] next steps in terms of moving forward

[49:18] with addressing and visioning for the

[49:21] future of land use within the county. Uh

[49:24] we talked about the county's zoning

[49:26] ordinance, um the county's comprehensive

[49:29] plan and how it relates to um several

[49:34] different issues including economic

[49:36] development, uh largecale energy

[49:39] projects as well as housing development

[49:42] within the county. Um after some

[49:46] conversation on uh all of those issues,

[49:50] uh we came to the conclusion

[49:53] um that currently the county has the

[49:57] tools necessary in place um to address

[50:01] things like if a data center were to

[50:04] come into the county that the county

[50:06] could use its zoning ordinance to um

[50:10] help uh give itself some more time to

[50:13] develop a specific data center

[50:15] ordinance. And so we [snorts] kind of

[50:18] talked about putting um an update on the

[50:21] zoning ordinance on pause for a little

[50:23] bit. Um but we really honed in on the

[50:27] county's comprehensive plan um because

[50:30] the comprehensive plan really is that

[50:34] guiding document

[50:36] um that provides a long range vision for

[50:41] um land use. um and growth and goals and

[50:45] objectives within the county. Um the

[50:48] current county comprehensive land use

[50:50] plan was passed in 2001, so it is pretty

[50:56] old. Um, since then, uh, the state of

[51:00] Iowa, uh, in 2010 actually went through

[51:04] and updated, uh, Iowa code and really

[51:08] asked, um, jurisdictions who were using

[51:12] their are updating their comprehensive

[51:14] plan to focus on a specific set of

[51:17] principles and and guidance and really

[51:20] give a good outline for what a

[51:22] comprehensive plan should look like. um

[51:26] and and [clears throat] uh what that

[51:28] what that plan um [snorts] should

[51:31] eventually uh seek to understand. And so

[51:35] um what I went I went back and put

[51:39] together this document for the

[51:41] supervisors

[51:43] um to give them an idea of what the

[51:46] process um for an update for the

[51:49] [snorts] comprehensive plan would look

[51:50] like, what it would address. Um so that

[51:54] way you as county supervisors

[51:58] um can get a better idea of what that

[52:00] process looks like and also add to it or

[52:03] subtract to it [clears throat] um to

[52:05] figure out kind of how to move forward

[52:08] with uh a comprehensive plan update. And

[52:11] so what this document does is it

[52:15] outlines the principles that I I talked

[52:18] about and also what a comprehensive plan

[52:21] does. And really a a good comprehensive

[52:24] plan asks and answers three questions.

[52:28] Uh the first being where and who we are

[52:31] as a county. Second, uh where do we want

[52:35] to go and who do we want to be? And then

[52:37] finally, how do we get there?

[52:40] Um and it looks at a wide range of

[52:43] issues like I said um and considers uh

[52:48] transportation, natural resources,

[52:51] agricultural

[52:53] uh preservation, energy efficiency,

[52:56] urban revitalization,

[52:58] uh clean and renewable energy,

[53:00] sustainable design, economic

[53:02] development, community character, and

[53:05] also housing. And so um it's a wide

[53:09] reaching plan. It it's generally a broad

[53:12] document that's should last um a

[53:15] community at least 10 to 15 years

[53:18] depending upon their growth. Um and the

[53:23] rest of of my document really um

[53:26] outlines the tasks that [clears throat]

[53:28] are involved in that update. Um so the

[53:32] first task is just looking at the

[53:35] existing plans and policies and

[53:37] conditions within the county and

[53:40] reviewing those. Second is doing uh a

[53:44] community assessment. So really looking

[53:45] at um the quantitative data available to

[53:49] us um and assessing that on a

[53:54] quantitative scale. And then the third

[53:57] is really um probably the the key to all

[54:01] comprehensive plans [clears throat] and

[54:02] that's the public engagement and plan

[54:04] development.

[54:06] So within um the public engagement

[54:11] um I outlined several different uh

[54:14] possibilities to um reach and get public

[54:19] input back uh for the comprehensive

[54:22] plan. The first that we talked about um

[54:26] at the prior meeting was setting

[54:28] [snorts] up a task force. Um that's

[54:30] typically, you know, between 12 to 15

[54:34] members. Um and it's a cross-section of

[54:38] the community of Blackhawk County. So,

[54:41] it includes a wide range of of leaders

[54:44] covering different um skills [snorts]

[54:47] and perspectives of the county. Um, and

[54:50] typically what we do is,

[54:52] » [clears throat]

[54:52] » Uh, we have three separate meetings that

[54:55] typically last around 90 minutes, and

[54:57] they each cover, um, several different

[55:01] of those principles that go into your

[55:03] comprehensive plan. Um the second part

[55:06] of the engagement is just a

[55:08] communitywide survey um that we would uh

[55:12] develop and administer to gather input

[55:15] from um the general public who doesn't

[55:19] participate in the task force meetings.

[55:22] Uh and then once we kind of get through

[55:24] that, we uh as part of the plan

[55:27] development take uh a draft plan and the

[55:31] goals of [clears throat] and objectives

[55:32] to the planning and zoning commission

[55:36] and sit down over several meetings to

[55:38] discuss those as well as developing uh

[55:43] an updated existing and future land use

[55:45] map. Um and then the final part of the

[55:49] public engagement kind of once we get a

[55:52] good solid draft in place is um doing

[55:55] some public open houses so that way we

[55:57] can get feedback from the public and

[55:59] they can physically interact and see

[56:03] what the plan is. Um and then the final

[56:06] task is obviously the implementation of

[56:09] the plan. So, um, that's a a general

[56:13] overview of kind of what a the scope of

[56:16] work of a comprehensive plan update

[56:18] would look like. Um,

[56:22] and I'm here to answer any questions or

[56:24] get any feedback that you might have.

[56:29] » I think you said too it was about maybe

[56:30] you said it today even I this like six

[56:33] to nine months. I guess I was thinking

[56:34] ours would probably be more nine months.

[56:36] » Yeah. And it and it really kind of

[56:39] depends. You know, comprehensive plans

[56:41] can take a a lot of dips and turns and

[56:46] really that's by intention because these

[56:48] are long range visioning plans and um

[56:52] they're meant to uh supersede [snorts]

[56:56] uh elected officials. I mean they are

[56:58] long range and they are a general vision

[57:00] of the county. So, um, obviously the the

[57:04] planning and zoning, they will approve

[57:07] the plan and it will go to the

[57:08] supervisors for approval ultimately. Um,

[57:12] so there's a lot of opinions um that we

[57:15] take into account when developing these

[57:17] plans. Um, and so sometimes it takes

[57:21] turns. Sometimes we go one way and we

[57:24] talk about it and they're like, "Ah, we

[57:26] should go the other way." So it it takes

[57:28] time like all good plans. Um, but really

[57:32] what it's meant to do is set that

[57:33] foundation for the future as you're

[57:36] updating your zoning ordinances, as

[57:38] you're thinking about um different uh

[57:42] [snorts] regulations and uh also

[57:45] strategic goals and objectives for the

[57:47] county.

[57:51] Can you maybe just talk a little bit

[57:53] about task force communitywide surveys

[57:57] that community input

[58:00] and then it going to planning and

[58:01] zoning? Have you experienced where

[58:05] that vision shifts once it gets to

[58:08] planning and zoning? And is it are we

[58:12] required by statute for it to go through

[58:14] planning and zoning once it goes through

[58:15] the community engagement piece or can we

[58:17] adopt it and have PNZ

[58:20] work more to implement?

[58:22] » Yeah. So P&Z is required to send

[58:26] » [snorts]

[58:26] » Uh the plan to the supervisors. So a

[58:28] comprehensive plan does have to go

[58:30] through your planning and zoning

[58:32] [clears throat] commission. And

[58:33] certainly

[58:36] there are disagreements about [snorts]

[58:39] uh certain policies and views. Um and

[58:44] the job of someone writing the

[58:46] comprehensive plan is to help weave

[58:49] those and find a solid ground to go on.

[58:54] Um, but there's

[58:57] and sometimes people just have to choose

[59:00] to agree to disagree at at moments

[59:03] because Yeah. I mean, we and that's the

[59:05] hard thing about writing this

[59:07] comprehensive plan. And

[59:10] when I typically write it, I try to find

[59:12] that middle ground and that middle

[59:14] piece. And sometimes people don't like

[59:18] it. And I try not to please everyone

[59:22] because I end up pleasing no one um at

[59:25] the same time. But it it is a it's a

[59:28] fine little dance that you have to do.

[59:30] And and in general, a comprehensive plan

[59:34] is is fairly broad, too. So that makes

[59:37] it a little bit easier when there are

[59:39] those [snorts]

[59:40] nuanced dis disagreements about certain

[59:43] issues is we try to look at it at a a

[59:47] 10,000 ft level rather than kind of deep

[59:51] into the weeds. Um because obviously

[59:53] those can be adjusted a little bit

[59:55] depending on

[59:57] who's making the decision. Does the

[1:00:00] length of the last time since

[1:00:02] we haven't done an overhaul of this or

[1:00:06] » Too much of a dive into this in

[1:00:09] » Quite a while? 25 years.

[1:00:11] » 26 years. Yep.

[1:00:12] » 26

[1:00:13] » 2001.

[1:00:14] » Does that

[1:00:16] do you anticipate that adding to the

[1:00:17] complexity if there is

[1:00:22] judging from the conversation that we

[1:00:24] had last week? I thought there were some

[1:00:25] really innovative things that we talked

[1:00:27] about. But do you see that being as a

[1:00:30] real roadblock?

[1:00:32] » We would be starting from square one.

[1:00:34] » Okay.

[1:00:35] » Yeah. So, it would definitely take a

[1:00:38] little bit. You know, some counties

[1:00:40] they've they've spent 5 years and went

[1:00:44] and updated it and they just kind of do

[1:00:46] it progressively. Others just kind of

[1:00:49] let it sit there and

[1:00:52] collects dust and becomes a little old.

[1:00:55] Um but yeah it I mean and and obviously

[1:01:00] since 2001 the world has changed

[1:01:02] dramatically and the world is changing

[1:01:04] dramatically. So it it will take um some

[1:01:08] time to kind of work through these

[1:01:09] issues and and that's where you you you

[1:01:12] really have to focus on getting um good

[1:01:15] solid feedback from the community um as

[1:01:18] guiding principles.

[1:01:20] Well, I think when we talked um the

[1:01:22] other day too, it was a lot of our own

[1:01:25] infrastructure we had to consider for

[1:01:27] while we were looking for future growth

[1:01:29] potential and thinking what we could do

[1:01:30] for Blackout County. we had to see and

[1:01:33] examine and that's I guess where our PNZ

[1:01:35] staff

[1:01:36] » Would be helpful for us and maybe others

[1:01:38] too but to identifying where that

[1:01:40] potential

[1:01:42] » Is [snorts] for us not just to go in

[1:01:43] because we would be changing from

[1:01:45] preservation of egg land for the most

[1:01:47] part to looking at economic [snorts]

[1:01:49] development potential. So yeah, I'd

[1:01:51] expect even some push back not just from

[1:01:53] P&Z, but from the rural from the people

[1:01:56] that we need we'd hear from the people

[1:01:58] that we're going to be

[1:01:59] » Asking to [clears throat]

[1:02:00] » Absolutely. Yeah. And it's such a

[1:02:03] [cough] it's such a broad document and

[1:02:05] we, you know, we we look at a [snorts]

[1:02:07] wide range of things. So, it's not just

[1:02:09] egg land, it's also infrastructure,

[1:02:12] where things are located, roads, where

[1:02:16] does PNZ see potential future growth

[1:02:19] that they would like to see, where is

[1:02:20] the county um so it it can be a little

[1:02:24] bit of a complex conversation at times.

[1:02:30] » Isaiah, last week, u you were talking

[1:02:32] about you're just finishing up one with

[1:02:33] another county. Would this be the bigger

[1:02:36] county if any of them you've worked on?

[1:02:37] And how many more have you worked on

[1:02:39] doing something like this?

[1:02:40] » Yep. So, uh, Breamer County just wrapped

[1:02:43] up theirs a few months ago. Um, we did

[1:02:47] Buchanan counties, I think, a year or

[1:02:49] two prior to that. Um, and so those were

[1:02:53] the two most recent ones. Obviously, in

[1:02:56] our region, Blackhawk County is the

[1:02:59] biggest county. Um, so that just adds a

[1:03:02] little bit of a complexity, especially

[1:03:04] with the metro. um as well.

[1:03:08] » So, this is something you could get

[1:03:09] started on soon then.

[1:03:11] » Yeah. Yep.

[1:03:12] » How soon or do we have a dollar figure?

[1:03:15] Anything that worked up yet?

[1:03:17] » So, I typically try it's a long

[1:03:20] conversation, but I typically not I

[1:03:23] don't provide a dollar figure until the

[1:03:25] supervisors are ready to move forward

[1:03:27] with the project. That's why I put

[1:03:29] together the scope of work so that way I

[1:03:31] could go back and kind of estimate how

[1:03:33] many hours each task took and then

[1:03:36] provide you a solid proposal. Um so that

[1:03:39] way the county can kind of make a

[1:03:41] decision. Um, but I don't like to

[1:03:43] generally provide the dollar figure

[1:03:45] right up front because I have had um

[1:03:48] communities that have asked that and

[1:03:50] then they go out for

[1:03:52] [cough and clears throat]

[1:03:53] uh RFP

[1:03:55] uh [snorts] and then my

[1:03:58] » Dollar figures public and it it defeats

[1:04:00] [laughter] the purpose of that

[1:04:04] right wrong or indifferent. Um, so

[1:04:06] that's the reason why I kind of take

[1:04:09] this process. Um,

[1:04:12] » No, that's all right. Yeah, you don't

[1:04:13] have to the position. I think that's why

[1:04:15] it's on for possible board action is if

[1:04:17] you wanted to

[1:04:18] » Author. Yeah. And I and I want to make

[1:04:20] sure that the scope of work reflects

[1:04:22] what you want to see because there are

[1:04:24] certainly other outreach methods and

[1:04:27] innovative ways that you can um

[1:04:30] certainly add to the scope of work. if

[1:04:32] you say, you know, we really want to

[1:04:35] focus on public outreach to X or we we

[1:04:38] think this isn't not enough or too much,

[1:04:41] um, you can kind of certainly adjust

[1:04:44] that scope of work to [snorts] reflect

[1:04:46] that.

[1:04:46] » Is that something that's been added in

[1:04:49] some of the others? Because, yeah, I can

[1:04:50] see where it would be a cookie cutter

[1:04:52] kind of a plan [snorts] for each county

[1:04:54] even though you'd be very different in

[1:04:55] your infrastructure. But

[1:04:57] » Yeah. Yep. In some counties, you know,

[1:05:00] depending on how old the plan is, you

[1:05:02] know, they'll say, "Oh, we don't need to

[1:05:04] really update the maps or we don't need

[1:05:06] to do any survey work. We can kind of or

[1:05:10] we just want to update this piece." So,

[1:05:12] we we don't necessarily need a task

[1:05:14] force with three meetings and we can

[1:05:16] kind of we just want to hone in on here

[1:05:18] and just focus on one piece rather than

[1:05:21] the entirety of the plan.

[1:05:22] [clears throat]

[1:05:23] And they probably do that somewhat,

[1:05:24] maybe two after the cost has been

[1:05:26] provided and they look at ways they can

[1:05:27] massage their particular one for Yep.

[1:05:30] » Maybe services. So you'd have that

[1:05:33] defined kind of as your scope and

[1:05:35] everything in there of the different

[1:05:36] pieces of it and then a total cost.

[1:05:39] » Yep. So if you're okay with the scope of

[1:05:42] work and the county is ready to move

[1:05:44] forward, I could put together an entire

[1:05:46] proposal. obviously break down the cost

[1:05:49] of what that proposal would look like

[1:05:51] and and certainly provide it for for the

[1:05:54] supervisors to approve and move forward

[1:05:57] with.

[1:05:59] I do know attending the township

[1:06:01] meetings, this has been brought up a

[1:06:03] couple different times. I know some

[1:06:07] folks in the townships might be

[1:06:08] interested in participating in this as

[1:06:10] well with some of their questions I've

[1:06:12] had to deal with from them. So, um, and

[1:06:15] I know we have

[1:06:18] one in particular, two maybe that are in

[1:06:20] township

[1:06:22] trustees or clerks that are also on P&Z

[1:06:24] or work with P&Z.

[1:06:26] » Yep. And typically when you look at the

[1:06:28] task force, I usually for the task

[1:06:30] force, I usually like to have a

[1:06:32] supervisor on the task force, one of

[1:06:35] you. Um because then you can kind of see

[1:06:37] what the process and conversation looks

[1:06:39] like. So that way when you get to the

[1:06:41] end of the plan, you're like, "Well,

[1:06:42] what's this?" I'm like, well, you heard

[1:06:45] the people like this is what we talked

[1:06:47] about. And the same way with P&Z, I like

[1:06:49] to have one member on P&Z. So that way

[1:06:52] there's kind of a continuation. And it's

[1:06:54] nice when you kind of go from group to

[1:06:56] group to have someone that's been part

[1:06:58] of the conversation because, you know,

[1:07:01] some people can at times look at and be

[1:07:03] like, well, why did you write this? and

[1:07:07] other people that are part of the

[1:07:09] conversation can explain that rather

[1:07:11] than thinking it's just me writing it

[1:07:13] cuz typically

[1:07:15] I just listen and I write. So,

[1:07:20] » Okay,

[1:07:21] » This is Chris. Um,

[1:07:23] » I was just hoping we could have maybe

[1:07:24] one more week um to digest and maybe

[1:07:28] give some feedback on the scope of work

[1:07:31] uh and [clears throat] give a kind of

[1:07:33] thumbs up. I mean, I think it's probably

[1:07:35] mostly there, but I just need a little

[1:07:36] bit more time to dive deeper into it.

[1:07:40] » I would I would agree. I really do. The

[1:07:43] the part that I'm most passionate about

[1:07:44] is the community engagement piece. And

[1:07:46] so, if if there are some other models

[1:07:48] that you've used if you could share some

[1:07:50] of those just as so that we don't say,

[1:07:52] "Yes, let's go with this." And maybe

[1:07:54] there is a different method um that you

[1:07:56] that you're that you're comfortable with

[1:07:57] that you've that you've used in the past

[1:08:00] that might benefit us even a little bit

[1:08:02] more. But I I mean I like what I'm

[1:08:03] seeing, but I agree with Chris to have a

[1:08:05] a bit of time to marinate.

[1:08:07] » So task force surveys and open houses

[1:08:10] typically would be what we'd utilize our

[1:08:12] PNZ meetings. That's that's a little

[1:08:14] different group, I think.

[1:08:15] » But I was going to say something for the

[1:08:16] public.

[1:08:17] » Yep.

[1:08:18] » Do we could do open houses I guess

[1:08:20] earlier in the process too? I'm just

[1:08:22] thinking making people feel comfortable

[1:08:23] about input or No.

[1:08:25] » Yeah. Yeah. I kind of and [laughter] I

[1:08:27] went back and forth on the open houses.

[1:08:30] I think um

[1:08:32] in terms of [snorts] like how I

[1:08:34] developed the plan, I think you have the

[1:08:36] open houses either before planning and

[1:08:39] zoning or after. I could be swayed

[1:08:43] either one. Um cuz I think there's some

[1:08:45] unique things that you can do,

[1:08:47] especially with comprehensive planning

[1:08:49] in these public houses. Like you can put

[1:08:51] a big map of the county up on the board

[1:08:54] and and you know do some pin exercises.

[1:08:57] people can identify different areas or

[1:08:59] issues that they see and sometimes those

[1:09:02] are really really good feedback to have

[1:09:04] before you kind of write the plan. So

[1:09:07] you could do that, you know, the timing

[1:09:10] I think it depends on how you want to do

[1:09:12] it. Um or you could do them before and

[1:09:15] after too. Um

[1:09:19] » Would would it help like giving you

[1:09:21] another week as well to kind of look at

[1:09:22] these and maybe throw some ideas to us I

[1:09:25] guess that you've done before and maybe

[1:09:26] we haven't considered this

[1:09:28] » Since it's none of us were involved in

[1:09:30] that first one [laughter]

[1:09:32] » In 2001. So yeah just some of the

[1:09:35] different ways of doing it. So

[1:09:36] » Yep I would

[1:09:37] » We were all very excited last week. I

[1:09:39] would really like to see what called the

[1:09:41] communitywide survey that we get

[1:09:43] participation from all 17 townships as

[1:09:46] well. We know that we're reaching all

[1:09:49] parts of our rural area with this.

[1:09:52] [clears throat]

[1:09:52] » Yep. And so, um, the survey tools that

[1:09:55] we have actually we can just have zip

[1:09:58] code and we can kind of break it down so

[1:10:00] that way we can see where the surveys

[1:10:02] are coming from. [snorts] Um, and

[1:10:04] certainly if there's some zip codes and

[1:10:07] areas that aren't included, you know, we

[1:10:10] can look at that as we're getting the

[1:10:12] results in and and come up with a plan

[1:10:14] to really kind of make sure that we're

[1:10:17] pushing it in those other areas that

[1:10:18] aren't [clears throat] participating.

[1:10:20] » And it primarily would be with rural

[1:10:22] areas, correct? So, we should hit all

[1:10:25] those pretty hard.

[1:10:26] » Yeah.

[1:10:27] » Yep.

[1:10:28] » How's the survey getting disseminated?

[1:10:30] Um,

[1:10:32] social media, um, [clears throat] is the

[1:10:35] big one. Um, we'd probably have all the

[1:10:38] the county Facebook pages share it as

[1:10:40] well as the supervisors share it because

[1:10:43] obviously you have a a pretty big reach.

[1:10:45] We could put it in the newspaper. The

[1:10:47] newspaper is always hit or miss, but

[1:10:49] people still read the newspaper. We can

[1:10:51] certainly um you know the other thing we

[1:10:55] can get on KWWL

[1:10:57] um and talk about the comprehensive plan

[1:10:59] update and ask people to reach it out. I

[1:11:02] think that would be a really good

[1:11:03] method. They have a nice little short um

[1:11:07] [clears throat] segment that they do as

[1:11:08] well. Um but I'm I'm always open for

[1:11:12] suggestions on other other ways as well.

[1:11:16] » [clears throat]

[1:11:16] » I'd like I mean I think this is a a big

[1:11:20] [cough]

[1:11:21] big [clears throat] step with

[1:11:21] longlasting um implications. So um and I

[1:11:27] I'd like to see us maybe consider even a

[1:11:29] a countywide

[1:11:31] uh mailing to each parcel with a QR code

[1:11:34] to the survey or something like that. I

[1:11:36] know that there's expense with that, but

[1:11:38] this is something with a longlasting

[1:11:40] impact.

[1:11:44] Yeah, I was just going to say uh all the

[1:11:46] people I know that live out in the

[1:11:47] county have flip phones, so that might

[1:11:50] be a problem on the social media thing.

[1:11:52] So, I think the news any any

[1:11:55] » I don't know. I'll talk with them and

[1:11:56] see how they get their how they stay up

[1:11:58] to date with some of their stuff, but

[1:12:00] I'm not kidding you.

[1:12:01] » Phones is a thing out there.

[1:12:03] » I get it.

[1:12:04] » They do get mail. I mean, it might be

[1:12:06] mailing. Actually, I do know a guy that

[1:12:08] has a smartphone that lives out

[1:12:09] [laughter] there, but mostly flip

[1:12:11] phones.

[1:12:14] » Yeah. To be discussed, I guess, on that.

[1:12:17] » And cost will come into play.

[1:12:19] » Well, yeah, cost. I mean, look, we're

[1:12:21] certainly going to be in the five

[1:12:22] figures and something. That's a pretty

[1:12:25] broad that doesn't narrow you down too

[1:12:27] much there, but uh I think having the

[1:12:31] I'm even open to the idea of maybe

[1:12:33] multiple open houses, one at the very

[1:12:35] beginning of this. So we can talk about

[1:12:37] why this is important, why it matters.

[1:12:39] Yep.

[1:12:39] » Um help justify the expense.

[1:12:42] » Um and then another and to your point

[1:12:45] that also allows for some input at the

[1:12:47] very early phases where we might catch a

[1:12:51] line a direction or two that we wouldn't

[1:12:53] have necessarily thought about. I mean,

[1:12:55] honestly, even Thursday's meeting, I

[1:12:58] think it was Thursday, um,

[1:13:00] » Tuesday,

[1:13:01] » Tuesday, whatever. Uh,

[1:13:04] » You know,

[1:13:06] Justin brought up some stuff that I

[1:13:08] hadn't gone into that meeting thinking

[1:13:10] about being involved in regards to

[1:13:12] housing, right? Like

[1:13:14] » All of that, the conversations do matter

[1:13:17] and so, um, I think some opportunities

[1:13:19] at the front end as well as the back end

[1:13:21] would would be beneficial.

[1:13:23] » Yeah. comprehensive plans, you know,

[1:13:25] they're they're fun to write because you

[1:13:28] dive into a swath of issues and you get

[1:13:32] a swath of opinions back as well. Um,

[1:13:35] and so and it's thinking about the

[1:13:37] vision and so they're often exciting

[1:13:40] plans to write because people are

[1:13:42] excited and passionate about their

[1:13:43] communities and they want to see their

[1:13:46] community improve. And so that's the

[1:13:48] best part about it is

[1:13:50] » You you get a lot of ideas um and a lot

[1:13:53] of new ideas as well. So

[1:13:55] » We did something like that with our

[1:13:57] strategic planning and that community

[1:13:58] piece was important to bring people in.

[1:14:01] So we could [snorts]

[1:14:02] » So another week or two or what we next

[1:14:05] week or

[1:14:06] » Yeah. One thought I'm just having now

[1:14:07] with with two uh candidates unless

[1:14:10] [snorts] there's one hidden behind the

[1:14:12] door in the room. [laughter]

[1:14:14] Uh

[1:14:16] like I I would love to push this forward

[1:14:18] and start start going now uh

[1:14:22] I'm just curious what what uh Senator

[1:14:26] Dler and Casey also might feel um going

[1:14:29] forward assuming that they step into so

[1:14:31] that way we don't we the our current

[1:14:34] board doesn't start moving with

[1:14:35] something and then for some reason a

[1:14:38] number of things happen and then maybe

[1:14:39] they don't have the same appetite maybe

[1:14:42] more information comes in later that

[1:14:43] makes uh their opinion in operation

[1:14:47] change.

[1:14:48] » Well, I think and and that you bring up

[1:14:50] a good point as I I do think that too.

[1:14:52] But I think we can put some of these

[1:14:53] things in place to get started with it

[1:14:54] and get it going, I guess, early on and

[1:14:57] and then this we're just a couple weeks

[1:14:58] away from the election and then those

[1:15:00] people can be invited as well

[1:15:02] » To it because I think those those

[1:15:03] opinions and thoughts will be important

[1:15:05] too. But

[1:15:06] » Yep,

[1:15:08] I figured that conversation was going to

[1:15:10] come up um

[1:15:14] three weeks. Yeah, I did talk to Brian

[1:15:15] about that and you know

[1:15:19] » I could be and I could see the decision

[1:15:21] either way, you know, waiting till

[1:15:23] January to kind of get started or you

[1:15:27] know before you know [snorts]

[1:15:28] comprehensive plans um we try to write

[1:15:32] them um not for uh you know we have five

[1:15:37] different opinions um and we we try to

[1:15:41] keep them generally broad um but we try

[1:15:44] to reflect the public. Um, and really

[1:15:47] kind of what I tell elected officials is

[1:15:50] like, uh, this isn't this is your

[1:15:52] comprehensive plan, but it's also the

[1:15:54] counties and it's it's meant to be, uh,

[1:15:57] a cross-section of the general public.

[1:15:59] So, I could I could see either waiting

[1:16:03] till after the election to kind of make

[1:16:05] those decisions, and I'm completely fine

[1:16:07] with that and would understand that. Um,

[1:16:10] and yeah, I'm Mr. Doler, if you want to

[1:16:14] throw in your opinion.

[1:16:16] » Yeah, go ahead.

[1:16:17] » Uh, Senator Bill Dler, 2837 Cedar Ter

[1:16:22] Blue. [clears throat] Uh, seems how I

[1:16:24] kind of somewhat got invited. Um, I I

[1:16:28] agree with uh Supervisor

[1:16:31] uh Leland that I I don't see a problem

[1:16:33] with you guys starting working through

[1:16:36] this cuz we'll have plenty opportunity

[1:16:38] for input and uh after the election

[1:16:41] whoever gets elected. Uh that'd be a

[1:16:43] good time. I think we need to have a lot

[1:16:46] of transition cuz obviously there's

[1:16:49] going to be some real change u with the

[1:16:52] board. So uh you know at least losing

[1:16:56] couple of you three of you and uh so I

[1:16:59] think that's important that this being a

[1:17:03] board of supervisor

[1:17:05] uh is more complicated than I think most

[1:17:08] people realize including myself. So uh

[1:17:13] there are so many different things that

[1:17:15] you have to work with and and spend time

[1:17:18] with. So slowing down the process I

[1:17:21] don't think would be a good thing and

[1:17:23] we'll have plenty of time to work and be

[1:17:25] involved with it uh when the time comes

[1:17:27] after the election whoever the new

[1:17:30] supervisors are. Thank you.

[1:17:32] » Thank you. I was going to say Isaiah

[1:17:34] probably takes some time as well. Like I

[1:17:35] said even if we signed a document today

[1:17:37] you liked your proposal and we said

[1:17:40] let's go with it or let we're ready to

[1:17:42] go with it. I think there'd still be a

[1:17:44] lot of work you have to do to even bring

[1:17:45] back to us to next steps and what

[1:17:48] » Yeah certainly

[1:17:51] you know I'm an Ian at heart and I hate

[1:17:54] doing and setting [snorts] up meetings

[1:17:56] with the task force in December and

[1:17:59] January because

[1:18:01] » Exactly

[1:18:02] » There's always the potential to get

[1:18:04] cancelled. So, um, but yeah, I it will

[1:18:09] take some time for us to kind of get our

[1:18:10] our feet underneath us, um, and set up

[1:18:13] the logistics and, um, you know, we'll

[1:18:16] we'll also get feedback from the

[1:18:19] supervisors on who they believe should

[1:18:21] be part of the task force. And I think

[1:18:23] that's, you know, a very important step

[1:18:27] and part of the process because you want

[1:18:29] people a cross-section of the community

[1:18:32] and community leaders. And

[1:18:34] [clears throat] obviously there's a lot

[1:18:35] of individuals [snorts] in Blackhawk

[1:18:36] County that can provide great input. Um,

[1:18:39] but sometimes, you know, you you got to

[1:18:42] get a good task force because that's

[1:18:44] where you get the brunt of your or of my

[1:18:47] fe the feedback for the plan. And so you

[1:18:49] want to make sure that you do that

[1:18:51] right. And that's a big commitment. It's

[1:18:53] it's three meetings, 90 minutes each.

[1:18:56] Um, and so that's an important part that

[1:18:59] you you got to take time to think about

[1:19:01] as well.

[1:19:03] » But I think it's like important like

[1:19:05] we'd have input on some of the

[1:19:07] individuals and groups and things that

[1:19:08] we'd see. The others will be coming in

[1:19:10] obviously to add or you know if they

[1:19:12] disagreed or something to have more time

[1:19:14] to discuss that too. But otherwise,

[1:19:16] yeah, I just think the combination of it

[1:19:18] all will be good. Yep.

[1:19:21] work together. Thank you. Well, it

[1:19:23] sounds like at least another week or

[1:19:25] just whenever I mean if a week or two I

[1:19:27] mean it's on us for to form our

[1:19:28] questions and you if you would provide

[1:19:30] some additional information to this if

[1:19:32] you think there are some things that

[1:19:33] maybe

[1:19:34] » I [clears throat] can certainly give you

[1:19:35] some um different examples that I've

[1:19:37] seen in other plans um as well for

[1:19:40] feedback and you can you know pick and

[1:19:43] choose and and decide. I certainly like

[1:19:45] Tavis's idea of doing a public hall pre

[1:19:48] and post. I think that's [clears throat]

[1:19:49] a great idea. Um, but there are some

[1:19:51] other creative ways that we can

[1:19:53] definitely look at.

[1:19:56] » Yeah, I like that too because I just

[1:19:57] thought one open house at the end is

[1:19:59] like great. But that's the kind of the

[1:20:00] roll out to me and we know we've all

[1:20:02] been involved with those when we got the

[1:20:04] roll out of the J turn

[1:20:07] » On one of the roads. It was a little I

[1:20:08] mean they said they'd done a lot of work

[1:20:10] beforehand, but it was just like the

[1:20:12] roll out then was too late to do

[1:20:14] anything about it, whatever. So, thank

[1:20:16] you.

[1:20:16] » Thanks. Thanks very much.

[1:20:21] All right, reports or information from

[1:20:23] the board.

[1:20:25] I'll remind everyone we have a board

[1:20:26] session at 1:00 today on the bond sale

[1:20:30] and work session on

[1:20:33] Thursday at 8:00 a.m. at VA

[1:20:37] » On the reloc or remodeling. I had to

[1:20:40] double check. Somebody thought it was

[1:20:41] Wednesday told [clears throat] me

[1:20:43] earlier, but it's Thursday.

[1:20:45] [snorts and laughter]

[1:20:46] wouldn't want to be somewhere at 8

[1:20:47] o'clock in the morning on the wrong day.

[1:20:52] » Nothing.

[1:20:53] » So, no. Okay.

[1:20:55] » All right.

[1:20:55] » Anything else? Okay. And I was going to

[1:20:58] say just a question I was going to throw

[1:20:59] out there and I know Michelle's back

[1:21:00] with the working on the bonds, but it

[1:21:02] was like the community funding

[1:21:03] applications are in.

[1:21:04] » Lori's looked through them. I'm not sure

[1:21:06] Michelle has signed off yet, but I was

[1:21:08] going to say if we want to do those this

[1:21:10] year. I I thought it was a great

[1:21:11] assignment for the new supervisors

[1:21:13] probably to do that project, but I

[1:21:15] thought probably unfair

[1:21:17] » In the middle of

[1:21:18] » Budget. I know. Yeah.

[1:21:19] » I know it's late. And so there's another

[1:21:21] thing I thought maybe if we could try to

[1:21:22] get that done, but I know it'll take

[1:21:24] some time. And so I just thought too I

[1:21:26] wanted to hear what your thoughts were.

[1:21:27] I think a smaller window for us to

[1:21:30] evaluate them just because if you give

[1:21:35] me 30, I'll take 31. It's kind of like

[1:21:37] that speed limit conversation, right?

[1:21:39] » Uh

[1:21:40] » Um if if we give we give ourselves two

[1:21:44] weeks to sit down, review them. If we

[1:21:46] need to extend another couple of days

[1:21:49] for all five of us to get our

[1:21:50] » Two weeks

[1:21:51] » Scores in. Is that

[1:21:52] » I remember it took a little longer than

[1:21:53] two weeks before, but yeah, we can make

[1:21:55] that a goal. Well, I was going to say

[1:21:56] it'd be nice if we had it done by the

[1:21:58] 1st of December.

[1:21:59] » Yeah.

[1:22:01] » Well, yeah. So, yeah, take a look. I

[1:22:03] just wanted to bring it up as a point of

[1:22:04] discussion so we knew it wasn't hanging

[1:22:06] out there to get it done.

[1:22:07] » I think done and acted on so that folks

[1:22:09] know.

[1:22:09] » That's okay. Yeah.

[1:22:10] » Yeah.

[1:22:10] » Where we're going.

[1:22:11] » How many applications in total were

[1:22:13] there?

[1:22:14] » Said 24.

[1:22:15] » Yeah. Okay.

[1:22:15] » So, if I'm offline,

[1:22:17] » Are the Maybe I missed something, but

[1:22:19] are they ready for us to start scoring?

[1:22:21] Well, I said um Lori had kind of said

[1:22:24] she had looked [clears throat] through

[1:22:24] those and made the list and stuff for

[1:22:26] us. Michelle said she just wanted to

[1:22:27] look at it one more time kind of make

[1:22:29] sure [cough]

[1:22:29] everything is good, but otherwise they

[1:22:31] are will be Chris. So, thank you.

[1:22:33] » Yeah. No, I think I think I agree with

[1:22:35] Tavis on the two week thing. Um

[1:22:38] I think that and it hopefully it would

[1:22:40] be a faster process since we've now done

[1:22:43] this once already. So, we're maybe a

[1:22:45] little more familiar with

[1:22:46] » The matrix. But, um yeah, but it was I

[1:22:49] think it's something we should get done.

[1:22:50] It was in a budget set by this board.

[1:22:52] So, I think we should finish that.

[1:22:54] » Yeah, I think you were the first one

[1:22:56] done last time. So, I don't know if

[1:22:58] we'll take your comments too seriously

[1:22:59] on two. [laughter]

[1:23:01] » It's important stuff. These uh this this

[1:23:04] money has a lot of impact. So, I want to

[1:23:06] get it out the door.

[1:23:07] » Yeah. To get it out. Yeah. Thanks,

[1:23:09] Chris. Okay. Any motion for adjournment?

[1:23:13] Some move. Second.

[1:23:15] » All in favor say I. I. I.

[1:23:17] » Meetings adjourned.

Untitled meeting

Transcript