HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-11-10 Info PacketCity Of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 30, 1981
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
RE: Informal Agendas and Meeting Schedule
November 2, 1981 Monday
3:00 - 5:00 P.M. Conference Room
3:00 P.M. - Council time, Council committee reports
3:15 P.M. - Executive Session
November 3, 1981 Tuesday
ELECTION DAY
NO CITY COUNCIL MEETING (New schedule begins with regular meeting on
November 10, 1981.)
November 9, 1981 Monday_
3:00 - 5:00 P.M. Conference Room
3:00 P.M. - Review zoning matters
3:15 P.M. - Discuss Ralston Creek Village Development
3:45 P.M. - Council agenda, Council time, Council committee reports
4:00 P.M. - Consider appointments to Riverfront Commission and City
Historic Preservation Task Force
4:15 P.M. - Executive Session
November 10, 1981
7:30 P.M. - Regular Council Meeting - Council Chambers
November 16, 1981 Monday
3:00 - 5:00 P.M. Conference Room
3:00 P.M. - Review zoning matters
3:15 P.M. - Council time, Council committee reports
3:30 P.M. - Discuss Sheller -Globe Public Hearing procedures
November 19 and 20, 1981 Thursday/Friday
9:00 A.M. Council Chambers
Public Hearing - City of Iowa City v. Sheller -Globe Corp.
PENDING ITEMS
Economic Development Program
Meet with Parks and Recreation Commission regarding parkland acquisition
Appointments to Board of Adjustment, Board of Appeals, Board of Examiners
of Plumbers, Human Rights Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission,
Resources Conservation Commission, Senior Center Commission - December 8, 1981.
1667
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
City of Iowa CI'`
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 26, 1981
To: City Manager and City Council 1
From: Hugh Mose, Transit Manager 0Q,
Re: Use of Small Buses in Richmond, Indiana
On Monday, October 19, I spoke with Darryl Sheffer, Transit Manager in Richmond,
Indiana, regarding their use of small buses in their transit system. We spoke
at some length and he provided me with the following information:
The City of Richmond has a population of about 44,000; it is largely an
industrial town. The municipal transit system owns twelve buses, including two
with wheelchair lifts. The entire fleet is comprised of Wayne Transette 17 -
passenger buses. Seven buses are on the street during the base period, and one
additional vehicle is operated during peak hours. Service is provided six days
per week, with no buses in the evening. Ridership is very low, averaging less
than 1,000 passengers per day. The riders are mainly senior citizens and
shoppers, plus a few school children; the system serves very few work trips.
The City of Richmond took over the transit system approximately ten years ago,
when the former private owner went out of business. Under the private operator
the system had used full-size transit coaches, but when .the City took over it
Purchased smaller Twin Coaches with a seating capacity of approximately 30.
These buses did not prove satisfactory, especially after the manufacturer went
out of business and parts became difficult to locate. Because ridership
continued to fall, when the Twin Coaches were replaced in 1979 the system opted
for even smaller buses and purchased Wayne Transettes. These buses have been in
service for the past two years.
The Wayne small buses are gasoline powered with 400 cubic inch Chevrolet
engines. The buses utilize body -on -chassis construction. Most units have
approximately 100,000 miles on them, and so far all components seem to be
holding up all right - engines, transmissions, rear ends, etc. Richmond hopes
to get five years' service from the vehicles, and expects that the chassis and
body will wear out at about the same time. The buses cost $21,000 new in 1979;
the same vehicle today would cost about $5,000 more.
The advantages noted for this type of vehicle are good gasoline mileage (7 mpg),
lower maintenance costs than the former Twin Coaches, driver acceptance, and
ovrawhil of
l ease chseverely maintenance.
hampe sboa ding and debarkingthe dwheneverastandeestarenpresent,sand
the small capacity, which presents a problem at peak hours, when not all waiting
riders can be accommodated. The total capacity of each vehicle is 29, 17 seated
and 12 standing.
Mr. Sheffer seems well satisfied with the Wayne Transettes in their type of
operation. However, he was very emphatic that in Richmond "people just don't
ride the buses anymore."
bj5/4-5
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES
I
i
tom..,.
City of Iowa CY'' nr; I�1I
- MEMORANDUM
Date: - October 23, 1981
To: City Manager and City Council
��11
From: Hugh Mose, Transit Manager �,(j'
Re: Leased Small Buses UU
Iowa City Transit is presently confronted with both a problem and an
opportunity. The problem is a lack of capacity at rush-hour during the
winter months. The opportunity is a chance to experiment with some small
buses that are available for lease from Rock Island, Illinois.
To address both issues we propose to lease three of these 30 -passenger
Twin Coaches from Rock Island and operate two on the street. This will
allow us to test the feasibility of small buses in our type of operation,
help alleviate the overcrowding problems that are certain to plague us
this winter, and to experiment with rush-hour "trippers" prior to the
arrival of our new buses next spring.
Assuming that these vehicles were placed in service in mid-January and
operated until the University's spring break, the cost of the project
would be as follows:
Lease of three buses @ $400/bus/month = $3600
Drivers'. wages (two temporary employees) _ $3300
Bus maintenance by Equipment Division
(@ 600mile) _ $3600
Driver training, schedule preparation,
publicity, etc. _ $ 500
Farebox revenue (from additional riders)
Net cost to City - X8000
{
It should be noted that these buses may not provide the high level of
comfort and reliability that our transit riders have come to expect.
However, for lighter duty, lower ridership routes and -"rush-hour only"
service, these buses should perform satisfactorily, allowing experimenta-
tion with the small bus concept and helping meet our wintertime capacity
needs.
If the City Council is at all interested in this proposal, the Transit
Division and the Equipment Division will inspect the buses, begin -some
preliminary -negotiations with Rock Island, develop some tentative
"tripper" routes, and report back to the Council with a complete proposal
no later than the end of November.
bdw5/1-2
MICROFILMED By
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES
/66 ?
6
Iowa City Public Library
Fiscal Year 1982
First Quarter Report
with Statistical Summaries
FISCAL YEAR OBJECTIVES:
1. A. Provide resources to clean and maintain new building
adequately.
B. Review current and develop new policies for public use of
building facilities: (in priority order) 1) meeting rooms;
2) public access catalog; 3) AV equipment; 4) display
facilities; 5) study rooms; 6) public lounge; 7) handicapped
users equipment; 8) AV lab.
C. Provide training to public and staff on use of new facilities
and equipment: (in priority order) 1) public access catalog;
2) AV playback equipment; 3) projection booth; 4) meeting rooms
sound system; 5) remote audio system; 6) AV lab production
equipment.
D. Develop policies and procedures to establish routines for: (in
priority order) 1) building security; 2) building maintenance;
3) answering telephones; 4) equipment maintenance; 5) supplies
and inventory control; 6) production of displays, publications,
cable TV programs and other public information devices.
E. Analyze new rate of use of services and facilities and adjust
staffing patterns, organizational structure, classifications
and job descriptions to absorb growth and meet public service
needs more effectively.
F. Acquire software and enter data for phase two of computerized
catalog: automated authority control and cross reference
system.
2. A. Increase rate of acquisition of new and replacement library
materials by 5%.
B. Monitor effect of merging juvenile and adult non-fiction
collections.
C. Evaluate switch to open stacks and microfiche for periodical
backfiles.
D. Increase support for collection development through gifts,
grants or private funds by 10%.
3. A. Provide information about new building facilities and automated
services through tours, brochures, press releases, library and
cable TV programs.
45 70
MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
1-1\ 2
B. Increase self-help capability of users by developing step-by-
step instructions for use of catalog, microfilm equipment and
all AV equipment in self-service areas by 1-1-82.
C. Begin planning for computerization of special information
files.
D. Establish new schedule for children's film showings and
storyhours which meets public needs.
E. Continue planning of services for new jail, handicapped users,
child/family resource center and Senior Center, with emphasis
on involvement of target groups in the planning and delivery of
services.
4. A. Establish a task force of board, friends, and staff to begin the
planning process for public libraries developed by King
Research.
B. Use new information produced by computer, 1980 census, user
requests/suggestions, and staff survey to supply data to
support planning process.
WORK COMPLETED:
1A. Contract cleaning crew received satisfactory first quarter {
( review. Building manager has routines for monitoring security,
I cleaning, and maintenance well under way.
I i
18. New meeting room policy adopted by Board 9/81; others revised,
j in progress or as yet not needed.
1C. Volunteers enlisted for training PAC users with observable
decrease in staff time required. AV equipment assistance was
M 7% of in -building use in first quarter. Other facilities not
I yet available to public.
i 1D. Essential building routines established and staff trained by 6-
15-81; others in progress.
j 1E. Circulation per hour was 170 for first quarter; standard for
i opening second station revised to six people in line.
4 Transactions at AV desk and waiting time within performance
limits. Telephone calls up 36% over fiscal year 1981 but most
calls answered within five rings. Information and Children's
Desk traffic up 52% and 73% respectively; unable to meet
standards.
2A. 2097 items added in first quarter; up 7% over one year ago.
This is one-fourth of the number needed to add one item for
every 40 circulated in fiscal year 1981. Most items processed
were backlog from previous quarter. Materials budget only 10%
expended versus 20-25% as planned.
i
1670.
MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
3
2B. Juvenile non-fiction increase of 38% compared to 16% for all
childrens items indicates a much greater use of the collection
in its new location.
2C. Nothing done this quarter. Backfiles not being properly
maintained due to heavy use and workload of shelving staff.
2D. Percentage of gift materials added Decreased slightly to 18.7%
$20,000 added to materials budget from private funds increases
fiscal year 82 budget by 25%. No time so far to spend the
additional funds.
3A. 17,500 brochures about new building and computer catalogue
distributed. 207 tours for 848 people were conducted.
Volunteer tour guides conducted 75% of the tours. All library
publications, especially about AV collections and the monthly
calendar, were being requested at a record pace.
38. Self -instruction materials in place for public catalogue and
all AV equipment in public areas. Instructions for microfilm
equipment in progress.
3C. Nothing planned this quarter.
3D. Experimental schedules for traditional 'programs during summer
and fall. Cable TV playbacks of programs available on request.
Some of the film showings and storyhours now planned for older
children.
3E. Service to jail patrons up 15% over first quarter a year ago.
The number of handicapped users in library increased
observably. Parent.workshops begun including videotaping for
replay.on Channel 20. Deposit collection for Senior Center
underway.
4. Nothing planned for this quarter. Second quarter staff work
Postponed until after 1-1-82.
ANALYSIS
This report documents that the library staff did much more than survive
during the first three months of service in the new building. But the
massive increases in use, including a one-time bulge in circulation and
consistently large increases in other services has left the library
seriously overspent in temporary hours for FY1982 and with many essential
administrative and collection development tasks unfinished and behind
schedule.
10570
MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
MINUTES OF STAFF MEETING
October 28, 1981
Referrals from the informal Council meeting of October 26 were distributed to
the staff for review and discussion (copy attached).
Items for the agenda of November 10 include:
Third reading of ordinance concerning funeral homes and mortuaries
Resolution expanding the IRB area
Two public hearings on the issuance of IRBs - Marcia Roggow and Dole
Beverage
Appointments to Riverfront Commission and Historic Preservation Task Force
Resolution regarding agreement with IDOT on Benton and Riverside intersection
Public hearing on Sheller -Globe should be deferred to a later date
Abstract of primary voting for approval
The Human Relations Director distributed a memorandum regarding the reclassi-
fication of positions and requested that this should be posted for the informa-
tion of all City employees.
The Human Relations Director announced a seminar on Affirmative Action planned
for November 6 in the Council Chambers. All administrative employees should
attend. It will cover handicapped discrimination in accommodations. A film
also will be shown, "The Workplace Hustle". This film also is available to be
shown in departments.
The Human Relations Director briefly reviewed the Civil Service lists and procedures.
It was announced that the United Way campaign is doing very well; the goal has
almost been reached.
Prepared by:
Lorraine Saeger
i
i
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICRO_ LAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES
f"
Informal (
October 2(
CDBG Fundi
Bicycles
Alternai
Sheller -G'
rti
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL,
.Thureday, October 29, 1981
Sewer Project Aid
Is Doubtful as House,
Senate Bills Differ
Baa W.LC Sxaecr IWHNAL SfafJneporfer
WASHINGTON -The House and Senate
Passed sharply different bills to continue
federal aid for sewer projects, sending the
Program to an uncertain fate In conference
committee.
The Reagan administration supports the
Senate measure, which would be less costly.
The White House has said It would rather
see the program killed than approve financ-
ing under criteria adopted by the House.
Congressional staffers contend the conferees
may take several months to agree on a com.
Promise package.
Both bilis would make $2.4 OilNon avnil-
able for the program In fLsca1.1982, but the
House measure could end up costing the
government tens of billions of dollars more
through the early 19906. The two measures
are at adds about the kinds of projects ellgi-
ble for Mancial aid, theareas on the coun-
try that would get most of the money and
Private Industry's role In paying part of, the
test of treaiing Iiidustrlal wastes..
The. House measure, approved by a 232
t0718 vote, leaves essentially unchanged the
current formula for distributing money to
states, counties and cities.
The House refused to go along with Pres
Ident Reagan's call to target sewer fands to
older,more heavily populated industrial
areas. The House bill also rejects the ad-
ministration's proposals to exclude federal
aid from sewer lines andtreatmentplants
built In anticipation of Population growth or.
Industrial, development. Both changes were
part of the measure that passed the Senate
without debate on a roll call vote last night.
Provisions In the House bill also would
make It easier for municipalities or public
sewer districts to exempt companies from
paying a Portion of the contrucbon costs of
new sewer lines and plants.
Overall, the House bill could cost the fed.
eral government more than $50 billion in the
next 10 years, which is roughly $25 billion
more than the Sedate version and what the
administration has said It Is willing to ac.
cept.
As reported, the White House and the En.
vironmental Protection Agency have warned
lawmakers that the President won't approve
any additional spending for the program this
fiscal year unless the House and the Senaw
approve,the proposed 'changes In funding
formulas. -- . --
Before the Reagan administration made.
Its hid to reshape the Program, local govern.
.Its
expected to receive at least $3.4 bit..
lion In aid this year. They had also built up
a backlog of more than $90 billion In potent,
tlul Projects eligible for federal grants by
the early 1990s.
More than 30 states already have run out:
of funds to continue the program and many
state and local officials fear that a pro•
tractedfight between Senate and House con-
-
ferees could cause hundreds of planned proj-
ects to be scrapped, scaled back or financed
from local sources.
1642,
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
I�
w
�1
L
S m
T
W
TH
F
5
q lOAM�Staff Mtg
5
6
(
8AM-Magistrate
10:30AM-Public
(Cont Room)
(Rec Ct
8AM-Magistrate
Court (Chambers)
Court (Chambers)
Hearing in the
matter of Ia-Ill
12noon-CCN
Cour3PM-Senior
Center
3PM-Informal
5.00PM-Housing
iConf Room)
Comm (Senior Ctr)
Council (Conf Rm)
7:30PM-Informal
TransmiesioncLine
(Chambers)
7PM-Parks & Rao
7:30PM-Formal P&Z
(Chambers)
P&2 (Conf Room)
8AM-Negotiations
Q
Comm (Rao Ctr)
7:30PM-Riverfront
Police (Conf
Comm (Conf Room)
F
to
n
,Az
8
a tat
BCouit9�Chambers)
8AM-Mag strate
Court chambers)
4PM-Broadband
HOLIDAY
8.30AMM-Hous A eat
$oard
3PM-Informal
Council (Conf Rm)
council
Telecommunication
Comm (Conf Room)
(Con
7j3OP�I-Air�Ort Com
CCon f£ RR000
{
•
7.3OPM-Co cil
jChambers)
l!
�
j
I`j
JAM -Staff Meeting
public Hearing,
10
Public Hearing
Z�
SAM -Magistrate
(Conf Room)
Sheller -Globe
(Chambers)
Sheller -Globe
(Chambers)
j
Court (chambers)
4:30PM-Board of
3PM-Informal
Adjustment (Chamb
8AM-Magstrate
iEng Rn
Council (Conf Rm)
•30PM-Historic
Court Conf
7:3OPM-Informal
preservation Task
B:30AM-Housin4
oRoom)
P&Z (Conf Room)
Force (Conf Room)
(Engaconfls
7:30PM-Formal P&Z
'Zq
2OAM-Staff
6
,?%
,2P �•
Mtg.
8AM-Magistrate
(Conf Room)
Court (chambers)
HOLIDAY
HOLIDAY
3PM-Informal
Council (Conf RM)
7M-Cumfn Right
7:3OPM-Council
Comm
(Chambers)
29 0
BAM-Magistrate
Court (Chambers)
3PM-Informal
Council (Conf Rm)
.
7P&ZP(Conf
Room)
MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
4"
City of Iowa Ci'
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 6, 1981
To: City C uncil
From: city onager
Re: Transit Assistance and Meeting with UMTA Administrator
This past week the U.S. Senate passed a transportation bill which provides
that Section 5 operating assistance shall be distributed based on the 1980
census. The City has been working with Senators Jepsen and Grassley and
particularly Representative Leach to attempt to get language placed in the
bill which would assure us of Section 5 assistance until Section 5
assistance is phased out. The bill will now go to a conference committee.
We will continue to work with the Congressional delegation and have asked
that we be alerted to the appointment of the conference committee.
This next Tuesday the Administrator of the Urban. Mass Transit
Administration will be in Davenport. Mayor Balmer, Mayor Kattchee, Mary
Neuhauser, John Lundell and I will meet with Mr. Arthur Teele in Senator
Jepsen's office. The transit operators, including Hugh Mose, probably
also will attend. We will attempt to gain support for utilizing the 1980
census figures and financial assistance for small transit systems.
bdw/sp
MICROFILMED BY
' JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
/0
- k
RE;:;' ,'gip i�OV 198f
JIM LEACH ['•""[["
wv�I� BABCIHC,FFICEA AND CIVIL
SEVICEAFFAIRS
Ill A[la4 bn
POST OFFICE AND CIVIL 5[HVICC
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
November 2, 1981
The Honorable John R. Balmer
Mayor of the City of Iowa City
Civic Center
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear John:
Thank you very much for your letter in support of the
continuation of industrial development revenue bonds
and for the copy of Iowa City's policy regarding these
bonds.
As you know, there is considerable discussion currently
regarding the use and abuse of industrial development
revenue bonds. Several bills now before Congress are
seeking to modify or target their use. No action is
being taken by Congress, however, pending receipt of a
specific proposal from the Administration, which is
expected this month. I will have Iowa City's experience
with industrial revenue bonds in mind as Congress con-
siders this proposal and the issue in general.
Thanks again for letting me know your views on this issue.
Sincerely,
JL: cm
Leach
Member of Congress
MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES
/G 7S
City of Iowa Cit -
MEMORANDUM
Date: November 5, 1981
To: City Manager and City Council
From: Hugh Mose, Transit Manager
Re: Small Buses from Rock Island
On Tuesday, I called the Rock Island County Municipal Mass Transit
District to confirm arrangements to inspect the buses available for lease.
Mr. John Murphy, Assistant General Manager, informed me that we were
welcome to come and look at the buses, but that he had arranged with a
party from South Carolina, who wanted to lease all 18 of the buses for two
years, to have right of first refusal.
On the chance that the South Carolina deal might fall through, the
following day Terry Reynolds, Equipment Superintendent, Arlo Fry, Senior
Driver, John Lundell, Transportation Planner, and I visited Rock Island to
inspect the buses. We were sadly disappointed to find that in spite of
the fact that the buses are only seven years old, and that they were in use
until this past July, the buses are JUNK.
The four of us were unanimous in our opinion that the buses are in such
poor condition that we could not reasonably get them ready for service
without a considerable investment of time and money. Not only are the
buses in questionable mechanical condition, but they all have severe
structural problems and their interiors have been badly neglected for some
time.
John Lundell and his staff are looking around to see if there are any
other small buses available that we could lease in a similar manner as we
had proposed for the Rock Island buses. Hopefully his information will be
available within the next two weeks.
cc: Terry Reynolds
John Lundell
Arlo Fry
bj4/7
MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICRO_ LAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
14670
W
S
CITYOF IOWA
CHIC CENTER 41 CITY
O E. WASHINGTON ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-50OD
November 5, 1981
Status Report
Iowa City Waste Water Facility
Since the passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
(Public Law 92-500) in 1972, Iowa City has embarked on an aggressive
program of investigation, analysis, and evaluation of its sanitary sewer
collection and treatment system. This work resulted in the completion of
Iowa City's Waste Water Facility Plan by October of 1979. The plan was
subsequently approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on July
7, 1980.
The Waste Water Facility Plan recommends the following improvements to
eliminate
sewer infiltration, existing ntreat ttal reatment plantaseffluentacts bement ,00etc9) from dinsanitary
oursanitary sewer system:
Improvement
River Corridor
Sewer
Southeast Outfall
Sewer
University Heights
Sewer
Sewer System Rehab
Work
Outfall Relief System
Sewer Improvements
Waste Water Treatment
Plant & Related Work
Total Cost
All Improvements
Total
Cost
Federal
Share
State
Share
City
Share
$ 7,000,000
$ 4,988,000
$ 333,000
$ 1,679,000
11,377,000
8,532,000
568,000
2,277,000
820,000
544,000
36,000
240,000
240,000
180,000
12,000
48,000
952,000
0
0
952,000
37,600,000
27,637,000
1,842,000
8,121,000
$57,989,000
$41,952,000
$2,796,000
$13,241,000
The City has proceeded with, and Federal and State funding has been
provided for, the construction of the corridor sewer project and design of
all other projects listed above.
1477
MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICRO_ LAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
r
I
2
As an indication of our progress, completion of the various stages toward
development and implementation of the Waste Water Facility Plan are listed
herein:
j MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES
4'
Date Completed
Stage
(or Anticipated
Completion Date)
1.
Infiltration Inflow Analysis
November 1976
2.
i
Waste Water Treatment System Plan
June 1978
3.
Sewer System Evaluation Survey
May 1979
4.
Waste Water Facility Plan
October 1979
5.
University Heights Sewer (Design)
July 1981
6.
River Corridor Sewer (Construction)
November 1981
7.
University Heights Sewer (Construction)
December 1982
8.
Waste Water Treatment Plant (Design)
October 1982
9.
Southeast Outfall Sewer (Design)
June 1983
10.
Sewer System Rehabilitation Work (Design)
June 1983
11.
Outfall Relief System Sewer Improvement
(Design)
June 1983
12.
Items #8 through #11 (Construction)
January 1986
The
City has received federal grants (75%) for
Items #1 through #6 and #8
through #10 and is requesting a grant for Item #7
at this time.
j MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES
4'
r::_
from IOWA CMT PUE_.IC LIBRARY
IOWA CITY,IA 52240
PRESS S RELEASE
Re: Library Service Cuts
Phone, 356-5200
"The new public library is drowning in a flood of enthusiastic
response from the community", Director Lolly Eggers announced today.
In the first quarterly report to the Library Board, Eggers noted that
it appears that circulation is leveling off to a 15% increase over
old'building rates, but the overall number of people using the
j building every day is staying at
Y 9 a hefty 43% increase. "That is
what's killing us," says Eggers. "We have been successful beyond
all our expectations and capabilities. There are now 13,500 users
for every staff member available to serve them. In the old library
this staff/user ratio was between 8000 and 9000."
J
It is obviously one of the best bargains in town. In fiscal 1981
with 278,840 people using the Library, the cost per user was $2.40.
This year with 420,000 people projected to use the library this cost
will decrease to $1.80 per user.
The Library has promised the public a showcase month to highlight
features of tha new building's service capabilities, and events for
I November's Grand Opening celebration will take place as scheduled.
It will be the only major library programming for the year, however,
and will be followed immediately with the imposition of limits on
several services. "It is ironic and unfortunate that on the eve of
our grand opening celebration we have come smack up against the
i
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
. AK 7S
..1
realization that we cannot sustain the increases in use throughout
this budget year."
While it is every librarian's dream to serve a community where 60% of
the residents are registered library borrowers, the impact of this
use on the collections and the staff's ability to reshelve, organize,
buy new materials and answer questions has been staggering. We
cannot continue to let collection maintenance and essential
"settling in" tasks go undone without long-term damage to the quality
of library service," Eggers said.
Following a review of options and the adoption of guidelines as set
I
forth by the Library Board at their October meeting, several service
changes were accepted. According to Ed Zastrow, President of the
Library Board, "The goal was to cause the least inconvenience
possible to Iowa City residents."
Beginning December 1, reciprocal borrowing agreements with public
libraries other than Coralville will be discontinued. The
Coralville Public Library lends more to Iowa City residents than
Coralville residents borrow from the Iowa City Public Library. Rural
Johnson County residents who are served by annual contract between
11-1
the Johnson County Board of Supervisors and the Iowa CAty Public
Library Board of Trustees are not affected by this change. In
i
1
addition, use of audiovisual facilities in the building will be
restricted to users who possess a valid Iowa City library card,
I
M 7P
MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40INES
4..
borrowing privileges to state institutions located in Iowa City will
be severely curtailed, and tours will be available only to groups
whose headquarters are in or who provide services to residents of
Johnson County.
Also starting December 1, the library will open at 1:00 PM instead of
10:00 AM on Thursdays and 10•AM instead of 9 -AM on Saturdays.
After January 1, the number of Children's programs will be reduced
from ten to six per week and the number of items a borrower can check
out will be limited to ten per card.
Finally, none of the building's new service capabilities will be
offered this year including plans to acquire handicapped equipment,
other audiovisual services or adult programs, and library users will
have to stand in line a little longer to check out items or to have
questions answered.
j "We feel these service reductions will increase the time available
for essential support tasks without seriously limiting the public's
access to library facilities," Zastrow said. "We are delighted that
the people of Iowa City have given their overwhelming endorsement to
i
the new facility and 'services, and now we must ask their
understanding as we adjust to the new workload and attempt to
maintain quality service."
i
I
I MICROFILMED BY
`JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40INES
/6 74P
- v
W
i
IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY
KEY SERVICE INDICATORS
1st Quarter FY82 compared to 1st
Quarter FYB1
FY81
FY82
x Change
People into building*
75,060
108,131
44.1
N per hour open
95.6
137.7
Items checked out
117,963
133,622
13.3
it per hour open
150.3
170.2
Cards issued
2,048
3,737
82.5
% issued to children
20.0
12.5
% issued to I.C. residents 75.6
84.4
Reserves placed
808
1,015
25.6
N paid reserves
201
342
70.1
Questions asked
11,165
17,228
54.3
Info desk - in person
3,708
7,932
113.9
Info desk - telephone
3,682
3,364
(9.5)
Children's desk
2,494
4,323
73.3
AV Desk
-
1,127
New
Telephone calls
7,008
9,557
36.4
Meeting room use
N meetings
19
145
est. attendance
213
2,565
Tours given
M
4
207
attendance
56
848
i -
* Does not include people
who only use lobby facilities
Such as meeting rooms,
t
1
telephones and restrooms.
1
E
f
i
1
1
i
r
ry
i MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
S
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
Unusual scheme used
in Baltimore's recovery
Lot Angt1w Tim" Strrlce
BALTIMORE — No place, except
maybe Oakland, Calif., or'Newark,
N.J., ever got more knocks than
Baltimore. It was A blue-collar town
with a ringaround the collar, a
spooky urban wasteland that looked
as H the Great Fire of 1904 had
struck only yesterday.
When the mayor's press secre.
tary, Chris Hartman, moved here 14
years ago, his friends in Washing-
ton, he recalled, had a singular
reaction: "Yuk."
Although this Is where Babe Ruth
learned to drink and burlesque
dancer Blaze Starr first merchan.
dised her considerable assets on The
Block, a seedy strip that peddles
wickedness and splits of champagne
of $50. Baltimore just didn't have
much character or softness. It was a
city, said one-time resident Billie
Holiday, that took pretty girls and
turned them' into prostitutes. Native
son H. L. Mencken was kinder,
saying only that latter-day Baltimore
resembled the ruins of a "once -great
medieval city."
Few challenged the contention.
Baltimore's piers on the upper
Chesapeake Bay were. rotting, the
neighborhoods of brick row houses
were being devoured by decay and
by the early 1950s, when the city
had not seen a new hotel or office
building for three decades, a mdnici•
Pal report predicted urban bank.
ruptcy within a generation. The
glietto riots of 1968 cut a swath
through downtown. No one was
surprised to learn about that time
that Baltimore liad lost 100,000
residents in 20 years.
Well, so much for doomsday.
Baltimore — or, as some locals call
It Bawlamer — has had a $1 billion
facelift. In the process It has made
one of the most striking recoveries
of any American- city. Mencken
would be dumbfounded.
The city whose defenders de.
tested the British In 1812 and
Inspired Francis Scott Key to write
"The Star Spangled Banner" Is alive,
and thriving city backers say It lures
more visitors than Disneyland, and
It has attracted wide-eyed urban
planners from as far away as
Europe.
The harborside slums and de-
crepit warehouses have given way to
a $450 million complex of shops and
restaurants, which. created 2,300
new -jobs. There is a 13 -block
collection of downtown hoels, shops
and apartments known as Charles
Center. There is also a new, $22
million aquarium, an underground
metro system 'scheduled to open
next year and a $45 million com-rn.
tion center.
"We know we had a bad reputa-
tion, so our philosophy has been that
if you're given lemons, you mace
lemonade," said Robert Willis, di
rector of tourism. "People used to
drive through on the trip between
Washington and New York and all
they'd see was run down neighbor.
hoods and smoky Industrial areas.
Our first effort was just to get them
to slow down and smell the rose<."
Baltimore's renaissance is partic.
ularly noteworthy because the city
has used an unusual scenario that
could benefit other urbap centers.
First, the Initial impetus for renewal
came from the local business com-
munity rather than government.
Second, the city has worked without
an overali master plan, favoring
Instead a shotgun approach that
devotes as much attention to restor.
ing neighborhoods as reviving the
downtown area. Third, emphasis has
been placed on rehabilitating build-
ings rather than demolishing them.
And fourth, Baltimore has tried to
ensure that its rebirth benefits more
than just the already-priviliged.
Recently, for Instance, Hyatt's
$35 million Regency Hotel opened
Its doors across the street from
,Baltimore's celebrated Harborplace.
And of 550 persons employed at the
hotel, 164 were formerly In govern.
ment job -training programs.
Mayor William Dgnaid Schaefer
arrived at the rlbborrcutting cere.
monies In a 1937 Yellow Cab. The
hotel -chain founder, A.M. Pritzker,
using his best Baltimorese, looked
around and exclaimed to the crowd.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES
"There ain't nobody like your
mayor."
Schaefer, 59, who has spent 26
years in city government, was a
defensive, abrasive, shy politican
known as "Shaky Schaefer" early in
his career. But he has developed Into
the major mover of a reborn
Baltimore and his biggest contribu.
tion has been to change the attitude
the city has of Itself.
"I'll tell you, if Schaefer can't get
you fired up about your neighbor.
hood, nobody can; said Dennis
Roberts, sipping a glass of wine in
the' living room of his restored
Victorian home in.Washington Hill
— once one of Baltimore's most
unsightly slums.
Roberts, a black,TV producer and
his wife, Chris, bought the house for
$1 from the city a's part of Balti.
more's "homesteading" program.
Like the other dollar houses on the
block, it was renovated at the
owners' expense and given a two.
year grace period on city-prdperty'
taxes. Nearby, artisan and craftsman
"shopsteaders" have moved Into
boarded -up stores they. bought for
$100 qn condition they restore them
and live above them.
7 G�'
uninsured San Diego
gambling on lawsuits
LOS Angela Timm Serrlce
SAN DIEGO, Calif. — City Attor.
ney John W., Witt calls it "a
calculated risk." City Manager Ray
T. Blair Jr. admits that it "scares the
hell out of me sdmetimes.
The source of Witt's concern and
Blair's trepidation is the city of San
Diego's unenviable positlon as• a
defendant In nearly 1,100 lawsuits,
representing a total liability of more
than a quarter of.a billion dollars,
while carrying no'lnsurance.
For a city noted for Its fiscal
conservatism, It represents a high-
stakes poker game that holds vir-
tually unlimited possibilities for the
city's financial future - most of
them bad. It's a wager that the city
has been winning — so far,
Jennifer Baerman was injured
when her moped struck a bump Ina
street in Pacific Beach that was
being repaired by the city, Roller
skaters were Incensed when the city
tried to limit their use of Balboa
Park. A Del Mar Heights couple felt
that firefighters did a poor Job of
trying to contain a $200,000 blaze at
their home. The only thing that
those Incidents have in common Is
that each resulted in the city being
sued by a private citizen. City
records show that such sults are'
becoming commonplace.
As of August, the' most recent
month for which figures are avaita.
ble, 1,083 civil lawsuits were pend.
Ing against the city. The damages
being sought from the city in those
cases total nearly $287 miilton.
The city's ultimate tab for settling ,
the cases will be far less than that.
Nevertheless, all those zeroes in the
'liability figure are disquieting to
budget -conscious city officials.
,The suits deal 'with subjects
ranging from the routine — auto
accidents, disputes, over bills, minor
injuries arising from slips and falls
— to catastrophic accident@ that
lead to deaths or major property
losses.
Indeed, Chief Deputy City Attor.
ney Ronald L. Johnson says, only
half -jokingly, '7f it exists, we've
probably been sued for it."
In the 1960s, the city was fully
Insured against damages arising
from lawsuits. By the early.1970s,
rising premium costs forced the city
to switch to an umbrella coverage.
plan in which the city paid a certain
deductible portion of each settle.
ment.
As the number of lawsuits filed
against the city Increased, the city,
In a bid to hold down Insurance
costs, was forced to keep raising the
deductible figure. Finally, the prem.
sums were so expensive and the
deductible so high — It reached
$500,000'in the late 1970s — that
city officials decided that they could
save money by dropping the insur.
ance and assuming full financial
responsibility for settling the suits.
Last year, the city paid $2.5
million In claims and court Judg•
merits, according to Jerry Johnson.
City officials estimate, though,
that it would have cost the city
about $4.8 million for Insurance last
year.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
I
City of Iowa Cit,
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 6, 1981
TO: City Council
FROM: Doug Boothroy&
RE: Report - "Planning and Zoning Review: Application Fees"
Enclosed is a study of fees charged to applicants for the
various review processes performed by the Planning and
Program Development staff. The purpose of the study was
to evaluate what costs to the City are involved during
these processes and whether the fees charged should be
raised to cover those costs.
This report is being sent to the Planning and Zoning
Comnission and to the Board of Adjustment for their
review.. The applications dealt with in tW report come
before these bodies fo*r their approval. Public dis-
cussion of the report's recommendations is scheduled
before the Planning and Zoning Commission on November
19th. The Board of Adjustment will have the fee study
on their agenda November 18th. Recommendations of the
Commission and the Board will be forwarded to the Council
shortly thereafter.
/6 if/
i MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
_ 4.
A P P L ICAT ION FEES
AM
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RARIDS•DIS MOIYCi
'j-.
'-1
PLANNING AND ZONING REVIEW
APPLICATION FEES
City of Iowa City
November, 1981
Prepared by:
Karin Franklin
Plan Administration Division
Dept. of Planning and Program Development
-7
MICROFILMED By
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES -MOINES
1 .4
j MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
- 4-
t
Table of Contents
A.
Introduction and Scope of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 1
B.
Alternative Fee Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 3
C.
Study Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 4
D.
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 4
E.
Notes on Revised Fee Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 15
List of Figures
1.
Subdivisions,... - flow chart of review . . . . . . . . . .
. 6
2.
Rezoning - flow chart of review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 7
3.
Actions of the Board of Adjustment - flow chart of review. .
. 8
4.
Current Schedule of Fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 9
5.
Fee Comparisons - Iowa Municipalities . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 10
6.
Johnson County Fee Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 11
7.
Synopsis of FY81 Expenditures and Fees Collected . . . . . .
. 12
8.
Cost/Revenue Comparisons - Case Studies: July 1981. . . . .
. 13
9.
Revised Fee Schedule - Proposed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 14
10.
Cost Comparisons - Case Studies @ Proposed Fees. . . . . . .
. 16
j MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
- 4-
t
Ir -
PLANNING AND ZONING REVIEW: APPLICATION FEES
. INTRODUCTION
In 1974 a study completed by the Department of Community Development revealed
that the fees being charged to developers for the review of subdivisions and
other development activities were considerably below cost. This held true also
for fees charged on rezoning applications and requests brought before the Board
of Adjustment. In order to close the gap between costs incurred and fees
charged, the City Council adopted an ordinance (74-2714) which increased the
amount an applicant would be required to pay for services rendered, thus
covering more of the costs of various review processes.
During the seven year period which has elapsed since adoption of the revised fee
schedule, a gap between the cost of the various review processes done by the
Department of Planning and Program Development (PPD) and the fees paid has
widened again. This disparity, between cost and revenue received coupled with
increasingly tight budgetary conditions, has led to the re-evaluation of the fee
structure by the planning staff at this time.
SCOPE OF STUDY
The fees to be evaluated in this study include those which cover applications
for the following:
1. Variances, exceptions, and other actions filed with the Board of
Adjustment.
2. Rezonings.
3. Subdivisions - preliminary and final.
4. Large scale residential and large scale non-residential development
plans - preliminary and final.
5. Planned area development - preliminary and final.
6. Combinations of numbers 3-5.
7. Vacations.
8. Annexations.
Fees paid for building permits and the costs incurred for inspections and any
"post -approval" services are not included in this evaluation. The study is
defined by the time at which a pre -application conference takes place and the
time at which the application is rejected or approved and recorded. Generalized
schemata of the review processes are shown in figures 1, 2 and 3.
BASIS FOR CHARGING FEES
Determination of the fees recommended in this report and the evaluation of
various fee structures have been based on the principles which underlie the
charging of fees for subdivision review and Board of Adjustment activities.
Fees are charged to developers as a cost of business, which public policy has
determined should not be subsidized by the community as a whole. The cost of
reviewing developers' plans to determine if the plans are in compliance with the
ordinances of the City is assumed to be part of a process culminating in some
speculative gain for the developer. This benefit which accrues to the developer
MICROFILMED BY
' JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES
/6 p/
4-
n
is not necessarily shared by the community as a whole and therefore, a fee is
charged to cover the involvement of the public sector in the development
process.
The rationale for requiring a fee for rezoning applications is similar to that
in the cases of subdivisions and other development efforts. Property owners
generally wish to rezone their property to a higher density, allowing thereby, a
higher return on their land investment. Voluntary annexations follow the
procedures of a rezoning application and are, therefore, subject to the same
fee.
Vacations are usually instances in which property owners wish to own public
property which is not being used and which is adjacent to their land. The
benefits which accrue with property ownership are seen as justification for the
charging back of all appraisal costs to the individual in such a conveyance.
Additional costs of publication and processing have been added to the appraisal -
based flat fee in the past.
Processing fees for variances and questions of interpretation brought before the
Board of Adjustment have a different rationale. Those applicants who request a
variance or interpretation of the Code are appealing to the Board for relief
from a hardship imposed by the ordinances of the City. Ideally, a Board of
Adjustment should not grant a variance or waver in enforcing the Code except in
those cases in which hardship can be shown. The fee which is charged to the
applicant is calculated to discourage any arbitrary submission of appeals, and
is kept low enough so as not to create an undue burden on the applicant.
Another action dealt with by the Board of Adjustment and requiring a fee is the
permitting of special exceptions to the Zoning Ordinance. These cases do not
require a demonstration of hardship but are determined by the Board's
application of the specifics of the ordinance. These applications often result
in a benefit to the applicant which is comparable to that described above in the
case of subdivision review. Therefore, a higher fee than that charged for
variances and interpretations may be justified.
LEGAL CONSTRAINTS AND ISSUES
When evaluating the fees and fee structures, a number of concepts which have
arisen in court cases in other states were considered along with the rationales
for charging fees discussed above. The decisive factor in much of the
litigation has been the reasonableness of the fee being charged. If a
municipality can show that the fee being charged is necessary to cover the cost
of processing the application and is not designed to raise revenue over and
above those costs, the courts have decided in favor of the fees. As is the case
with most challenges to municipal ordinances, the courts generally assume the
legislated ordinances are reasonable and the burden rests with the challenger to
prove otherwise.
The costs which may be covered include not only those costs which can be
directly attributed to the review process, but may also include a portion of the
administrative costs and other indirect costs associated with the operation of
the relevant City departments. Some cities have attempted to include the cost
of long-range planning in their fees, however, if those fees are contested a
municipality may be required to show a specific correlation between long-range
planning functions and the review process.
AO/
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
3
S -
ALTERNATIVE FEE STRUCTURES
Outlined below are three different ways to design a fee structure. The
advantages and disadvantages of each are noted.
COST ACCOUNTING
In order to ensure that fees cover only the costs incurred, a direct cost
accounting system is the best approach to adopt. However, the increase in staff
time spent on the accounting procedure itself may make this system less
attractive. Each person who is involved in the processing of an application is
required to account for time spent on the application; all charges for word
processing, printing, xeroxing, etc. need to be recorded; and, upon completion
of the review, a billing and collection process is necessary. An additional
liability with this type of charge -back system is that the developer is faced
with a degree of uncertainty as to the total amount of the processing fee.
Although an experienced developer can estimate his debt, the actual cost is not
known until approval or rejection is complete. The fact that some delays in the
process may be due to factors beyond the developers control, the assessment of
costs for extended meetings and negotiations may place an inequitable burden on
the developer.
The advantages to this approach are the legal security cited above and the
incentive for the applicant to submit all materials correctly and in a timely
fashion, thus making the entire procedure more efficient. Ideally, a well-run
cost accounting system could save the City and the applicant time and money.
However, the effectiveness of such a system depends heavily on the commitment of
all departments involved to strict accounting of the public resources used.
FLAT FEE PLUS COST ACCOUNTING
This alternative consists of the payment of a flat fee at the time the
application is initiated. The fee is predetermined according to the type of
application submitted; payments at the completion of the review process are
calculated based on the cost accounting system outlined above. The applicant
may find that a refund, or an extra payment, is necessary upon completion of the
application review.
The pros and cons of this particular
accounting approach. However, there is
that money is received at the beginning
a commitment to the project.
FLAT FEE: TAILORED
system parallel those of the strict
an added benefit to the City in the fact
of the process, tying both parties into
The fee structure which is currently in use in Iowa City is one which requires
the submission of a flat fee with each application. The fee is tailored to the
type of process being requested and is graduated for some types of applications
according to the size of the development, or the area to be rezoned.
One of the advantages of this approach is the predictability of the amount to be
paid, givingthe applicant more immediate information as to the cost of the
project and giving the City a more definite indication of what might be expected
in terms of revenues received. Since the fees are set, there is no complicated
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40INES
h_.
Figure 1
Pre -Application Conference APPLICANT/PPD --�
Application Filed CITY CLERK
Notice of Public Discussion PPD
Post Sign (PAD, LSRD, LSNRD)
ENGINEERING
LEGAL BLDG. INSPECTION FIRE DEPT.
Staff Analysis Report PPD
WORD PROCESSING
PRINT SHOP
Mail out Staff Report PPD
2-4 Meetings - ]PLANNING & ZONING COMM.
Public Discussion LEGAL PPD
Ordinance, Resolution, or Memo PPD
Notice of Public Hearing
Retrieve Sign
WORD PROCESSING
Informal/Formal Public Discussion CITY COUNCIL
1 Record Final Plats
I CITY CLERK I
SUBDIVISION, LARGE SCALE RESIDENTIAL (LSRD), LARGE SCALE NON-RESIDENTIAL (LSNRD) &
PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT (PAD) APPLICATION PROCESS
6 /6V
_i
MICROFILMED BY
`JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
- C-
V_
Figure 2
Pre -Application Conference r1 A
Application Filed C
Notice of Public Discussion
Post Sign
Staff Analysis Report
Mail out Staff Report
4 Meetings
I
Ordinance
Set Public Hearing L
Notice of Public Hearing
i
jInformal/Formal. Meetings
(3 Readings of Ordinance)
1 Revise Zoning Maps
1
disapproval. STOP PROCESS OR
APPEAL TO CITY COUNCIL
REZONING APPLICATION PROCESS
i 7
MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
Ala rl
,l
- i-
. m
._7
Figure 3
Pre -Application Conference VAPPLICANT/PPDApplication Filed Notice of Public Hearing
Post Sign
Letters to Neighboring
Property Owners
Staff I
Mail ou
Public f
File Op!
I
i
Retrieve
/
LEGAL
INSPECTION SERVICES
necessary. In conjunction with this increase it is recommended that the review
process be streamlined internally to decrease the amount of staff time required
for each application. Issuance of a publication with the filing of an
application, which explains the particular review procedure and outlines the
required documents needed from the applicant, could decrease considerably the
amount of time required of the staff for the review and revision of submitted
material. In addition, a procedural checklist to be used internally could
increase the efficiency with which an application is processed.
A proposal for a revised fee schedule is shown in Figure 9. The structure is the
same as that which is currently used by the City. The staff recommends that
either this structure continue to be used or, that the City adopt a flat fee and
charge -back structure. As outlined above, the flat fee and charge -back provides
revenue related to each process with the submission of the application and
allows for the complete recovery of all costs when the processing is completed.
The policy decision which must be made, in regard to the selection of a fee
structure, is the extent to which the City wishes to subsidize the action in
question. As a structure allows for less cost coverage, the greater is the
amount of public subsidy.
The recommended fees reflect a significant subsidy in cases involving a variance
or other action of the Board of Adjustment, and seek to decrease the subsidy in
the review of applications which result in the concentration of benefits to a
particular party. The extent of the decrease in subsidy may be broadened by
adopting the flat fees proposed in the schedule and instituting a charge -back
system instead of the per lot variable. The fee for special exceptions, also an
action of the Board of Adjustment, has been increased to cover costs, since the
economic benefit which is enjoyed by the allowance of an exception does not
justify the subsidy provided in other Board action; there is no question of
hardship in the granting of special exceptions.
The final recommendation of this study is that the fees be deleted from the Code
of Ordinances and be established by resolution. It is apparent that the
schedule will warrant revision periodically and that a resolution is a more
expeditious means of making such a revision.
/W/V
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
B
or extended cost accounting involved. The liabilities of this structure rest in
the fact that there is not necessarily a one-to-one correspondence between
processing costs and fees paid. Therefore, the City may find itself in a
situation in which excessive fees are being paid, or a situation in which the
fees paid do not come close to covering the costs of processing the application.
STUDY METHODOLOGY AND FINDINGS
The calculation of fee amounts and the selection of a recommended fee structure
have been based on three empirical factors:
(a) Comparisons with other cities in Iowa and with the fees charged in Johnson
County;
(b) Time records kept for specific applications processed in July 1981; and
(c) Gross figures of revenue and expenditures related to review processes in
FY81.
The 1974 zoning and subdivision fee study revealed that in a comparison with
other Iowa towns, the fees charged in Iowa City were significantly lower than
those charged in other Iowa muncipalities. As can be seen in a comparison of
Figures 4 and 5, however, that situation has changed so that Iowa City's fees
are roughly comparable to those charged in other municipalities. In terms of
more complex development procedures - planned area developments, large scale
residential and large scale non-residential developments - the fees in Iowa City
are high. However, it should be noted that many cities do not make a distinction
in their schedules between more complex review processes and the usual
subdivision review. The various zoning administrators and planners responsible
for review functions in the cities listed in Figure 5 expressed the opinion that
the fees which they currently charged were inadequate and did not cover the cost
of administering the program. A number of the municipalities planned on
increasing their fees in the near future.
In Johnson County, the fee schedule was revised in July 1981 to reflect
increased costs in the review process (see Figure 6). These fees reflect an
increase of between 100-400% of the original fees, depending upon the type of
application. The magnitude of the fees in this schedule are indicative of what
is required to bring the schedule more in line with the expenditures associated
with the various application procedures.
COST/FEE COMPARISONS - JULY, 1981 AND FY81
Comparison of the cost of review and the revenue received from fees during FY81
and during the month of July 1981 reveal outstanding deficits in all cases
(Figures 7 and 8). Most of the costs noted can be attributed directly to
particular applications, with the exception of word processing, multilith and
xerox, and car rental. These costs are charged to a division account and the
actual costs related to particular applications being examined must be
extrapolated. Even without those support costs, however, the disparity between
the cost of the time spent on an application and the fee charged is great.
RECOMMENDATION
In order to align more closely the public cost of processing and reviewing
applications with the fees paid, an increase in the amount of fees will be
4
/6J01
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
I
Figure 4
CURRENT SCHEDULE OF
FEES
Subdivisions
Preliminary - Minor*
$ 40 +
$1 per lot
Preliminary - Major
$100 +
$1 per lot
Final
$ 40
Planned Area Development
Preliminary
$100 +
$1/lot or du
Final
$ 40
Large Scale Residential Development
Preliminary
$100 +
$1/lot or du
Final
$ 40
Large Scale Non-residential Development
Preliminary
$100
Final
$ 40
Combined Subdivision, Planned Area Development,
and/or Large Scale Residential'Development
Preliminary
$150 +
$1/lot
Final
$ 60
Rezonings
Less than one acre
$100
More than one acre
i
$200
Refunds and surcharges
Request approved by P & Z
None
Request denied by P & Z
brought to Council by applicant
None
withdrawn by applicant before Council
30% refund
Change of Zone District after submission
25% surcharge
Actions of the Board of Adjustment
I
Variance
$50
Exception
$50
Other actions before Bd. of Adjustment
$50
*Minor - no streets
0
i MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES
_-1
Figure 5
r^E COMPARISONS - IOWA MUNICIPAIK?ES
elim
Final 1 RP7nninne i ...
OTTUMWA
-0 _
- $ 25.00*
(27,381)
$ 25.00*
$ 25.00*
*Variable extra
charge, if appli-
DAVENPORT
$25+$1/
cation approved.
(103,264)
lot -less
$135.00
$ 65.00 $ 65.00
Fees do not
than 10
cover
costs of adminis-
lots
tration.
SIOUX CITY
(82,003)
$30 file; -
$15
- $ 20.00*
-
*$15
engr
-
extra charge
to expedite.
AMES
(45,775)
(4
-0- -
$ 40.00
$ 20.00
-
Engineers charge
for street design
and sewer layout.
Need perceived for
WATERLOO
higher charges.
(75,985)
$40+$1/
lot
$1/lot $ 15.00*
$ 25.00
$ 25.00
*Rezoning for condi-
tional use - $100.
Fees do not meet
BURLINGTON
$50/lot
$25/lot
costs; will raise.
(29,529)
first 5;
first 5-
$ 50.00
$200.00
$2/lot
$1/lot
< 5 -
< 5 -
i
Minimum
$250.00
Minimum
$125.00
CEDAR RAPIDS-
(110,243)
-0-
- $ 50.00 $
25.00
$ 50.00
Publications and
public hearing
notices charged
j
separately
I
IOWA CITY
(50,508)
$440+$1j
$ 40.00 $100 less $
50.00
$ 50.00
$100+$1/
than 1 ac
$200
lot
more
than 1 ac
I
i
I
I
10
i MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES
s
f-,
V_.
Figure 6 ^
JOHNSON COUNTY FEE SCHEDULE
Subdivisions
Preliminary $150 + $40/lot
Final $150
Preliminary/Final combined $100 + $40/lot
Zoning Amendments
Change to Al, A2, A3, RS, RIA, RIB, R2 $150 + $20/acre
Change to R3A, Ci, C2, CH, M1, M2 $250 + $40/acre
Modification in application requiring
republication 0-q
Vari
Spec
Modi
lln
Figure 7
SYNOPSIS OF FY81 EXPENDITURES AND FEES COLLECTED
Expenditures
Personnel - PPD only
Hourly wage $9/hr. @ 25 hrs./app, (36 app.)
+ 18% overhead
Recording fees (including preliminary plats)**
Legal publications
Multilith and xerox
Car rental
Word processing
Fees collected
Zoning and subdivision fees (minus refunds)
Board of Adjustment activities
$ 8,100
1,458
203
581
989
404
2,428
$14,163
2,625
820
$ 3,445
*During this time period, 19 zoning and subdivision applications were
reviewed and 17 applications to the Board of Adjustment. An average of
25 hours of staff time per application was assumed based on the case
studies done in July 1981 and on staff hours noted in the 1974 study.
**Preliminary plats are no longer filed at the Recorder's Office by the
City Clerk.
12
i MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
$10,718 (deficit)
L'.
w
Figure 8
Applicant
File
Name
No.
Dean Oakes
S-8014
3rd
Linder
S-8108
Valley
Oaknoll
S-8112
(addition)
***
Syner-
Z-8104
gistic
710 S.
V-811(
Riverside
Drive
701
V-8111
Oaknoll
320 Lucon
V-811;
*PPD hrs. (inc'
**This applicat'
after a revisi
***Denied at P &
1
Figure 9
j
i
m..�i
i
� r
REVISED FEE SCHEDULE - PROPOSED*
Subdivision
F'
Preliminary - Minor
Preliminary - Major
Final
Planned Area Development (PAD)
Preliminary
Final
Combination-prelim./final
Large Scale Residential Development (LSRD)
Preliminary
Final
Combination-prelim./final
Large Scale Non-residential Development (LSNRD)
Preliminary
Final
Combination-prelim:/final
Combination - PAD, LSRD, LSNRD, or Subdivision
Preliminary
Final
Combination-prelim./final
Rezoning and Voluntary Annexation
Actions of the Board of Adjustment
Variance
Special exception
Other actions
Vacations
*See notes, page 15.
14
j MICROFILMED BY
`DORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INES
$450
$450 + $10/lot
$450
$450 + $10/lot
$450
$500 + $10/lot
$450
$450
$500
$450
$450
$500
$450 + $10/lot
$450
$500 + $10/lot
$300
$100
$250
$100
$500
/6P/
1
NOTES ON THE REVISED FEE SCHEDULE
Preliminary plat applications require a per lot fee in addition to the flat fee.
The per lot fee is intended to reflect the greater detail and close review
included in the preliminary plat requirements, which are a function of the size
of the development. The flat fee is intended to cover the fixed costs which can
be attributed to the minimum amount of time spent by all City employees on the
processing of an application plus the typing, printing and various costs of
overhead.
The higher flat fee for a submission containing a combined preliminary and final
plat is due to the increase in the minimum cost attributable to the review and
completion of legal papers for the final plat.
As stated in the text, fees for vacations have been determined by the cost of an
appraisal plus some minimal processing costs. The costs of appraisals vary with
the size of the parcel in question; however, a minimum fee can be estimated
based on the daily rate charged by appraisers. The recommended fee shown
reflects two days of appraisal work.
Refunds and surcharges, previously included for rezoning applications, have
j been deleted from the schedule in order to recover costs as much as possible and
to simplify the schedule. The refund, previously allowed, did not reflect any
actual decrease in the cost of processing a withdrawn application but further
subsidized the rezoning.
15
M
MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
Figure 10
Applicant
Dean Oakes
3rd
Linder Valley
Oaknoll
Synergistic
710 Riverside
Drivr
710 Oal
320 Lu
-.7
4
COST COMPARISONS -
CASE STUDIES @
PROPOSED FEES
Request
Lots or du
Cost
Proposed Fee
Subdiv.
Prelim. -major
36
$820.94
$810
Subdiv.
Final
7
$470.54
$450
LSRD
Prelim.& Final
1
$397.42
$500
Rezoning
-
$234.61
$300
Varinnra
-
$316.09
$100
4
r
;
wil
a
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
PREFACE
As an advisory body to the City Council, the Housing Commission is
expected to recommend housing programs, policies and directions for the
Council to adopt, modify or reject. In order to perform this advisory
role, the Commission must spend considerable time researching problems
and seeking solutions. Since the concept of congregate housing is not
fully understood by many, or if one does have some understanding, it is
_- limited to concepts and models coming from traditional funding programs
such as HUD Section 8 congregate housing complexes or from local
"congregate" type housing operations such as Oaknoll Retirement Residence
or the Mary 0. Coldren Home, it was determined in 1978 that the Housing
Commission would explore the needs and program concepts of congregate
housing. Money to plan and convene a workshop was included in the
Department of Housing and Inspection Services budget for 1979, however,
the workshop was never explored as originally planned. The reasons for
not dealing with the Congregate Housing issue deal in part with the fact
that during this period of time, the State Housing law underwent a
complete rewrite and mandated cities such as Iowa City to redesign their
code and inspection policies. This time consuming task left the volunteer
citizen group with little time and energy to work on "new" ideas.
At the urging of the staff, the Housing Commission again set the goal to
explore congregate housing as part of their program for 1980. The Council
again set aside some money for the Housing Commission and on September 23,
1981, the desires, conversations and planning of several years came to
_ focus at the Highlander Inn and Supper Club, when 62 conferees
representing the social service agencies; local, state and federal
_ government; the greater Iowa City financial institutions; architects;
real estate people as well as university students and faculty came
together for a workshop on congregate housing. The workshop was
specifically designed to allow the Housing Commission to listen to the
community, and after having listened, to formulate recommendations to the
Iowa City Council.
j From the opening welcome by Mayor Pro Tem Glenn Roberts, to the concluding
f l remarks by Housing Commission Chairperson Goldene Haendel, it was evident
that this was not just another workshop.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES
The excitement and enthusiasm of the workshop participants created an
electric effect that seemed to encourage and stimulate the main speaker,
James Sykes, Executive Vice -President of Colonial View Limited, the
sponsor of Colonial View Apartments, a congregate housing complex in Sun
Prairie, Wisconsin. The urgency, conviction, sincerity and empathy with
which Mr. Sykes spoke of the needs of the elderly, especially his own
experiences in assisting elderly confront and overcome obstacles in
housing, and his challenge to •Iowa City to act, reciprocated the
electrical charge such that once the main address was concluded,
participants readily convened into their chosen discussion groups and
immediately busied themselves with the task at hand - that of formulating
~�
some recommendations to the City Council by way of the Housing Commission.
The recommendations centered around the topics of how to best assess the
housing needs of Iowa City's elderly population; how to provide basic
support services within a congregate housing complex and within the larger
community; how to design a facility to be responsive to the spoken,
unspoken, known and yet to be known needs of the elderly who will make the
/60a
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES
.1-
VA
facility their home; to recommend a sponsor for the project; to assist in
targeting possible site criteria for the facility; and finally, to suggest
methods of financing the project.
The text of Mr. Sykes' presentation, edited in part for ease of reading,
has been included in this report to help those who attended the workshop
refresh their memories, as well as to allow those who were unable to
attend to benefit by the knowledge and experiences of helping the elderly
as experienced and shared by Mr. James Sykes.
MICROFILMED BY
'JORM MICRO_ LAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
I
3
"CONGREGATE HOUSING: A COMMUNITY CHALLENGE AND OPPORTUNITY"
An address by James Sykes at the Congregate Housing
Workshop held September 23, 1981, in Iowa City, Iowa
My work, something called Director of Public Service for the Wisconsin
Cheeseman, is a front, so I don't really work there, you see. I do indeed
have the privilege that few people have of having my time to use as I
choose and I choose to use it in public service because that's where all
the fun is, as you know.
It's taken a long TIME to get through the preretirement training program
that I'm in but I hope by the time I'm 50 I will have learned some things
that many of you learned a long time, ago so that my retirement years will
be much better than those of your parents and the parents that preceeded
them. What better way to spend each day than to be involved in the lives
of older people. Many people get a lot of satisfaction from what they're
doing and others do a lot of things in order to have a little time left
over to get some satisfaction from what they're doing. My privilege is to
work every day with older people at a senior center and in elderly
housing. So when I play around with policy issues at the state level or
mess around Washington on some impossible kinds of problems and try to say
something worth listening to, sometimes I'm not speaking as a planner or
as a policy person or as one who's read the literature, but as one who that
morning talked with somebody who's trying to make it on SSI or somebody
_ whose treatment program is going to be reduced or will be different
because of policy at different levels. That's kind of the negative side.
The positive side is that every day I get absolute verification of the
gerontological truth that people can continue to learn, to grow and to
fulfill themselves at every age. Unfortunately, in most of our
communities and certainly in terms of national policy we have a different
kind of a framework within which to deal with the subject of older people,
— we tend only to deal with those in greatest need. Congress wrote it into
the Older American's Act last time around to identify the extent to which
those in greatest psychological and social need are being served by the
programs of the Older American's Act.
09
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES
The new administration speaks of safety nets. But just think for a
moment, were we to approach the problem of educating our children or
designing a livable city with a safety net mentality, we would not educate
1'
our children nor would we create communities in which it's good to live.
You in Iowa City and we in Madison and Sun Prairie have, for lots of years,
built the kind of communities and the kinds of neighborhoods out of what
we give to one another and not out of desperate need but out of asking a
far more important question, the question of this workshop: "How can we,
together, with the resources we have, provide the kind of programs, the
kinds of facilities, the kinds of opportunities, the kind of a community
"
in which people can, in fact, grow and develop and continue to learn and
to serve and to work?" And, at the same time, without segregating or
limiting people, to create the kind of communities in which those who
become ill, those who lose their source of income, those who face problems
either illness or psychological problems can still be full citizens;
people with the right to live in that community as much as those who,
"
fortunately, have productive jobs and opportunities or their health.
Well, it seems to me, I'm here to do two or three things that I'll try to
do expeditiously.
09
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES
4
One, I think, is to underline what you, the community leaders, already
know very well, and that is that there is a tremendous unmet need and an
unrealized opportunity for creating, strengthening, developing, and
furthering, within this community, the kinds of services, programs and -
housing that older people can benefit from and, indeed, the entire
community. I congratulate you for the work already done. I am pleased to
note the Senior Center that has been opened. I am pleased to know of
Ecumenical Housing and I am pleased to know that this community is moving
as your mayor pro tem has commented.
I believe I am here in part to comment on how one community, Sun Prairie,
has identified its need, developed a plan, designed a program and a
facility, manages elderly housing and a senior center, but only briefly,
and I plan to allude to the results of that. I'm here, as I am wherever I -
travel, particularly in Wisconsin, to urge you to build what you know is
needed; to create and strengthen the kinds of programs that will add
quality to your community's life, especially for those who are older and
maybe to deflect you from becoming HUD -dependent. I think one of the
realities that is apparent, at least to me, is the extent to which
communities believe their response to their needs depends upon sections of
the law or allocations from far away, Des Moines or Washington. To that
extent, you, in your local setting, deny your own strength and ability and _
become dependent upon a very questionable, very doubtful source. I'll be
careful in those comments to acknowledge as one who has a HUD 202 project, -
that I'm terribly proud of the work that we have done with HUD. I'm proud
of a government that sets up a Section 8 and a 202 program and the kind of
service we've received from HUD. Nonetheless, the point is, that there is _
more strength, more capability, more potential for action in this room now
than there is after tremendous concerted effort by consultants and others -
in processing the kind of paper that would possibly make you eligible for
a grant or a loan under one of the HUD programs, because here, for every -
ounce of energy invested, there will be a payoff.. For all the effort
invested in preparing a document for somebody else, the grantsmanship
game, the odds are one in fifteen, one in twenty-five, one in thirty-
three, and that's not all you get with it is low odds, you get a number of
regulations and controls that may not, in fact, serve your community well.
But I'm glad to say in my community I think those regulations and codes
and things have served us well.
Finally, I hope to raise some questions with you on a plan; in a sense,
sponsorship and management; touch on some of the financial planning that
goes into it; how to bring in and, in fact, incorporate and integrate the
supportive services; and a few comments about design.
Well, I believe that is what I'm supposed to do today. But let me speak
for a few minutes on need and I know, very well as I look into this -
audience, that I'm simply going to underline what you already know well.
Some of you may not know what some of the rest of you know and, of course,
that's the function of your workshops today.
One of the strangest, most difficult concepts for me to grasp is the
tremendous gap between the beautiful, persuasive, highly -motivated,
thoughtful, concerted comments of people in the pews or in the pulpit,
politicians in local, state or federal government, social scientists, and
children of older people. The words they speak about their responsibility
for the older people of our society, their parents, are beautiful, they're _
really terrific. The preamble, Article I to the Older American's Act, is
49,x
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I10INES
k. Nonetheless, in your community, you as community leaders have a respon-
sibility to make certain that those 85% of our elderly population that are
doing pretty well, (I hope we can move that figure towards 90%). That
this segment of the people who are relatively well off are not just simply
seemingly well off because they are not, in fact, sick or in institutions.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES
a statement that we can all be proud of, "People are entitled to
affordable housing suitable to their needs." The benefits of research
should be made available to this generation of older people. All
_
citizens, of course, should have adequate cash income to be able to
compete in purchasing in the market place and to retain their dignity, and
on it goes. We are uniformly excellent, as a nation, as a society, as a
community, in talking about older people and their needs. The gap is
_
between talking, and the fact that we are failures in translating that
beautiful language into programs. We don't spend so much time talking
about the importance of educating our children anymore because that's
given in our society.
In the State of Wisconsin, for every dollar that goes into services for
—
older people, $1300 goes for the education of our children. Nobody asks
whether that adequately reflects our social and personal concern about,
the education of our children. On the other hand creating the kinds of
programs and services and an environment in a community that older people
also can continue to learn in, to grow in - 1300 -to -one. We let the
politicians, planners and the ministers off the hook by applauding and
saying Amen to their definition of the need and our responsibility. We do
—
nothing about the budgets that do not reflect that concern. Its easy to
take it out on the ministers and politicians, but let me ask you to first
look at your private budget and what you spend for the well being of your
—
parents to help add something to their lives as opposed to what you may
have spent for your children, or most particularly what you spend for
—
yourself.
The need is there. But not to get into that philosophical world, let me
-
just be very concrete: In every community where there's a fairly normal
curve distribution of older people, let's take Johnson County, for an
example, if I've read the newspapers correctly and if their information is
_
correct, there may be something like 5,000 people over age 65 in this
county. If that's the case, the probability is that 85% of that 5,000
population are "doing fine, thank you." They're doing pretty well,
they've got nearly adequate income, they have a supportive community, they
have a neighborhood, they have a nice home, and the taxes and mortgage are
paid. I think we ought to be proud as a society that we have for so many,
created the kind of a community, the kinds of jobs, the kind of
^^
productivity and the kind of nation in which that can be true.
!
If Johnson County's a typical county, there are some five percent of the
population over 65 that are already institutionalized. They are already,
because of their health and their conditions, or if I may, because of the
lack of alternatives, in institutions. So, if you're typical, there
remains 10% unidentified. Ten percent by fairly standard analysis of
needs of people who are in need of supportive services, of programs, of
cash income, because their own circumstances, whether financial, social
or for reasons of health, are not sufficient to care for them. In 5,000
that's 500. Now, please understand this is a broad stroke and I do want to
say something about how we began to cope with these numbers in Sun
Prairie.
k. Nonetheless, in your community, you as community leaders have a respon-
sibility to make certain that those 85% of our elderly population that are
doing pretty well, (I hope we can move that figure towards 90%). That
this segment of the people who are relatively well off are not just simply
seemingly well off because they are not, in fact, sick or in institutions.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES
They may, in fact, be dependent on the county or the state or the federal —
government for all their food and well being. That's an important first
rule. The second, which is the point of this conference, is to really
focus on that 10% who are not well off and who are not institutionalized.
Admittedly, for lots of reasons, even within that 10%, there are many who
do have the informal supports that they need. But, by and large, by
definition, the 10% I'm talking about are those without that support.
Take a look at any county, any city, and you' 11 see that the overwhelming
percentage of those persons in greatest need of financial assistance; of
suitable housing; of social services; are, in fact, older women without
family nearby or effective family support. This is approximately a four -
to -one ratio with older men. We're talking about people who need your
help as a community.
The most important decision one makes at nearly every age in one's life is
where one lives. Just think about your own circumstances where you live.
That is, of your own needs. if you have little children, you want good
schools, or maybe have access to your job, or all kinds of factors; where
one lives is terribly important! No less so, and in fact, markedly more
so, for older people. By this I do not mean the sense of the option of the
"I'm gonna retire and I'm gonna move to wherever we move when we retire,"
concept; what a strange concept. Even more so for older people who have
lived in a home where their children have been raised, surrounded by walls
that have their history all through it and for them the option is not
where to move but whether to move. Any community that's doing careful
planning is spending a great amount of its resources -in making certain
that there is a place in that community with the kinds of support that
will enable those people who choose to remain in their homes to be able to
do so.
Homestead and elderly tax exemptions do something to help. Home helpers
do contribute something else. But some effort must be made to facilitate
visitation; some way must be found to help people with their finances.
Certainly some help must be given to home care, certainly something must
be done to keep taxes down so that they may continue to do everything you
as healthy active people do. This is what must be considered in planning.
That's the first line of attack and that's where you ought to be with as
many positive programs as possible.
Let us also recognize that choices erode away from many people. Unlike
the young families that began to add a room here and there or make the
decision to get into a larger house as necessary, our older couples or
individuals are in the period of decline and instead of the promise of
tomorrow it becomes the predictability of a smaller income and less
ability to get around and to maintain themselves. It's not a happy time —
for making choices. It becomes doubly important for we who are in the
planning game, we who are responsible for our community, to make certain
that as much of the trauma is taken out of the move as possible. Let me —
suggest to you the easiest, best way to take trauma out of moves is to make
certain that move from their home, when that becomes necessary, is into
someplace that is promising that says something by its very architectural
design, by its very location in the community. This affirms that you are
not being moved out of a place that is just so filled with you, your
history and your own personality, into a place that erodes it, that denies
it and for many that is exactly what has happened. When people can no —
longer care for themselves we move them into something not very
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I401NES
attractive, often into an apartment, often into some kind of a place that
they cannot afford. However, in a community that cares about its young
people and its older people, such a community makes certain that an
inevitable move, is to someplace that adds dignity to that life. But that
does not "just happen", it takes planning and it takes commitment just as
much as it took planning and commitment to build the kind of edifices that
people could worship in, the same kind of commitment and money that it
took to develop those learning centers, those schools, with stout walls or
with attractive decor and design, that same level of commitment must be
focused on the problem. If you are a part of a community that says "we
will spend 1300 times what we have in terms of our resources for the
education of our children as to what we'll spend for our elderly", then
there is also in your life and in your community a tremendous gap between
the words that you mouth and the plan that you have.
Yes, we must do everything we can to keep people in their homes, but let us
not be caught by a mythology that surrounds that belief. A11 of us talk of
wanting to remain in our homes and be carried out feet first when we must.
That's our plan. But it's easy for some of the rest of us to look at that
population who have spoken that hope and say, "Isn't it wonderful that 88%
of the people in our community are still in their own homes or in their own
environment?" Look carefully at that environment. They live on main
street and they live down the block and they live in their own homes, but
how do they live? Is it splendid isolation? Is that image of self -
independence that is represented by a person living in her own home, is
— that overwhelmed with what that person needs in terms of other people? We
_ have so many people among the 85% who, if there were a better option,
would leave that four bedroom house to some of the young families coming
- along and would go someplace where they would be with other people. They
have bought a bill of goods such that their personality, their personage,
their concept of independence, their selfhood is tied to their living in
that house even though it has become a very heavy burden around their
necks. We must do what we can to make certain that we don't simply close
— our eyes to the many who we can easily presume to be well off and taken
care of because they are living alone.
In June I had the privilege of traveling in Scandinavia and I looked at
the plans, programs and the people of a nation where there is a national
policy for caring for older people. Fifteen percent of the average budget
of a Norwegian village goes for the care of older people. Their
demographics are very similar to ours; they're not at 15%, they have about
w 10% to 11% percent of their population classified as older people. That's
the commitment. Multiply out what 15% of your Federal, state and local
budget would represent in terms of services for the older people. I'm not
up here suggesting that you take 15% out of the City of Iowa City budget
and set it aside for the elderly, but please understand that when you take
1% or one-half of 1% and devote it to the services for older people, that
very well may not be an adequate fulfillment of the pledge or a
translation of the rhetoric that you believe in your heart. And you who
are the critics from the outside, you who are the ones who are going to
make things happen, take a hard look at that budget and only give passing
reference to the language that people use. Look at the budget, look at
what's being spent. And that budget has to do with churches and social
organizations as surely as it does with governmental budgets, and yes, it
has to do with your own personal budget as well.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
---T
We know in terms of congregate housing there is a very specific gap that
service housing as it's called in the Scandinavian countries and
congregate housing as we've come to call it in this country, can fill.
And that is, the gap between those who are living independently and able
to get along really very well and those who are in sheltered settings,
skilled care facilities, nursing homes, hospitals, where they are getting
not only all the care they need but, in many instances, more than they —
need. But somehow, we are coming to an understanding that there may well
be a middle ground that may have a few of the tinges of the institutional
kind of living but that's a price worth paying if it's also the kind of a _
setting in which one can continue to live as independently as possible for
as long as possible.
The need is great for a specific response and we're going to talk about a _
variety of responses but it's not going to go away, it's not going to be
solved by ignoring it and it's not going to be dealt with intelligently,
wisely and principally by people who say: "But keep in mind these are the --
days of declining resources;" "The programs are going down the tube;
we're not getting more money into Section 8 or 202;" Don't believe them.
The problem is not going to go away because some of the sources of the
funds in the past that have been somewhat available to partly respond to
those needs are being eroded, that's not going to happen, the problem is
not going to go away.
Let me take just a few moments, and it's a little hard for me to start _
talking about Sun Prairie without getting wrapped up but I think it is
instructive. Sun Prairie is 13,000 people, 800 older people. Our senior
center and our service area and our congregate housing complex serves what
we call northeast Dane County which is, eight townships and four villages
as well as the city of Sun Prairie. When we started in 1969, we started _
with a few people sitting in somebody's front room acknowledging among
themselves that all but two, were older people and there was, in fact, in
this community a need. And it was expressed in very pithy ways. "What
happened to Joe?" "Where did Mary go?" "How come we don't see Michael
around anymore?" The truth is all three were in the community but all had _
gone out of the normal ways that we relate to one another at PTA or in the
shopping centers or in churches where we see people. They had dropped
out, but they still lived there. The older people themselves acknowledged
that there was a need in that community, they didn't have the word senior
center in their mind or a social service system or titles and codes, they
just said: "Hey, we who live here need some place to get together, we need
something to do, we need a role in life." Those were real words from real —
people, our people, not other people. And our community, like yours,
took those questions, those statements as a serious problem demanding a
community response. That is not to say that it is something one person
can do. Oh yes, one can go visiting a person on a one-to-one, but it
required a broad community response. So we went to the City Council and
said: "Hey, the basement of the museum, it's open, there are two rooms `
down there and a john and a little pantry, can't we have that?" They gave
us that. We got to the end of the first year and we said: "We have $543 of
unpaid bills and we don't know where to go to get them paid." They paid
that. And that was about 10% of the recreation budget, for sure, in our —
small town. We weren't asking for a program comparable to what they were
giving to the kids in the parks but just a little bit to help us with a few
of the bills that came in. But at the very beginning, in our little story,
there was a marriage, a cooperative relationship, not an adversarial
relationship but a working together. We the community had a problem and
A
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
r-
S
9
that had to do with older people having no place to go and nothing to do.
We the community, as the leaders, Council members and others, had a
responsibility for not only adequate fire and police protection and clean
and good and effective parks, but also for the lives of the older people
who had built that community.
- So around a little group of people in a little basement, no big resources,
no federal grants, nothing else, we just decided this was worth doing.
And from the very beginning some of our members began to recognize that
for those who came there were also some who could not come or did not come.
From the beginning our senior center had a outreach component. We didn't
call it that. Some of the members on the council went out and visited
other people in the county. We recognized as a community that served one
another quite naturally for 100 years in an agricultural setting of Dane
County, Wisconsin, that this was still our district, our community. We
didn't go through a long process of intergovernmental relations with town
governments, we just drew a map and said "Where are you from?" and they
said: "Town of; "And who are you, or you're from town of... Well, that's
certainly is a part of our service area;" It had been for 100 years, and no
reason why, when it came to organizing social services or housing, that
same natural geographical area should not be our geographical area.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
The center moved from the basement of the museum because it was crowded
I-;
and unsafe, into a facility that the business community, most particularly
the Wisconsin Cheesemen, provided. We provided it not to make a senior
y
center happen, or to provide services, or to give them a more dignified
setting, we gave it because we had resources, we had a responsibility to
the community and the people who had built our corporation. The need was
not proven in a fancy center, but in the humble basement of a museum. The
need was there. Anytime you start a program it doesn't take very long to
recognize that even though the week before you started had you done a
survey, the answer would have been: "No, we don't need a senior center";
'
"No, we don't need congregate housing", but the week after, and certainly
the year after, start interviewing the people who are a part of that
process, then you'll understand that not only was it needed but it met a
i.
very desperate need in the lives of a lot of people. And by the way, if
you want comparable data, you can do a survey on four year olds and ask if
they need school.
We recognized when we started to develop a senior center that it wasn't
"•
simply for those who came in, and it wasn't just recreation, education,
and cultural activities, but it was also a center for reaching out to
people who needed the services, outreach services, programs and services
extended to the people.
In each of the townships we recruited somebody to be an outreach worker,
to go visit the homebound, to bring them to the center. But it didn't take
very long, because we were anchored into principle #1, the most important
decision one makes in one's life has to do with where he/she lives. We
recognize that while we are meeting social needs, while we were providing
-
educational opportunities, while we were truly enriching the lives of one
another with a great idea and a great organization, humble and small
though it was, that we still had not addressed the most serious problem
_
that constantly confronted our center as people came in, and that is:
"Where am I going to live?" "Where am I going to go when I come out of the
hospital?" "What are we going to do about Mark, who is becoming
G
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
10
confused?" Out of the acknowledged need, and again I'm talking about no
feasibility study done by social scientists with good research capability
and survey research, I'm not putting that down, I think there is a real
role for that, but it came out of the people who were there, and every
service the Colonial Club provides, every program that we provide, started
with people sitting around a table, not with somebody coming in and
saying: "Hey, there is this Title available and we could do something if
we got this money,.." "We could..." "Did you ever hear of UMTA?" We
decided we needed a van before we found out what UMTA stood for, and we
knew we needed elderly housing before we understood what HUD stood for.
Some of us may have learned about it in school, but that learning was
unreal. Anytime you have a group of people who are speaking about their
own needs and their neighbors, in the field of aging, that means older
people themselves. They are going to confirm with more adequate data than
any social scientist can produce, that the need is great and the
opportunity to meet that need is not complicated, but very simple.
We started with housing, and like many others, we looked at federal
programs available at that time, and we formed the Sun Prairie Housing
Authority. I was named the executive director and the chairman of the
corporation of the Cheesemen and was named the chairman of the housing
authority. We put together the most beautiful proposal that you could
imagine. The mayor of our town was a well known Republican who knew
Romney, who was in Washington at the time as Secretary of HUD, and I was a
lesser known Democrat who knew a couple a senators in Washington. We knew
everything. We had a documented need.
I can't remember whether it was #38 on the priority list or #46, but you
can be sure that public housing did not come to Sun Prairie despite well
documented need. But we were smart enough, it seems to me now, in
retrospect, to not have put all of our eggs into that basket. The need is
there, it is our need, we've documented it. It's not going to stand or
fall on the basis of someone else's grantsmanship or how we rank in a
state where there are a lot of communities like us with lots of unmet
needs when it comes to older people.
So we formed a non-profit corporation and applied for the program that was
being funded by HUD at that time, the Section 236 program. We hired the
architects, spent the money, brought some private resources together, put
together what we were certain was the world's best application for 236
housing. It was clocked into HUD just in time. It was in the review
process when the then Secretary of HUD announced at the Dallas meeting
that under the Nixon administration all housing programs were going to be
frozen so they could do a careful analysis of the effectiveness and so on.
You remember, of course, the impoundment years. Our 236 application
became just another major effort documenting needs. A couple of years had
passed by the way, and it was down the tubes.
We looked at one another and said: "Who needs HUD?" That's not even a
critical comment about HUD. "We can do it," and we did. A private
corporation, for us it happened to be the Cheesemen, began putting up
elderly housing. We provided money to a church foundation, at arm's
length, to provide a type of Section 8 rental assistance, although we
didn't call it Section 8, a little
Director, and the member of the board
identified needs and provided cash.
corporation, one with money to throw
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES
committee composed of the Center
of trustees of the Methodist church
I'm not talking about a rich
away, I'm talking about a fairly
/60432
typically sized corporation in a fairly typical town doing what is not
typical, and that is being socially responsible.
Well, we started developing and we developed 78 units of elderly housing,
quickly acquired 20 more on the site, and in the meantime had to expand
the senior center from 6400 square feet to 15,000 square feet to serve
that population. All the time, the long range planning committee was
meeting. ...and from almost the first day when we were among the healthy,
younger people, the concern of the frail elderly, those who were becoming
less capable, was always on the agenda. We began to respond to that as a
senior center, not as a community, but the community was coming along with
us. They knew what we'were doing, they knew what our goals were and why.
They knew who the people were that we were serving, their people. The
business community was coming along, with strong support. We started a
day services program so that we had within the center the capability to
provide rehabilitative services to people that needed it. We provided the
— services in a wellness setting, a beautiful setting as a matter of fact.
We purchased a group home, one became available down the block and all of
_ a sudden we said, "Isn't that what we're talking about, a place where
people can help one another?" It was not so much that our independent
housing was not already providing the vehicle for mutual help, but a very
specific function for people who were more frail. Two of the four that
moved in first, moved out of a nursing home into our group home. Which, by
the way, is still operating, and it's operating on almost nothing. No big
complicated issue, it works. Our group can do many more units or
— structures without any drain on any local resources and without any grants•
from the city; I should note that we did take the house off the property
tax, but that is the extent of government help.
At the same time we recognize that we were only beginning to touch the
— need for filling the gap between independent housing in which older people
live without structured support systems, and the nursing homes that were
_ filling up. As a result, our long range planning committee did make the
commitment to go into congregate housing. At that time, we didn't know
that word, that was a fancy word that we picked up later, but we knew what
it was. It was to provide meals, to provide housekeeping services, to
provide personal assistance, and to provide these services to people who
were generally well, able to take care of themselves, with a little bit of
assistance in getting dressed, with cleaning the apartment, and not having
to worry about adequately nutritious meals, could continue to live for a
— much longer period of time independently because they were within a
community of people who were caring for one another. It became a very
natural theme for our group which says "Living independently with
neighbors who care." It was like being back in the old neighborhood
concept of caring people. That doesn't happen naturally, what tends to
happen "naturally" is that the spouse dies, the children move out; the
mother remains in the house, and the informal, natural networks of support
that grew up along with us as we were developing our families and were
involved in our jobs, in the marketplace and in the community, were
falling off. Thus, we see it takes an intentional, planned response to
make certain that a community, and I mean community, not a church or a
single facility, is able to provide some of those supportive services.
An idea which seems to be a wet blanket on every planning group when it
comes to talking about housing or especially housing with services, is "we
can't afford it." "Where will we get the trained personnel?" I want to
AfO2
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
M
12
tell you, those folks you are trying to serve in 1981, fed threshing crews —
out here, in Johnson County, for years. The person that did that while
raising the kids, can still do it. You've dressed your children, and
you've probably dressed your parents. You've balanced a checkbook or came —
close, and it still needs to be done. You've cleaned house for years.
These are the services we're talking about, not the services of a
geriatric nurse practitioner or clinical psychologist, we're talking _
about people helping people. But it takes an organization, you've got to
organize it to make it happen. It doesn't just naturally happen.
Fortunately for some, it does and that's beautiful, and you don't have to
worry about it. But for many others it does not. It takes your skills to
organize that together. When we put 99 people together under one roof,
we have built in by those who moved in, the support base we needed for one
another. --
Yes, I suppose we did have to hire a cook, and we do pay a person who does
some of the housekeeping, but we don't pay a lot of others who do _
housekeeping for the lady next door.. And we don't pay anybody to carry
trays. In every community the voluntary resource, if they are part of
something relatively organized, can really enable people to live. I know
it's a play on words, independent living, even though they need some help —
in order to live independently.
Well, that's Sun Prairie, 94 units of congregate housing with the help of —
HUD. It's our little secret though - If we had been rejected the second
time by HUD, as we were the first, we would have found a way to do it
ourself. We would have found a way because that is what we did before. I
know that in every community the only resources HUD has available to give
are our resources and the game of having them relocated and reallocated in
Des Moines or in Washington is not a winning game for a relatively
prosperous community, or at least for those slightly above the mean income
for the nation, and Iowa City is there. Find a way, make it happen in this
town.
Well, we knew there was a need, now there was a plan. We organized and
developed a design, barrier free for sure, but buildings that added -
dignity, not the least kind of a thing we could do for $150,000. We said
that beautiful space is important. A beautiful building in a beautiful
setting is as important for these ,eople as a beautiful museum or a
beautiful school or a beautiful church is for some other people in the
community.
You living and working in Iowa City have some things going for you. Let's
look at what they are. You have an unmet need that needs a response.
That's the most compelling reason for doing anything -- a clear need. Now
let me assure you that your community doesn't know that you have this —
need, and the reason is that for every time you come up with a story of
somebody in need, you're talking about small percentages, the 10% or the
7%. The people you are speaking to have stories about their aunt or -
mother who's doing just terrific. They want you to extrapolate from their
example rather than for them to extrapolate from your example, that for
the one hidden unmet need, there's another 10 others out there. I assure _
you, the need is there. You have all kinds of training in this conference
room alone to document it.
In addition, you have older people who have lived the experience of what _
it means to have some disabilities, some problems, and to know how
/600 -
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
— 13
difficult it is to cope with some of those, or they have a sister or a
mother who's had that experience.
— You have both the people who know the story and you have people in need.
You have the money. I'm not going to stay in town long enough to do a
careful analysis of the budget of Johnson County or the City of Iowa City
or what's in the bank and in the trust funds and the foundations and in the
corporations, but let me assure you, it's there. The only difference
between the money that we have in Sun Prairie and that which you have in
Iowa City is that we are using ours. We have the same type of resources,
money and people who volunteer. You don't have to get a great big social
service budget. You need some of that organized help and money, for sure,
but the potential, the power, people power and money power, is in this
town to make that happen.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
You have a program, already acknowledged by the title of your conference
workshop, that is a partial answer to a serious need. It won't solve
”
everybody's problems. People will say "Will that really solve the
problem?" No, but for the 100 people that you house, or the 150, or the 25
7
or 50 more that come in under that, you've provided a very significant
I
service.
With the cooperative efforts and coalitions working together with city
J
government, the churches, the private sector and volunteers, there is no
limit to what you can accomplish.
But you've got some things going against you, and you should be aware of
—
them. One of the things working against you is that much of what you know
because of your interest and where you are is a great big amorphous "no
f
need" philosophy being preached out there, or a philosophy that, "If
they're really starving, we'll catch them in the safety net," or "If
they're really in trouble, we have the welfare department." That is not
-1
intelligence. That is not wise. That is not positive. That is about the
"
most negative concept to developing anything in the community, whether it
be a corporation or city government, or recreation program, you name it.
That's not the way. So don't use that for the old folks, if you're not
willing to use it for your own life; that you'll only give your kids a
nickel when they are really hungry, you wouldn't do that. You'll only buy
them a 12 X 12 or a 6 X 6 room because that's all they really need to live
in. Dont set up a different standard for older people. That different
standard is set up precisely because we are all confused about older
people and we have bought a mystique about the declining years, that older
people are comfortable in their rocking chairs, and you know they can't
learn as well anymore, and they've lived their life and they've made their
contribution. Pull all the lines, and the sum is, "We therefore have no
responsibilities for them." Recognize for certain it is not a national
dilemma, it's not a national problem, it is a local problem - these people
live here. Their needs are local, they haven't been imported and they're
"here" not "there" because they have been wasteful or people who have been
irresponsible. They are your brothers and sisters and your community
people. Therefore the response has to be local as well.
On sponsorship, who's best?
I personally have a strong bias towards the private sector, that private
non-profit sector with strong cooperative relationships with the
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
14
community, and with city government. I believe that as you look for a
sponsor for congregate housing, it should be able to build on the
experience that's already underway with the Senior Center and Ecumenical
Housing. It should be comprised of the business sector, the social
services sector, in a sense the religious sector, community neighborhood
association, and the local government.
As a former -county board supervisor I can tell you how often the social
service people or the religious people or the business people came anc
said, "That's your responsibility," and in saying that, they have in fact
discharged their responsibility by presuming that by simply paying taxes
they are a partner; they're not. It should not be exclusively the City's
responsibility. The community has to work together, it seems to me, in
terms of the sponsorships.
As you contemplate sponsors, let me just tell you what HUD looks for.
They say is there a legitimate local sponsor?" "Has it got some
financial capability? Does it have a track record?" "Has it been out
there doing something?" It doesn't have to have been housing, just as
long as the people that are in this sponsoring group, are people who can
make things happen.
Because HUD, like so many other agencies, visit with people all the time
who have a tremendous idea and a great big heart; a very great concern,
but have never put anything together in their lives.
It's the worst investment for HUD and for private enterprise, so that
sponsoring group has to have that capability, social service capability,
some kind of a track record and a long term commitment.
Who or what or to what extent is there already a natural group in the
community that could be that sponsor? And what steps are needed now,
informally to recruit the kind of people that comprise that kind of a
sponsoring group to make something more happen in this community and of
course the formal structure to get a 501C3 rating with the tax people and
to establish your non-profit status? _
On management, I think you need to be asking yourself who can best design
and provide the social services that are reCenter?quired. Is it the Senior
Authority?
it the Department of Social Services? Is it the Housing
y. Whatever, I hope its public and private people and groups
working together.
And what role will older people themselves play in this process? If they
are not up front and in the key chairs, I don't care about majorities at
this point, but if they're not there dominantly, then you will have cut -
yourself off, presuming you are not the older people, from the very
resource, the very fuel that's necessary to make this thing go.
As you begin to look at financial planning - certainly you'll have to look
everywhere. CDBG may be a source, HUD certainly is a source and the Iowa
Housing Finance Authority, by whatever name, these are sources with
mandates and missions to be helpful. I'll acknowledge up front that they _
have very limited resources and the need in that state or this nation is
very great and you may not effectively compete. Nonetheless, there is
competence there, technical assistance and by their mandate they are _
obliged to provide it. From my inquiries and understanding here in Iowa
/64fal —
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES
M
r-
15
you get good technical assistance from your area HUD office and I'm
delighted to know that.
Well, what other support services need to be provided in congregate
housing? That's a whole other area. But let me just say that on the
minimum you need meals, housekeeping services, and personal assistance.
Sure you need to build in transportation, home delivered meals, and home
helpers. They have 47,000 home helpers in Norway, a nation the size of
the state of Wisconsin, to help people. There's all kinds of services;
_ the capability is here. It can happen even if the United Way does not
reach its goal, or in a state without sufficient Title XX monies, or a
federal government that is turning its back on the social services end of
its responsibility.
Design, again there are people at this conference who know the difference.
You have all seen a building that feels good, that adds something to you,
f and you've been in a storefront and the other places that take something
from you. Were we to have done the planning in our corporation as though
"what can we do to solve the problem this month?", we would have been out
of business ten years ago. We built warehouses too big, we built a senior
center too big, because we recognize that the reality is that a few years
from now it will be too small and the cost of doing something about it will
be infinitely larger.
You have to have a plan for action. The competence to prepare an action
plan is in this room, but you also must have the determination to move.
_ The easiest way not to move is to say, "it's too complicated, I can't
J understand it." "HUD regulations ..., oh all the forms." Do not leave it
to the technicians; the will to move this community is within the
community and its citizenship. The need for technical assistance is
there, you can hire that help. But you can't hire the goal, the drive, the
_ motivation, the will to make something happen. That has got to come out
^ of you. The confusion that happens in so many communities is that they
jump over themselves worrying about their lack of technical competence.
And they never express forcefully their will and their determination to
make something happen.
Set a date, make it happen, and if you're a little cautious, don't
r announce it yet. But if I were here, I'd say, "June of 1982, 83 maybe, we
will break ground, or we will acquire the..... we will...." Who's we?
Recruit them, and let them speak to the need and give a plan.
jPrivate money and public money will go where they see a clear need that
connects to their own acknowledged understanding of need. When somebody
p tells me about the serious problem of shoplifting in Sun Prairie, they
don't get a nickel out of the Kramer Foundation. I don't have any
i evidence that confirms that need. Come in with the dollars and cents kind
of material. Help whoever we are who control resources to understand that
the need is very vivid. But that isn't enough either. That's where it
usually ends, tears in our eyes, distress in our hearts; come in with a
workable plan. That plan must not only identify a problem but must say
what we're going to do about it. Be certain to scale it just slightly too
large for your community to swallow up front. Too much, 140 units, not
70. $2 million, not $1.6 million. Then, if you have to drop back to 1.6
.. it's easier to get there from 2 than it is from 1.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES
AI
16 —
But back to the final point, and then I will complete my remarks.
Browning said that "man's reach must exceed his grasp or what's a heaven
for." I think your reach is limited not only by the length of your arm;
but with that the sum of all of your arms working together, all the
sectors of this community pulling together, you may acquire heaven and
even rehabilitate it.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICRO_ LAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
..7
17
WORKSHOP DISCUSSION GROUPS
_ Following the presentation by the guest speaker, participants convened
into four discussion groups dealing with Support Services, Sponsorship
and Management, Financial Planning, and Site Location and Design. Each
discussion group met for two sessions for a total of two and one-half
hours and was lead by a moderator selected for the task on the bases of
demonstrated skills and knowledge about the group's specific area of
concern and interest.
The areas of discussion and the recommendations of the discussion groups
were as follows:
- Suppor` t Services
The support services group focused on the needs and demands for
residential housing with services. In particular, the group focused on
the kind and extent of the services to be provided in relationship to the
needs and characteristics of the residents. The group summarized their
efforts by suggesting that the community undertake a survey of needs at
both the individual level and at the organizational level to better
i determine the extent of the problem of housing with services for the
elderly and handicapped individuals. One such vehicle for data collection
could be a self-administered assessment form that could be distributed by
way of the weekly Shopper, a local weekly newspaper that contains want
ads, garage sale notices and so forth, and is delivered free -of -charge to
each household in the greater Iowa City area.
Among the services the discussion group felt were missing were grocery
delivery services; with special counseling services, such as assistance
to the bereaved; along with adequate emergency care.
Grocery delivery was singled out since many of the recently built housing
for the elderly projects were built downtown, where few if any grocery
j stores are available within walking distance, or if they are, they cater
to students and elderly clientele and as such tend to charge higher
Prices than outlying supermarkets geared to family purchasing in larger
sizes and quantities.
Sponsorship and Management
The sponsorship and management group discussed the criteria for sponsors
of congregate housing and basic management tasks such as tenant selection,
staffing and personnel policies.
.. After considerable deliberation the discussion group recommended that an
established group within the city be considered or approached to serve as
by the sponsor for the congregate housing program. Among the groups identified
not-
for-profit torgapotential
nizationformedto establish sponsors eand ope ate group hom snfor
Physically and mentally handicapped or disabled individuals; Oaknoll
Retirement Residence, a private for-profit life care retirement complex;
Mercy Hospital, a 270 -bed private hospital operated by the Sisters of
Mercy of Chicago, Illinois; and the Ecumenical Housing Corporation, a non -
Profit group comprised of local churches for the purpose of sponsoring and
constructing an 81 -unit housing for the eldery apartment complex
utilizing Section 202 financing and Section 8 rental assistance.
/6 01
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
18
If the City chooses to approach one of the above organizations, or if they
should seek out an organization established expressly for the purpose of
sponsoring congregate housing, then the City should consider offering tax —
exempt bonding to provide additional incentive to the developer.
The discussion group encouraged solicitation of for-profit sponsorship,
individual or joint sponsorship by the City of Iowa City or Johnson -
County, and the solicitation of private contributions by endowments or
share sales.
A discussion of sponsor qualifications resulted in a recommendation that a
selected developer be committed to the philosophy of congregate housing
and be of recognized integrity and demonstrated skills in quality
management.
Tenants of congregate complexes should be selected so that there is a mix
of single males and females, couples, wealthy and indigent. —
Staffing for congregate services should include some professional staff
but should also involve volunteer assistance. It was noted that staff, _
both professional and volunteer, should offer to the tenants a variety of
ages.
Financial Planning
The discussion group on financial planning explored the market determina-
tion for congregate housing, the income groups that should be served and -
the financing possibilities of capital and service costs.
The participants recommended that a distinct sponsoring body should be _
considered to better assure a commitment to congregate housing. The group
further suggested that the City Council should make a public commitment to —
congregate housing. _
Among the financing options recommended by the committee for _
consideration were, federal grants, CDBG, Small Cities, etc.; Industrial
Revenue Bonds; Tax Exempt Housing Bonds, (state law Chapter 403A); private
endowments; private investments; and state appropriations of housing
monies.
The committee suggested the City consider utilizing a school building,
since the school board already has one structure that has been offered for —
sale and others under consideration.
The committee commented on the $55,000 of CDBG monies identified in the
fiscal budget for 1983 as funds that could be utilized for congregate
housing along the lines discussed during the workshop.
Site Location and Design
The discussion group on site location and design discussed the location
for a congregate housing complex and the interior and exterior design —
features for the functioning of the occupants.
The committee recommended seeking existing single family dwellings to be _.
used as congregate group homes. It was felt that a home in the $60,000-
$70,000 bracket would be a logical starting point for a group type
congregate home. —
/68�
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140114ES
4'
I—
19
In discussing the site features of the facility, it was suggested that
consideration should be given to locating a congregate housing facility in
an already established residential neighborhood; that there should be
opportunities for outdoor activities such as gardening; and that
consideration should be given to invite the surrounding neighborhood
community into the activities of the congregate housing complex
especially providing such support services such as housekeeping and chore
helP•
_
Another approach that was discussed was the pooling of financial resources
by private individuals such as may result by the selling of individual
homes and pooling proceeds. Proceeds then could be used to buy a home to
be used as a congregate residence. It was suggested that four or five
-
single persons might be interested in pooling their real estate sales
profits, and with the combined proceeds, a home could be obtained from the
existing real estate market and support services could be provided out of
surplus proceed income established in a maintenance trust.
i
1
It was suggested that congregate home designers not specify less than two
bedrooms per unit. It was the feeling of the discussion group
participants that the need for space is strongly felt by the elderly who
1
quite often leave spacious single family homes and move into rental units,
often for the first time in their life. The accumulated treasures of a
lifetime are often hard to part with, and an extra bedroom can help retain
some of those momentos and furniture to ease the transition from private
independent living units into congregate units. It was also strongly
recommended that a kitchen or kitchenette be provided in each dwelling
unit. Congregate meals are important, but there is a need to have food
ti
storage and preparation facilities for breakfast, snacks, entertaining
and other times when it is desired or necessary to support congregate meal
services.
.l
It was remarked that program tenant selection and operations should
concentrate on the "well" population of elderly and handicapped and not
those already candidates for a nursing home.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
4'
�r