DOT answers questions about JETS facility

     After a lot of discussion concerning a new JETS facility in Jones County, the Board of Supervisors held a conference call with the Iowa DOT (Department of Transportation) Office of Public Transit to get some additional questions answered.

     During the March 21 board meeting, County Attorney Phil Parsons, JETS Manager Kathy Koerperich, and Brock Grenis with ECICOG also sat in on the call.

     As far as ECICOG owning the proposed JETS facility for 30 years before the county takes ownership, the DOT said that timeframe is based on federal guidelines.

     “The state changed to align with the feds as far as useful life of a building to ensure the facility is in the hands of transit for a 30-year lifespan,” explained the DOT. “It could be 30-40 years depending on the materials used.”

     ECICOG applied for the DOT transportation grant for the JETS building. So ECICOG would have to own the building, if built, now that the grant has been awarded.

     Supervisor Jon Zirkelbach asked whether that 30-year lifespan would ever change. The simple answer: No.

     Parsons commented that just because the 30-year stipulation is part of the DOT’s guidelines, that doesn’t necessarily mean they couldn’t deviate from that.

     “We have no reason to,” the DOT said. “We have to be consistent.”

     Supervisor Wayne Manternach asked whether the county would get its 20 percent match back should the building get sold before the end of that 30 years or if ECICOG ceases to exist.

     The DOT is not involved in that 80/20 arrangement. But, if the above scenario proved true, the DOT would request its grant funding back on the building’s depreciated value. That money would have to come from ECICOG and/or the county somehow.

     Parsons told the board that the county needs to have another conversation with ECICOG to make sure the county’s share was protected.

     “The DOT would get reimbursed,” said Parsons, “but there’s nothing as far as the county to get reimbursed.”

     “We can work that protection into the MOU (memorandum of understanding),” suggested Grenis.

     “I would feel a lot more comfortable with that,” said Supervisor Joe Oswald.

     Before the county can move forward on the JETS project, a request for qualifications (RFQ) has to be submitted. The property on which the facility would be built also has to be purchased. This would be done by the county itself.

     “My position,” offered Parsons, “is that I am against it. It’s too risky, but I’m not the decision-maker. It may not necessarily be cost-effective for the county.” Parsons said basically the county would have to provide maintenance on a building for 30 years that they do not even own, just to protect vehicles (JETS) that the county doesn’t own as well.

     “There might be other options that we can entertain,” suggested Zirkelbach.

     Grenis said the county has at least a month to make a final decision on the JETS building.

     “The sooner the better, though,” he said.

     An RFQ would not be released, said Grenis, until the county was firm on its decision.

     “For me,” commented Supervisor Ned Rohwedder, “I feel it’s a good deal with the grant.”

     “There is so much involved, and a lot we have to do,” said Manternach.

     “JETS is a great service,” said Oswald, “one we need to continue to provide.”