[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.