Awkward First Date - Linn and CR

Linn County Supervisor Brent Oleson has an interesting assessment on his blog of the board's meeting last week with the Cedar Rapids City Council.

He compares it to an awkward first date. But it was no love fest.

For instance, it doesn't sound like the county board is keenly interested in bankrolling projects on the city's wish list:

We learned that the City of Cedar Rapids would like the county to bond for many different projects that they have on a wish list from an amphitheater to a nearly $80,000,000.00 PLAY (Planning Lifelong Activities for You) fun & fitness center. There's more, but we won't be bonding for any of that so I will stop there.

Additionally, we politely indicated to CR leaders that first and foremost the county had to have an ownership interest in the project being proposed. Second, we had to work cooperatively and be equal partners in the process that develops and implements the project (in other words, were not your bank account). Third, that any bond issue would be put in front of the voters (I believe Mayor Corbett promised that as well in his campaign). Finally, and I only speak for myself here, any bond issue will be for essential county purposes ONLY.

Awkward. Still, Oleson is looking for a meaningful commitment:

I would love to get along with the Cedar Rapids city council. We work very cooperatively with other city councils and mayors all over Linn county, so its a little strange to me that we have some communication and partnering problems with Linn County's largest city. I think 80% of the problems would be resolved if CR leaders recognized that county leaders must be included in issues at the beginning and fully if they want county help in solving problems; that county and city leaders must communicate on a regular basis and that communication must be meaningful; that neither city or county leaders should have contempt for the other and do things which minimize or all-together exclude one from real and meaningful participation in solving problems (that usually means varying ideas and a debate and some compromising).

Will they ever get together? I have my doubts, but stranger couplings have succeeded.

Oleson's points are valid. As I've said before, if the two governments could succeed at just one  joint effort, it could lead to bigger things. I thought animal control would be the one, but I was wrong.

And I don't think it will be an amenity in the center of the city. That's not going to wash with the board's constituency outside the metroplex. It's got to be an effort with crystal clear, mutual benefits.

Oleson mentions flood mitigation as a possible place for cooperation, and I agree that would be a good candidate. And it would be a good ice breaker for date No. 2.