The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-02-19 Info Packet-' '-� CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY February 19, 2015 www.icgov.org IP1 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule FEBRUARY 23 WORK SESSION IP2 Work Session Agenda IP3 Information from Iowa City Community School District: February 10 Minutes and maps IN Memo from Recycling Coordinator: Multi -family recycling update and recommendations IP5 Memo from City Clerk: Proposed Meeting Schedule, April —August 2015 IP6 Pending City Council Work Session Topics MISCELLANEOUS IP7 Copy of letter to Board of Regents from Mayor Hayek: Presidential Search and Screen Committee IP8 Email from President of League of Women Voters of Johnson County to Mayor Hayek and Mayor response: Combining Assessor offices IP9 Article from City Manager: State Revenue Falls $100 Million Below Estimates IP10 Article from City Manager: Farmland values drop for first time since 1986 IP11 Email from Mark Koehler and response from Police Chief: Crime in Iowa City IP12 Response from Supt. of Parks and Forestry to email from Sandra McQuillen: Cedar Rapids ash borer plan IP13 Civil Services Entrance Examination — Maintenance Worker I - Refuse IP14 Copy of letter to Highland Avenue residents / businesses: Traffic Calming on Highland Avenue DRAFT MINUTES IP15 Historic Preservation Commission: February 12 IP16 Housing and Community Development Commission: January 15 IP17 Public Art Advisory Committee: February 5 r City Council Tentative Meeting 02-19-15 Schedule LSP1 LIQ _ ex Subject to change February 19, 2015 -ftk iwp��Dit CITY OF IOWA CITY Date Time Meeting Location Monday, February 23, 2015 5:00 PM Special Formal Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting 7:00 PM Special Formal Meeting Monday, March 9, 2015 5:00 PM City Conference Board Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall Work Session Meeting 7:00 PM Special Formal Meeting Monday, March 23, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, April 7, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Monday, April 20, 2015 4:00 PM Reception prior to meeting TBA (Coralville) 4:30 PM Joint Meeting / Work Session Tuesday, April 21, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 5, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 19, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, June 2, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, June 16, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, July 7, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, July 21, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall Formal Meeting Tuesday, August 4, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, August 18, 2015 5:00 PM Work Session Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting 19-15 IP2 1 r i ,=M.® +cW1�� ,wr ®' CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City. Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org Special Formal / Executive Session 5:00 PM — separate agenda posted City Council Work Session Agenda Monday, February 23, 2015 Following 5:00 PM Special Formal Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall - City Hall 410 E. Washington Street 5:00 PM ■ Questions from Council re Agenda Items ■ Review resolution on the Equity Report Action Plan [# 8] ■ Review the ICCSD Boundary Proposals [IP # 3 Info Packet of 2/19] ■ Discuss recycling opportunities for multi -family housing [IP # 4 info Packet of 2/19] ■ Council Appointments [# 11 ] ■ Information Packet Discussion [February 12, 19] ■ Council Time ■ Meeting Schedule [IP # 5 info Packet of 2/19] ■ Pending Work Session Topics [IP # 6 Info Packet of 2/19] ■ Upcoming Community Events/Council Invitations Board of Directors Work Session Minutes Tuesday, February 10, 2015 Educational Services Center - Room 142C 1725 N. Dodge Street Iowa City, Iowa 52245 Generated by Kim Colvin on Tuesday, February 10, 2015 Members Present: Tuyet Dorau, Patti Fields, Brian Kirschling, Chris Lynch, Marla Swesey, Orville Townsend Members Absent: Jeff McGinness Also Present: Superintendent, Steve Murley; Chief Academic Officer, Becky Furlong; Chief Talent Officer/Chief Community Affairs Officer, Chace Ramey; Chief Operating Officer/ Chief Technology Officer, David Dude; Chief Financial Officer/Board Secretary, Craig Hansel The meeting was called to order at 9:09 pm. 1. Attendance Area Lynch reviewed the handout showing community feedback from the Board listening posts regarding attendance areas. Mudey stated the Policy and Engagement Committee discussed the role of the diversity policy after Itwas repealed, equity in attendance areas, matriculation, and Appendix 5: Parameters for School Facilities Planning. Murley presented a first daft of secondary attendance areas. He reviewed the changes which showed more balance in SES learner, ELL learner, and special needs learner percentages. The Board discussed the proposed attendance areas and public transportabon/how readily accessible, proximity of students to one school but assigned to another, transportation not factored in, parental access and involvement, keeping ELL, special needs, and SES gaps as small as possible, concern of opening Liberty High at capacity, and the need to look at boundaries on a more regular basis. Administration will create two more maps; one with clean slate boundaries, and the other more geographically compact with efficiency and bring them back to the Board for input on March 10, 2015. 2. Discretionary Bussing Administration has discussed the potential for eliminating discretionary bussing and the Board indicated they did not want to do that. Administration looked at a universal pay to ride system as a whole however the challenge is the cost incurred would be $ 1,200,000 for elementary if everyone took advantage of it. The Board discussed the blanket approach to just end discretionary bussing being concerning and not acceptable, evaluating all current discretionary areas to see If there have been any changes that would warrant elimination, the need to look at each area individually, ensuring all like area in the district are treated the same, safety issues/concems, prioritizing current criteria, a methodology in evaluating starting with building principals for their input, and if this is the right time to do it in light of possible shifts in attendance zones. Dude sought clarity on Board direction which was a starting point of taking the current discretionary areas to building principals for their input. 3. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 10:21 pm. Board President Board Secretary Potential High School Boundaries --1A xxxrea �� o o e - o e F x 4 xo. w a i _. i aaxo. x - - - x (�. T r + - ♦N fr3 I � � a I �1 � k III � �� --! �� iw�• wa1r�� 11 �'�� 4111 �\ .I — r— r� f I I � •- I � £ N � 111111 xxa,ati{ y_ z - xw a. 34 1111114E 111 Oc ' \ � aiq ' y 41 FA TQ- g — — i rc mxEu 6 � ➢ $ a� uwear® I s 3 � s 11 1 L 3 _ 4 r dx 1 �I�Ia $ a� a 4 — tt _ a N �� 11 {1111{111111111 r - � " I I I _ - 1 - _ _ 'TM II rll � 411-11-1i-F(±--IL TIS_, 1 0.5 0 1 2 3 Miles {{{ H l A = G d Sy— NAD 1883 St- Iowa S -h FIPS 1482 t N -L mb RG —f—I Gonc J 111111 • D N M1A r 1883 = 1 Ea3 Lig-1,848,418888] E - False Nndnm -o ww g �Lj{+} ♦ly-✓1+— -��aA I+ _ — _ _— �— _ - C S IA1 d -b35888 d d P_11 1 1: 40 61 S d d P-11 12:41 ]83333 Of Onn4S L d gi : 08888 - —* uwx 1r; UnRS Foot US v 111111 f i —r— F � � _ — — 411+11+'1 111111 1{I1{1II111I 111111111411 '1—l� Greateddy.Or-David Gude, GM1ief Opemt ng Offrer Iowa GM1y GommunTy SCM1ool Oi3nR Uptlatetl_ 211112111532117 PAI Road and parcel data cou rtesy of Me G,.g plic lnf.—on Sy—Gvsan of-J.h—, Gounry 11f.1-1.1 Te 1.1.gy Department Secondary School Boundaries 111 E ti l l l l l r city J 11111 F Liberty llllllr A11111L 71 11111— West School Total Students %Low SES Leamers %Special Needs Leamers %ELL Learners crty 1759 31.5% 12.]% Q]% Liberty 1,065 19.fi% Wert 1,311 33.3% 10.0% Symbol Legend • Elementary ■ New Elementary • Junior High • High School ■ New High School • Alternat- • Other .I II.L1 Surface Water I......... City Boundaries IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Child -Centered: Future -Focused Potential High School Boundaries --1A e y w✓. � y 3 ^i� I ? I "N �a , F. x, a ° a ^ e Q 0 i aaxo. ' JE_t- I "II{I ISA -5"L ° r � s 6� � I 0 m+o v "^® a ° e , I ^ o fI - s r � � ° i I � esm I x: ^ i g mo oaw _ -- i 1 0.5 0 1 2 3 — Miles C` y =1 G d to System_NAD 1983 statePlane Iowa sou[d FIPs N 1402 Feet P n: Lambert —1—ICan c D N ttA 19833 1,141,416 ae97 WE S F I R n g; 09999 1 d :935999 standd Parallel l_ 40919] Standard- Parallel 2 11 S L---, g :49W .9999 - — - - - created by D,_ David Dude, Ottief Op—, Offker I.. Ody OD —fty sch..I Oi3nR uptl ated- 211112915 3.34.9] PM 3 m' �I � � a� Road and parcel data courtesy Dfttte Oeograpric lnformat Dn Sy5em Dvsan Df McJDdnson DDDnty l nfo, to1-1D1Dgy Department Secondary School Boundaries III city Liberty West School Total Students %Low SES Leamers %Special Needs Leamers %ELL Learners crty 1,259 31.5% 12.]% Q]% n6eM 1,065 19.35% 1.5% 1.9% Wert 1,3]1 33.3% 10.0% 35.8% Symbol Legend • Elementary ■ New Elementary • Junior High • High School ■ New High School • Alternat- • Other . UJILIII Surface Water r_.._.._.. City Boundaries IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Child -Centered: Future -Focused sai-0 41 wlllPV CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: February 18, 2015 To: Tom Markus, City Manager From: Jen Jordan, Recycling Coordinator Re: Multi -family recycling update and recommendations On December 9, 2014, Public Works and Sustainability Services staff met with you to discuss progress on increasing the availability of recycling services at multi -family apartment dwellings. On February 12, staff from Public Works, Transportation Services and Neighborhood and Development Services met to discuss barriers and opportunities for multi -family apartment recycling. This memo is intended to summarize the progress and direction as discussed during those meetings. Introduction: Iowa City is comprised of approximately 27,000 households, about 15,000 of which receive curbside trash, recycling and yard waste service through the City. Apartments are required to provide service for trash but not recycling, as per a code change in 1978 when recycling was not available. Very few apartments provide recycling (about 60 out of about 1,030 total buildings/complexes). A pilot project, outreach and education have approximately doubled the number of buildings with recycling service in the past two years (from 30 to 60), but the vast majority of tenants do not have ready access to recycling. Drop-off recycling sites are an option for all residents but are not convenient or accessible for many people. Given that over half of what goes into the Iowa City Landfill and Recycling Center is recyclable {paper and cardboard (27.5%), plastic (21.3%), and metal (4.5%)1, extending recycling opportunities to multi- family apartment residents could significantly reduce the tons of natural resources that are buried in the landfill each year. Neither tenant demand nor outreach and education efforts by staff have been effective to significantly increase the number of property managers who voluntarily choose to provide recycling. Staff recommends the City consider a multi -family apartment recycling mandate to ensure that all Iowa City residents have on-site access to recycling. History/Background: In 1992, the Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG, now the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County) Solid Waste Management Planning Division conducted a Multi - Family Dwelling Unit Recycling Study. In 1995, based on that pilot program, JCCOG convened a Multi -Family Dwelling Recycling Committee made up of representatives from • City of Iowa City staff, • City of Coralville staff, • East Central Iowa Council of Governments staff, • University of Iowa staff, UI student government and an environmental group, • three private waste hauling companies, February 18, 2015 Page 2 • nine property management companies, • City Carton Recycling • the Tenant/Landlord Association. Despite support from the committee for multi -family recycling programs, no action was taken on the recommended policy initiatives. Cost, logistics, space restrictions and service availability were recognized as barriers to recycling programs at apartments. Since then, the availability of recycling services through private waste hauling companies in the area has improved both the cost and logistics of multi -family recycling. Over the past decade, multi -family apartment residents have repeatedly voiced their desire for recycling services at their homes. In 2012, the Iowa City Landfill and Recycling Center received funding from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources' Solid Waste Alternative Program to implement a six-month pilot project. Private waste hauling companies were hired to provide recycling services at five apartment complexes and condominium associations (190 units total). The pilot resulted in an updated understanding of costs and logistics for multi -family recycling and a Best Management Practices (BMP) manual that aided in outreach to property managers, condominium associations and multi -family beginning in 2013. Lessons learned from the six-month pilot include: • At least three local trash hauling companies are currently able to provide recycling services. • The average monthly cost for multi -family recycling services was $2.57 per unit. • Diversion rates were between 29% and 54%. • Contamination rates were low at all locations throughout the pilot. • One location reduced the frequency of trash collection by 50%, saving enough in trash hauling costs to offset the additional recycling fees. • Logistics and space for an additional dumpster were not an issue. • All five locations chose to continue to offer recycling services at their own expense at the conclusion of the pilot. Since the pilot program, staff has worked to share the results of the pilot project with property managers, condominium associations and tenants. Outreach has included: • a new webpage(www.ic og v or /g recyclepilot), which includes the BMP manual • ongoing media releases and associated media coverage • mailings to 250 local multi -family property owners and landlords • presentations to the Greater Iowa City Area Apartment Owners Association • ongoing conversations with interested property managers • partnerships with the University of Iowa's Office of Sustainability and Student Government to share information with students who live off campus in multi -family housing (fall 2013) • outreach to tenants at the Off Campus Student Housing Fair (2012, 2013, 2014) In addition, the University of Iowa Student Government has started an online petition to "request that the City of Iowa City implement programs that will guarantee access to on-site recycling for all tenants of apartment complexes." As of February 17, that petition has 1,664 signatures. These outreach and education efforts have approximately doubled the number of buildings with recycling service in the past two years (from about 30 to about 60), but the vast majority of multi -family February 18, 2015 Page 3 dwellings (about 970) do not have ready access to recycling. This restricts a basic service for 11,000 residents. Other communities have completed pilot programs, subsidized or completely paid the first year of privately -contracted recycling service, expanded City curbside service or mandated that apartment managers provide the service by a given date. Locally, all communities in Johnson County except Iowa City and Coralville offer multi -family recycling services identical to single-family recycling services through a contracted private hauler. Multi -family recycling was mandated throughout California in 2012. Other Big 10 college towns have various ways of ensuring recycling for all residents: • In Ann Arbor, MI, property managers are required to offer tenants the opportunity to recycle. • In Champaign, IL, the City -provided program serves residences with five or more units ($2.60/unit/month) and shared housing, such as fraternities and sororities ($1.30/resident/month). Temporary exceptions were allowed at the beginning of the program (September 2010) based on when trash -hauling contracts were signed. • The City of Columbus, OH, recently expanded curbside service to apartments up to four units and select other apartments and condominiums (an additional 15,000 household in total). For those not eligible for City service, drop-off sites and private subscription service are available, but not required. • East Lansing, MI, offers curbside recycling to single-family homes, duplexes and small, multi- family homes with up to 20 units. • Minneapolis, MN, requires all commercial and business property owners to offer recycling; a minimum twice -monthly collection is required. In addition, recycling containers, storage and collection areas, recycling instructions for tenants and a written recycling plan are required. • Evanston, IL, does not currently offer multi -family recycling services but is in the midst of a pilot program. • Lincoln, NE, does not have a program or requirement for multi -family recycling but has produced a multi -family recycling tool kit to encourage landlords to voluntarily offer recycling services. Discussion of Solutions: Recycling services could be extended to multi -family apartments in several ways. Currently the City provides recycling services to single family homes up to four-plex apartments. Options to expand services include: Expand City Service: The City could, over time, increase the number of homes served by investing in additional staff and vehicles. The City would need to acquire agreements for access and protection from pavement damage liability. This option could include expanding trash and yard waste collection services as well. Any expansion of City services would likely raise concerns from private waste haulers who currently serve the multi -family market. Require multi family apartment owners and managers to provide recycling services: This option would mandate that property managers/owners of multi -family apartments that are not part of a condominium regime to provide recycling services just as they are currently mandated to do for trash service. As is the case with trash, this would likely be accomplished by hiring private waste haulers who would either provide a recycling dumpster for the complex. Existing screening regulations would apply to recycling dumpsters. February 18, 2015 Page 4 Either of these options would require ongoing outreach to property managers, a code change and education to tenants about recycling. Financial Impact: Expanding City service would include budgeting additional staff and vehicles to serve more households with recycling (and possibly trash and yard waste services). Adding existing multi -family apartments dwellings would expand City services to about 950 buildings, or about 12,450 households; this would almost double the number of households currently served. Mandating property managers to provide recycling services would incur cost to the City in the form of staff time for enforcement. The cost for recycling would be borne by the property managers/owners and likely be passed along to tenants. In the pilot project, it was determined that the average cost per unit to add recycling services was $2.57 per month ($30.84 per year), with the range being $1.67 to $3.40 per month. It is possible that property managers could negotiate a reduced trash hauling service schedule and fee in order to add recycling services, in which case any overall cost increases would be minimal. Additional dumpster space or screening may be needed in locations that do not have sufficient room to simply add a recycling dumpster. In either case, staff time would be needed to draft a code amendment and perform outreach to landlords, private haulers and tenants. Recommendation: Based on conversations with tenants, property managers, other communities' recycling coordinators and the local private waste hauling community, staff recommends working towards a code change to require property managers/owners of multi -family apartments that are not part of a condominium regime to provide recycling services to their tenants for cardboard, paper, plastic and metal. Steps would include: • engaging property owners, managers and other interested stakeholders • working with Neighborhood and Development Services on the ordinance and including the requirement for recycling services in the rental permit application, and incorporating recycling into routine inspections, • finalizing the ordinance with input from stakeholders and • presenting to City Council In 2011, staff from the City Attorney's Office and Public Works drafted a code update to require new multi -family apartment dwellings to provide recycling services. This could be reviewed, completed and presented to Council in the current fiscal year. Existing properties would see a natural grace period of up to two years through the rental permit and inspection process. Exceptions would be considered to accommodate expected and unforeseen issues. Input from stakeholders will assist in determining these exceptions. Anticipated issues and potential solutions include: Fire Code Some locations may have issues complying with fire code. This primarily applies to internal storage. If a trash room is already provided, it should already meet code and could serve as an indoor recycling area. Otherwise, internal storage for a communal recycling area would not be required in the recycling code since such an area is not required for trash. External storage requirements specify that "dumpsters February 18, 2015 Page 5 or other metal containers must have tight -fitting lids and be stored at least five feet from combustible walls, opening or combustible roofs." Space/Logistics Parking and green space requirements only compete with recycling space if an existing dumpster enclosure has to be expanded or if an enclosure has to be added to meet zoning code requirements. If a dumpster enclosure/screen is already in use and there is room in the existing enclosure, adding recycling bins, carts or a small dumpster there is the most logical and inexpensive option. In some cases, existing screens may not be large enough and may need to be expanded (though smaller trash dumpsters may provide a simpler solution). Some grandfathered locations may not currently have a dumpster screen; in most cases adding a recycling dumpster would require compliance with screening requirements. The pilot project participants were all located in suburban areas and none had space or logistics issues. However, some multi -family apartment locations will lack space to accommodate a new or expanded enclosure. In this case, sharing a recycling dumpster with an adjacent property may be feasible. In some cases where it is difficult to locate recycling containers on private property, the City could investigate the placement of public recycling facilities such as mini -drop-off sites. Solid waste haulers may have additional options available. In some cases, it may not be physically possible to accommodate a recycling container; in these situations the City may exempt these properties from offering recycling. Service availability Private recycling service is available through multiple local haulers. Contracts between property owner/managers and solid waste/recycling providers will need to be updated. With the increase in service, private haulers may need to purchase additional equipment or hire additional staff to accommodate the increase in business. The steps outlined above should allow sufficient time for private haulers to expand service capability. �•I-rCITY OF IOWA CITY 1P5 -®� MEMORANDUM DATE: February 18, 2015 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk /VL" RE: Proposed Council Meeting Schedule, April — August 2015 Below is a proposed meeting schedule (April thru August) for discussion at your work session on February 23, 2015. The schedule takes into consideration Council Members absences, a summer schedule of meeting once in July and August, staff evaluations, and provides for remodeling of Harvat Hall. We can schedule a special meeting if the need arises. Please check your calendars and let me know if you'd like to make any changes in the proposal. Tuesday, April 7, Work Session, 5:00 PM April 7, Formal 7:00 PM Wednesday, April 15, Special Formal (City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk evaluations) 5:00 PM Monday, April 20, Reception prior to meeting 4:00 PM TBA (Coralville) April 20, Joint Meeting / Work Session 4:30 PM Tuesday, April 21, Work Session, 5:00 PM April 21, Formal 7:00 PM Tuesday, May 5, Work Session, 5:00 PM May 5, Formal 7:00 PM Tuesday, May 19, Work Session, 5:00 PM May 19, Formal 7:00 PM Tuesday, June 2, Work Session, 5:00 PM June 2, Formal 7:00 PM Tuesday, June 16, Work Session, 5:00 PM June 16, Formal 7:00 PM Tuesday, July 28, Work Session, 5:00 PM July 28, Special Formal 7:00 PM Tuesday, August 18, Work Session, 5:00 PM August 18, Formal 7:00 PM S:scheduleFINAL2015 (APR-AUG)doc iPs LZ _,i r MAN 0*1 CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE PENDING CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION TOPICS February 19, 2015 March 23rd 1. Gateway Project update Pending Topics to be Scheduled 1. Discuss city related marijuana policies and potential legislative advocacy positions 2. Review of the Sensitive Areas ordinance 3. Discuss formation of staff /citizen climate adaptation advisory group (spring 2015) 4. Discuss transit route planning framework 5. Review University of Iowa enrollment and housing projections February 11, 2015 Board of Regents State of Iowa 11260 Aurora Avenue Urbandale, Iowa 50322 Dear Members of the Board of Regents: IP7 •ra..._ CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (3 t 9) 356-5009 FAX www.lcgov.org As Mayor of Iowa City, I write to apply for a position on the University of Iowa Presidential Search and Screen Committee. The next administration will encounter many challenges and opportunities. The anticipated expansion in enrollment will impact student housing, transportation, urban planning, and the delivery of City services. Our institutions presently are making significant capital investments both on campus and near campus that promise to transform the community. A strong collaboration between town and gown on issues like student safety, arts and culture, public infrastructure, housing, and economic development — to name just a few — is essential to our shared success. More than most college towns, the University campus weaves its way around and through Iowa City. This creates a degree of mutuality and the health of each institution impacts that of the other. Since 2008, the City of Iowa City has worked closely with the University administration on alcohol policies, flood mitigation, public safety, downtown enhancements, environmental sustainability and other issues of mutual concern. As Mayor I would be honored to serve on the Presidential Search and Screen Committee. I have been through several search processes for the City of Iowa City's top executive position. I understand the relationship between University administration and municipal leadership. And I believe that my participation would enhance community input and help the City of Iowa City establish a productive relationship with the next president. Thank you for your consideration of this application. Matt Hayek Mayor City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 321-6598 maft-hayek@iowa-city.org From: Marian Karr Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:39 PM To: Marian Karr Subject: FW: Combining Assessor offices From: Gaylen Wobeter [mailto:gaMob@live.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 1:43 PM To: Matt Hayek; TNeuzil@co.johnson.ia.ua Subject: Combining Assessor offices Terrance Neuzil, Chair, Johnson County Board of Supervisors Matt Hayek, Mayor, City of Iowa City The League of Women Voters of Johnson County has received a request to support combining the services and offices of the Johnson County Assessor and Iowa City Assessor. The League is a strong advocate of efficient, cost-effective, proactive local government. We also believe an annual review of goals, priorities, issues and procedures along with hiring professional staff is fundamental to governing well and in the best interest of all. In the mid 1990s and early 2000s, the Johnson County League did comprehensive studies of both Johnson County government and regional governance. One area we looked into at that time was the issue of two auditors, one for Iowa City only and one for the remainder of the County. While we did not specifically conclude that the two offices should be combined at that time, we did believe it was an area that should be carefully considered. The League feels it would benefit both jurisdictions to discuss and review the possibility of one assessors' office to serve the entire county. Such an examination of the issue would allow all to best understand the nuances of combining the two offices that provide services to two constituencies. It is our understanding that the current offices use two computer systems. That too should be studied in order to best determine what course of action is best for Johnson County and the City of Iowa City. The League understands the urgency of replacing retiring staff, however regular and timely studies of office functions would eliminate the need to resolve a long-standing issue quickly. We hope both the City and the County will jointly address the issue. Thank you for you consideration of this request. Gaylen Wobeter President, League of Women Voters of Johnson County February 19, 2015 i ON CITY OF IOWA CITY Gaylen Wobeter 410 East Washington Street President, League of Women Voters of Johnson County Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 3S6-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX Dear Ms. Wobeter, www.tcgov.org Thank you for your email suggesting an analysis of combining City and County Assessor's Offices. We are also committed to providing efficient services and believe in ongoing reviews of personnel practices and long-term succession planning. Consistent with these values and at the request of the Johnson County Board of Supervisors we conducted the analysis that you suggest last year in preparation for Mr. Baldridge's retirement. The analysis was presented publicly at City Council's June 3, 2014 work session. Council discussed the issues involved and decided to maintain separate offices. I know that I for one went into this discussion very open to the idea of a merger, however after reviewing the analysis I concluded that maintaining separate offices was in the best interest of Iowa City residents. The evaluation presented to Council last spring drew upon the research of several offices across the state, as well as input from both the Johnson County and Iowa City Assessor's Offices. Reports and evaluations from other cities that were a part of our analysis included those conducted by Sioux City (2014), Davenport (2013), Clinton (2012), Mason City (2012), Ames (2005), Dubuque (2001), Marshalltown (1999), and Des Moines (1997). The Iowa City Assessor's Office also produced similar reports in 2006 and 2014. In addition to reviewing the evaluation materials of previous analyses, staff directly solicited input from officials of these communities. Our evaluation included a discussion of potential cost savings, but also addressed several other issues that are important when reviewing consolidation. The five issues reviewed were: 1) Cost savings; 2) City representation on governing and appeals boards; 3) the equity of assessments; 4) the accuracy of assessments; and 5) customer service. Ultimately, cost savings were not as certain or as significant as one might assume and in fact costs could potentially increase for Iowa City residents in the near term. This coupled with the certainty of reduced representation on boards was enough to conclude that a merger was not in the best interest of Iowa City residents at this time. A copy of our report which includes an analysis of each of the five issues above is attached. It is important to note that state law places responsibility for this decision solely on the City Council. Thank you again for your email. Regards, Matt Hayek Mayor of Iowa City IP3 City OF RWM CITY 410 Eau Wasloostoe Streel lows C11y. Ions 52240-IY26 019) SS64000 4319) 3563009 FAX www.itsov.org City of Iowa City Staff Report: City/County Assessor Organizational Structure IMPETUS FOR REVIEW At the request of the Johnson County Board of Supervisors, City staff conducted a review of the possible costs and benefits associated with eliminating the position of City Assessor and consolidating the assessing operations of the City and County. With retirements expected in the City and County Assessors Offices in the coming years, it is an opportune time to conduct this review. It should be noted that discussions on this topic have involved two distinct issues. First is the possibility of consolidating the two offices, as is the focus of this report. However, another related issue has been raised, which is the preferred assessment methodology employed by the respective offices. Assessment methodologies can be altered without an office combination. For commercial property, Iowa assessor's offices have recently been transitioning to the income approach. This approach uses net income information from rental properties to capitalize a value. The Iowa City Assessor's Office is currently collecting income and expense information and using the income approach for comparisons and for appeals with plans for wider use in the near future. The office plans to utilize the income approach for apartment property for the 2015 assessments. The Johnson County assessor has been using the income approach to value commercial property for the past few years. The information presented herein was compiled from reports generated by the Iowa City Assessor and the City of Ames. The study conducted by the City of Ames resulted in the continuation of separate assessor's offices. Both the Iowa City and Johnson County Assessors were extremely helpful in providing information. Input was also solicited from the cities of Mason City, which recently evaluated a merger, and Sioux City, which is in the process of beginning to study the topic. BACKGROUND Each county in the state has an assessor's office. Any city with a population greater than 10,000 may elect to have its own assessor that handles assessor's duties within that city's corporate limits. Currently eight cities in Iowa have a city assessor. The eight Iowa cities that have a city assessor are Ames, Cedar Rapids, Clinton, Davenport, Dubuque, Iowa City, Mason City, and Sioux City. Six of the nine largest cities in the state maintain a separate city assessor including Iowa City. There is no overlap in cost or services provided by the Iowa City and Johnson County Assessor's Offices. The City Assessor is funded through the property taxes of Iowa City residents and provides services exclusively to Iowa City. The County Assessor is funded through property taxes paid by County residents outside of Iowa City. The decision to maintain a city assessor or to consolidate the service with Johnson County will be solely at the discretion of the Iowa City City Council. OPTIONS EVALUATED Staff evaluated three options: maintaining the status quo of two separate offices; consolidating into the County Assessor's Office; or maintaining a City Assessor's Office, but contracting with the County to provide assessor duties within Iowa City. The third contract option was evaluated by the Iowa City City Attorney's Office and it appears that State code may not allow for such an arrangement, though to staff's knowledge it has never been tested. DECISION-MAKING CRITERIA It is staff's view that consolidation of assessor's offices should occur only if the following benefits are achieved: 1. Cost savings for Iowa City taxpayers 2. The same or better representation of Iowa City interests on governing and appeals boards 3. More equitable assessments among Iowa City property owners 4. More accurate assessments among Iowa City property owners 5. Better customer service provided to Iowa City property owners These goals are consistent with the evaluation performed by the City of Ames. The City of Sioux City has identified many of the same issues, noting that the "main consideration for the review of the merger is saving for the taxpayer. One rationale for pursuing a consolidated assessor's office would be if cost savings can be realized for Iowa City taxpayers. The majority of any savings realized would likely be the result of the elimination of a supervisory position. Conducting this review at the present time is consistent with the City's practice of evaluating vacant or soon-to-be vacant positions in order to implement reductions in staffing primarily through attrition. Additional cost savings could potentially be realized through sharing computer-assisted mass appraisal (CAMA) and web software. The FY2013-14 County Assessor levy rate for County residents is $0.2647 per $1,000 of taxable valuation. The City Assessor rate for the same fiscal year is $0.2587 per $1,000 of taxable valuation. Over the ten years covering fiscal years 2005 through 2014 the Iowa City Assessor's tax rate has averaged $0.2440 while Johnson County Assessor's average has been $0.3638. FY2014-15 tentative tax rates will be approximately $0.23 and $0.31, respectively. The following table presents the levy rates for each assessor's office over the last ten years. County Assessor Bill Greazel does note the following influence on the difference between the two levy rates when asked about factors explaining the differential: The major factor influencing my levy rate is the extensive use of TIF on the commercial properties in Coralville, North Liberty, and residential in Tiffin. I cannot levy against these properties but must value and defend those values in court. Coralville does contribute $50,000 per year for litigation costs. The assessed value of TIF real estate in my jurisdiction is $967 million, in the Iowa City office it is $21 million. In 2017 $35 million will sunset, in 2018 $470 million will sunset. This will bring the levies closer together. The County Assessor also states that after a consolidation, he "would not expect the levy rate to change in a way that the average taxpayer would notice." City Assessor Dennis Baldridge notes the following: FY2013-14 budgets are $853,856 for Iowa City and $1,211,570 for Johnson County, and taxable valuations are $3.021 billion and $3.093 billion. If budgets were combined, the levies would be effectively averaged and the resulting levy would probably fall somewhere between the two. The assessor's levy could increase for Iowa City property owners and decrease forJohnson County property owners outside Iowa City. Mr. Baldridge also notes that significant individual savings by property owners would require a significant reduction in total expenses, as the tax impact of the difference between the two offices' respective FY2014-15 levy rates will be approximately $8 for a $200,000 residential property. That being said, at this point it would not be feasible to develop a budget for combining the two offices with any precision. Further, all cost savings would not be immediate, as there would be some upfront costs associated with consolidation. Start-up costs could include converting both offices to the same computer systems, possible office remodeling, equipment and supply costs, and potential costs in equalizing salaries and benefits. The information below was presented in the Ames study. It compares the pre- and post- consolidation expenses for assessor's offices in Iowa that have consolidated their operations. Ames staff cautions that FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 10 Year Average Iowa city 0.23693 0.23765 0.23164 0.26077 0.24980 0.23848 0.23472 0.24632 0.24453 0.25873 0.243957 Assessor Johnson County 0.33885 0.32458 0.35393 0.35333 0.47873 0.37928 0.43792 0.37289 0.33390 0.26472 0.363813 Assessor County Assessor Bill Greazel does note the following influence on the difference between the two levy rates when asked about factors explaining the differential: The major factor influencing my levy rate is the extensive use of TIF on the commercial properties in Coralville, North Liberty, and residential in Tiffin. I cannot levy against these properties but must value and defend those values in court. Coralville does contribute $50,000 per year for litigation costs. The assessed value of TIF real estate in my jurisdiction is $967 million, in the Iowa City office it is $21 million. In 2017 $35 million will sunset, in 2018 $470 million will sunset. This will bring the levies closer together. The County Assessor also states that after a consolidation, he "would not expect the levy rate to change in a way that the average taxpayer would notice." City Assessor Dennis Baldridge notes the following: FY2013-14 budgets are $853,856 for Iowa City and $1,211,570 for Johnson County, and taxable valuations are $3.021 billion and $3.093 billion. If budgets were combined, the levies would be effectively averaged and the resulting levy would probably fall somewhere between the two. The assessor's levy could increase for Iowa City property owners and decrease forJohnson County property owners outside Iowa City. Mr. Baldridge also notes that significant individual savings by property owners would require a significant reduction in total expenses, as the tax impact of the difference between the two offices' respective FY2014-15 levy rates will be approximately $8 for a $200,000 residential property. That being said, at this point it would not be feasible to develop a budget for combining the two offices with any precision. Further, all cost savings would not be immediate, as there would be some upfront costs associated with consolidation. Start-up costs could include converting both offices to the same computer systems, possible office remodeling, equipment and supply costs, and potential costs in equalizing salaries and benefits. The information below was presented in the Ames study. It compares the pre- and post- consolidation expenses for assessor's offices in Iowa that have consolidated their operations. Ames staff cautions that there are many factors that influence each office's finances, and thus drawing conclusions from this data may be problematic. City of Marshalltown/Marshall County Consolidated 1999 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 County $251,969 $261,754 $444,823 $409,089 $426,640 $441,116 City $1751822 $183,531 ---------- ---- Total $427,791 $445,285 $444,823 $409,089 $426,640 $441,116 City of Des Moines/Polk County Consolidated 1997 Consolidated 1992 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 County $1,385,537 $1,347,958 $2,933,881 $3,224,338 $3,290,358 City $1,649,526 $1,674,222 ------ - - Total $3,035,063 $3,022,180 $2,933,881 $3,224,338 $3,290,358 City of Fort Dodge/Webster County Consolidated 1992 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 County $117,952 $130,448 $134,380 $206,822 $204,732 City $119,994 $1281179 $131,310 Total $237,946 $258,627 $265,690 $206,822 $204,732 City of Newton/Jasper County Consolidated 1987 Consolidated 1991 FY85 FY86 FY87 FY88 FY89 FY90 County $207,340 $233,817 $203,130 $376,861 $343,540 $547,640 $513,670 FY86 FY87 FY88 FY89 FY9rO FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 County $99,750 $90,777 $98,202 $110,478 $159,055 $169,804 $272,605 $192,972 $201,412 City $77,879 $63,537 $69,656 $74,741 $81,639 $72,700 ----- ------ Total $177,629 $154,314 $167,858 $185,219 $240,694 $242,504 $272,605 $192,972 $201,412 City of Waterloo/Black Hawk County Consolidated 1987 FY84 FY85 FY86 FY87 FY88 FY89 FY90 County $207,340 $233,817 $203,130 $376,861 $343,540 $547,640 $513,670 City $260,094 $238,348 $238,116 --- ------ -- Total $467,434 $472,165 $441,246 $376,861 $343,540 $547,640 $513,670 4 Ultimately, it appears that any expected cost savings for Iowa City taxpayers from consolidation would be uncertain at best. Even if the total expenses of the two offices were to diminish, the reduction may not be significant enough to decrease the assessor levy for Iowa City taxpayers. The Iowa City Assessor's Conference Board, currently composed of the Iowa City City Council, the Johnson County Board of Supervisors, and the board of the Iowa City Community School District, makes important policy decisions that Impact the financing and service delivery of the assessor's office. The city government has one vote, the county government has one vote, and the school district has one vote. The elimination of the City Assessor's Office would result in a lessening of the City's impact on the Johnson County Conference Board where the one city government vote would be determined by the majority vote of the twelve city governments in the County. The Board of Review is an important body as well in the assessing process. This body is empowered to adjudicate appeals from property owners regarding assessments made by an assessor. It is crucial that the members of this body have specialized knowledge of the Iowa City market. Members need only be residents of the assessor jurisdiction; therefore there is no guarantee that any Iowa City property owners, who represent a little over half of the County's population, would be represented on the County's Board of Review. Currently, the Johnson County Board of Review has three members, one of which must be a farmer. The Iowa City Attorney's Office represents the Iowa City Assessor's Office and Board of Review in all litigation dealing with assessments. They provide legal advice and represent the assessor's office in assessment appeals to district court and to the state appeal board. If the assessor's offices were combined, those duties would fall to the Johnson County Attorney's Office. ��PJ��%1►1�7_��I�1t1;T_I�1L�1�_�� ►�'�I�� A variety of tools are available to judge both the accuracy and the equity of Assessors' property assessments. These include equalization orders, the coefficient of dispersion, median ratios, and the price -related differential or regression index. These measures are available for residential and commercial properties, but not for industrial properties. Historical information using these measures for Iowa City and Johnson County is presented in this section. Both the Iowa City Assessor's Office and the Johnson County Assessor's Office have produced excellent statistics for many years. While these measures are presented for both residential and commercial assessments, they are best utilized for residential sales because there are enough transactions to be statistically significant. Using these measures for residential properties assessed at over $800,000 can also be problematic, as there are not enough sales in that price range to constitute a dependable sample size. Median Ratios: The preferred measure of central tendency in assessment ratios is the median rather than the mean because the mean tends to be unduly influenced by high or low ratios. The ratios measure selling prices in the current year against assessments set in the previous year, so if the assessments are accurate, the result shows whether selling prices are going up or down. The Iowa Department of Revenue uses the median assessment to determine equalization orders in odd - numbered years. If, after assessments have been set by the local assessor, the median ratio is higher than SOS%or lower than 95%, the state will issue an equalization order. Assessors use median ratios to adjust values to current market condition and can avoid equalization orders by making changes locally rather than allowing the state to do it for them. Median ratios for the Iowa City and Johnson County assessors' offices have traditionally been very good. Iowa City has avoided residential and commercial equalization orders for at least the last twenty years and Johnson County has a similar record. Ca "Mmdal Medlin Ratio Residential Medan RaW la 99 a 97.5 M 97 92 96.5 w 96 ' 95.5 2069 2616 2611 95 4WMCR7 69.21 97.77 em 94.1 ■2lrnseCwM7 f9A7 929 M91 f292 211092oto 2611 2092 -'wn city 97.12 9532 9737 #f9 '6lohnsan Courty 95A] 1937 f7A9 fS0 Ca "Mmdal Medlin Ratio la — a f6 M 92 911 w W 2069 2616 2611 2012 4WMCR7 69.21 97.77 em 9232 ■2lrnseCwM7 f9A7 929 M91 f292 Equalization orders are mandated for classes of property across an entire jurisdiction. They are based upon sales ratios, which compare assessments to selling prices. Equalization orders are issued biannually by the Iowa Department of Revenue when assessors have not done a close enough job of approximating true market value for respective classes of property. Of the five equalization adjustments issued over the most recent ten-year period, no equalization orders were issued for residential or commercial properties assessed by the Iowa City or Johnson County Assessor's Offices. Three orders were received for agricultural property by the Iowa City Assessor and two by Johnson County. Coefficient of Dispersion (COD) is a measure of assessment uniformity based upon the degree to which sales ratios for individual properties vary from the median ratio. The higher the COD, the greater is the degree of inequality in assessments within a given class of property. The International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) has established standards for COD. A score beyond those standards indicates the existence of an inequitable assessment pattern for that given class of real estate, provided that a sufficient number of sales took place within the jurisdiction. The State of Iowa has likewise adopted 6 standards for COD, but those standards are more liberal. That likely reflects the variety of properties and non -urbanized nature of the state. The charts below show coefficient of dispersion data for Iowa City and Johnson County over the last four years. There is virtually no difference in residential CODs between the Iowa City Assessor's statistics and those of the Johnson County Assessor. Both are excellent and rank at the top among all Iowa assessors. Both offices perform well below the state median for both residential and commercial CODs. Residential COD 2s 20 15 10 S 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 ■ Iowa City 8.29 9.99 7.32 8.02 — ■ Johnson County -- -- 7.07 9.83 8.46 7.14 ■ State Median 20.01 23.61 20.46 21.09 Between 2009 and 2012, both the Iowa City and Johnson County Assessors Offices were among the best three offices in the state in terms of residential coefficient of dispersion. In both 2011 and 2012 they were ranked first and second in the state, with the Iowa City office first in 2011 and the Johnson County office first in 2012. While residential CODs for the Johnson County and Iowa City offices have both been below 10% each of the last four years, the statewide median has been above 20%. By this measure, both offices are doing an excellent job of ensuring uniformity of assessments. Commercial CODs are normally much higher than residential CODs, mostly because of the low number of commercial sales, as noted above. Both jurisdictions normally have several hundred residential sales per year, while commercial sales number less than fifty per year. Therefore commercial CODs tend to be more erratic and less reliable as an indicator of the quality of assessments as can be seen by the highs and lows in the commercial CODs below. The IAAO suggests commercial COD standards between five percent and twenty percent. Commercial Commercial CODs for both Iowa City and Johnson County are somewhat erratic because of the low number sales of commercial property and the unpredictable nature of those sales. Iowa City especially has seen a noticeable reduction in the number of apartment sales in recent years with the increased practice of converting apartment buildings to condominiums and residential cooperatives. That being said, both offices have typically outperformed the statewide median in the data presented above. The Price -Related Differential (PRD) or Regression Index is another measure of assessment equality. Property appraisals can sometimes result in unequal tax burdens between high and low properties within the same property group. The price -related differential (PRD) is a statistic for measuring assessment regressivity or progressivity. PRD is the mean ratio divided by the weighted mean ratio. Since the weighted mean utilizes selling prices and assessed values, the PRD gives an indication of fairness of values. A PRD above 1.00 indicates that lower valued properties are being treated unfairly in comparison to higher valued properties. In other words, it would suggest that high value properties are under -assessed in relation to the low value properties which would indicate regressivity. A PRD below 1.00 indicates the opposite, higher values are being treated unfairly by being over -assessed in relation to the low value properties. IAAO recommends PRDs in the range of 98% to 103%. The range is not centered on 100% because there is an upward mathematical bias to the PRD. Both regressive and progressive PRD's can result from misclassification, appraisal techniques or systematic problems in appraisal schedules. Residential PRDs 112.00 - 110.00 - 108.00 106.00 104.00 102.00 100.00 98.00 - 96.00 94.00 92.00 2009 2010 2011 2012 ■ Iowa City 101.20 101.95 95.10 101.50 ■ Johnson County 101.00 102.06 101.50 101.20 ■ state Median 105.60 109.57 108.40 108.00 Again, both offices perform very well in this measure. Both offices ranked in the top eight of all offices statewide in residential PRDs in each of the last four years with data available. Commerical PBDs 140.00 120.00 - 100.00 - 80.00 60.00 40.00 z0.00 - 0.00 2009 2010 2011 2012 ■ Iowa City 108.10 107.47 115.80 129.60 ■ Johnson County 98.63 96.90 91.68 106.30 Commercial PRDs appear to be much more erratic than residential PRDs because of the extremely low number of sales. IAAO standards recommend at least thirty sales. Statewide medians are unavailable for commercial PRDs. In summary, available historical data provides the following insights and comparisons regarding relative accuracy and equity of assessments with and without consolidation: 9 • Over the last ten years, residential and commercial property classes in Iowa City and Johnson County received no state equalization orders. Both offices are performing very well on this measure. Coefficient of Dispersion (COD) data is also very favorable for both offices. Iowa City and Johnson County have both been at the top of statewide rankings for several years. • The attached Ames, Iowa study stated that Coefficient of Dispersion data for five other counties where the City Assessor's Office was eliminated showed only limited evidence that accuracy and equity for the major cities were improved after consolidation. In four of five cases the commercial COD's were significantly worse after consolidation. • Price Related Differential data indicates that PRD's for both jurisdictions are generally within the IAAO standard. MPROVED CUSTOMER SERVICE How a professional position can be eliminated with no impact to Iowa City property owners is a logical question. One way that this can be achieved is by improving efficiency and the quality of customer interactions through the use of technology. The County Assessor's Office is largely a paperless office, relying on its online presence to generate digital applications for homesteads, business tax credit applications etc. This helps to receive and store the data efficiently and provides additional convenience to the customer. Appraisers are equipped with tablet collection devices to eliminate the generation and storage of paper records. The Iowa City office relies more on paper forms. This works well for the Iowa City Assessor staff as they are working in proximity to their office and make frequent trips to their workstations. County Assessor duties exist outside of Iowa City and therefore staff have a greater need for mobile communication as they are at their office workstations less frequently. In a consolidated office, the distribution of assessment information over the web would be limited to one site instead of two, using Beacon software. As with assessment methodology, customer service-oriented process improvements and technology upgrades can be implemented with or without consolidated offices. Both assessors' offices utilize a CAMA system for valuations. Iowa City uses VCS from Vanguard Appraisals, Inc. for residential, commercial and industrial property. Vanguard is an Iowa company, whose CAMA system is used by over ninety percent of Iowa assessors. Johnson County uses VCS for commercial and industrial property and ProVal, a national company, for residential property. Combining offices may provide some customer service benefit in terms of uniformity of processes and self-service applications. However, this migration to a common residential appraisal software would entail some upfront costs and potential short-term effects on service delivery as the conversion would also consume staff time. Some of the cities that have evaluated consolidating assessor offices have the additional service delivery challenge of a county seat located in a city separate from the city with an Independent assessor's office. Such was the case with the Ames evaluation; the city had to weigh the effect consolidation to a single office in the Story County seat of Nevada would have on customers in Ames. Ames also evaluated the possibility of a single assessor operating out of two offices, one in Ames and one in Nevada. A potential 10 Iowa City/Johnson County consolidated office would not have this additional challenge, as both offices currently operate out of the Johnson County administration building on South Dubuque Street. Cost savings: It seems intuitive that the consolidation of two offices providing like services and the elimination of a professional position would entail long-term cost savings. However, it appears that any potential cost savings to Iowa City taxpayers would be modest at best and would not be immediately realized. In fact, there would likely be upfront costs to the conversion of software systems and the merging of personnel structures. While the two assessor levies will likely come closer together as large TIF districts elsewhere In the County sunset in the coming years, in immediate terms the assessor levy would potentially increase for Iowa City property tax payers as the current Iowa City Assessor levy Is effectively averaged with the somewhat higher County Assessor levy. The levy could increase for Iowa City property owners and decrease for Johnson County property owners. Representation: Iowa City will necessarily lose Conference Board and Board of Review representation if the two offices are merged. Furthermore, the Iowa City City Attorney would no longer represent the City in litigation dealing with assessments. Legal guidance and representation would be provided by the County Attorney's Office. Equity and Accuracy of Assessments: Both offices have an excellent track record in the metrics that evaluate the equity and accuracy of assessments. It would be expected that assessments Iowa City properties would continue to perform well in these measures with or without office consolidation. Additionally, assessment methodology or performance to these metrics can be addressed independent of an office merger. Customer Service: It would be expected that customers would continue to enjoy current customer service levels with or without a separate City Assessors office. As with cost savings, there may be long- term marginal benefits to be realized that may come at a short-term cost of staff time diverted from service delivery. Potential negative customer service effects of office consolidation are minimal given that both offices currently operate out of the same building. Further, even in the event that separate offices are maintained, both offices could be asked to use the same policies, procedures, and forms to the extent possible to facilitate positive and consistent customer service interactions. The recent review conducted by the City of Mason City resulted in the continuation of separate offices, as did the review conducted by the City of Ames. Mason City staff noted that, When we went through the process of considering the consolidation of the two offices we decided not to consolidate for a couple of key reasons. [The] first reason was the costs of consolidation and keeping separate assessors were going to be very similar. The county assessor was going to have to hire staff and convert our records to his system which was going to be costly and time consuming. The second reason was loss of control in the operation of the assessor's office. We would be one of many cities in the county making decisions on these types of matters versus only dealing with the county and school. 11 In summary it came down to cost to the taxpayers was going to be less with keeping the City Assessor and we maintained better control of this aspect of our government. City staff recommend maintaining a separate City Assessor's Office while continuing to transition to the income approach for commercial assessments within Iowa City. While the City is confident that the equity and accuracy of assessments and customer service would continue to be exemplary under either organizational structure, the uncertain cost savings of a transition coupled with the certainty of reduced representation make it unlikely that a consolidation would be of net benefit to the taxpayers of Iowa City. 1. Statistical Calculation Definitions for Mass Appraisal 2. Defining and Discussing the Ratios that are Important to Assessors 3. Coefficient of Dispersion: Hypothetical Examples of How to Calculate the Coefficient of Dispersion and the Effects on the Individual Taxpayer 4. Coefficient of Dispersion for Jurisdictions in Iowa that Have Combined Assessor's Offices S. Davenport City And Scott County Assessor Offices Draft Consolidation Plan 12 ATTACHMENT 1 Statistical Calculation Definitions for Mass Appraisal Iowa Department of Revenue 13 Statistical Calculation Definitions for Mass Appraisal INDIVIDUAL Obtained by dividing the total assessed value by the sale price of ASSESSMENT the individual property. SALES RATIO: MEAN RATIO: Obtained by dividing the total of individual ratios for a class of realty by the number of ratios. MEDIAN RATIO: The ratio located midway between the highest ratio and the lowest ratio when individual ratios for a class of realty are ranked in ascending or descending order. The median ratio is most frequently used to determine the level of assessment for a given class of real estate. WEIGHTED RATIO: The ratio produced by dividing the total assessed value of all sales In a group by the total consideration of those sales. STANDARD The standard deviation is the degree of difference between the DEVIATION: mean and any single data. The standard deviation Is arrived at by calculating the mean of a set of data, subtracting each Individual data item and squaring the resultant value. The average of these new values (the variance) is divided by the number of values minus 1. The square root of this number is the standard deviation. COEFFICIENT OF Technically defined as the standard deviation divided by the mean, VARIATION times 100; a high Coefficient of Variance (COV) suggests greater (VARIANCE): variety in individual ratios. The closer the COV is to 0, the more stable the sales group (provided there are a sufficient number of sales). Whatever the COV percentage is, given a normal distribution, it represents the range within predictability where 68% of the sales lie. For example, If the mean is .80 and the COV Is 25.0, then 68% of the ratios will lie between .60 and 1.00 (.80 - [.25 x.80]) The COV can be a good measure of uniformity. COEFFICIENT OF The Coefficient of Dispersion is calculated by first identifying the DISPERSION: difference between each individual sales ratio and the median ratio. These differences are added (without reference to negative or positive numbers) and divided by the total number of sales in the group (this is the Average Deviation). Divide the Average Deviation by the Median Ratio and multiply this result by 100. the lower the Coefficient of Dispersion, the more uniform are the assessments. A high Coefficient of Dispersion suggests a lack of equality and uniformity among individual assessments. Iowa Department of Revenue — Property Tax Division 1 04/20/09 14 Statistical Calculation Definitions for Mass Appraisal PRICE -RELATED The Price -Related Differential (PRD) Is a statistic for measuring the DIFFERENTIAL: regressivity or progressivity of assessment. It Is calculated by dividing the mean ratio by the weighted ratio. Generally, PBDs have an upward bias, as well as the sample mean, with the weighted mean not exhibiting an upward bias except where sample size Is small. The upward bias originates from the numerator in the calculation and can exhibit regressivity when the condition of assessment time lags exists. This bias should be offset by a reasonable margin for sampling error In interpretation. Except for small sample size, PRDs should range between .98 and 1.03. Progressivity Is indicated by a lower PRD and, conversely, regressivity Is indicated by a higher PRD. Iowa Department of Revenue — Property Tax Division 2 04/20/09 15 ATTACHMENT 2 Defining and Discussing the Ratios that are important to Assessors City of Ames 2005 staff report 16 Sales Ratio Definition: The ratio of an appraised or assessed value to the sale or adjusted sale price. (A+c!►g0 ,1�pnNwsl �A/As�esdawf Adiwlw2soallon, Mw bftmM o W AmmiWm of AMOSI s OMcas.19" ) Example: = S140,700 = 0.97 = 97% Sale Price $145,000 Diiscumlon: The sales ratio is the basic unit of measurement used to analyze appraisal uniformity as it relates to Mir and equitable assessments. It can be used to examine individual equity as well as a basic statistic in analyzing uniformity of assessments in groups or categories of properties. Median Ratio Definition: The ratio located midway between the highest ratio and the lowest ratio when individual ratios for a class of raft are ranked in ascending or descending order. The median ratio is most frequently, used to determine: the level of assessment for a given class of real estate. Ommmy 9(And Estaft AwnmwW Saks Rwin Snwd -, comOW by lwm D ofAc m ad Fhr =) Discussitm: As indicated by the definition, the median ratio is the middle, or midpoint, ratio when the ratios aro arrayed in order of magnitude. When you have an every number of Saks, the median is computed as the average of the two middle ratios. The median divides the ratios into two equal groups and is not greatly impacted by extreme ration. The median has several advantages in ratio studies. It is easy to compute and interpret it discounts the effects of data errors unlike other measures of central tendency. The disadvantage of the median is that is that it gives no weight to legitimate outliers. There are outliers that are valid sales that treed to be considered in a ratio study as the following example demonstrates. Sale Number Assessed Valve Sale Price Sales Ratio Outlier 1 5375 000 $150 ,000 2.50 2 5440 800 S190.000 2.32 3 S490,000 S250,000 1.92 4 5470 400 $320.000 1.72 Median S $510,000 000 1.02 6 $11150,900 $1,250,000 0.92 7 $1,980,000 750 000 0.72 8 $3,10010W SS 000 000 0.62 Outlier 9 S3 50,000 000 1 0.50 The example brings up two more points: First of all, even if you were to determine the outliers in the above array of sales were not valid sales, the resulting coefficient of dispassion would indicate a lack of equity and uniformity in the assessments. This point will be demonstrated in our discussion of the coefficient of dispersion. The second issue that the example displays is that what would appear to be good median ratio does not necessarily mean good assessments. 17 Coefficient of Dispersion Definition: A measure of assessment uniformity based upon the degree to which individual ratios vary from the median ratio. The higher the coefficient of dispersion, the greater is the degree of inequality in assessments within a given class of property. In general, a coafftcient of dispersion in excess of I.A.A.O. standards indicator the existence of an inequitable assessment pattern for that particular class of real estate, provided a sufficient number of sales exist. (lr+o"AppreW w dAsse mwW AAnkh&Wba, ilio WandmW Assodobw of Assns% Offo n,1990.) Discussion: The coefficient of dispersion (COD) is the most widely used measure of uniformity in ratio studies. The COD provides a measure of appraisal uniformity and equity that is independent of the level of assessment and permits direct comparisons between groups of 'Tia International Association of Assessing Officers (LAAO) recommends that the COD for residential property be within the range of o to 15. The IAAO's range for a commercial COD is 0 to 20. The only way to achieve a COD within a range of 0 to 15 is to actively study the sales of residential properties in your jurisdiction, conduct periodic interior inspections and apply the sales information to accurate assessment information. As you may have noticed when you were looking through the hypothetical examples, an assessment ju risdiction with a reasonable median ratio can have an unacceptable COD. Equalization orders do not improve the uniformity or equity of the assessments within an assessment jurisdiction. In some Instanc s, equalization orders -can make the COD worse by increasing the total absolve of the sales ratio. The COD is a valuable tool for indicating if individual property owners are paying too little or too much in property taxes. In addition, the COD can indicate if a particular group of properties aro paying a disproportionate share of property taxes. An example of this would be if high value properties were under4ssessed. This could have a negative effect on the tax bass for the entire assessment jurisdiction. As mentioned before, equalization orders would not correct this problem. In summary, the COD is a valuable indicator to assist the assessment jurisdiction in developing fair and accurate assessments. This benefits both the individual taxpayer and the taxing jurisdiction. Mean Ratio Definition: Obtained by dividing the total of individual ratios for a class of realty by the number of ratios. The mean ratio is used in computing the regression index. Mommy vl Re l FAmre Asws=wW Saks "10 Study, compiled by Iowa Dgwowo of Revenue std Frown.) Discussion: When the sales data has been properly obtained, screened and processed the mean provides a valuable measure of appraisal level. 18 Weighted Mean Ratio Definition: The ratio produced by dividing the total assessed value of all sales in a class of reaky by the total consideration of those sales. The weighted ratio is used in computing the regression index. 4 y 4ffird F— Jne=wxr Sass Rate Sh+, cmTHM by lore Dapubwmt of kffa re sed Ft.l Discussion: - The weighted mean ratio weights each ratio in proportion to its sale price. The mean and median give equal weight to each sale price. The weightirt feature of the weighted meas makes it the appropriate measure of central tendency for estimating doe total dollar value of a population of parcels. The weighted mean is required in the calculation of the price related dit%rential. . Price -Related Differential (Regression Index) Definition: The mean divided by the weighted mean. The statistic has a slight bias upward. Pr;ce- related differentials above 1.03 tend to indicate assessment ragressivity; price -related differentials below 098 tend to indicate assn anent propessivity. t�+�.�r,e,��, t� w�a.r�ofoer>«a. ►moa Diseession: Property appraisals can sometimes result in unequal tax burden between high and low properties in the same property group. The price -related differential (PRD) is a ddistic for measuring assessment regressivity or progtessivity. If the PRD is greater than 1.00, it would sum high value properties are underassessed in relation to the low value properties which would indicate regressively. if the PRD is Less than 1.00, it would indicate that the high value properties ams oveerasse wd in relation to the low value properties. The international Association of Assessing Officers reconunoneis a PRD between 0.98 and 1.03. Both regressive and progressive PRDs can result from misclassification, appraisal techniques at systematic problems in appraisal schedules. Comparing Median, Mean, Weighted Mean Ratios and Price -Related Differential Median: Weighted Mean: Sale Number Alae ssed Value Sale Prise Sale Ratio I S 171,000 $ L90,000 0.90 2 S 227,500 S 230,000 0.91 3 S 294.400 S 320.000, 0.92 4 $ 490000 $ 500 000 0.98 5 11, 00,000 $1.250,000 1.04 6 $2,;87.500 S2:750,000 1.05 7 S5 00 000 $510000001 1.06 Column Totals S10 70 S1060 6.86 098 S 10.670.400 – 1.04 $10,260,000 Mean: 6.96 = 0.98 7 Price -related Differential: QA s 94.2 –• assessment progressivity 1.04 19 ATTACHMENT 3 Coefficient of Dispersion: Hypothetical Examples of How to Calculate the Coefficient of Dispersion and the Effects on the Individual Taxpayer City of Ames 2005 staff report e C g t "va UA lu ri as •c C4 cS A uj 21 tv A N O O® Cl O O S <o � add_ 400 A o �yrbr� Mo N N �g H N M h H C4 eft wl� mo r - o 21 tv A N <o � add_ 400 o o �g .•Nc-� �v��on .r 21 tv A N �i V) Y�1 N W N A V !T E" A !? o t7 N N N N N N N V e+o®door I ms 8 F dock®cc if F ' nE>+wMlt N OA�o N t � Y %0 �c w NNNNN H N Ch t- H P w �►1 on M �.. N N N N N N M N N N N N N N N V .r,.rgvv,v,v ododood od flood o� Y "8 8" Al p>" p fA y fA H fA Vl L N N N iA /A H H a .�NMer hb P �NM'erh+�f+ N A V !T 22 M E" A !? o iANNN Nhy V e+o®door F if ' nE>+wMlt OA�o N � F %0 �c w NNNNN H N H H H N w V .r,.rgvv,v,v ododood Al fA fA y fA H fA Vl L a .�NMer hb P 22 M 23 iV 14 Zi h J,! I a -so a ocao E o � 0 I I cd d"'D JOS] C; a � � m A if. N O M W a'n H N V! fA H t� 1-0 H N 0 o� Id �$�ppF N ir1 H H H N H N — N M � v1 �O � S -r N ty .r %M %D g -- 23 iV 14 Zi h o a a- C; a � � A if. N O M W a'n H N V! fA H t� 1-0 H N 0 o� Id �$�ppF N fA fA 4* fA N — N M � v1 �O � a iC .r 23 iV 14 Zi h N 8 �A H H to H H N N N N H H H N tI�9AgoO pp �QQ a �p Q CI? O O C 0 0 0 0 F 1�OtS00000 �w � w M O p O 'r► $ O $ Op G g Op SCI A H H H N H NN iA Vy�� H 8 � G �p O b oOCC �HNVlHMHH 4 E N 24 8 �A ham N N N H H H N tI�9AgoO pp �QQ a �p Q CI? O O C 0 0 0 0 F N �w R O p O 'r► $ O $ Op G g Op A H H H N H NN iA Vy�� H 8 24 ATTACHMENT 4 Coefficient of Dispersion for Jurisdictions in Iowa that Have Combined Assessor's Offices Important Notes • A COD of 0.00 occurs when a jurisdiction has only one sale. This indicates a perfect statistical level of assessment for this type of reviewing method. Multiple sales are required to produce an accurate indication of the level of assessment for a particular class of property. • COD is based on sales where the property was conveyed by a deed in an arms -length transaction. No contract sales were included in this study. • The IAAO acceptable range for residential COD 0.00-15.00, while commercial property is 0.00 to 20.00. • Source: Summary of Real Estate Assessment Sales Ratio Study, compiled by the Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance, 1983-2003. City of Ames 2005 staff report 25 City of Des Moines / Polk County Residential COD for City of Des Moines and Polk County from 1994-2002 (Combined in 1998) W.w 35.00 - -- - - -- 30.00 . . 25.o0 p 20.00 U 15.00 - 10.00- p..... d..... -Il- .. ,a. .*I. .p....,a. ... ...•O 5.00 -- 0.00- 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 ! 1996 1995 1994 ----o•-- City of Des Moines 15.72 13.35 15.18 14.16 13.39 15.5813.41 14.04 • • •84 • • Pok County 7.84 7.35 7.70 7.25 7.28 7.36Im7.29 7.62 Year Commercial COD for City of Des Moises and Polk County from 1994-2002 (Combined in 1990) 40.00- 35.00 30.00-- 25.00 0.00 25.00- 20.00 • W.$. O• 15.00- 10.00. 5.00 5.00 10.00- 5.00 0.00 2002 I 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1993 1994 � -�-- Gty of Des Mores 37.77T21.86 27.08 26.66 27.96 32.16 27.09 19.88 26.75 • •� • • Pok ORIM 1 17.74 1 14.73 23.76 20.11 21.66 25.31 25.34 23.32 17.48 Year t n City of Fort Dodge / Webster County Residential COD for City of Fort Dodge and Webster County from 1988-1996 (Combined in 1992) 70.00- 65.00- 60.00- 35.00- 0.0065.0060.00 35.00 50.00 45.00 40. 30.00 50.00- 45.00- 40.00- 35.00- 30 -00- 25.00 20.00 15.00 10-00--_ 3.000 0.00 ry. •�- 19% 1993 •• ` 1994 1993 1992 - - - I - ' '-- 1996 1995 36.63 46.39 w... 1991 1990 . ■ 1989 1989 ---�-- City of Fort Dodge 16.29 13.30 21.36 17.39 15.22 20.41 19.31 17.99 16.8E • • •■ .. Webster 25.03 22.28 31.56 33.33 24.24 22.61 19.37 19.93 2232 Year Year Commercial COD for City of Fort Dodge and Webster County ftvm 19$8-1996 (Combined In 1992) 70.00----- 65.00 65.00- 60.00- 55.00---- 55.00 50.00- 30.00 - 45.00- 43.00 40.00 40.00 30.00- �j 0.00 25.00 00 00 10.00 5.00 0.00 - - - I - ' '-- 1996 1995 36.63 46.39 1994 40.05 1993 35.83 _ - - 1992 l 1990 1999 1988 19q-SU4 33.32.09 27.95 25.11 ---♦- City of Fort Dodge 30.31 • • •a • • Webster 24.25 27.13 0.00 Is 31.07 63.95 3.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 Year Note: Webster County had only one commercial sale wbcrc 0.00 is limed. 27 City of Marshalltown / Marshall County Residential COD for City of Marshalltown and Marshall County from 1995-2003 (Combined in 1999) 50.00 4s.00 40.00 33.00- 30.00- 3.00 30.0025.00-20.00 25.00- 20.00- 15.00 5.00 0.00- 0.00-2003 -- A- - - a ' '- .. - - - -- 2= 2002 2001 2000 1999 199E 1997 1996 1995 --�- C ky of Mlerdwdkown 14.70 14.03 13.84 13.44 14.34 11.43 9.98 13.50 12-00 -R- morshalcomty 14.93 19.12 18.70 13.89 22.00 13.6E 15.99 20.05 20.35 Year Commercial COD for City of Marshalltown and Marshall Couuty from 1995-2003 (Combined in 1999) 50.00- 43.0D 40.00 35.00 30.00- 0.00 25.00 20.00• 25.00- 20.00. 15.00.--- 10.00 5.00 0.00 • A- - - 0 • ' O 2003 2002 { 2001 2000 1999 11995 1997 19% 1995 - �-- City of Marahahtawn 48.27 35.54 4121 27.14 27.72 24.36 14.93 17.13 14.01 ..W-. Mmhad 41.10 7.32 119.83 20.99 33.25 24.39 26.36 46-37117.381 Year 28 City of Newton / Jasper County Reside>stia! COD for City ofNewton and Jasper County from 1987-1995 (Combined in 1991) MUM 90.00- 30.00- 0.0030.0070.0060.00 70.00- 60.00 p 50.00 40.00- 0.0030.00 30.00- 20.00 10-00 0.0® uuu.UU 90.00.80.00- 0.00 70.00 70.00-- 60.00- 50.00 40.00 30.00 2000. 10.00 0.00 -60.00 -- -- .. .... _ • - - 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1969 1937 - �--- City of Newton 13.18 15.26 14.61 13.74 15.41 14.67 34.97 121.21 17.03 15.11 ...� .. ,las County 1 21.90 22.79 17.68 22.00 23.91 21.15 26.10_L!9.07 121.54 22.99 Year Commercial COD for City of Newton and Jasper County from 1987-1995 (Combined in 1991) V uuu.UU 90.00.80.00- 0.00 70.00 70.00-- 60.00- 50.00 40.00 30.00 2000. 10.00 0.00 -60.00 .. .... _ • - ". ' 1993 1994 1993 1992 1491 1990 1989 1 1988 1987 --+-- City of Newton 26.51 12.98 t 15.22 12.51 8.S7 15.53 32.70 21.77 1 22.35 . • •a • • Jasper County 31.31 18.87 28.02 23.34 t 30.52 17.56 1 0.00 26.10_L!9.07 Yeir Note: Jasper Carry had only one commercial sale whore 0.00 is lid. 29 City of Waterloo / Blackhawk County Residential COD for City of Waterloo and Blockbzwk Couety from 1983-1990 (Combined in 1986) 60.00- 55.00- 0.0055.00 50.00 50.00. 45.00 40.00- 35.00- 0.00 35.00 G 30.00 93 8 25*00 20.00 15.00 10.00- 5.00- 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00, - - --=~x - ; - : -_'.• '•• '.r '� , , .. .. _ ..a•..•.• .,, 1990 ` 1989 1988 1990 1989 1"1 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 --♦- Cky of Waterloo 22.1E 22.44 22.71 21.34 20.57 19.05 23.96 39.04 • - •1 • • Bbckhawk County 16.00 16.32 18.32 15.29 17.71 16.72 13.95 12.04 Year Commercial CUD for City of Waterloo and Blackhowk County from 1983-1990 (Combined in 1986) 60.00 55.00 50.00 45.00 40.00 35.00 p30.00 t� 25.00---- 20.00- 15.00- 10.00- 5.00-10.905.00, 5.00, 0.00. - - --=~x ; - : -_'.• '•• '.r '� , , b 1990 ` 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 -= �- City of Waterloo 38.39 35.44 23.08 53.46E 28.77 56.95 48.27 27.32 I • • •8� • • Hhckhawk 18.07 43.88 21.83 37.49 3 I.00 56.55 44.6E 16.90 Year 30 ATTACHMENT 5 DAVENPORT CITY AND SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR OFFICES DRAFT CONSOLIDATION PLAN 31 DAVENPORT CITY AND SCOTT COUNTY ASSESSOR OFFICES DRAFT CONSOLIDATION PLAN REQUESTED BY DAVENPORT CITY CONFERENCE BOARD AUGUST 2013 32 The Mayor of Davenport requested that a working group of staff from the City, County, and Davenport School District develop a draft plan for the consolidation of the City and County Assessor Offices. The staff group was formed in May and have worked together to review the current staffing, budget, and programs of the two offices along with comparisons of other large county offices both consolidated and separate. The group developed average cost by parcel, population, and assessed value as well as average number of employees and type of job classes. The previous two studies done in 2002 and 2006 by PVM Consulting also were reviewed. The charge from the Mayor was a plan to consolidate the offices and not an analysis of the cost benefit of a consolidation. (Letter included for reference.) With that in mind, staff reviewed current impediments to consolidation that would have to be overcome and the timing of actions to make a clear path for consolidation. The City Assessor has announced her retirement in August of 2014. The State law requires the Examining Board to request a list of eligible applicants to fill the vacancy within seven days of that vacancy. The consolidation legislation should occur prior to the City Assessor vacancy. The County Assessor term ends December 31, 2015; therefore, he will be able to implement the consolidation after merger. A smooth transition would require that both Assessors create one FY15 budget that would allow for the consolidation in August. Both Assessors have significant fund balances; however most of these dollars are pledged to projects for assessment software or hiring outside appraisers for update work. The unaudited County Assessor fund balance at June 30, 2013 is $1,079,915. The unaudited City Assessor fund balance at June 30, 2012 is $443,378. CASH AND FUND BALANCE 6/30/13 6/30/13 6/30/12 6/30/12 Suh Fund Balance SAt Fund Balance County Assessor 1,125,340 1,079,915 1,142,419 1,073,205 Davenport Assessor 525,282 443,378 ,2,40,959 160,376 S 1-650- $ t_s23293 t 1-383-378 S 1231591 The FY14 budget of the City Assessor resulted in a property tax asking of $1,508,459 including the utility tax replacement dollars. That FY14 levy is $0.37452. The County Assessor's budget resulted in a property tax asking of $985,000 and a levy rate of $0.27996. The FY14 tax asking is lower than the FY 14 budget due to the use of accumulated fund balance for outside assessment work. Combining property tax dollars levied over all taxable property in the County for FY14 results in a combined levy rate of $0.33043. A goal of the consolidation should be to save enough dollars that the combined rate is not higher than the previous rate for the County 33 Assessor alone. The resulting decrease in the City Assessor levy would reduce taxes for a median Davenport homeowner by approximately $5 and a $250,000 small business by $22. Meeting that goal would require a reduction of costs between $350,000 and $400,000. COMpali30n with Other Counties Below is a summary review of budgets, levies, and staffing for the five largest counties in Iowa for FY13. FY13 numbers were used in this analysis as comparison information for FY14 was not yet available. In the cases of Linn and Johnson Counties, each has a separate city assessor similar to the current arrangement in Davenport. Combined Assessor Information FY 2014 Adjusted FY FY 2013 FY 2014 Utility FY 2013 Utility 2014 Utility Budget per Replacement FY 2014 Replacement Replacement Budget and Property Tax and Property FY 2014 and Property FY 2014 Goal Polk Tax Dollars Levy Tax Dollars Tax LevyTax Dollars Tax Levy Savings County $ 985,000 0.27996 N/A N/A Assessor 0.51059 48,444 3,314958 15,885,282,262 Davenport S 1.508.459 0.37452 N/A N/A Assessor 55,916 2,011,586 Consolidated S 2_493A59 S 1491A59 0.33043 S 2.11610 0.27996 S(380-849) Assessor 5,326,514 COMpali30n with Other Counties Below is a summary review of budgets, levies, and staffing for the five largest counties in Iowa for FY13. FY13 numbers were used in this analysis as comparison information for FY14 was not yet available. In the cases of Linn and Johnson Counties, each has a separate city assessor similar to the current arrangement in Davenport. 1,966,935 34 Assessor Information FY 2013 k of FY 2013 100% Assessed Budget per Budget per Budget per County Population Levy Parcels Budget Valuations S1001(Valuation 100 Population 100 Parcels Polk 430,640 0.24382 167,145 5,695,206 31,602,304,842 $18.02 W22.50 $3,407.34 Linn 211,226 0.51059 48,444 3,314958 15,885,282,262 533.53 $2,521.73 $5,104.01 Cedar Rapids 0.21871 55,916 2,011,586 5,326,514 Scott 165,224 0.28081 36,526 1,135,714 12,214,855,249 $19.08 $11.410.67 52,994.84 Davenport 0.3149 41,300 1,195,047 2,330,761 Blackilault 131,090 0.28236 73,913 1,500,280 8,439,105,003 $17.78 $1,144.47 S2,029.79 .inbnxon 130,882 0.3339 38,599 1,144,486 10,704,574,672 $18.37 $1,502.83 S3,7_16.21 kswa City 0.24453 22,180 822,449 1,966,935 34 In order to create a more apples -to -apples comparison, this chart attempts to combine the FY13 funding levels of the Davenport City and Scott County Assessor's Offices to analyze how the cost of the assessment function in the entire county compares to that of the largest five counties in Iowa. Even at current funding levels, a merged assessor's office is above average in efficiency for this group. If nothing were reduced by combining these offices, the new assessor's office would be in line with large Iowa counties. When considering merging the Davenport City and Scott County Assessor's Offices, it is important to consider what is fundamentally different and similar about the two organizations so that proper planning and thought can be given to addressing potential issues down the road. Similarities • Both offices have converted to the Vanguard Software system and in the case of the City Assessor have budgeted for the commercial base conversion, which will provide a basic platform for combining valuations. An opportunity to reduce consolidation costs may be available by transitioning future revaluations into Vanguard as they are completed. • Both the City and County Assessor's Offices utilize a Board of Review for appeals. A Board of Review can be maintained in Davenport if the offices are consolidated. Differences • The Davenport City Assessor's Office utilizes an in-house work force to complete assessments. The Scott County Assessor's Office utilizes a contract with an outside firm to provide the majority of its assessments. • Davenport City Assessor's Office employees are on a different pay scale than Scott County Assessor's Office employees. • Davenport City Assessor's Office employees participate in the City's benefit plan, which would change if the office were merged with Scott County. 35 Combined City and Average of Iowa's County Assessors Five Largest Counties FY 2013 Levy Rate City — $0.3149 / County — $.28081 $0.3037 Budget per $100K Valuation $19.08 $21.36 Budget per 100 Population $1,410.67 $1,580.44 Budget per 100 Parcels $2,994.84 $3,354.44 % of Commercial Properties 7.01% 6.37% When considering merging the Davenport City and Scott County Assessor's Offices, it is important to consider what is fundamentally different and similar about the two organizations so that proper planning and thought can be given to addressing potential issues down the road. Similarities • Both offices have converted to the Vanguard Software system and in the case of the City Assessor have budgeted for the commercial base conversion, which will provide a basic platform for combining valuations. An opportunity to reduce consolidation costs may be available by transitioning future revaluations into Vanguard as they are completed. • Both the City and County Assessor's Offices utilize a Board of Review for appeals. A Board of Review can be maintained in Davenport if the offices are consolidated. Differences • The Davenport City Assessor's Office utilizes an in-house work force to complete assessments. The Scott County Assessor's Office utilizes a contract with an outside firm to provide the majority of its assessments. • Davenport City Assessor's Office employees are on a different pay scale than Scott County Assessor's Office employees. • Davenport City Assessor's Office employees participate in the City's benefit plan, which would change if the office were merged with Scott County. 35 Cost Savings of Memer The following goals have been identified as major goals if the two offices are merged. • Maintain the Scott County Assessor's Office levy rate, which is lower than the Davenport City Assessor's Office levy rate. • Reduce operating costs by approximately $440,000 in order to maintain a consistent Scott County Assessor's Office levy rate. Merging the offices together will ultimately result in staffing changes. While it is not the function of this report to advise what the staffing will be for a merged assessor's office, below is an example of how staffing could be structured to obtain significant operational savings. While staffing levels would remain fairly constant, it is likely that the contract for outside appraisals could be significantly reduced and/or eliminated. The total annual budgeted amount for those contracts is approximately $500,000. The County Assessor Office's Second Deputy is retiring in FY14 prior to a merged budget. To smooth the consolidation this position should be held vacant until the merger. The combined office functions should be further analyzed to assure that through some basic process changes and reassignment of duties that all of the administrative functions are being met. Also the two Assessors should map out a process and timeline to change to more in house assessment work to significantly reducing the requirement of outside contracts. This change will create the savings needed to accomplish the levy rate goal. W Combined City and Example Staffing in County Employees Consolidated Office Assessor 2 1 Chief Deputy 2 1 Second Deputy 1 0 Deputy 1 2 Appraiser b 9 Office Coordinator 0 1 Office Administrator 1 0 Admin Appraiser Coordinator 1 0 Chief Clerk 1 1 Clerk 4.5 4 Total 19.5 19 While staffing levels would remain fairly constant, it is likely that the contract for outside appraisals could be significantly reduced and/or eliminated. The total annual budgeted amount for those contracts is approximately $500,000. The County Assessor Office's Second Deputy is retiring in FY14 prior to a merged budget. To smooth the consolidation this position should be held vacant until the merger. The combined office functions should be further analyzed to assure that through some basic process changes and reassignment of duties that all of the administrative functions are being met. Also the two Assessors should map out a process and timeline to change to more in house assessment work to significantly reducing the requirement of outside contracts. This change will create the savings needed to accomplish the levy rate goal. W Ilan Implementation The FYI budget is due no later than January 1, 2014 by law. It would be reasonable to expect that a combined budget could take 60 to 90 days to prepare. In order to begin that process the City of Davenport would need to vote on resolution which would state its intention to eliminate the City Assessor Office on July 1, 2014. The resolution should further address the need to collaborate with the County Assessor on the merger and to pledge the fund balance of the City Assessor Office for payouts and merger expenses. The resolution also should state that it is not the intention of the merger to increase taxes on the other jurisdictions but the City would work with the other local governments to assure that the goals of flat county levy rate can be maintain for FY15 and FY16. After those budgets, the levy rate would be a factor of revenue available to meet the budget needs of the merged office. That resolution should be approved not later than the end of September 2013 to follow the timeline suggested. 37 Memorandum To: Craig Malin, Davenport City Administrator From: Mayor Gluba Date: March 12, 2013 Re: Development of a Draft Plan for Assessor Consolidation Dear Craig, At the last meeting of the Davenport City Conference Board it was decided to establish a working group consisting of myself, the Chairman of the Scott Board of Supervisors, and the President of the Davenport Community School Board to develop a plan for consolidation of the Davenport City Assessor's Office and the Scott County Assessor's Office (See the attached editorial). I am officially asking you, or your designee, to begin working with staff from the other jurisdictions on a draft proposal to accomplish the above in a timely, legal and effective manner. This draft proposal would then be presented to the above elected officials for our review and consideration. I would like for staff to start work on this as soon as possible and to provide periodic reports to the above officials. Perhaps this could be done in conjunction with our intergovernmental meetings. I have asked the County Board Chair and the School Board President to select a staffperson from their respective offices to work with you on developing this plan. Please let me know how you plan to proceed with helping us accomplish this initiative. William E. Gluba Mayor, City of Davenport, IA cc. Ralph Johansen, President, DCSD Board Larry Minard, Chair, Scott County Board of Supervisors 38 IOWA CITY AND JOHNSON COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICES POTENTIAL COSTS AND BENEFITS OF OFFICE CONSOLIDATION OFFICE CONSOLIDATION Review of organizational structure was requested by the Johnson County Board of Supervisors Retirements expected — opportune time to review staffing Distinct issues: office consolidation vs. assessment methodology BACKGROUND M Each of Iowa's 99 Counties has an assessor Cities with populations greater than io,000 may elect to have a city assessor There is no overlap in services or costs between the city and county assessors Eight cities in Iowa have city assessors Six of the nine largest in the state have city assessors The decision is entirely at the discretion of Council ----------------------. - ----------------------------------------- Maintain status quo of two separate offices Consolidation into a single office Maintaining two separate offices but contracting with the County for assessment services State code may not allow for this option, though to staffs knowledge it has never been tested DECISION MAKING CRITERIA. Staff would recommend consolidation if the following benefits were expected to be realized: Cost savings for Iowa City taxpayers Equal or improved City representation on governing and appeals boards More equitable assessments More accurate assessments Better customer service COST SAVINGS Iowa City assessor levy is currently lower than the County levy Sunsetting TIFs in other Johnson County jurisdictions may bring these closer together in coming years Upfront costs to consolidation Software systems, equalizing salaries and benefits To benefit Iowa City taxpayers, the total reduction in costs must be enough to overwhelm the difference between the two levies Short-term costs; uncertain long-term savings; potential savings are marginal for average taxpayer Levy difference currently = $8/year on a $200,000 home REPRESENTATION The Iowa City Assessor's Conference Board is comprised of the Iowa City City Council, the Johnson County Board of Supervisors, and ICCSD Elimination of the City Assessor's Office would mean that the City would share the `city vote' on a County Conference Board with the other cities in Johnson County The Board of Review adjudicates appeals; Iowa City property owners would not necessarily be rArnrneArltAA nri +b,n _T"b"c" i 0"jj +A7 RnarA nT RPS l9 -NAT EQUITY AND ACCURACY OF ASSESSMENTS ---------- 0 ------------------------------- Both offices perform exceptionally well in statistical measures of assessment equity and accuracy Equalization Orders: none received by either office in the last ten years for either residential or commercial properties Coefficient of Dispersion: both offices in the top 3 in the state during the past four years with data available for residential COD Price -related Differential: both offices in the top 8 in the state during the past four years with data available for residential PRD CUSTOMER SERVICE n Both offices currently operate out of the same building (no difference to customer) Software systems, forms, and procedures could be standardized with or without office consolidation As with cost savings, there is the potential for marginal, long-term gains at the expense of short- term, more certain costs EVALUATIONS IN OTHER CITIES Sioux City 2014 review: will likely maintain separate offices Davenport 2013 review: maintained separate offices; may review again next year Clinton 2012 review: maintained separate offices Mason City 2012 review: maintained separate offices Ames 2005 review: maintained separate offices Dubuque 2001 review: maintained separate offices Marshalltown: 1999 merger Des Moines: 1997 merger CONCLUSION Cost savings: long-term uncertain; short-term likely none Representation: Iowa City would lose representation of its interests on governing and appeals boards Equity/Accuracy of Assessments: Exemplary under either office Customer Service: Exemplary under either office Recommendation: Maintain City Assessor's Office while continuing to transition to an income approach to assessments when desirable and standardizing processes and procedures with the County Assessor when practical Marian Karr From: Gaylen Wobeter <gaywob@live.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 1:43 PM To: Matt Hayek; TNeuzil@co.johnson.ia.ua Subject: Combining Assessor offices Terrance Neuzil, Chair, Johnson County Board of Supervisors Matt Hayek, Mayor, City of Iowa City The League of Women Voters of Johnson County has received a request to support combining the services and offices of the Johnson County Assessor and Iowa City Assessor. The League is a strong advocate of efficient, cost-effective, proactive local government. We also believe an annual review of goals, priorities, issues and procedures along with hiring professional staff is fundamental to governing well and in the best interest of all. In the mid 1990s and early 2000s, the Johnson County League did comprehensive studies of both Johnson County government and regional governance. One area we looked into at that time was the issue of two auditors, one for Iowa City only and one for the remainder of the County. While we did not specifically conclude that the two offices should be combined at that time, we did believe it was an area that should be carefully considered. The League feels it would benefit both jurisdictions to discuss and review the possibility of one assessors' office to serve the entire county. Such an examination of the issue would allow all to best understand the nuances of combining the two offices that provide services to two constituencies. It is our understanding that the current offices use two computer systems. That too should be studied in order to best determine what course of action is best for Johnson County and the City of Iowa City. The League understands the urgency of replacing retiring staff, however regular and timely studies of office functions would eliminate the need to resolve a long-standing issue quickly. We hope both the City and the County will jointly address the issue. Thank you for you consideration of this request. Gaylen Wobeter President, League of Women Voters of Johnson County From the City Manager CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS 2/13/15, Week 3 Inside this issue: Introduction 1 News of Interest 2 Bills 3 �11 M411 - Metropolitan Coalition Introduction State Revenue Falls $100 Million Below Estimates State tax receipts between July and January totaled $3.86 billion, which is $100 million below estimates made by a state revenue estimating panel, according to the Iowa Legislative Ser- vices Agency. A revenue shortfall could have a sig- nificant impact on state spending, in- cluding less money for state aid to public schools and universities, public safety, natural resources, and a host of other government programs. Gov. Terry Branstad has cautioned that the state's economy has felt a ripple ef- fect from a decline in prices for farm crops, which could negatively impact tax coffers. However, the latest revenue numbers don't necessarily indicate trouble for the state's budget — at least not yet, according to senior state fiscal analyst Jeff Robinson. "A lot of the growth is expected to be in the tax returns, which haven't been filed yet," Robinson told the Des Moines Register on Monday. "We are hopeful that the year will be normal." But he isn't certain the current $100 million gap between actual revenue and estimated revenue will be filled by the end of the state fiscal year. The state's fiscal year began July 1, 2014, and will end June 30, 2015. Sen. Robert Dvorsky, D-Coralville, chairman of the Iowa Senate Appro- priations Committee, said lawmakers are developing their state budget plans 2015 Legislative Session on a revenue forecast released by a pan- el of three state experts in December. The forecast anticipates state revenues for the current fiscal year at $6.86 bil- lion, a 6.8 percent increase over last fiscal year. But if revenue is down when another forecast is made in March, lawmakers will revise their spending plans, he said. Branstad's biennial budget proposed last month is balanced and fits within a five-year projection giving Iowa fami- lies and job creators stability and pre- dictability, said Branstad spokesman Jimmy Centers. But he said the Bran- stad administration will continue to monitor estimates from the state's reve- nue estimating panel. For the past seven months, the state's general fund revenue has been up $152.4 million, which is a 4.1 percent increase compared to the same period a year ago, the Iowa Legislative Services Agency reported. However, the state revenue estimating panel had forecast that revenue growth through January would be up by $253 million. Some of the key contributors to state revenue growth over the past seven months have been: personal income taxes, up $88 million, or 4.2 percent; sales/use tax, up $65.7 million, or 4.4 percent; and corporate taxes, down 17.5 million, or 5 percent. In January alone, state revenue fell by $29.5 million, or 5 percent, below the same month last year. From: Tom Markus Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 12:37 PM To: Marian Karr Subject: FW: CBJ Morning Rush for Feb. 13 Please add article re farmland prices to the info packet.. mer Your daily briefing of the must -read news from around the Corridor, the state and beyond for Friday, Feb. 13, 2015. Compiled by Angela Holmes, Chase Castle and Dave De Witte, news@corridorbusiness. com Farmland values drop for first time since 1986 News on the agriculture front just isn't getting any better. Not only has lower commodity prices had a ripple effect on companies such as John Deere, they now are affecting the once solid Midwest farm values. The Des Moines Register reports that according to a Federal Reserve survey of agricultural banks released Thursday, farmland values in Iowa and four other Midwest states posted their first annual decline in almost 30 years. The Federal Reserve of Chicago reported that farmland values dropped 3 percent in 2014, the first year decline since 1986. Iowa was the hardest hit of the five -state region, slipping 7 percent last year. The plunging commodity prices are mostly to blame. Land prices don't look to get any better any time soon as farmers will more than likely hold on to their land this year, causing less of a demand for it. From: Mark Koehler <mkoehler1@icloud.com> Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2015 12:57 PM To: Matt Hayek; Sam Hargadine Subject: Crime in Iowa City Why has the crime in Iowa City gotten so out of hand? There have been several armed robberies and burglaries over the past few months, and now there is another armed robbery today. Today's incident happened in the middle of the day, just a block from where I park every day. I work downtown at the University and park in the Court St. garage. Now I am afraid to walk from my car to my office. Several of my co-workers have expressed concerns lately as well. I hope something is in the works to reverse this trend. Sincerely, Mark Koehler Coralville, Iowa Sent from iCloud Marian Karr From: Tom Markus Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 4:44 PM To: Marian Karr Subject: FW: Crime in Iowa City Please copy to council. From: Sam Hargadine Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 3:56 PM To: 'Mark Koehler' Cc: Matthew J. Hayek; Simon Andrew; Tom Markus Subject: Crime in Iowa City Mr. Koehler, Thank you for writing to the Mayor and myself. We are in the process of finishing the 2014 Annual Report but unfortunately it is not ready to be published yet. A preliminary review of the crime statistics indicate that crime overall in Iowa City is down. You mentioned specifically Armed Robberies and Burglaries. In 2013 we had 62 Robberies and in 2014 we had 58, a slight reduction. In 2013 we had 355 Burglary/Breaking & Entering reports and in 2014 we had 284. The total of all crimes in Iowa City for Year 2013 is 4,718 and for Year 2014 is 4,465 which is a 5.36% reduction. You can find the Annual Report for 2013 and previous years at http://www.icgov.org/?id=1965 and as soon as its available we will post 2014 there as well. We have had a rash of burglaries to homes and cars recently but this is very common when thousands of our residents leave town for the holiday break. Each year we put out extra patrols in uniform and plain clothes to catch people breaking in to areas that are commonly dense with student housing. Each year we catch individuals breaking in to cars and homes but we don't catch them all. Not all categories of crime is down. Incidents of shoplifting and auto thefts are increasing and since we know it we will take measures to reduce that trend. These numbers only reflect the reports that we receive of crime that's occurred. The Iowa City Police Department solves these cases at a very high rate compared to the national average and similar sized cities in Iowa. Iowa City remains a very safe place to live and though were not crime free there is no city that is. Regards, Samud & NaVacdine Chief of Police Iowa City Police Department 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240-1826 Original email received as 4f(7) 2/9 Consent Calendar Marian Karr . ........................_ ................. From: Zac Hall Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 3:44 PM To: 'mcquill5@netins.net' Cc: *Council Members; Tom Markus; Geoff Fruin; Mike Moran Subject: Cedar Rapids Ash Borer Plan Sandra, IP12 I have been asked to provide feedback regarding your email to City Council with respect to the Gazette article highlighting Cedar Rapids' EAB plan. We have conferred with foresters throughout the state and will be addressing the EAB issue similarly as others have done. Our plan will be a continually evolving process that will guide us as we navigate through infestation and recovery. We are exploring all economically feasible options and will focus our direction toward a more sustainably diverse forest. Fortunately, with approximately 2,000 publicly owned Ash trees, Iowa City does not have the same challenge as Cedar Rapids, Davenport or Des Moines. Do not hesitate to contact me if you have other thoughts or questions. Thank you for your input, Zachary Hall Superintendent of Parks and Forestry zac-hall@iowa-ciM.org (319) 356-5107 ��:c��ea io.a APlease consider the environment and do not print this email unless absolutely necessary. PLEASE NOTE: THIS EMAIL IS SENT TO PROVIDE THE COUNCIL WITH TIME -SENSITIVE INFORMATION. TO AVOID AN UNINTENDED "MEETING" IN VIOLATION OF THE IOWA OPEN MEETINGS ACT, PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY TO ALL." IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, PLEASE CALL THE CITY MANAGERS OFFICE AT (319) 356-5010. I Marian Karr 4f(7) From: Sandra McQuillen <mcquill5@netins.net> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 5:11 PM To: Council Subject: CedarRapids ash bore plan TO: All council members RE: Wednesday Feb.4 Story in CR Gazette Would like to call council's attention to the front page story today outlining the policy regarding Ash tree prevention treatment. Plan to follow this up with IowaCity Forester regarding present -policy. We are so dedicated to everything "green" in Iowa that I hope there are similiar plans to save healthy "speciman" trees rather than clear cutting as has been done in so many places. Thanks for your attention to this. Sandra McQuillen 3114 Raven St. Iowa City 02-19-15 IP13 �r CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org February 17, 2015 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Maintenance Worker I — Refuse Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Maintenance Worker I — Refuse. Tyler Jenn IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Lyra W. Dickerson, Chair r j -19-15 ar CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (3 19) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org February 13th, 2015 Highland Avenue residents/businesses Re: Traffic calming on Highland Avenue Dear Highland Avenue Resident/Business: You recently received a survey asking your opinion on the implementation of traffic calming measures on Highland Avenue as proposed by the neighborhood at a public meeting last fall. Each household/business was given an opportunity to vote for or against the proposed traffic calming measure in their respective section of the street. In the segment of Highland Avenue west of Keokuk Street, 100% of respondents (21% response rate) wish to proceed with striping a centerline and edge lines to better define the travel lane. As such, this action will be completed during the warm weather months this year. Between Keokuk Street and Franklin Street, only 44% of households (38% response rate) support the installation of speed humps, therefore they will not be installed. Between Yewell Street and Spruce Street, only 21 % of households (65% response rate) support allowing parking on the south side of the road where currently prohibited, therefore parking will remain as is. Police will continue to provide additional enforcement and periodic use of the speed trailer, especially where traffic speeds are greatest between Gilbert Court and Broadway Street. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at darian-nagle-gamm@iowa-city.org or 356- 5254. Sincerely, D ria a�i�'e-Gamm Traffic Engineering Planner cc: Tom Markus Jon Resler Jim Steffen Geoff Fruin Doug Boothroy Troy Kelsay Ron Knoche Kent Ralston Jason Havel Marcia Bollinger E5 MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 12, 2015 EMMA HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Ackerson, Thomas Agran, Gosia Clore, Kate Corcoran, Andrew Litton, Pam Michaud, Ben Sandell, Ginalie Swaim MEMBERS ABSENT: Esther Baker, Frank Durham, Frank Wagner STAFF PRESENT: Bob Miklo OTHERS PRESENT: Alicia Trimble RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Swaim called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL HISTORIC PROPERTIES IN THE NORTH CLINTON/DUBUQUE STREET DISTRICT AND THE CIVIC DISTRICT: Miklo provided an overview of the properties in the North Clinton/Dubuque District. He showed photos of each building. He summarized the historic survey forms for certain buildings. He pointed out the buildings located in the Jefferson Street Historic District that are already protected. He identified properties that are owned by the University of Iowa and are therefore exempt from the Commission's jurisdiction. He said that other than those properties only the Sanxay Gilmore House at 109 Market appears to meet the criteria for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Corcoran said, regarding properties close to the University and/or downtown, there is a lot of encroachment from the north with the big, new apartment buildings. She asked who the Commission felt about trying to preserve those properties. Swaim said she does not think those buildings are strong enough architecturally to be designated as landmarks. She said there are examples of that kind of building in the North Side. Swaim said those buildings tell a story, but might not meet the standard in terms of meeting broader themes in Iowa City history. Ackerson agreed that they were not of sufficient historic value to pursue designation. Michaud compared these to the houses in Mount Vernon near Cornell College, but these are not as architecturally as significant and the Commission has to choose its battles. Miklo asked Commission members, after having reviewed the packet material, if there is a consensus that 109 Market, the Sanxay-Gilmore House, is a property for which the Commission would want to pursue landmark designation or work with the owner to try to get it listed on the National Register. Swaim said it was built in the 1850s, quite early, and is a well preserved example of the architecture of that period. MOTION: Corcoran moved that the Commission designate 109 East Market Street as a property for which the Commission respectfully recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission consider and review for special attention for preservation. Sandell seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Baker, Durham, and Wagner absent). HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 12, 2015 Page 2 of 13 Miklo said the Civic District starts at the alley north of Iowa Avenue on the north side, down to Burlington Street on the south side, Gilbert Street on the west side and then over to roughly mid -block between Van Buren and Johnson Streets on the east side. He pointed out some specific properties on the aerial photograph, including the Civic Center, the Unitarian Church, the State Historical Society Building, the New Pioneer Co-op, The University of Iowa Community Credit Union, the recent building on Washington Street, Chauncey Swan parking ramp, and the Recreation Center. Miklo said this area was studied extensively by the Commission a number of years ago (mid- 1990s). He said that all of the properties in the area were surveyed, with the exception of those on the south side of Iowa Avenue. Miklo said that as a result of that survey, the College Street Survey, the Commission identified two historic districts: the College Hill Historic District, which is on the National Register and is also a local historic district, and the East College District. Miklo said that same survey identified the potential for some conservation districts. He said the Commission did implement the College Hill Conservation District, which went beyond this boundary and went up Iowa Avenue starting at Johnson Street. Miklo said there was some discussion of having a conservation district on Washington Street. He said the Commission at the time decided not to make it a conservation district. Given the curren question he advised the commission to keep in mind that this area was reviewed for potential designation, and the Commission did come to some conclusions and implemented some districts as a result, but chose not to include most properties west of Johnson Street. Miklo said the State Historical Society Building is a more modern building. In that same block he said the survey indicates that 410 Iowa Avenue, owned by United Action for Youth (UAY), has architectural merit and may be eligible just based on that. Miklo said there is a rather large addition on the back that does lessen its integrity but was done somewhat sympathetically. Miklo said the survey form from 422 Iowa Avenue, also owned by UAY, says that this has architectural merit. He said that unlike some of the other buildings eligible for the National Register, other than architecture, there weren't other factors making these eligible for the National Register. Miklo said he spoke with Marlys Svendsen, the consultant who did the survey, and asked her whether these really rose to the level of being on the National Register eligible. He said Svendsen reminded him that buildings that are listed on the National Register for architectural purposes encompass the one sort of building one can move without losing its National Register status. Miklo said that if a building is listed because of its history or association with an historic figure, moving the building usually disqualifies it for the National Register. Miklo stated that 430 Iowa Avenue and 500 Iowa Avenue are both modern buildings. Miklo said that 505 Iowa Avenue was built as a sorority house. He said the building was not surveyed but thought this is a building that would be worth delving into regarding its history. Miklo said the other several buildings down Iowa Avenue have been remodeled to such an extent that they don't have the integrity to be eligible for the National Register. Miklo said that 523 Iowa Avenue has had some remodeling but still has some integrity. He said this one would need more research to determine if it is individually eligible. Miklo said that 520 Washington Street was actually moved onto this site when the credit union was built. He said there are more modern buildings across the street. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 12, 2015 Page 3 of 13 Regarding College Street, Miklo referred to a more contemporary building and a building that was extensively remodeled as not eligible. He said that 505 and 507 College Street were also extensively remodeled and are therefore not individually eligible. Miklo said the survey there indicated there might be potential for a conservation district here, but given that there are only two such buildings on that part of the street with any historic integrity remaining, he felt that would not be worth pursuing. Regarding Burlington Street, Miklo said there are obviously some modern buildings. Miklo said that 10 South Gilbert Street is the one building that the historic site survey indicates is individually eligible because of a number of criteria: architecturally, historically, and association with important historic figures. Miklo showed 18 North Van Buren Street, which was remodeled and does not have architectural integrity, nor does 220 South Van Buren Street. Miklo concluded that the one building in the area that is clearly eligible for the National Register is the Unitarian Church. He said the draft planning document considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission identified this as having historic merit and states there may be a role for the City to play in helping preserve this building. Miklo said it is a fairly small piece of property, so it may be difficult to do much with it, whether the building is there or removed. He said the City owns the parking lot next door, so that may provide some possibilities for transferring development rights in exchange for saving and reusing the building. Miklo said it is clear the church congregation has decided to move. He said the question for the community is what the building could be reused for another purpose. Sandell asked Miklo to identify on the map where the contiguous, historically interesting properties are located. Miklo said there are the two at 410 and 422 Iowa Avenue, but they are booked in by modern buildings so are not something that would constitute a district. He said 505 Iowa Avenue has a building that, with some research, may be revealed to be National Register eligible. Miklo said there is another property at 523 Iowa near the other end of that block, but there are three buildings in the middle that would not be eligible. He said there is not really a grouping that stands out. Michaud asked why the south side of the 500 block of College Street has been disregarded. Miklo responded that there are two buildings owned by the Mental Health Center that have some historic merit, but that have been remodeled to such an extent that they are not individually eligible for the National Register. The two buildings across the street are also not eligible. Michaud asked if the other three or four on the block would not be considered at all. Miklo answered that they are not within the study area and not within the Civic District that is being considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Michaud said there are two that are adjacent that are original that are not part of College Hill. She said that one house is an 1890 frame, front gable with original porch, and it has not been well maintained. Michaud said the adjacent house is an 1880s brick house that is a five-plex with some Italianate influence. Miklo said that when the College Hill Historic District was established, the houses were left out for some reason. Michaud said she thought it was because of the owners. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 12, 2015 Page 4 of 13 Sandell said that when he walks down the street, he thinks there is a character there of historic houses, whether they are within the district or not. He said there is a streetscape character there, especially on the south side, and these houses contribute to that. He said that while the line is drawn in the middle of the block, he could argue that that is the character of that streetscape, and to take those two houses in particular and add them to the Civic District would not seem to fit into the character. Miklo said that is actually not the proposal. He said that east of Van Buren Street, those properties would be incorporated into the Central Planning District. He said they are not being proposed to being included in the Civic District. Sandell asked Miklo to speak to the purpose of the redistricting of those particular houses on that side of the street. Miklo replied that the Civic District is the area being looked at, because it is an area that was not included in the recent downtown plan of the Central District Plan. He said the actual proposal before the Planning and Zoning Commission is to add the three blocks that are primarily owned by the City, with the exception of the Unitarian Church, into the downtown district and add the area east of Van Buren Street and north of Iowa Avenue into the Central Planning District. Miklo said there are no zone changes proposed at this time, but if the City property ever redevelops the plan would indicate the area would be part of downtown and appropriate for a downtown zoning district. Swaim asked if the Commission is looking at both the Civic District and what the Commission might recommend be called attention to as well as the addition to the Central Planning District. Regarding the Civic District, Miklo replied that staff identified the area and called it the Civic District, because it is primarily owned by the City. He said the plan before the Planning and Zoning Commission would be to take the three blocks of the Civic District and add them to downtown: everything west of Van Buren Street and south of Iowa Avenue. Miklo said the other blocks would be added to the Central Planning District. Swaim asked if the Commission is being asked to make a recommendation on those others on the outside. Miklo responded that the status in the City plan for the other two that Michaud mentioned is staying the same; it is not changing. He said staff is just using the word district as a label; it is not a zoning district nor a historic district but is just a way to identify an area. Miklo said that if the area is confirmed as being part of the downtown, that area has a different set of goals for the area than the area to the east of Van Buren Street. He said those goals were sent to the Commission in a previous packet. Sandell asked what it would take for the Commission to include the south side of that block of College Street into the College Hill Historic District. Miklo responded that it would be an amendment to the district. He said the State Historic Preservation Office would need to be consulted. Miklo said he thought it would be a tough sell as a district. He said the buildings to be included would not be individually eligible because of remodeling, and the mental health building would not, because of the loss of the porch character and the addition on the back. Miklo said that if the concern is streetscape, that is a different concern than historic preservation. Sandell said that for whatever reason the Commission did not consider these buildings part of the neighborhood, he believes these contribute to the historic character in this neighborhood. He said he feels it is important that the Commission look at these. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 12, 2015 Page 5 of 13 Miklo said that if one looks at the criteria for a historic district, one of the thoughts is that someone from the historic period would recognize this street as a street of their time if they landed on this street today. He said that would be hard to argue for the this part of College Street, given some of the remodeling and intrusions. Michaud said that the south side of the street would be recognizable. Miklo pointed out that a streetscape encompasses both sides of the street. Michaud asked if a conservation district would work for this. Miklo said it would be a conservation district of two to four buildings, and he would question putting into it the kind of energy needed to establish it, given some of the other buildings the Commission is concerned about. Michaud said she understands limitations of time and resources and prioritizing, but she thought there must be a way to work with the building and permits department so that when someone decides to put in a four-story building, he doesn't automatically destroy the trees. Miklo said this is an area that the Planning and Zoning Commission has identified that is a concern to them in terms of the streetscape and the building mass in that they don't want to see another block like 500 Washington Street. He said the current zoning would allow that sort of building, so the Planning and Zoning Commission has asked staff to look at this very closely. Miklo said there may be zoning changes that could be done here that would result in new buildings fitting into the street better than what has happened on Washington Street. He said the Planning and Zoning Commission is interested in whether the Historic Preservation Commission feels this is historic or not. Miklo said that with these four buildings, there is just not the integrity to make these part of the historic district. He said that doing some things zoning -wise to make this a better streetscape is another avenue the Planning and Zoning Commission could pursue. Swaim said if the Historic Preservation Commission could recommend to the Planning and Zoning Commission that that side of the street or the whole block could be considered for a different zoning, one that would encourage maintaining the streetscape. Miklo said the Commission's role is to say whether these buildings are historic enough that they warrant some protection. Miklo said the Commission could go beyond that and say that if the area redevelops, the Commission would like to see a better transition to the College Hill Historic District. He said that would be a logical recommendation. Swaim said, considering that older neighborhoods have been carved up and are in some cases just individual or pairs of buildings that are still there, if there are ways the Commission can at least have some input into other ways besides designation, even if it is going on record to the Planning and Zoning Commission that this is important, it is worth the Commission's while to do that. Michaud said that, regarding massing, there has been a suggestion by several people that there not be multiple buildings destroyed with one large building erected. She said that would kind of control spacing between structures so that there would not be one mass or fagade. She said that right now the zoning is CB -2, which allows a 45 -foot tall structure. Michaud said that if it was just at least broken up into two or more rather than one building, it would really help. Miklo said the Commission is being asked to consider the building stock in this area. He said that clearly there is not enough for a historic district. Miklo said the Unitarian Church rises to be HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 12, 2015 Page 6 of 13 individually eligible, and so consideration of that as a landmark in the future or efforts to try to preserve it in some way would be a role for the Commission. Clore asked if any of the other buildings are individually historically important. Miklo said that the Commission is being asked to consider the building stock in this area and the need for preservation. He said that there does not appear to be sufficient properties to constitute a historic district. Clore asked if in addition to the Unitarian Church are there individual buildings that are historic. Miklo stated that the two on 400 block of Iowa Avenue have architectural merit, and there is not enough information about the two in the 500 block of Iowa Avenue so more research would need to be done. He said the ones the Commission is discussing on College Street are not individually eligible. Ackerson said that the Civic District, that three -block area, is one single entity that the Planning and Zoning Commission is going to be considering. He said it seems appropriate that the Historic Preservation Commission formally state its opinion on the Unitarian Church building. Ackerson said the Commission seems to generally be in consensus that it is worth consideration as a historic building in and of itself. Ackerson said the recommendations that the Commission might have on the rest of the property east of that seem to revolve around discussions of buffer zones and things to smooth the transition from the Central Business District to historic areas to the east. Miklo said that sending the concern that the Historic Preservation Commission would like to see a better transition is something that the Planning and Zoning Commission can then use to look at the zoning rules and how that might be achieved in those areas, realizing that the individual buildings are not being designated for preservation — that they might change over time but hopefully any new buildings would fit in the neighborhood better. Sandell asked, regarding the idea of the City pursing the Unitarian Church building for reuse, if there are any other examples. Miklo said an indirect example might be the Englert, where the City worked with a non-profit group to finance securing the building to preserve it as a theater. He said there are many examples from other cities of such buildings being adaptively reused including municipal purposes. Swaim said the Unitarian Church could serve many purposes in the community. She said it has architectural and historical significance and merit. Swaim hoped that the citizenry could encourage the City to find a way to save this building which might involve the City buying this building and work with other groups to find ways to reuse it. Michaud said it could be a great City museum. There are examples of other museums in historic buildings. Sandell asked if the two buildings on Iowa Avenue are being considered for being moved. Miklo said that he did not know, but wanted to make the point that when a building is listed because of its architectural merit, moving it does not necessary lead to its delisting. Michaud said she was concerned about the loss of those two houses. Agran said that the Commission would not be writing them off. He said they are of note, but whether or not they could be save through zoning is not something they would be deciding. Swaim asked if the Commission should first focus on the church since it is clearly historic. Sandell agreed but would also like the Commission to somehow address the housed in the rest of the surrounding area. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 12, 2015 Page 7 of 13 MOTION; Corcoran moved that the Commission recognize that the Unitarian Church at 10 South Gilbert Street could qualify individually, on its own merits, for historic landmark status and the Commission requests that the City give it special attention and explore how the City might facilitate the preservation of this property and its use as a community facility. Ackerson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Baker, Durham, and Wagner absent). Corcoran said she would like to consider 410, 422, ...... Miklo said, regarding the four properties on Iowa Avenue, that it is clear there are not enough of them to comprise an historic district. He said the question is whether they rise to the level of being individual landmarks. Ackerson said there are a lot of interesting structures in the area, but none of them seem to be sufficiently extensive in area covered to be a district of their own. He said the Commission may have an interest in making a smooth transition from downtown areas to outlying residential areas, but he was not sure the Commission needs to get mired down in details about the individual properties. Michaud asked if they should make a recommendation regarding spacing and massing rather than identify individual landmarks. Litton asked if making a smooth transition could be accomplished by down zoning. Miklo replied that it could but that down zoning is very challenging, and the better approach might be to amend the zoning regulations that apply to the current CB -2 zoning to result in a better form. Miklo said the consensus of the Commission seems to be to encourage the Planning and Zoning Commission to explore zoning tools such as setbacks, massing, and landscape preservation to provide for a good transition to the College Green Historic District. He asked if that is the essence of the Commissions direction. Swaim agreed but said it would not just be a transition to College Green but also to the blocks surrounding on both sides. Michaud asked if they should consider sticking with the original town plat 80 foot wide lots so that properties are not joined to create larger lots and buildings. Michaud said the 400 block of Iowa Avenue looks like a place where one could just put up a four-story building one block long. She said even though it is a City property and a parking lot, it also has many locust trees that keep it from looking like a parking lot. Michaud asked if the Commission would want to say anything in general about those blocks and contrast what has happened on Washington Street. Miklo responded that he thought that is the essence of what the Commission has been discussing. Swaim said she was referring to the streets that abut the current Civic District. Miklo asked if the Commission is discussing everything except the three blocks west of Van Buren Street. Sandell said it would refer to everything north of Iowa Avenue and east of Van Buren Street. Ackerson said it is probably worth not leaving slivers — one or two buildings - of properties that are between one district and another. He said the Commission should not put new artificial boundaries into our maps. Swaim asked if Ackerson was thinking of a more general statement. He said he thinks the recommendation should go from Gilbert Street to the College Hill Historic District and the College Conservation District to the north, just so there are not little gaps. Miklo asked if Ackerson's suggestion is to start at Gilbert Street versus Van Buren and Iowa. Miklo pointed out the three blocks that the City primarily owns that don't have residential structures or character or scale. Ackerson clarified that he does not want to include those HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 12, 2015 Page 8of13 blocks in the broader recommendation. He said his concern is the area to the east and the boundaries. Michaud discussed limiting the commercial first floor that has been a jolt on Washington Street. She said that mixed use is one thing, but having huge spaces that are unoccupied for decades is another. Having restaurants that are open till 4:00 a.m. next to single family homes. Michaud said that mixed use and multi use sound benign, but it's a way to get another bar on the block on the first floor. Swaim asked the Commission members if they wanted to send a recommendation that sensitivity and attention be paid to areas east of Van Buren so that they maintain a sense of the streetscape. She said that getting into the zoning is another issue. Miklo summarized the Commission's discussion about the broader goals for the area east of Van Buren Street and north of Iowa Avenue. MOTION: Corcoran moved to encourage the Planning and Zoning Commission to explore zoning tools regarding setbacks, massing, scale, and landscaping to provide for a good transition to adjacent residential neighborhoods for the area east of Van Buren Street and north of Iowa Avenue. Ackerson seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Baker, Durham, and Wagner absent). Michaud said that what has been proposed to the Planning and Zoning Commission is three high rises along Gilbert Street that are the same as the high rises downtown. She asked if there should be a wall of high rises on Gilbert Street. Michaud said that the Planning and Zoning Commission's reaction was very negative. She said that it is a transition zone, and things can't go up in height when they're supposed to go down. Miklo said that in his view the role of the Historic Preservation Commission is to identify historic buildings and neighborhoods and pursue ways to protect them. It is the role of the Planning and Zoning Commission to determine building heights. He said that other than the Unitarian Church, the Commission is not talking about historic buildings in the three blocks that are owned by the City. Swaim said that is something Commission members can look into as individual members of the public, rather than as a Commission. Agran agreed that since it is outside of the Commission's purview, it seems an appropriate thing that people who are interested individually make their own recommendations. DISCUSSION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN PRIORITIES AND ANNUAL WORK PROGRAM: Swaim said that the document was produced in 2007, and the Commission has looked at it every year since. She suggested the Commission brainstorm for a few minutes, and then perhaps a subcommittee could look at this and fine tune it and then make recommendations to the full Commission. Swaim said she would like the Commission to put actual dates on items so that things don't get pushed aside while more immediate items are considered. Swaim said there are a variety of goals and objectives under every one of them. She said she thinks it is critical that the Commission prioritize what it is doing and put its efforts toward. She suggest focusing on a few things, even though they are all important. Swaim pointed out that the Commission has limited resources. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 12, 2015 Page 9 of 13 Miklo said that two years ago for the work program, the Commission identified Melrose Avenue Historic District, Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District, and meeting with the University to discuss preservation of properties on campus. He stated that the Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District has been accomplished. Swaim added that restoration of the City Park log cabins were also on the list. Miklo said, regarding the Melrose District, that there was considerable discussion with the neighborhood association and it was left it in their court as to whether to proceed or not. He said he has not heard anything recently. Swaim said she and Miklo had some meetings with their neighborhood board. She said there was some interest at that time, but as often happens, it ran out of steam for a while. Swaim added that the preferred method is for the nomination to come from the public rather than the Commission. Swain questioned whether the Commission should pursue that district. Miklo said that, given the Commission's level of resources, creating another large historic district would make it difficult to staff and maintain it. He said that given the recent situation with the Dubuque Street cottages, he felt there might be more benefit to the community to focus on key, landmark properties, where the Commission is not adding a lot at once to its work program. Miklo suggested identifying some key landmark buildings to work with the property owners and hopefully nominate those. Trimble, Director of Friends of Historic Preservation, said there has been a lot accomplished in the past few years, including Goosetown/Horace Mann, Jefferson Street and several landmarks. She said people may think the Commission and Friends are sitting idle because of the cottages issue. Trimble said that perhaps the cottages could have been saved earlier, but it would have been at a cost, because something would have had to be given up in terms of the other projects completed in recent years. Trimble said that what is in the list shows the priorities. She said the City has cut so much funding for historic preservation. Trimble agreed that things should be prioritized but said she would also like to see a list of everything that can be thought of so that the Commission can show what it is still working on. Miklo said that there are historic survey forms on many properties that are not included in historic or conservation districts. He said that a lot of them are old and have a little historic character but don't rise to the level of landmark status. Miklo said but there are a few out there, such as 109 Market Street, that are real gems that are pretty vulnerable. He said that having Commission members and volunteers go through all of those surveys to identify those properties would be very helpful, to come up with a list of perhaps a dozen buildings that are key standout buildings that are not in an historic district and are not protected. Miklo said the full Commission could then discuss the properties and move to nominate them as landmarks. Regarding the work program, Swaim said that G oosetown/H o race Mann Conservation District has been completed. She said that the last two grant application for the log cabins, which were made by Parks and Recreation, have been denied. Swaim said she is hopeful that the wording can be reworked to apply again. Regarding Melrose, Trimble said she would reach out to Jean to see how things are going. Trimble said it does seem to be in the "bring it to the neighborhood" phase, so she thinks it HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 12, 2015 Page 10 of 13 could be picked back up. Swaim said the Commission could play the role of having larger neighborhood meetings to answer questions and such. Swaim said there are buildings that are now over 50 years old that were not that old when surveys were initially done. She said ranch houses are an example of that, and it might be something the Commission would want to study for the long-term. Michaud stated that Manville is more threatened than ranch -style houses. She said that in Manville Heights, some developers are buying multiple properties, tearing them down, and building duplexes. Michaud said that the Manville Heights residents might be more receptive to a historic district at this point. Trimble agreed that there might be renewed interest in that neighborhood right now. She said that when it goes back into the neighborhood meeting phase, there might be some people who step up to volunteer. Trimble said that younger people seem to really want the mid-century modern architectural features. Swaim said she doesn't see that as something that the Commission would put a lot of time into, but if there is a community preservation commission somewhere that has started to look at that issue, then the Commission could just communicate with them to check on the progress. She said she doesn't see it as a major initiative. Swaim asked if the process would be agreeable to people: to do a little more brainstorming for major concerns and have a subcommittee to look at the details and provide recommendations. Trimble said there would be a near South Side historic site survey available soon. There may be s a small historic district or individual landmarks identified by the survey. Michaud said that the cottages were not continuous with the railroad depot. She said that because there was a modern building or two in between, they were overlooked. Michaud said the buildings were isolated like some of the buildings discussed this evening. Michaud agreed that things have to be prioritized. She asked, however, if there is a possibility that, rather than a conservation district, there could be some kind of restrictions on the front facades of buildings, such as she has seen in a neighborhood on the north side of Chicago. Miklo said that a subcommittee would bring more focus to this. He said the list he has compiled from tonight's discussion includes individual landmarks, Manville Heights, Melrose, and a strategy to deal with mid-century modern buildings. Trimble asked if there is a really good example of mid-century modern neighborhood. Corcoran responded that the neighborhoods north of City High. Ackerson, Corcoran, Sandell, Swaim, and Trimble volunteered to be on the subcommittee to look at these items and provide recommendations to the full Commission. Swaim said she had spoken to Baker, who is also willing to be on the committee. Sandell asked if there was an update after the Commission's discussion on standing seam metal roofs. Miklo would need to work with the Building Inspector to draft amendments. Trimble said that one of the reasons there have been issues with specific properties is because the City never filled Christina Kuecker's position when she left in 2011. Trimble said it might be HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 12, 2015 Page 11 of 13 worth bringing up to the City Council that the Commission is short a staff who is devoted primarily to historic preservation and is short all of its funding. She said it really slows down the process, and it will make things more and more eleventh hour. Trimble said that if the City Council doesn't want these situations to keep happening, then there has to be staff available. She also recalled that when she was a commission member there was funding for commissioners to attend educational programs. Miklo said that the City is currently looking for someone to fill a part-time temporary position at eight to twelve hours per week. He said it may be a challenge to find someone with the right qualifications to work those few hours. Swaim said she would draft a letter to the City Council regarding staffing and funding. She said she would bring it to the next meeting for Commission consideration. Trimble said the cottage issue really brought out a lot of people who seem to be willing to help, some of whom are academics. She said that maybe at some point, volunteers can be coordinated to do research on certain properties or to write a landmark application with the data for surveys that are already done. REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF: Miklo said there were two window replacements approved by staff and a modern window replaced by a new window. Miklo said that in both cases the windows were in poor condition. He then said he recently had another experience regarding replacement windows. He had received a call from a board member of a sorority. She said they wanted to replace all of their windows. He said he explained that the first step was to establish that they were in bad shape and could not be repaired. Miklo said the board member insisted that they were all really bad and leaky. He said they agreed to meet at the house to inspect the windows. Miklo said that they met at the house with the general contractor and started to inspect windows. He said the upon inspection they found that every one of them had been replaced within the last 20 years. Some of the replacements were vinyl windows, others were wood with metal cladding. The house mother complained how drafty the windows were in her apartment, and the sorority members that were in their rooms when we inspected, also complained that the windows were terrible. They had said they did not operate — would not open and close easily. The contractor said they could not be repaired like a traditional window so they had to be replaced again. Miklo said he was relieved that he did not have to go through the process of educating them about the value of retaining historic windows, but he observed it was unfortunate that they threw away the original windows. He noted how this is an example of the short life span of replacement windows. Miklo asked if anyone had any corrections to the CLG report, but there were none. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JANUARY 8,2015: MOTION: Corcoran moved to approve the minutes of the January 8, 2015 Historic Preservation Commission meeting, as written. Agran seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 8-0 (Baker, Durham, and Wagner absent). HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 12, 2015 Page 12 of 13 HISTORIC PRESERVATION INFORMATION. Swaim stated that the awards program went very well. She said that Agran, Clore, Corcoran, Trimble, and Bailey McClellan, the planning intern, did a great deal. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 7:04 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte Z O O U O Z U O w T- H W o U > � Z � N� N W Z W CL F" V Q O N 2 N X X X X X x X X N co X X X x X X 0 x X X 0 N X X X ui X X X X X X W O M x W O W O X X X X x X X X p x X X X X x X X X O O X X X X X X X X X 0 X 0 x 0 X x x x x 0 0 C14 x x X x x w 0 0 X X x co 0 co o x x x x x x x x x o 0LLJ X 0 X X x LU x X X X v x x x x x x x X 0 M Q No X X X I X X 0 X X X ti M O' M X X i X X N Lo a (Mrn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn W W N N N N N N N N N N N F- M M M M M M M M M M M Z Q Q ~� Z Z W Y 0 W 2 N Q W Q m Q Z O F- O 0 a Z g p w O Z U- Z J O LL I=- a J Z W Z w O Q Z Q p W Y Y O U 3: OF U_ Z a O XOlkj N r w Y 02-19-15 IP16 MINUTES PRELIMINARY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JANUARY 15, 2015 — 6:30 PM IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY, MEETING ROOM A MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Byler, Andrew Chappell, Michelle Bacon Curry, Jim Jacobson, Dorothy Persson, Rachel Zimmermann Smith MEMBERS ABSENT: Christine Ralston, Angel Taylor STAFF PRESENT: Kristopher Ackerson, Marcia Bollinger, Tracy Hightshoe, Steven Rackis OTHERS PRESENT: Barbara Vinograde (Iowa City Free Clinic), Jane Drapeaux (HACAP), Albert Persson (Iowa City), Susan Blodgett (Elder Services Inc.), Ron Berry (MECCA), Becci Reedus (Crisis Center), Tracey Achenbach (Housing Trust Fund), Scott Hanson (Big Brothers Big Sisters), Crissy Canganelli (Shelter House), Brian Loring (NCJC) HCDC recommends the City Council adopt the amendments to the Iowa City Housing Authority's Housing Choice Voucher Administrative Plan as submitted. HCDC recommends the City Council approve the FY16 Aid to Agencies budget as seen below and, if funding is reduced, reduce each allocation over $15,000 proportionally. FY16 Aid to Agencies Budget Recommendation Agency FY15 Actual FY16 Request FY16 Recommendation 4 C's Community Coord. Child Care $5,000 $15,000 Arc of Southeastloyda $5,000 $5,000 Big Brothers/Big Sisters $30,000 $33,500 $30,000 Community Corrections prop. Assoc. SO $0 NA Compeer of Johnson County $0 $7,000 Crisis Center of Johnson County $40,000 $52,973 $40,000 Domestic Violence Intervention Program 545,000 5.52,000 $45,000 Elder Services In $30,010 555,000 $30,000 Families INC $5,000 Four Oaks -Pal Program SO 50 NA' - Free Lunch Program $5,000 $15,000 $15.000 Goodwill of the Heartland $60,000 HAC AP - Food Reservoir Back Pack Program $12,000 528,000 Housing Trust Fund of JC 524,000 $24,000 $24 000 ICCSD Family Resource Centers 515,000 $37,500 $0 IC Free Medical/Dental Clinic $7,500 $15,000 $15,000 lov,,a lobs for American's Graduates (JAG) $0 510,000 IV Habitat for Humanity - Furniture Project $5,000 540,000 Johnson County Social Services NA $0 NA Junior Acheivement of Eastern lm- a $0 54,499 May or`s Youth Employment Program NA $0 NA MEC CA $15,000 $20,000 $15,000 Neighborhood Centers of $50,000 575,000 550,000 Pathvmys Adult Day Health Center $5,000 $15,000 $15;000 Rape Victim Advocacy Program 510,000 $15,000 $15,000 Shelter House $45,000 $47,500 $45,000 Table to Table $0 $25,000 United Action for Youth $49,000 565,000 $39,700 Total Request: $397,510 $721,972 $378,700 CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 6:30 PM. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 20. 2014 MINUTES: Persson moved to approve the minutes of the November 20, 2014 meeting. Jacobson seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. PUBLIC COMMENT OF ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: There were none. STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT: Hightshoe introduced Kris Ackerson as the new staff contact for HCDC. Hightshoe also reminded the Commission that the Housing and Public Facility applications are due tomorrow, January 16, 2015. CONSIDER THE ALLOCATION OF $200,000 IN UNCOMMITTED FY15 HOME FUNDS: Hightshoe explained that in FY15 the Housing Fellowship was awarded $200,000 in HOME funds to acquire the land for a LITHTC project of 28 units, 10 to be HOME assisted. THF was unable to secure land so the project did not proceed. No funds were disbursed. Hightshoe explained that these funds are subject to the Uncommitted Funds policy. The policy allows for three options for HCDC consideration. 1. Existing projects that did not receive full funding will be considered. 2. Projects that had submitted applications but did not receive any CDBG or HOME funding will be considered. 3. New proposals will be considered. Hightshoe and Ackerson reviewed the FY15 applications and did not recommend funding or partially funding any of the existing allocations. Staff recommended placing the $200,000 in the pool of FY16 funds available for allocation. HCDC will be reviewing applications and making a funding recommendation on March 12. This issue had been discussed with THF earlier and they were encouraged to submit an application for a revised project by the CDBG/HOME application deadline. Bacon Curry moved to accept the staff recommendation to combine the returned FYI funds into the FYI funding pool to be considered for allocation by HCDC on March 12, 2015. Chappell seconded. A vote was taken and the motion carried 6-0. CONSIDER UPDATES & AMENDMENTS TO THE ICHA'S HOUSING CHOICE VENDOR (HCV) ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN: Zimmermann Smith asked Hightshoe what the Commission's role was in this process. Hightshoe explained that the Commission reviews housing policy and amendments and makes a recommendation to City Council concerning proposed changes or new policies.. Rackis explained that there were two proposals for HCDC consideration. While voucher participation is almost 99% there are some households who have difficulty finding an acceptable unit and their voucher expires after 180 days. The household is given 180 days to locate a unit; however time extensions may be granted. Rackis stated this proposal would allow the tenant 365 days to find an acceptable unit and submit a request for tenancy approval. He noted that even at the cap of 365 days, they can give an extension for reasonable accommodations. Rackis noted that in the 2013 Cook Rental Survey the vacancy rate was 0.067% in our . community for a one bedroom unit. Rackis feels that the vacancy rate today is still less than 1 %. Due to a limited number of one -bedroom units, the new proposal would allow additional households to qualify for a two-bedroom unit, as opposed to a one -bedroom unit. Zimmermann Smith asked if the proposal was to change one bedroom eligible families to receive two bedroom vouchers, or just increase the payment standard for the one bedroom. Rackis answered they are proposing changing the subsidy standard. Under the current policy, a single adult with one child under the age of 4 would receive a one bedroom voucher, the proposal would allow a single adult with one child under the age of 1 to be issued a one bedroom voucher, so any single adult with one child over the age of 1 would be issued a two bedroom voucher. Zimmermann Smith asked if Rackis had data on how many applicants needed more than 180 days to find an acceptable unit and how long a tenant is on the waiting list. Rackis explained that the wait time is about seven months, and that 60-70% of the people that get a letter don't even respond or complete the appropriate paperwork. The extension of the voucher timeline is for people who already have received a voucher and are looking for an appropriate housing option. Zimmermann Smith asked how many of the people who use the vouchers end up staying in the area for a long period of time. Rackis stated the majority of people stay. There are only 19 families that have transferred their assistance out of the jurisdiction. Rackis also stated that about 88% of people who respond and initiate a search utilize their voucher. Chappell asked if under the current standards, if a single adult with a three year old child is issued a one bedroom voucher, do they then have to move to a two bedroom unit once the child is over the age of 4? Rackis answered that at the annual reviews the housing authority will look at the family's situation. If the child is over age 4, they can be issued a two bedroom, but it does not require that the family move, it is at the family's discretion if they want to find a two bedroom unit. Chappell was concerned that if the policy is changed would it cause current families with children ages 2 and 3 to move, and Rackis said no, they have that option, but they don't have to. Chappell moved to recommend that the City Council adopt the amendments to the Iowa City Housing Authority's Housing Choice Voucher Administrative Plan as submitted. Bacon Curry seconded. A vote was taken and motion carried 6-0. REVIEW OF THE FYI ALLOCATION PROCESS & HOUSING PROFORMA: Hightshoe stated that tomorrow, January 16, 2015, is the deadline for the Housing and Public Facility applications, On Feb. 19 the commission will have the question/answer session with the applicants and then on March 12, HCDC will make a budget recommendation to City Council. City Council will review this recommendation at their May 5 meeting. Each year the housing pro forma is reviewed to aid in decisions when rental housing applications are reviewed. Once the applications are received they will be sent to Commission members. Staff reviews the sources and uses of funds. These two amounts should be the same. Sources of funds include how the organization will pay for the project costs, such as HOME funds, State funds, private loan, etc. The uses of funds includes how the money will be spent. This includes the cost of the land, construction, soft costs, etc. Additionally staff will look at the 20 year proforma that outlines the projected revenues and costs for the project based on City underwriting guidelines. If anything appears inaccurate, unreasonable or not in line with our guidelines, it will be noted in the project's staff report. Staff's goal is to ensure that the project receives enough income to cover expenses throughout the compliance period. If sufficient revenue exists, the City will require repayment if possible. Hightshoe included an example of a pro forma report in the packet for the Commission to review. DISCUSSION REGARDING FY16 AID TO AGENCIES FUNDING REQUESTS: Zimmermann Smith acknowledged that staff recommended a minimum allocation of $15,000 that was also stated in the Council approved 2016-2020 CITY STEPS plan. Hightshoe stated when agencies applied the guide encouraged agencies to apply for at least $15,000, but it was not a requirement. Zimmermann Smith suggested reviewing all the agencies that applied for at least $15,000 first. After that discussion, the commission would discuss those application under $15,OOO.Her next suggestion was to look at the applications that were fully funded in the last fiscal year as the starting point for discussion. The Commission members revealed how they individually made their determinations on funding. The Commission discussed and debated where to make adjustments in their tentative funding numbers. Persson voiced her concern that DVIP and Shelter House should receive equal funding as both are homeless shelters in this county. She stressed both need to cooperate and coordinate with each other and would be concerned if one were funded at a different level than the other. Jacobson asked if last year there was a situation where the Commission recommended no funding to an agency and the City Council changed it. Hightshoe stated that Elder Services was allocated a substantially lower amount than in previous years as the prior CITY STEPS plan had elder services as a medium priority. HCDC funded high priorities first and had limited funding for medium or low priorities. When Council reviewed, they restored some lost funding to Elder Services with additional general fund revenues. They did not reduce any other recommended allocation. Bacon Curry stated her support of IJAG because the program impacts a lot of kids who if not intervened upon at that point may end up needing some of these other services a few years down the road. Jacobson asked what the other potential funding streams for IJAG might be, and Bacon Curry believes the State of Iowa but was unsure of other sources. Byler questioned the funding of 4C's, and wondered why the Commission was not funding it. Zimmermann Smith stated that 4C's has an income stream due to licensing fees, etc. Hightshoe reminded the Commission that the numbers they are working with are estimates. The City budget has not been approved by the Council yet, nor has HUD finalized our entitlement amounts yet. Adjustments may need to be made after we have final numbers. Jacobson moved to recommend to the City Council approve the FYI Aid to Agencies budget as seen below. If funding is reduced, then staff shall reduce each allocation over $15,000 proportionally. Persson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion carried 6-0. MONITORING REPORTS: • FY15 The Housing Fellowship — CHDO — Hightshoe stated they spend their money on their finance manager and have six full-time employees. • FY15 Crisis Center —Aid to Agencies —Reed us said Crisis Center is using their Aid to Agencies money on their emergency assistance program. • FY15 Shelter House— Aid to Agencies — Hightshoe stated that Shelter House received money from Aid to Agencies and use the funds on operations/salaries. ADJOURNMENT Bacon Curry moved to adjourn. Byler seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion carried 6-0. z O U) N U F - z W a O J w W D z O U z Q. z N M O D O U W w W U z Q 0 z W F- F - Q as N r x x x x x ww o o x N w w; x X x X X X co xx x x x x x co X X o x o o ti X x X X X X M x x ; x x x ; x 0 N O x x x X x N a W CD � CD r. ca r- LO r LO o N 0 N 0 0 N 0 N N 0 N 0 N 0 N 0 N F- W J J W V W Z H z W I -- w U)N Lu 5 J z 2 W _ U Q Z Q z m Z m O 0 � 0 J w= w J JJ } �U Z m U 9 CL m Q H Nm N V) U X W w : C: (D aQQ 11 n _W YXOO Z-19 -15 I PI -7 �] MINUTES PRELIMINARY PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2015 HELLING CONFERENCE ROOM - CITY HALL Members present: John Engelbrecht, Mike Moran, Tam Bryk, Brent Westphal, Sayuri Sasaki Hemann, Ron Knoche Not present: Bill Nusser Staff Present: Marcia Bollinger and Geoff Fruin Public Present: Sean O'Harrow- UI Museum of Art, , Marc Moen and Bobby Jett - Moen Group, Andy Davis- Iowa City Press Citizen RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL Recommend to the Iowa City City Council to support the recommendation of the Artist Selection Panel that artist Cecil Balmond of Balmond Studios, London, England be named as the artist selected for the design of the public art piece to be located in the area known as the Black Hawk Mini Park on the Iowa City Pedestrian Mall. CALL TO ORDER Meeting called to order at 3:30pm. INTRODUCTION OF NEW MEMBER SAYURI SASAKI HEMANN Engelbrecht asked the new member Sayuri Hemann to introduce herself to the group. She stated that she moved from Portland but has lived in Iowa City for four years. She stated that she strongly believes in the Public Art Program and the way it activates a space and engages the public. She also stated that she is an artist and enjoys creating installations with textiles. ELECTION OF OFFICERS- CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR Engelbrecht then turned the group's attention to the election of officers. He stated that he is currently the Chair of the Committee and that Westphal is currently the Vice Chair. Engelbrecht and Westphal stated that they would be willing to stay in their current positions. Bryk moved that Engelbrecht stay as Chair and Westphal stay as Vice Chair. Moran seconded. Motion passed 6:0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA Engelbrecht then asked the public in attendance to introduce themselves. There was no public comment of items not on the agenda. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 4TH, 2014 MEETING Knoche stated that he had one correction to make to December meeting minutes. The minutes stated that Fosse recommended that the bylaws be renewed every year but it should have stated that they should be reviewed every year. MOTION: Moran moved to approve the December 4th, 2014 meeting as amended. Westphal seconded. Motion passed 6:0. RECOMMENDATION OF ARTISTS FOR DESIGN PHASE OF THE BLACK HAWK MINI PARK ART PROJECT LOCATED ON THE PEDESTRIAN MALL Engelbrecht then asked the group to discuss the recommendation for the design phase of the Black Hawk Mini Park Art Project. Bollinger asked if they Committee had any questions or comments regarding the memo that was distributed prior to the meeting. Hemann asked about the process and what happens after the recommendation goes to the City Council to be approved or disproved. Fruin stated that the Committee's recommendation today would be selecting the artist who would work with Genus Landscape Architects to complete the design component. Fruin stated that the City Council could override the Committee's recommendation but he also stated that he thought that was highly unlikely. Bryk asked how the Committee's recommendation will be presented to the City Council. Bollinger stated that the formal recommendation will come through the minutes. Bryk stated that she would like this recommendation to be a point on the City Council agenda to ensure a discussion occurs as a Council agenda item. Fruin stated that there is an authorizing resolution that describes the process and any additional information which is memorialized in City records. Fruin suggested that Balmond's recommendation can be included as a separate item within the authorizing resolution which was acceptable to Bryk. Engelbrecht asked for any additional comment on this item. Bryk asked Hemann is she had a chance to attend the artist open houses. Hemann stated that she was able to attend the open house for Balmond and watched the video for the other two artists. She stated that she supports the Committee's recommendation of Cecil Balmond. Bryk stated that she agreed. Engelbrecht then opened up the discussion and asked for public comment. O'Harrow stated that he thought that the process was handled very well and that it was one of the best that he had been a part of. He stated that he thought it was fair and transparent. O'Harrow also stated that he was impressed with the quality of applicants. He stated that they are some of the best artists in the world. Engelbrecht asked for a motion for a recommendation to City Council. MOTION: Bryk moved that the Committee support the subcommittee's recommendation for Cecil Balmond and move forward to City Council. Westphal seconded. Motion passed 6:0. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF FURTHER PROJECTS- REVIEW OF AVAILABLE BUDGET, COLLEGE GREEN PARK STAIRS ART, MATCHING FUND CALL FOR PROPOSALS Engelbrecht then asked the Committee to consider the next agenda item and discuss further public art projects. Bollinger reviewed what had been discussed in previous meetings related to this agenda item. Bollinger stated that Veronica Tessler had submitted an invoice for $2,000 for the Yotopia mural. Bollinger stated that this is an example of matching funds projects that the Committee could continue to sponsor. Bollinger stated that there was also discussion surrounding stair art at College Green Park. She also stated that she had been in conversation with Jill Harper who was the artist who worked on a number of mosaic art projects across the city including the Grant Wood pillars. She provided an estimate for a mosaic installation of $5000 for an art project on the steps. Engelbrecht stated that he was a big proponent of a matching fund project. He stated that he thought that there were many artists out there that have interesting ideas that the Committee could help fund if they like the project. Moran stated that he was not a fan of the idea of mosaics on the stairs because it would deteriorate faster. Bollinger stated that the Committee has $5,000 left and that she would like to know what they want to prioritize. Engelbrecht asked what a call for artists would look like for matching funds. The committee then discussed what a call for artists would look like. Hemann stated that she did not think that a bottom funding limit would be necessary but that a maximum limit would be helpful. Engelbrecht also asked whether or not they would help fund programs such as the BenchMarks program or if they want to stick to individuals. Engelbrecht offered to spend some more time on a subcommittee to develop a set of criteria. Bollinger stated that she thought that was a good approach. Moran stated that one positive element is the caveat that regardless the applications would have to come through this Committee to be approved and funded. Bollinger asked if there was anyone else willing to be a part of the subcommittee. Hemann stated that she would like to be a part of the committee. Bollinger stated that the subcommittee would develop a call to bring for discussion at the March meeting. Bollinger then stated that they needed to decide funding allocation with the current budget. The Committee agreed that they would like to hold onto $1,000 for maintenance but that the other $4,000 would go to the matching fund call that will be developed through the subcommittee. The Committee also agreed that they would prefer to wait on the stairs project until next fiscal year. UPDATES: POETRY IN PUBLIC & NEA OUR TOWN GRANT Bollinger stated that submissions for Poetry in Public are flying in with the deadline approaching. Bollinger stated that she needs a member to participate in the review committee to pick the winners of program. Westphal stated that he would do it again this year unless someone else would like to. Bollinger stated that the NEA —Our Town Grant application was submitted and it is expected that decisions will be made this spring/early summer. OTHER No other news. ADJOURNMENT Knoche motioned and Moran seconded a motion to adjourn at 4:37 PM. Minutes created by Ashley Zitzner. .Q a 0 N LO LO X X X- X X N t XX X- ;