Supervisors want to draft contract with conservation over nature center duties

To better establish the responsibilities in operating the future nature center, the Jasper County Board of Supervisors wants its legal counsel to work on a 28E agreement with the conservation department, whose director and board were apprehensive of the idea and question the motivations behind the contract.

Supervisor Brandon Talsma said in order to create the agreement the board had to approve an engagement letter with Ahlers & Cooney since it is “beyond the normal scope they would provide” to the county. He stressed the document provided to the board and included in the agenda was not the 28E agreement.

“This is an engagement letter saying we would like to engage Ahlers & Cooney’s services to help us draft this agreement is all it is,” Talsma said.

Skepticism about the agreement began at the board table.

It seemed to Supervisor Doug Cupples that it could be something the county could work out without paying a lawyer, but Talsma countered that he would like it in writing. Cupples even suggested the matter be held off until a later date, and he wanted the county to avoid paying exorbitant lawyer fees.

“We just spent, like, $100,000 for the rail park,” Talsma said. “Two thousand dollars in attorney fees really isn’t that much. So what are you proposing?”

Cupples proposed the county try to work things out with conservation before going down this route. Talsma argued whatever they work out will still have to be put into writing, which would require the county to still pay an attorney to draft a 28E agreement. Talsma felt an agreement was needed for the nature center.

“That way going forward — and even with subsequent boards of supervisors — it says this is the county’s responsibility, this is what we will do, this is what we won’t do, this is what we’re expecting conservation to do,” Talsma said. “And it’s all laid out for future conservation boards and with future boards of supervisors.”

Jasper County Conservation Director Keri Van Zante asked if creating a 28E agreement ties future boards’ hands in doing what they want to do with the nature center. Talsma said not 100 percent. Nothing the board can do can tie a future board’s hands; a 28E agreement can be changed by a future board.

“Is this something the county is going to do for all new projects, new buildings? Or is it just conservation?” Van Zante asked.

Talsma said, “It’s just conservation because you guys are the only ones that are building a standalone building for your department. Everybody else is housed in a county facility.”

Van Zante argued the nature center will become a county building housing county employees. Talsma agreed but said for the past 15 years it has been clearly communicated that the upkeep and maintenance of the nature center will not fall back to the responsibility of taxpayers.

Van Zante said, “It just seems strange when millions of dollars have come from the community. It’s hard for me to explain to people why the board doesn’t want to put any future–“

Talsma interjected, “Oh no, Keri, it’s not just this board. For 15 years this has been what has been communicated, including with Denny Stevenson who was on the board when this whole thing first started.”

When $400,000 in ARPA funds was awarded to conservation, Talsma said it was communicated once again that the costs of the nature center would not fall back to the taxpayers. Talsma added that fundraising for the initial construction is all fine and dandy, but then years down the road it could require tax to maintain.

Accompanying Van Zante at the June 24 supervisors meeting was conservation board member Andrew Stone. He felt like the supervisors were picking on one department. Talsma argued conservation is the only department building its own facility, noting the county engineer cannot fundraise for a new facility.

Supervisor Thad Nearmyer said he didn’t feel like the board was picking on one department, and he felt an agreement would give both parties clear direction for the nature center. Van Zante mentioned that one idea for a funding stream for the nature center would be to rent out the facility, but Talsma didn’t like the idea.

“Could that be re-talked about when we’re talking about this too?” she asked.

Talsma said, “I think all of that can be included in this 28E agreement.”

Still, Talsma also noted the board does not want to “get in the business of being in direct competition with private venues that operate in Jasper County.” Stone questioned where the board draws the line on competition for event venues and that he doesn’t foresee it to be a big problem.

“There is enough for everyone to be involved,” Stone said

Talsma said, “OK, well I don’t. And what I hear back from the private venue holders is they are concerned about us trying to set up a public venue that will run in competition with them.”

Regardless, Nearmyer said it should be part of the discussion.