Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-06-01 CorrespondenceCITY OF IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 TO: William Ambrisco'Darrel Courtney, Kate Dickson, Susan Horowitz, Randy Larson, John McDonald, George Strait You and each of you are hereby notified that pursuant to the authority vested in the Mayor of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, or under State Law and the Ordinances of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, as Mayor, I hereby call a special meeting on June 1st at 5:15 o'clock, p .m., to be held in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center of Iowa City, Iowa. The meeting is called for the purpose of Considering a Resolution approving an agreement between the City of Iowa City, Iowa and Stanley Consultants, Inc., for i the provision of Construction Management Services, (North Excess Flow and Waste- water Treatment Facilities and the South Wastewater Treatment Facilities) as detailed on attached agenda. Dated at Iowa City, Iowa, this 31st day of May 19 RR _ M R ATTEST: CITY -CLERK I �i i"Y CITY OF I.OWA CNIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON ST. IOWA C(fY, IOWA 52240 (319)356-500D THIS FORM SHOULD BE RETURNED TO CITY CLERK Notice of Special Meeting of June 1, 1988 received: ` Signature of C uncilmembera b ©8 (Dater Time j i i k p IF UNDELIVERABLE: 5ignature of Officer p b t p CITY OF IOWA CITY CHIC CENTER 410 E. WASHNGTON ST. IOWA CfiY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5030 THIS FORM SHOULD BE RETURNED TO CITY CLERK Notice of Special Meeting of June 1. 1988 received: ignature of Councilme r Date l( T 3e 17;3/ IF UNDELIVERABLE: Signature of Officer CITY OF IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON ST. IOWA CfiY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 THIS FORM SHOULD BE RETURNED TO CITY CLERK Notice of Special Meeting of June 1, 1988 received: Signature of Councilmember TD—a 3I- r _ a- Date Time IF UNDELIVERABLE: Signature of Officer CITY OF IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 THIS FORM SHOULD BE RETURNED TO CITY CLERK Notice of Special Meeting of June 1, 1988 received: Ikisignazure df Councilmember sem, ate Time IF UNDELIVERABLE: Signature of fficer 0 0 CITY OF IOWA CITY CHIC CENTER 410 E. WASHNGTON ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 Notice c THIS FORM SHOULD BE RETURNED TO CITY CLERK IF UNDELIVERABLE: Signature of Officer ved: CITY OF IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 i THIS FORM SHOULD BE RETURNED TO CITY CLERK Notice of Special Meeting of June 1, 1988 received: kature ofCouncilmember Date Time IF UNDELIVERABLE: Signature of Officer CITY OF IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 THIS FORM SHOULD BE RETURNED TO CITY CLERK Notice of Special Meeting of June 1, 1988 received: Signature of Councilmember Date Time IF UNDE I11 ABLE: Sig ture of Off cer 7,18 17'•114 AC) : a 3 orl;6- pf/0/12 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM. -1 Date: May 31, 1986 To: City Council From: City Manager Re: Miscellaneous 1. Riverfront CommisCity Council give sion. You may recall that the Commission recom- mended that the consideration to a pedestrian iss Streets along the Iowa right-of-way between Harrison and Prent River. The area was to also be maintained for public recreational use. The Department of Planning and Program Development staff will review this matter in the upcoming months and we will provide you a report. If there is any concern with respect to the actions we are about to take, please advise. 2. Paul -Helen Building. The Zacson Corporation (formerly Telemarketing Services) has recently renewed its lease for three years with an option for an additional three years. You may They recall this iadis a new business located in the Paul -Helen Building. us they are very pleased with the performance of the Iowa City office. bc5 i �o� CITY OF IOWA CITY CIviC CENTER 410 E. WASHNGTON ST IOWA CITY. IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 May 25, 1988 Mr. John Cruise Barker, Cruise, Kennedy, Houghton b Foster, Lawyers 920 S. Dubuque Street P.O. Box 2000 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Dear John: I wanted to respond to your letter of May 19 to assure your client, Mr. Jim Glasgow, that the Council will give him every opportunity to amend the preliminary and final plats for Idyllwild on the Water to bring it into conformance with the Floodplain Management Ordinance. I also want to assure you that neither the staff nor the Council had any advance knowledge of the deficiency which was discovered, and we were thus unable to share that information with Mr. Glasgow prior to the May 17 Council meeting. Furthermore, contrary to what was indicated at that Council meeting, the Council's denial of the preliminary plat will not operate to start the 60 - day clock running again on this subdivision. As in the past as to other subdivisions, we will allow Mr. Glasgow an opportunity to submit revised preliminary and final plats, and will attempt to deal with them within the required timeframes. When we denied the preliminary plat last week, we were under the impression that we were up against a time deadline which the developer had not waived; and that we were thus required to act. It is my understanding that Mr. Glasgow has since waived the 60 -day time period on the final plat, giving the Planning Commission and City Council until June 29 to take action. We appreciate Mr. Glasgow's cooperation in that regard. Sincerely yours, _ �',Q, A P„""� ohn McDonald Mayor bj/pc2 RECEIVEDMAY 231988 Mayor John McDonald City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Re: S-6607, Idyllwild Subdivision Preliminary Subdivision Plat Dear Mayor McDonald: This morning we held a meeting in my office to discuss the Idyllwild Subdivision preliminary plat. Those present included the subdivider, Jim Glasgow; the engineering representative, Larry Schnittjer of MMS; Attorney Jim Houghton and myself. We discussed as much as we knew about the denial of the Idyllwild Subdivision preliminary plat. I was asked to write you this letter requesting a reconsideration. Even to this moment, none of us have been informed as to the particular deficiency with the preliminary plat as it was announced at the City Council meeting. There was absolutely no discussion with any of us prior to the Council meeting and I believe there was no attempt to discuss this with us. We be- lieve that in all fairness and in the interests of equal treat- ment, this subdivider ought to be accorded the opportunity to correct deficiencies in the same fashion as all other subdivid- ers. With very little information to go on, it appears to us that the deficiency that surfaced at the last minute concerns the question of whether several lots on Taft Speedway have the legal access as required by the flood plain management ordi- nance. If the deficiency proves to be accurate, there are nu- merous alternatives, any one of which would easily solve the problem. The subdivider could place a notation on the plat that those particular lots are unbuildable until Taft Speedway is brought up to the correct elevation which, I believe, is a mere six inch increase in front of these lots. The subdivider BARKER, CRUISE, KENNEDY, HOUGHTON & FOSTER LAWYERS 930 S. DUBUOUE STREET-P.O, BOX 2000 CHARLES A BARKER IOWA CITY, IOWA AREA CODE 319 JOHN D. CRUISE 32241 TELEPHONE 35I.0101 MICHAEL W. KENNEDY JAMES D. HOUGHTON DAVIS L FOSTER VICXI B. HARRISON May 19, 1998 Mayor John McDonald City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Re: S-6607, Idyllwild Subdivision Preliminary Subdivision Plat Dear Mayor McDonald: This morning we held a meeting in my office to discuss the Idyllwild Subdivision preliminary plat. Those present included the subdivider, Jim Glasgow; the engineering representative, Larry Schnittjer of MMS; Attorney Jim Houghton and myself. We discussed as much as we knew about the denial of the Idyllwild Subdivision preliminary plat. I was asked to write you this letter requesting a reconsideration. Even to this moment, none of us have been informed as to the particular deficiency with the preliminary plat as it was announced at the City Council meeting. There was absolutely no discussion with any of us prior to the Council meeting and I believe there was no attempt to discuss this with us. We be- lieve that in all fairness and in the interests of equal treat- ment, this subdivider ought to be accorded the opportunity to correct deficiencies in the same fashion as all other subdivid- ers. With very little information to go on, it appears to us that the deficiency that surfaced at the last minute concerns the question of whether several lots on Taft Speedway have the legal access as required by the flood plain management ordi- nance. If the deficiency proves to be accurate, there are nu- merous alternatives, any one of which would easily solve the problem. The subdivider could place a notation on the plat that those particular lots are unbuildable until Taft Speedway is brought up to the correct elevation which, I believe, is a mere six inch increase in front of these lots. The subdivider ■ Page -2- May 19, 1988 could" remove those lots from the subdivision or designate them as "out lots." The subdivider could use those lots as green space, put an alley to the rear of the lots, or redesign one of the streets within the subdivision. In any event, one of the above solutions would ordinarily be agreed upon between the subdivider and City staff. We have not yet been accorded the option of doing that and we are now requesting it. Though we have so many vocal opponents, we will continue to abide by the law and it will be our support. To protect the subdivider's rights, we will be filing a District Court appeal and we will persistently attempt to resolve this controversy on all available fronts. Very truly yours, n D. Cruise ; JDC/dc cc: Jim Glasgow Construction Company + Larry Schnittjer Stephen Atkins Donald Schmeiser Terry Timmins Richard J. Boyle 02/47-01-147 �Do2. E City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: May 25, 1988 To: City Council From: City Manager Re: City Manager Performance Review I have attempted to prepare evaluation information which will hopefully assist the City Council in conducting my annual performance appraisal. In preparing the attached evaluation information, I met with some difficulty in designing a weighted criteria, that is some type of numerical system to determine whether criteria are being met. I purposely avoided the weighted criteria and have developed information which is more general in nature and hopefully by way of your notes and comments will be helpful as a performance review instrument. Evaluation is obviously a touchy subject, whether it is an evaluation of some type of a product or an individual. Traditionally, personnel evalua- tion has often been a critical and/or negative look at an individual's performance rather than the process of developing and improving relation- ships between the employer and the employee. Evaluation is a critical look at what an employee has accomplished during a given period of time, but also I believe it is a communication process, thereby allowing a method of discussion apart from the more formal decision-making process. Despite the close working relationship between the City Manager and the governing body, opportunities for personal discussions are very rare. Through regular evaluation, I believe we can begin to learn more about what everyone is doing, what everyone expects from the other, and what are the strengths and weaknesses in the relationship. Before beginning an evaluation, i think there are a number of basic prin- ciples that need to be understood to make the process successful. Those principles are as follows: X03 2 i. An evaluation must have a defined purpose. Evaluation is an opportu- nity to discuss and improve upon the working relationship between the governing body and the City Manager as well as to help define goals and objectives for future performance of the organization. We cannot assume that everyone understands the official purpose of an evaluation and, therefore, we need to take opportunities to identify just what each would like to see secured from this communication process. 2. The evaluation should begin with a mutual aareement and acceptance. j Ideally, I believe the evaluation process is a joint undertaking, which means both the governing body and the City Manager want to do it f and have a hand in figuring out how it should work. By working on it t together, and coming up with mutual understandings, I believe we can meet the overall goals of improving performance and maintaining commu- nications. 3. The evaluation process should be regular. I believe that as the City Manager and governing body we have gone a long way toward making the evaluation a standard of performance in the relationship between the Manager and the City Council. If it is not done on a regular basis, I believe it could become ineffective, possibly threatening and suspi- cious. 4. The evaluation should be open and constructive. When the evaluation process is actually underway, it is a process of sharing - talking openly. It is important in the process we try not to waste our time on the areas that a City Manager can do very little about, such as a City Council's disagreement with a personality quirk in an individual employee. This is not to say that personality quirks can and do not often affect job performance, but we must be able to identify in this process we are trying to deal with the actual work and not an individ- ual's personality. If, however, the personality, such as erratic behavior of an employee continues, it can and should be a subject of discussion. I believe at all costs we should recognize that we are in the process of communicating and not one of combat. C 3 5. The evaluation should be based on objective criteria. If the criteria for evaluation is well thought out and positive, I happen to believe we will end up with a positive and effective evaluation. The best evaluation criteria for a position such as the City Manager is crite- ria that is comprehensive and identifies skills, achievements and results. In other words, if you try to review and evaluate every dimension of your chief administrator, it may be difficult to come up with objective criteria, specifically when the chief administrative officer is required to wear many hats. I think we each need to think about expectations and then expand on those expectations. 6. The evaluation should lead to positive action. To be effective there must also be a follow-through to successful evaluation. You need to make sure in your planning that action steps are required on the part of the City Manager and/or the governing body. It is critical in each of the follow-up evaluations we ask ourselves "How did we do?" An evaluation should lead to opportunities to better the organization and the relationship with the governing body. SJA/sp /Y CITY MANAGER PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: ADMINISTRATION (Factor I): I. Manpower Development: Does he appoint and train effective subordinates? Has he retained excellent people who were tempted to go elsewhere? 2. Supervision: Does he direct his group and control their efforts? Does hee— ncourage their initiative? Is he available to his employees for guidance and counseling? Does he evaluate his key personnel and suggest ways for them to improve? 3. Execution of Policy: Does he understand and comply with the overall Policy, laws and philosophy of the organization? Do his efforts lead toward successful accomplishment of goals? 4. Budget: Is his budget realistic? Is it prepared in a good format? Is it reasonable? Does he control expenses within the set levels of the budget? 5. Re ortin : Dod he submit complete Staff Reports on schedule? Are they rea a e. Are Staff Reports concise, to the point and submitted with appropriate recommendations when necessary? 6. Planning: Is he familiar with the City's policies, objectives and practices? Does he translate these policies, objectives and practices into specific programs? 7. Leadership: Does he motivate others to maximum performance? Is he respected as demanding, but fair? Does he get enthusiastic response to new ideas and needed reorganization? 8. Job Organization: Does he delegate responsibility, but handle job details efficiently? Does he use the time productively? Does he pro- gram activities in an orderly and systematic way, and within Council Policy directives? g. Communication: Does he keep appropriate people informed? Does he Present —Moughts oughts in an orderly understandable manner? Is he able to convince people to adopt his viewpoint? Is his written correspondence clear and concise? EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS (Factor II): 10. Communit Re utation: What is the general attitude of the community to this man? Is ie regarded.4s man of high integrity, ability and devotion to the City? 11. Professional Re utation: How does he stand among others in the Public mints ra ion proton? Is he respected by other professional and staff representatives? i City of Iowa city MEMORANDUM Date: May 25, 1988 To: City Council From: City Manager Re: Compensation System You may recall approximately one year ago I directed a memorandum to your attention concerning my desire to initiate a performance-based compensa- tion plan for our department directors. It is my intent to provide salary adjustments for department directors in the upcoming year, based upon performance, as substantiated by the more extensive evaluations I conducted last year. Due to the fact that we have new members of Council, by way of this memorandum I wanted to re -apprise the City Council of the compensation system procedures to be undertaken and the reasons that such a system has been initiated. Performance-based compensation plans are gaining greater acceptance in the public sector, not only as they affect management and supervisory em- ployees, but also labor groups have begun to accept the desirability of such systems. Our current labor contracts, while very rigid with respect to the administration of the pay plan, have recently begun to, through the bargaining process, recognize our desires to improve the performance of the organization and in turn the quality of services provided to the public. The state legislature in providing additional financing to improve compensation for teachers, built into the legislation a perfor- mance-based element of the compensation to be awarded to teachers. Again, I believe this is reflective of the general public support for perfor- mance-based compensation. 2 Governments have traditionally placed a premium on the length of service with an organization and the compensation systems were developed from that thinking. This type of compensation system was quite effective in rewarding length of service and helped encourage employees to remain in local government employment. While a worthy goal, compensation systems based primarily on length of service do not satisfactorily attend to or encourage creativity in decision making. Furthermore, such systems would appear to actually discourage management risk taking. Such lock step systems of reward, based upon time and position, have the reverse effect and, I believe stifle innovation. These compensation systems encourage an employee to think of length of service to qualify for future compensation rather than seek rewards of creativity and assume risk taking inherent in compensated their employees without this process. Governments have satisfactory attention to the creative aspects of decision making. The city government, as any other employer, participates in a changing personnel market. We must compete for a limited number of highly trained employees but, as is often the case, the private sector can provide greater compensation. To recruit and retain these individuals and maintain a qualified work force, city government's top level management should have a system of rewards based upon achievement and not simply a response to length of service. The City's management team is committed to making city government more productive and more accountable to the community we serve. As a demon- stration of commitment, performance based compensation is being initiated. In support of such compensation systems, last year I conducted extensive 3 and detailed performance evaluations of each employee under my direct supervision. These more extensive evaluations are also being required wherever practical throughout our organization. Such reviews are com- monplace in the private sector. Compensation should relate directly to contribution to an organization. i Many people bring special qualities and make special contributions to the organizations they serve. Knowledge, creativity, initiative and attitude vary widely among individuals and compensation should follow accordingly. I In order for any organization to become conducive to any type of merit and/or performance based compensation system, it is critical that employees know and fully understand that their efforts will be recognized and rewarded. As simple as this may sound, I believe many organizations fail miserably in this regard. The possibility of extrinsic rewards is not the sole reason for an employee to put forth extra effort, but as human beings we are economic creatures. Research suggests that any type of compensation/reward system which is administered contingent on I performance can have a positive impact on both the employee's performance as well as job satisfaction. It is important if the City, as an organization, is to succeed in a performance based compensation system, we must promote proper employee expectation relative to our plans. We must encourage employees to make positive decisions and understand that the decisions are of some organizational consequence and can ultimately affect their economic status. Under the best of circumstances, fair and accurate employee evaluation is difficult. There are unique characteristics to public sector employment i n and thereby often make the public manager's job even more demanding. Most government jobs are more service oriented and therefore difficult to define in terms of clear performance objectives than those jobs that are in the private sector. These factors and a general appreciation by Policymakers that public managers often find themselves constrained in their options by the formal rules and regulations that comprise the Civil Service System, are important to note to have an effective evaluation process. ' Compensation for individual employees in the department director category ! f are based upon several criteria. pt I 1. Salary adjustments for employees will be considered at least once a year. A department director's performance may be reviewed more often if necessary. 2. The individual salaries for department directors will be fixed by the City Manager at a point within the approved range. Money to fund such adjustments will be based upon the City's ability to pay, overall employee performance, related economic conditions within the community, comparable worth to similar positions, and any other legal requirements that may become necessary. 3. During the course of administering a performance based compensation system, there will be opportunities to reward employees for excep- tional performance and unusual accomplishments. Variable salary adjustments for individuals will occur and may vary from year to year just as an individual's performance may vary. An exceptional 1 5 performance and the compensation that may accompany that performance will be granted only upon demonstration of a performance exceeding job requirements. Such examples would be (a) developing new programs which result in a significant financial savings and/or improvement in City services; (b) extraordinary contributions to a particular field of activity which would draw state and national recognition and/or local and regional acclaim; (c) development of the unique management and/or operational program, with particular emphasis on a program that may be applied to other units other than the one in which the employee works; (d) a willingness to accept special assignment and/or management responsibility which would be atypical of the work which is customarily assigned. 4. There are five levels of performance for each of the department director positions: Distinguished - exceptional performance far above the job requirements; Commendable - noticeably above what is expected in the job; Competent - a completely satisfactory and acceptable performance by an experienced employee; Fair - needs improvement to be satisfactory; Marginal - probationary or conditional, below the acceptable. 5. Following the annual review and performance appraisal by the City Manager, each department director will be rated and compensation determined. To avoid any misuse of the rating system, as a policy, the City Manager will only give four distinguished and/or commendable ratings to department directors. No more than two of the four may be distinguished. The City Manager is responsible for 12 individuals with respect to annual performance review. These include the 04 0 6 department directors - Finance, Police, Fire, Public Works, Transit, Parks & Recreatioor Planning, Housing & Inspection Services, and the Assistant City Mao ager. The Senior Center Coordinator position is in the administrative pay plan; however, the City Manager does prepare an annual performance review. The City Manager is also responsible for preparing performance reviews for the Administrative Assistant and the Economic Development Coordinator. The positions of Library Director and Airport Manager are not subject to City Manager review. The positions of City Attorney, City Clerk and City Manager are subject to City Council review. bj/pc2 i I I 6 department directors - Finance, Police, Fire, Public Works, Transit, Parks & Recreatioor Planning, Housing & Inspection Services, and the Assistant City Mao ager. The Senior Center Coordinator position is in the administrative pay plan; however, the City Manager does prepare an annual performance review. The City Manager is also responsible for preparing performance reviews for the Administrative Assistant and the Economic Development Coordinator. The positions of Library Director and Airport Manager are not subject to City Manager review. The positions of City Attorney, City Clerk and City Manager are subject to City Council review. bj/pc2