HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-06-29 TranscriptionJune 29, 2009 City Council Page 1
June 29, 2009
Council Present:
UISG Rep.:
Staff:
Others Present:
City Council Special Work Session 6:35 P.M.
Bailey, Champion, Correia, Hayek, O'Donnell, Wilburn, Wright
Shipley
Helling, Karr, Davidson, Dulek, Moran, Dilkes, Fosse, Yapp, Tharp,
Rocca, O'Malley
Airport Commission Members - Minnetta Gardinier, Greg Farris, Howard
Horan, Janelle Rettig, John Staley
Meeting W/Airport Commission re• Aviation Commerce Park South Study (study in 6/18
packet and agenda item #~:
Bailey/ Ready to get started? Thanks for being here, um, why don't we start with introductions,
and we'll start over here.
Gardinier/ Uh, Minnetta Gardinier.
Farris/ Greg Farris.
Horan/ Howard Horan.
Rettig/ Uh, Janelle Rettig.
Tharp/ Mike Tharp.
Wilburn/ Ross Wilburn.
Wright/ Mike Wright.
Hayek/ Matt Hayek.
Bailey/ Regenia Bailey.
Champion/ Connie Champion.
O'Donnell/ Mike O'Donnell.
Correia/ Amy Correia.
Shipley/ Jeff Shipley.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 2
Bailey/ Great! Well, um, the Economic Development Committee met with Howard and with
Mike, oh, I don't know... a couple of weeks ago, and we looked through the study and
um, the minutes are in our Info Packet. Um, our interest is in layout number five and we
wanted the Airport Commission to, uh, pursue that and see if that's realistic, and we're
interested in moving ahead faster, I think, on flood mitigation measures, um, to allow the
south area to develop, and we felt that it wasn't important necessarily to bring the whole
North Aviation Commerce Park or to take care of that before we started marketing the
South Aviation Commerce Park because of the difference in zoning. So those were some
of the conclusions and...and what we talked about at that meeting, and I don't know if
you all have had a chance to talk about that since then, or um...or if you had responses to
that, but I think our interest is hearing what you have to say about the study and then a
discussion about how we can, uh, market these, uh, commercial properties.
Correia/ Anybody on the Committee want to talk?
Rettig/ Um, the study was done with a lot of foresight to the future and future development
needs. We've already been approached, um, twice now for people interested in
developing their own hangars. One for a, uh, business interest. Um, we have a small
amount of space still available, um, up around the current hangars that one more hangar
can go in. We also have the ability to expand down on two of the south T-hangars. After
that we're completely out of space. There's no developable hangar space, except for
what's here. As far as the North Aviation Commerce Park, I'm not sure if you're aware of
this, but all of the development of that park, or of that area, the road, the...the fill, the
infrastructure, um, was put in and the clock started ticking and interest has been occurring
on that, and so we are still not out of debt on paying off that development in that park, so
none of the ideas of this helping the Airport in, um, stabilizing our budget and...and
being more self-sufficient and lowering our debt load on the T-hangars we have now has
come to be yet, um, and so what started as, and someone will need to help me, the project
on the North Aviation Commerce Park, basically over double with the interest payments
that were...am I right on this? Well, regardless, don't quote me. But, so I think that our
concern that we've had in our conversations is, um, we haven't finished selling all that
land. We're not out of debt on that land, and even if we are out of debt on it, um, in the
near future with something else that might be on the agenda, that, um, to develop
additional land and...and in the methodology that occurred on the North Aviation
Commerce Park, um, is...is problematic because we just can't, you know, um...we will
never get out of debt if we develop land that doesn't have a market to be sold today, and
there's no plan for it. It is in the flood plain so substantial investment would have to be
done to raise that, and the question is whether or not we should be building in the flood
plain in the first place, but beyond that, a substantial investment in the creek, um, and
you've already had another study on that, that will show you how much it would cost to
make, uh, the creek, uh, sustain more land and drain more land. So, in general, um,
developing the south area, um, until such time as we're out of land on the north area,
seems to be problematic in my opinion. Um, I...I think if there is a market for it, it's
entirely different matter, um, but there wasn't a proven market for the north area and it's
taken a long time to even start things moving.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 3
Bailey/ We discussed that a little bit, and I think part of the challenge with the north area is it
started out as...the approach was leasing and then there was some zoning back and forth,
and we thought that that was part of the challenge, and then...and working with ICAD, I
think that we...there is additional interest in commercial and industrial land, simply
because all we have is 173 acres that we have on the east side right now. So, they're
looking at a program for shovel-ready sites and interested in bringing on more land online
in the area. So...that's the indicators that we've been getting.
Rettig/ We also make $25,000 a year from our agricultural lease.
Bailey/ Right.
Rettig/ Um, so the minute we start bringing in fill dirt to raise us out of the flood plain
(mumbled) anything else, we would lose that $25,000 a year. We're in a lease on that
land, um, and...we, I mean, you know our budget as well as we do, I mean, the ability to
absorb $25,000 cut. Here's an interesting example on the north, the very first lot that
sold, gained our operating budget nothing because it...just went immediately to debt, but
we lost over $7,000 of income from that. So, selling the lot was a mixed blessing
because we sold the only lot on the north side that was making us any money. And...and
so, if you develop the south side before it's time, we will lose $25,000 of income and if
the same pattern is it takes four or five years to get someone to buy this, I mean, that's
$100,000 of lost revenue on land that might not have a market for a few years.
Bailey/ What is your debt (several talking)
Rettig/ I'm sorry. We have...we have debt on the North Aviation Commerce Park...
Bailey/ What's the total on that?
Rettig/ We have...I (several talking)
Bailey/ Kevin? I thought I saw Kevin here.
Rettig/ I think we owe $100,000 and change on the North Aviation Commerce Park right now,
and then we have debt on the corporate hangar, which pre-dates every one of us sitting
around this table and how that came to be. And then there's debt on two of the three
south T-hangars, and now there will be debt on the University of Iowa, um, hangar that's
on the Airport...building H.
Bailey/ Okay. Amy, you had a question?
Correia/ Well, um...I think, I mean, cause given that we put...we put money, the Airport put
money into developing infrastructure for the...North (mumbled)
Rettig/ Yeah.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 4
Correia/ Okay, just...(both talking)...right, um, that has been sitting for a while, and that we are
putting in infrastructure in our, the new industrial park area. I wonder about our capacity
to...to, or ICAD's capacity or whoever...I know we're working in concert to market and
get projects in to stretch too thin and have all, you know, kind of both areas putting
infrastructure in and having...not have the capacity to get interested buyers and...and
um, the ball rolling there. Um, and L..so I think that's, you know, is it more of a long-
term strategy, okay, we're going to concentrate on the, um, our new industrial park area
that we're putting in, incurring some debt to put in the infrastructure on, and then five
years down the road or whatever, however that we would stage that for the Airport area.
But I also do have concerns about the flood plain issue, as well.
Bailey/ Well, and there was some talk of pursuing flood mitigation grants from the FAA
in...what (mumbled)
Tharp/ The, uh, the FAA would participate in some of the flood mitigation because it impacts the
entire Airport. Um, the percentages at this point I'm not sure of...of what they'd
participate in, and they also wouldn't participate until after our airfield needs are taken
care of, which based on the current schedule of projects would be about 2014.
Bailey/ And we talked about a little bit in our meeting about the...the opportunity of pursuing
flood mitigation funds, particularly this year when there's stimulus funds and other funds
out there, and seeing what is available, and both Howard and Mike thought that that
might be an option.
Rettig/ I think that's a philosophical point of view, about whether or not you should be changing
the flood plain to build more infrastructure and business, or whether there should be areas
that we...if you build it up there, it will flood somewhere else. So that matter is an
entirely different discussion about whether that's wise public policy, but...but the FAA's
participation in it would, the only way they would consider it is when everything else is
done. So they have programmed out to us, uh, through 2014. Now this year with, um,
economic stimulus money, it's unclear what's going to happen because they took next
year's program for the Airport and moved it up this year and said please spend this money
this year. For our point of view around here, that was a great deal because we don't have
to pay the 10% local match, and we created about 100 jobs for four, five months around
here. But, the question is are they going to then move everything up, which would be the
hope that they would, because if not, then the...that economic stimulus money just
dumped in this year and then nobody gets grants next year to do anything. So if they
move everything up, that would put us at 2013, isn't that...or did you already calculate
that in (several talking) so flood mitigation money, if it's available from the FAA,
wouldn't be available till FY2014.
Correial Then what about...are there...there's...height restrictions of any building that's going on
that close to the Airport?
Horan/ That's on page 39 of your study, and it's pretty well marked out. There's bright yellow
lines, building restriction line 35 feet.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 5
Correia/ And did you all talk about that, in terms of being able to market, I mean, you know, I
don't know if...if you look at our current industrial there are some buildings that are
(several talking) and so, I mean...
Horan/ Yeah, AECOM was all over that and...and they had, they had good coverage there I
think.
Tharp/ I would anticipate if this land goes before the FAA for a release for sale that they would
do similar to what they did on the north, uh, side and put a...a height restriction on...on
the release (mumbled) everything that's in the plan is outside of the...there's a 35-foot
building restriction line. Everything that is projected to be developed, whether it's
Airport or, uh, Airport need or commercial need is, uh, outside of that line, but what the
overall height would be, I'm not sure at this point.
Horan/ I just chime in, uh, that I thought the meeting the other day was great, uh, and um,
what...what I heard was, let's get the planning in place, let's do the work, let's...let's put
the blocks in a row and stack 'em up the way that we want, or would wish, um, so that
when we have those abilities, um, we can do it. Um, and then of course there is the
possibility of, still in response to the 08 flood, some um, some flood mitigation money
that we could use, so...that's the way that we're pursuing, uh, we're going to come up
with some ideas about how we would like this orange area here to be dealt with, uh, and
then we'll...we'll put it back into the...into the mix.
Hayek/ Uh, one thing I took from the meeting the other day, which I agree with...it was a very
good meeting, was that your recommendation that we go with number five was at least in
some part premised on waiting until the north end was completely (both talking)
Horan/ Well, the waiting part is really the FAA wants to put their blocks and their marbles in a
row, and they want us to do taxiways between...for our two runways, which are the two
significant concrete projects, uh, brick and mortar projects if you will, um, and...and
maybe even expanding the ramp. I'm not sure if that's in their plan. Um, and they would
like us to get those two or three things, um, in planning, in place, um, before they jump in
and um, help us with the flood mitigation.
Hayek/ So if...if the conclusion that this group reaches is to proceed and not delay this until the
north end is completely sold off, does that change Commission's perspective...
Horan/ Well, we still have two years left on our lease with Merschman, um, L ..you know, the
timing may turn out to be very tight, uh, in which case that's just nothing but a good
opportunity, and I think that to be ready for that is the best thing.
Hayek/ But...but number five remains your...
Horan/ Yes.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 6
Hayek/ ...preferred approach, and L ..and we might have talked about this and we might not
have - I can't recall - I guess intuitively I was surprised that the recommendation from the
Commission happened to be the one that puts the most land off the Airport print and into
the (mumbled) market.
Horan/ Well, I can only answer as one vote on the Commission, and...and um, the long-term
sustainability of the Airport is one of my personal goals, and to, uh, get it, uh, down to a
dollar a year on the City's budget is, um, one of things I'd like to see accomplished, and
it's conceivable that we could, uh, we could make that happen. We could get some tax
revenue out of that, out of the land, um, and perhaps um, I still, uh, you know, I
remember when they built the McDonald's in 1956 at the corner of Benton and Riverside
Drive, and then they moved it across the street as a matter of fact, um, and nobody
wondered...nobody asked why would that work? Why would it become what it would
become? And...and Jeff reminded us that we need 35,000 cars a day at that intersection
to put a McDonald's down there. Why won't that happen in 20 or 30 or...let's be ready
for that, and let's take advantage of that on behalf of the Airport.
Rettig/ I'll just...you asked us the last time we met to figure out whether or not there was land
that could be developed. And...and here is the answer. After aviation needs, projected
out, there is land that could be developed, but from a public policy point of view, this is a
broader question, and one I disagree with. I don't think we should...should use up all of
our green space. I don't think we should build in the flood plain, and I don't think we
should allow development close to an Airport. I think you're asking for trouble to do
that. Bigger and bigger planes are taking off from here. Accidents happen! And so if we
allow more construction, closer, and we change the flood plain to do that, and we use up
our green space to do that, I think that's a public policy decision. But what we were
asked is, are there...is there land down there that you don't absolutely need for aviation,
and here's the answer: yes there is. But from a public policy point of view, I would
oppose this. I don't think you should build in a flood plain. I don't think you should
allow more development close to the Airport, and I do think we should preserve some
green space for future issues. I think we have other land in other places available for
economic development. Until that's used, I think this is the least favorable, um, and I
think Amy was referring to a commercial park, somewhere else that we're pursuing as a
City, and...and so, that's my vote on this. You...what you asked us to do, here it is, but I
think this is a bad idea. Personally.
Hayek/ If you separate out the ecological, uh, and other reasons, unrelated to the actual Airport
functioning, um, talk to me about, uh, long-range footprint needs for an Airport, and
just...just in terms of the space you need to operate. I don't want us 20 years hence to
feel, to be at a point where we've got to buy back land that we once owned in 2009 to
accommodate some sort of expansion.
Rettig/ Well, and I think if...if David Hughes was with us (mumbled) I think what he would say
is based on all the models, with all the input and all their best guesses, this is what we
need. But, you know, I...I'm not sure that any of us can sit around and predict what's
going to happen, I mean, if...like jets get affordable and people want to fly them
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 7
themselves like they do big SL1Vs then that's a whole different matter. But, right now, we
could build...two maybe three new hangars today and fill 'em immediately. Whether it's
us or Jet Air. I mean, people are coming, wanting to locate here, professors come to
school who say I want a hangar, and we have absolutely no space for it. So the best
guess, with all the input, with the FAA's approval, is this is what we'll need into the
future. LJh, whether or not that'll change in 40 years I...can't answer that. Probably won't
be here to see.
Bailey/ Any other questions or comments?
Gardinier/ I guess if I could add a couple of comments, in terms of being the new lcid on the
block, um, I think when I went to the State Aviation meeting, I think one of the take-
homes from that is that the Airport has grown tremendously since the last State study was
done, in terms of the amount of revenue that it brings in to the city and I think that
development of that is something that could be taken further even, um, which would
bring more dollars into the Iowa City area, in terms of trying to promote, um, more use
of...of the...of the Iowa City Airport by corporate areas around town. You know, I think
that that's something that's probably somewhat underdeveloped for Iowa City, relative to
other small airports.
Bailey/ (mumbled)
Gardinier/ Hangar space or even just corporate planes, using Iowa City as a...as a landing and
departing area for...I know just when I left Iowa City ten days ago, on a trip, you know, I
noticed that Jet Air had put up these screens, advertising that they have charter service,
and they discovered that there were companies that were chartering flights from, I can't
remember if it was St. Louis or, you know, some other large city in the area to bring their
people here and to take them home from here when they actually could have used Jet
Air's charter service. So, you know, that's just a really short example of Jet Air now
having some screens up advertising to people that come through the door, that they
actually have charter service and if they can build up their charter service, that's going to
again bring in more profit, you know, more dollars, not only to the Airport, but to the
community.
Rettig/ Medical flights, you know, there's been a little downturn in that in the last six months or
something, partially because people are killing themselves less, they're driving fewer
miles, they have less accidents, they donate less organs. I mean, I hate to word it that
way, but that's partially right, but in general, there's only an upward trend on that, and
there's only an upward trend on corporate flights. Despite the little drawback that
happened recently, um, flying commercially is difficult, and if you fly in commercially, it
can take you two days to do something, where if you charter or your company has your
own plane, you come in and be back by the afternoon, and so that is an upward trend.
There have been times where they've flown parts in to our Airport for different factories
here, and...and so, it's not recreation that's growing. I think the recreational pilots sitting
here would tell you that's (mumbled) but the...the business use of planes is...is changing,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 8
ever so slightly, and in our case has everywhere of an upward trend because we're located
in the perfect place.
Bailey/ And that was incorporated in the study to a degree.
Rettig/ Yes. With the inputs that you know now.
Bailey/ Right.
Hayek/ If, uh, if there were budgetary protections in place, uh, with respect to loss of the leased
acreage on the south, the $25,000 you get a year (mumbled) your perspective, would the
Commission have an opinion on...on the timing of the south?
Horan/ Well, I think we're...we're relying on the, uh, we are all relying on the FAA because it's a
90/10 sort of deal for concrete and brick work on the air side, and they've made it pretty
clear that they want to get those taxiways done, um, before they spend, uh, money on
helping us down here, or perhaps even with the flood mitigation. So, um, I, yeah, once
again, let's get the planning and thinking in place, um, and...and be ready for all
opportunities.
Rettig/ The other question, and I have no idea on this, um, Willow Creek study and what it
would take to make more flood plain, uh, stability there, um, and I'm talking off the cuff,
but some of that work would probably involve closing that runway, or at least causing
problems on that runway, when they're at this end.
Tharp/ Um, the storm...the culvert, the box culvert that was fed into here, um, covers I think part
of that, um, I forget what the storm surge it was rated to, but I believe the culvert there
was designed to cover the future expansion, as well as the culvert that the, that was put in
on the...
Horan/ ...under the road.
Tharp/ ...yeah, over here on Mormon Trek, uh, the extension there. So what, uh, the study, uh,
really took a look at was the, uh.. .
Rettig/ Between here and here.
Tharp/ ...connector areas, yeah, between essentially a little bit north of runway 7 and following
Willow Creek down.
Rettig/ There might be construction conflict, I mean, especially with this taxiway, because in
order to develop this, you have to do the creek, right? And what was it, $4 million?
Tharp/ Oh, the...the um, I believe the study that was incorporated here called for some, uh,
dredging it and uh, fill, dike-type things on the sides of the creek, and that was about $2
million, give or take.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 9
Rettig/ Two million...okay. So the part that's on the airfield is about $2 million. So the bigger
question is, do you have $2 million to do Willow Creek? Without any FAA money?
Bailey/ Uh-huh.
Champion/ Well, we don't right now.
Bailey/ Well, and that's what we talked about, is...is, asking you all to also be alert for $2 million
from other sources, as you see, and keeping that in mind for flood mitigation. Anything
else...
Champion/ Well, I would like, I mean, I would like to see us go forward with number five
and... and be ready. It's not going to happen today, or tomorrow.
Bailey/ But I think we have been in agreement that we need to bring more industrial and
commercial land online, just because of the property tax structure in the state. It just
makes sense.
Correia/ So...in other meetings we've been spending grant money to buy property that's in the
100-year flood plain, to not have it be developed, but in this instance we want to put
property in the 100-year flood plain to develop.
Bailey/ I think that there are mitigation measures that could enable it to be developed, I mean...
Correia/ I mean, we could say that for the property that we've been buying for that...would
potentially have one for residential development, I mean, there are flood mitigation and
certainly in Idyllwild I think there was some flood mitigation.. .
Bailey/ Well, there's all the distinctions though made between residential and commercial when
it comes to flood mitigation issues, because I mean, essentially with residential there are
more people in harm's way.
Correia/ Sure!
Bailey/ ...commercial...
Correia/ With industrial you have a lot, you have a huge...right, the investment of material,
capital, I mean, to what extent...would building in....a mitigated flood plain be a
deterrent to potential businesses who would want, I mean, do we know the extent.
Bailey/ Maybe we should explore (both talking)
Correia/ Yeah, I mean, I guess...I...not developing because the other piece is, you know, what
happens in other places because we've mitigated and developed in this area, does that put
other areas of the city in harm's way that are residential, I mean, Willow Creek goes
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 10
through a lot of...you know, significant residential areas of the city, and so have we, I
mean, I would be interested in talking to the experts, to say what could be the
potential...threat to other areas of the city, mitigating this area for this type of
development, does it put risk down farther in any residential area, I mean, I think those
are questions that need to be, forme, that would need to be answered to be able to have,
to be able to know if I support this or not at this point, as well as we are embarking on
another area for industrial development. I think that we should...keep our, you know,
eyes on the ball there.
Champion/ Well, Amy, I think if we decide to go forward with flood mitigation we'll certainly
look at the repercussions of doing that. That'd be part of the whole program.
Gardinier/ One thing that I would just mention that I...I don't know what sort of mitigation is
being discussed, but one thing that I became aware of through the University and its
response to flood problems there is that mitigation, federal government requires that
mitigation cannot cause worse flooding down stream.
Champion/ Or up stream.
Gardinier/ Or up stream (laughter) but basically I know that with some of the mitigation that they
were talking about at the University level that the federal government came back to them
and said, 'No, you can't do that,' because it's going to cause worse flooding, basically
you're going to pile up dirt or whatever, it's going to cause worse flooding down below,
and so, again, I don't know what kind of mitigation you're talking about here but that's
one thing to certainly be aware of.
Bailey/ Well, and I think that we can all agree that this is a beginning to a conversation, that this
points us in a direction. There's general concurrence on...on this layout five. There are
questions to be explored. Public policy questions, as well as the very pragmatic questions
of $25,000 a year with the lease, all kinds of things, but I think from the Economic
Development Committee's perspective, the...the direction was let's begin to step into this
and ask those questions and chunk them out and see what's next, see what the funds
available, see what mitigation looks like, see...see, ask these kinds of questions, and so
moving forward on this, rather than saying, "No, this isn't a good idea." I think that that's
where we're at with this right now. This is the beginning of a journey, not necessarily the
end, um, studies are rarely the end (mumbled) so, um, so any other questions that we can
ask as we sort of step into this? I mean, we're...
Wilburn/ I have just a comment, uh, just for everybody, uh, looking back beyond this study of
the south area, related to, um, why develop this here and the impetus, but even looking
back at the north commercial was the conversation that began related to ways to assist the
Airport in becoming, uh, either sustainable or greater, um, revenue opportunity for the
Airport so there was less demand from, uh, the City's General Fund, um, so even the
development of the north area, so if the question is why develop here if there are other
areas in the community that are available for industrial, commercial use, I think part of it
was if we've got this down here, what are some ways down here that will, that uh, are
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 11
maybe a direct link to help support what's going on here, and I'm not saying whether yes
or no to develop in...in the flood plain, and, but I think...I think that's if...if part of the
conversation, and you folks are leaning towards not building here, then I think there
needs to be thought going back to that original premise that, um, revenue for Airport
operations, that that needs to be kept in the back of our minds as we have those...those
conversations, uh, because um, if...if a future Council...if this Council and a future
Council says, well, we're not going to, regardless...paying attention to flood mitigation
and answering all those questions, if we are not going to do this then, um, I could foresee
perhaps foresee, um, some current or future Airport Commission Member saying, well,
you tied our hand...you know, you're telling us we've got to sustain ourself and you tied
our hands when we had this opportunity to create some revenue, um, potential revenue
for the Airport...I think all these things are related and we shouldn't isolate any one
particular component of this. So just something to think about as we.. .
Hayek/ Um, as we embark upon this planning and study stage, do we really need to commit,
whether it's...modestly or more aggressively to a particular alternative? I don't...I'm
not...I'm not comfortable right now committing t number five, um, I think that all five are
various iterations of essentially the same approach, um, and...and what the results, for
example, of mitigation study would tell us might dictate which direction we go, and I'm
just not comfortable for this group to say it's going to be number five, when there's so
much that needs to be done by way of study.
Bailey/ But that always gives the Airport Commission a place to start, which was...which is
what you wanted to see out of the Economic Development Committee's, let's explore this,
I mean, I think it's in here, the feasibility for balancing the interests of the Airport, and
our industrial needs, and then we can add the flood mitigation needs with layout five. It's
a place to start.
Hayek/ That's fine. I mean, I...I don't mind having a template, but I don't want us to be stuck
with it if...if the information turns out (both talking)
Bailey/ And I think we have alternatives here, um, as we explore this timeline, so...
Wright/ There's nothing that commits us to number five at this point.
Bailey/ Right, right. I mean, this, like I said is the beginning of a journey of figuring out
timeline, and if we find that there....aren't going to be flood mitigation funds until 2014,
that...that points us in a direction, because and maybe that's the timeline we'll look at.
Rettig/ We're in a farm lease through 10 and 11.
Bailey/ Right.
Rettig/ Then it ends in January of 12.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 12
Bailey/ So one of the things (several talking) is before, I mean, the Commission obviously before
the next two -year lease or whatever, we'll want to know where we are with this...clearly.
So...and probably a lot of different faces around the table when that's discussed
so...anything else?
Rettig/ While you have us here, do you want to talk about the other thing on your agenda
Airport-wise?
Bailey/ Other thing on our agenda that, um, the sale?
Rettig/ Land sale.
Bailey/ Would anybody...does anybody have any questions about the land sale that's on our
agenda...tomorrow night?
Hayek/ You know I...I had mixed feelings about it, uh, because it doesn't bring this parcel onto
the tax rolls, keeps them off the tax rolls, uh, on the other hand as I understand it, paying
full asking price, and more importantly the...the services to be brought (noise on mic,
unable to hear)
Horan/ Yeah, through the fence operations. They are an independent operation. They operate
through our fence (mumbled) FAA and aeronautical community (several talking)
Rettig/ I...I would note for the record that John Staley has become a public citizen, not a
Member of the Airport Commission. As a representative of the University. Um, I...I
totally agree with you. I don't know if you follow our minutes carefully enough, but I'm
always really gong ho about when we can sell something, put it back on the tax rolls. If
we can't lease it for more money, then it's okay with me to get taxes from it. In this case,
it just makes sense. You're consolidating aviation. It...it's good for our overall counting
because it allows some economic development of where the Airport, or the helicopter
hangar is now. I mean, that's the whole reason they have to move, is, uh, new buildings
want to go there in the Oakdale campus and they can't because of the flight patterns. So
you consolidate that, you consolidate everything -the noise, the traffic, the, you know,
risk. Um, but it doesn't put it back on tax rolls, but on the other side, we've recently put a
ton of money back on the tax rolls, you know, with property and hopefully we've one
more parcel sold and under construction. That'll make the other part look more exciting,
so if it wasn't for a aviation thing, I might have a little bit different opinion. I mean, I
thought the University's research hangar could go there too and have it in the, you know,
through the fence, actually it's a taxiway, but because it's aviation related, I think it's a
win-win situation, and it will get us out of debt. For...on that (several talking) for the
north! Not out of debt for life, but for the infrastructure, and...and that's a plus to me
because I'm tired of paying interest.
Champion/ You know, I think it was the right decision.
Rettig/ So, we're all for it and I hope you will be tomorrow night too.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 13
Bailey/ Okay. Anything else for the Airport Commission? That was a nice segway to our next
item, agenda items, so if there's nothing else -thank you all for being here. (several
talking) We look forward to working with you on layout five as that unfolds or whatever
it happens to be. Okay, shall we move into agenda items. (several talking) Agenda
items?
Agenda Items:
ITEM 10. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING DISTRIBUTION OF THE
"PROGRAM FOR IMPROVING NEIGHBORHOODS" (PIN) GRANT
FUNDS.
Correia/ I had, um, a question on correspondence that was I think included on, in the agenda item
for, um, the PIN grants?
Champion/ LTh-huh.
Bailey/ Okay.
Correia/ Were we considering closing (mumbled) Rec Center on Sunday as part of our
discussion we were talking about closing an hour early, right? Were we...
Champion/ I'm sorry. I couldn't hear your question.
Correia/ There...there was a correspondence, um...in our packet from June...and the comments
on various things. One is, uh, an opinion about closing the downtown Rec Center on
Sundays as part of...of our budget discussion. We didn't do that.
Helling/ Um...if you'll recall we talked about closing the, uh, Scanlon Gym and the Mercer
facility early.
Correia/ Early right, but not a whole day.
Helling/ And...right, and...you opted for, to do something downtown rather than at Mercer. I'd
have to go back and check, but what was given to me, and what was presented originally,
was a...as well as Mercer, was also closing on Sunday. We didn't select that.
Correia/ Didn't select that, right. Okay.
Helling/ But, I'll have to go back and check and see because Parks and Rec then sent me a
recommendation for something different than...than closing Mercer and Scanlon, and I
don't recall if...if the Sunday issue is part of that or not. I don't think so, but I'll go back
and check.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 14
Correia/ But in the things that we selected, that we didn't....opt for closing downtown Rec Center
on Sundays.
Helling/ Right, correct. (several talking) I...I don't know if that was even, if I even put that on
the table.
Correia/ Okay. Okay. Just checking.
Bailey/ Other agenda items?
ITEM 11. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATIONS FOR
FUNDING ASSISTANCE FOR STATE RECREATION TRAILS
PROGRAM (SRT) PROJECTS TO THE IOWA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (IDOT), FOR DEVELOPMENT OF RECREATION
TRAILS.
Hayek/ Item 11 is, uh, resolution approving, uh, applications for those, uh, pedestrian bridges.
Bailey/ LTh-huh.
Hayek/ And I guess a couple of questions -number one, is...does the fact of our delay on Sand
Lake factor into that? (mumbled)
Helling/ Yeah, I don't think so because it's trail construction, and it could be constructed, I don't
know, Jeff, if you...uh, my guess is it wouldn't be put out here knowing that...that we
already know the schedule for Sand Lake's been delayed.
Davidson/ Yeah, the notion there, Matt, is that the trail can be broken out as a separate project.
The intention with the Sand Lake master plan is for that to eventually be the south,
basically for us to move down the south terminus of the Iowa River Corridor Trail to
Sand Lake, I mean, it's a beautiful opportunity to have a real nice terminus there. We can
do this project as a stand-alone project. Of course you'll...you'll approve that ultimately,
uh, the rest of the master plan can then hold off as per your...your current policy.
Hayek/ Okay.
Bailey/ Other agenda items?
Wilburn/ Can I ask a question about, uh, something the Consent Calendar?
Bailey/ Uh-huh.
ITEM 2. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED OR AMENDED.
g. Correspondence.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 15
2. Matthew Pacha: Recommendation to name Sand Lake in
honor of Terry Trueblood
Wilburn/ Um, it's related to...item 2.g.2, it's a letter from Parks and Recreation Commissioner
Matt Pacha. It's a letter endorsing, um, about the Parks and Rec, asking, approving,
putting before us recommendation to officially name Sand Lake Park in honor of, uh,
Director Terry Trueblood. Um, I just want to voice my support for that. I, um, there
have been other processes, things, where we pick and Parks and Rec has taken a look at
it. There may or may not be formal policy related to it, but I in particular would be
interested in moving towards this sooner, or rather than later. I don't know if, uh, this
would need...if that specific item would need to be put on a, uh, work session, but um, in
my opinion, um, support and work that, uh, Terry's done, many people do a lot of good
work for the city, but um, I think, um, in terms of, um, his dedication, uh, through all ages
and all interests, all items that come up, his fingerprint is on many of our facilities
and...and outreach approach related to, uh, different groups, and I mean, even meeting
with skateboarders to come up with the concept for the skateboard park, and I think, um,
that uh, this is, uh, in honor and recognition, which uh, regardless of um, a Council level
procedure, uh, given again our...our, it's within our purview to, um, do naming items.
We do these things. We...we named this very chamber after someone, not necessarily
with a specific procedure in mind, but uh, if there's others interested in preceding with,
uh, this naming opportunity, um, it would have...I would feel very strongly about doing
this sooner rather than later.
Champion/ I totally agree with you.
Bailey/ Well, I can speak, I mean, and you said without the policy. I did meet with the Chair,
um, and I agree with, you know, Terry's done amazing things throughout the community,
um, with the Parks and Rec department. I met with John Westefeld about the policy
itself, and it was their understanding that that's one of the things they asked for, and they
are in the process, and Dale and I have talked about this. I think Dale can speak a little
bit more to the timing issue.
Helling/ Yeah, we...kind of have our feelers out to see where, you know, some policies, naming
policies and gift policies and, uh, this is one of the things that would come under that, and
so we're trying to find out what other people do and how they work towards the
parameters they've set for these kinds of things, um, and I, you know, I agree with
everything that's been said, in terms of Terry, uh, the...I think we do want to be careful
and not set a precedent that, uh, that we can't live with in the future. Um, and that would
be my primary concern (mumbled) timing. But, again, I don't, you know, I don't know
that it's going to take us that long to find out whether folks (mumbled) something that
works, but who would be looking at that, you know, be respective of this particular issue.
Wilburn/ I don't, again, I'll go back to, uh, I don't have a problem with aCouncil-level policy,
procedure, and procedure for the future, but again, I just, there have been, uh,
opportunities that Councils have...have um, gone forth, proceeded with, uh, naming
opportunities, and I just...I just believe that, uh, this is one that I think they're...that
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 16
would be, uh, supported strongly by the community and uh, this would be one that we
can act on and I would be, if there are concerns related to, um, proceeding with this
without a policy, Council-level policy in place, I, um, I personally would be willing to go
ahead and face that criticism, uh, in the future. I feel very strongly about this, so...just
wanted to put it out there for Council to consider.
Bailey/ Other agenda items?
ITEM 17. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN
AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND JOHNSON COUNTY,
IOWA, FOR THE APPLICATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF ANY
AWARDED EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE
GRANT (JAG) PROGRAM AWARDS.
Helling/ I just had one. I just wanted to bring up item 17, which is the Byrne grant that was split
with the County. Um, that...is time sensitive in terms of getting the grant in so if there
are any questions that you would have, I would have somebody from the Police
Department here tomorrow night to answer those.
Bailey/ Do we have any...is that necessary from anybody's perspective?
Helling/ This is just another year of the same...same grant. The thing is they're dedicating the
money for (mumbled)
Wright/ I didn't have any questions.
Bailey/ Any other agenda items? All right, let's move on to Planning and Zoning items.
ITEM 2. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED OR AMENDED.
g. Correspondence.
2. Matthew Pacha: Recommendation to name Sand Lake in
honor of Terry Trueblood
Wilburn/ I'm sorry to belabor the point, but just, um, are there Council Members interested in the
item that...is that something that we can discuss here or not?
Dilkes/ It is something you can discuss that's on the agenda.
Wilburn/ Another reason that I bring... are folks interested in a naming opportunity of the
Council level of Sand Lake, uh, after Terry Trueblood?
Champion/ I am!
Wilburn/ Without a pol...without a policy in place?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 17
Champion/ I don't have any problems with our policy.
O'Donnell/ I don't either. I think Terry, you know, we can see it really all over the city. We've
got (mumbled). We sit in Emma Harvat Hall, um, L ..I think Terry is, uh, Terry's
footprint, like you say, will be recognized for many, many years down the road and I...I
fully support it and I...I think it should be at the Council level, without a policy.
Bailey/ On...has anybody approached Terry, Dale?
Helling/ Pardon me?
Bailey/ Has anybody approached Terry?
Helling/ Not to my knowledge.
Wright/ That might be one thing before we, uh, forging ahead, but I...I think I'd feel a little bit
more comfortable. You said it's not going to take very long to check out some, um
(noises on mic) policy together.
Helling/ I don't think so.
Wright/ I'd prefer to do that.
Wilburn/ What I'm suggesting is not doing it without his consent, but if there was enough interest
in the Council of directing staff to proceed with a conversation with Terry that we would
like...Council would like to do this, what is your reaction to it and...
Wright/ I would wholeheartedly support, uh, naming a park for Terry, but I would like to have a
policy about doing this, before we start...before we set a precedent again.
Wilburn/ And my only concern about that is the timing and, um, given his health status and...
Champion/ I mean, we named Thornberry Dog Park without a policy. We named the Scanlon
Gym without a policy. (several talking) donor policies.
Dilkes/ I think the decision in front of the City Council right now is...and I think it's the same
one that was here the last time you talked about it, is - is there a majority of you that want
to proceed with the naming of that park, assuming Terry's consent, without a policy, or is
there a majority of you that do not want to consider that until there is a policy in place.
Hayek/ I'll weigh in. I don't think we should name it without a policy being in place, and I would
completely separate Terry Trueblood, who...who's a person for whom, uh, if ever there
was a person for whom a...a place or structure should be named in our government it's
him, and it has nothing to do with him and I totally support what you're saying, uh, for
the reasons related to Terry Trueblood, but um, if there are concerns about precedent, if
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 18
there's a need for a policy, we need to look at this objectively and...and get it straight,
and then proceed.
Bailey/ And I thought that that was the...the discussion that we had with Parks and Rec. I
actually thought that this had been decided, a direction had been determined. Um, that's
why I sat down and met with John, and I think that's why Dale is pursuing looking at
some other policies is that's what we had discussed.
Wilburn/ I also thought that part is that it was, uh, at a minimum an opinion from Parks and Rec,
and they and obviously they have...they have made a recommendation. They hadn't
made a recommendation as a body before. So.. .
Bailey/ Well, I'm uncomfortable pursuing it without a policy. This is not...it's not a comment on
Terry's contributions to this community whatsoever. I just...I believe that that's the better
way to proceed.
Dilkes/ And we understand though that we have named things before (several talking) Steve
Atkins Drive, for instance.
Champion/ We did, uh, Emma Harvat Hall. This building was named after somebody without a
policy. I mean...
Hayek/ I don't even know what the considerations are. Is it, you know, for a...is there hesitation
to do that for someone who is a present employee? You know, are there similar things
we should think about? I don't even know what to think about, and I don't want to over
think this, um...
Bailey/ Well, I don't want to over-talk it, but there are, I mean, there are two issues here. I mean,
some of the examples are...fundraising, and some of them are honorific, and I think that
generally looking at a policy that enables both approaches is...is the appropriate way to
go. So...okay? So, we're pursuing a policy.
Correia/ And so can we have a timeline on when we would have a draft policy? I mean, it
doesn't seem like it would take too long to have some...
Bailey/ I don't know. Dale?
Helling/ LTh, we can try to have something for you...well, we wouldn't have it for next week, but
the following meeting...later in the month.
Wright/ That would be terrific!
Bailey/ LTh-huh. I think that would be great, and I think that that's the kind of timeline that the
Parks and Rec Commission is looking at. I mean, we have a policy at the Library.
Perhaps it's...it can be applicable to...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 19
Helling/ See what we can get, and then (mumbled)
Bailey/ Okay, all right, Planning and Zoning matters.
Planning and Zoning Items a & b:
ITEM 4. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS.
a) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14, ZONING,
ADDING A BUSINESS SERVICES LAND USE CATEGORY,
MODIFYING THE STREET WIDTH STANDARDS FOR
INSTITUTIONAL USES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES AND
CLARIFYING APPLICABLE REGULATIONS TO AND ALLOW
MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
IN THE PUBLIC ZONE. (SECOND CONSIDERATION)
b) CONSIDER SENDING A LETTER TO THE JOHNSON COUNTY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TEMPORARY PAVEMENT
RECYCLING FACILITY AT LOT 3 SHARPLESS SUBDIVISION.
(CU09-0001)
Davidson/ Thank you, Madame Mayor. LJh, item a is second consideration of the clean-up items
that we had (mumbled)...
Karr/ Do you have your microphone on? I'm sorry, Jeff, it's dead.
Bailey/ Can't hear you very well though.
Davidson/ Thought I did...might not have it up far enough.
Karr/ Thank you.
Davidson/ Let's see.
Bailey/ I don't think it's turned up...
Davidson/ Is that better? Does that make any difference? Is that better?
Bailey/ You're going to have to...
Hayek/ Too much of an introvert!
Wright/ Maybe have two of them!
Davidson/ (laughter) I will just do this. I can even hear myself, that I'm being broadcast now.
Okay, item a was the second consideration of the clean-up items from the zoning code.
Any questions about that? Okay. Item b then is a new item, and it is to consider sending
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 20
a letter to the Johnson County Board of Supervisors. Johnson County Board of
Adjustment, I think that's supposed to be Board of Supervisors? No, it's...I'm sorry, I
stand corrected. It's the Johnson County Board of Adjustment. LTh, regarding a
conditional use permit that Peterson Contractors Inc. has applied for. Uh, this is a
application to establish a temporary recycling site on lot 3 of Sharpless Subdivision and
this is all related to the ongoing reconstruction of interstate 80, uh, we've all observed
what's been taking place the last three years between Highway 965, or actually, um, yeah,
I guess Coral Ridge Avenue, and the Iowa River. That will now be moving to the Iowa
River, or to Dodge Street, basically over the next three years you'll see the...the same
thing occurring out there. Um, the site that we're talking about is there. It is lot 3 of
Sharpless Subdivision at the, uh, Herbert Hoover Highway interchange with Interstate 80,
and there's an aerial of the site, uh, this area right in...here is where the, you can see
they've been filling in this area. This is the Sharpless Auction, uh, business and I just lost
the...there we go. And this is the area that we'd be talking about. What's under
consideration here, uh, is...the fringe area agreement that Iowa City and the County have,
requires that, uh, we be allowed to review conditional use permits within our two-mile
extraterritorial jurisdiction, and this is...this is another one of those. We had one recently
that it is in our two-mile extraterritorial jurisdiction area, but it is not in the growth area.
This is not in the area that as of our current growth area that the Comprehensive Plan
establishes we foresee being within Iowa City in the foreseeable future. Um, the, uh,
if...if we send a letter, um, recommending that this not take place, it does require afour-
fifths majority vote of the Board of Supervisors to approve, uh, the use in that case. Uh,
but we are in fact recommending approval, uh, just a couple of other things about it, uh, I
mentioned it was on lot 3 of the Sharpless property. Uh, what they do here is they take
up the old pavement, uh, on Interstate 80, uh, and then they, uh, reduce it to a material
that is then used for the sub-base for the new road, so it's a very positive process in that
respect, minimizes the amount of waste material then that's created from the
reconstruction project. It will take two to three years, uh, as I mentioned. Uh, that entire
project's been elongated a little bit just because of the cash flow issues that Iowa DOT...
we planned on it being a much shorter construction cycle, but it is going to take this long.
Um, mentioned that it's outside of the Iowa City growth area. We are recommending
approval, subject to removal of the facilities no later than six months after completion of
the I-80 project, so basically when the project's done, all of the...all of the temporary
recycling equipment is taken off site and uh, that's the end of it basically, so that's the
letter we're proposing to send, and that'll be on your agenda tomorrow night. Any
questions?
Wright/ Is there any potential for a lot of dust or particulate matter, coming out of this project?
Davidson/ Um, I'm sure there is some dust and particulate matter. One of the...one of the
positive things about this site, Mike, is that it's very close to Interstate 80, so those sort of
externalities...we actually feel this is a really good site in that respect, cause there's, uh,
it's pretty much right off the interstate and you're there, so it's not going to create a lot of
externalities for people if they had to drag it half a mile down the road into Iowa City or
something like that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council
Bailey/ Any other questions?
Page 21
Hayek/ Based on our adjacent (mumbled) suggest that that be directed opposite direction of
Hoover Elementary, speaking of Hoover. (several talking and laughing)
Davidson/ Any other questions? Thank you.
Council Appointments:
Bailey/ Thanks. Okay. Council appointments. Um, we have applicants for the Historic
Preservation Commission, the Library Board of Trustees, and the Telecommunications
Commission. So, Historic Preservation, one vacancy, one applicant. David McMahon.
Champion/ McMahon, is he good?
Bailey/ Are there four for that? (several responding) (mumbled) Um, Library Board of
Trustees, we have three vacancies, two applicants.
Champion/ And they're both currently serving their first term.
Bailey/ So are we comfortable re-appointing?
Champion/ Yes (several responding)
Bailey/ Okay. Telecommunications Commission, um, Saul Mekis has applied. Now he has
served before, but um, we had a resignation, so...one vacancy.
Wright/ Been a very committed (several talking) he is the only application we have for that
(mumbled)
Bailey/ Okay. So...all right.
Champion/ We're lucky to have him re-apply actually.
Bailey/ Yeah! All right, budget priorities and franchise fees. Dale?
Budget Priorities and Franchise Fee:
Helling/ You received a memo in your packet...and what we had attempted to do was...give you
as much detail as we have at this point in time about the legislation and exactly what it
means. There are still some unanswered questions that, and Eleanor can jump in, but she
has made inquiry, for instance, one of the questions we're looking at is whether or not the,
what used to be the SILO, the school infrastructure local option, uh, sales tax is now a
state tax and whether or not that is still treated as a local option tax, which would be
exempt, uh, which would exempt the schools from the, uh, the franchise fee. No, I got
that backwards. If we...if we assess a franchise fee then...then they would not pay the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 22
local option tax. If it is indeed a local option tax, or whether it's now considered a state
tax, which is...um, I believe non-exempt, is that right?
Hayek/ And we don't know that yet?
Helling/ We don't know that, that's right.
Hayek/ Okay.
Helling/ That's right, um...and then...we, I put in the memo just the laundry list from the...right
from the statute in terms of what are the broad categories that you can use local option
sales tax revenue for. Um, the total amount that you would receive, and that's in the
second paragraph on the second page, is broken down. It's about $840,000 for each 1%,
that's if it's levied, or it's assessed to both the, uh, gas and electricity, and you can see the
breakdown there as well, uh, on how that would be, uh, paid. About $352,000 from
residential customers, and about $244,000 each from commercial users and industrial
users.
Champion/ What about the (mumbled) gave us a lot of information, at this point in time.
Helling/ Well, that's what we want to do! (laughter)
Wilburn/ If I could interject to just, uh, for some background information, supplemental
background information, a reminder and, Regenia and Dale, jump in if I...if I forget
something or mis...uh, misspeak about this. Um, we had proceeded with, uh,
recommending to the Metropolitan Coalition which worked towards revenue alternatives
to proceed with, uh, the supporting the bills through revenue alternative options, and
options to property tax, and in working with our...our partner cities, um, the idea was to
come up with, uh, what those alternatives to property tax might be, as opposed to
necessarily endorsing one way or the other, a specific item that was on the list, and
franchise fee was one item that was on the list, and that, um, because there was no vote
by the Council about gas/electric franchise fees before, but that um, the concept of
revenue alternative, uh, to be developed and...and then if the option became available,
then would be the point to discuss whether or not any of those alternatives would be
something that Iowa City would want to pursue, and I suppose that's where we're at now.
It's been approved, is this something that we wish to approve. So...
Helling/ I think the way it was...the whole debate, and we know about the Des Moines case and
uh, there's a number of cities that use a franchise fee, some mainly just to offset their
costs to the franchise, but...as Des Moines was doing, using it for a broader purpose. I
think that what considered as a...as a local alternative tax, uh, or a way to, um, raise
revenue (mumbled) local level, I think it's very clear that the legislature intended it to be
an alternative source of revenue, not just to apply to the management of the franchise, but
to go beyond that. So really I think there are a couple of broad questions that you need to
look at and the first...Ross just indicated what that is, and whether or not a majority of
Council is willing to at least at this point consider using the franchise fee as an alternative
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 23
form of revenue, and if you are, then to look at the laundry list and start to consider what
are the uses that you think would...would be appropriate, um, I did outline just a few of
the things that you had talked about before, starting at the bottom of the second page, um,
and certainly first and foremost, as you know in the ordinance that...first thing you have
to do is enumerate what you're using for...for franchise management for inspection and
um, that there's two or three things, but basically it's management of the franchise or
administration of the franchise. Um, then beyond that you can use that for the broad
category things, but one thing we talked about was, um, the...local option sales tax that
was just passed, and if you collect a franchise fee, um, can... l % up to 1 % could not be
assessed as a, uh, a local option sales tax, so that would diminish somewhat by the
amount of about $840,000 your annual revenue for the local option sales tax for the flood
related projects. So, that's one thing. You're not...certainly not obliged to do that, uh,
you could just see that reduced by that much, uh, I think we had about $9 million a year
roughly so this would reduce about...about, or less than 10%, uh, on an annual basis.
And then the last thing is the one thing that you did talk about with public safety, and we
talked about it more particularly as it relates to the fire station, the firefighters, and we
came up with some numbers there that I think, uh, our...our annual cost for the new fire
station, that's staffing, um, operation and maintenance of the fire station, and retirement
of the internal debt, not any GO bonds that we sell but the internal debt comes to about
$950,000 a year, about $147,000 roughly is...would be to retire internal debt if we did $2
million internal loan. So we package that all together just to look at your annual costs. It
would have to come from, um, General Fund. Uh, we also talked a little bit about
additional police officers and uh, the cost per officer to equip and train afirst-year officer
is about $75,000. That's wages, benefits (mumbled).
Champion/ Well, I, um, I'm certainly in favor of the Council seriously thinking about doing this
for public safety only. Fire (several talking)
Wright/ That's exactly what I was thinking about too. Those are the two areas I think we
(mumbled)
Wilburn/ And the question I would ask would be, um, since this sales tax was put out as directed
toward flood, would we want to take that percent to reimburse back to that, to flood,
that's the only question that I.. .
Bailey/ I would be inclined to do so.
Correia/ For those three years, or four...is it four years? (several talking)
Shipley/ I think this is a very bad policy for the City to pursue, especially in light of the current
economic climate, and especially we just had the local option sales tax, um, and it passed
by the slimmest of margins and I sincerely doubt that citizens would have voted for it if
they knew that the City was going to be shaking them for, you know, $2 a couple months
down the road. Um, and I know that the, you know, this fire station project needs to go
forward. I know the Police needs more funding. Um, but I...I think you can
seriously....any dollar you cut from the budget is equivalent to revenue. So, uh,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 24
especially in these economic times, I mean, people need food. They need money to save,
uh, there's definitely another way to go about this, and I sincerely urge the City to stop
considering or even investing any resources in...in investigating this matter.
Hayek/ I'm open...I am open to considering a limited franchise fee, uh, for public safety,
including...to include both police and fire, um, I...I uh, I am of...I do think that...that the
school SILO, the flood local option sales tax and increase in property taxes have placed,
uh, a significant strain on taxpayers in recent years, um, and...and that...that would, I
think, dictate being conservative in our position of a franchise fee, and I think limiting it
to public safety...is both a smart thing to do in terms of our policy needs right now, and
would be more acceptable to the community, um, I don't think we should view this, uh,
opportunity as a panacea, uh, for our budget, um, but I think we could use it to offset
some of those, uh, recent expenses, whether it's fire or police, in a smart fashion and I
think that...as far as I can tell, the exact numbers are a bit of a moving target. For
example, we don't know exactly what the local regulatory expense to the City would be
to regulate the franchise...the utility, so that...that is....probably far less than 1%, but we
don't know exactly how much less...
Helling/ That's something, given...if a majority of the Council wishes to look at this, then that's
the first thing, one of the first things we would have to do is calculate that, because as it,
this statute indicates, you first have to cover that and then the excess can go to the
purposes for which (mumbled) spelled out.
Wright/ I would like to see that (mumbled) it gives us a more accurate base.
Bailey/ Right.
Correia/ One of the things that I was wondering is, and I don't know if this is...allowed. Um, but
is...is there the ability within a franchise fee to offer some type of...I'll just use the word
rebate for lack of a better word, at this point, as I'm thinking about it...for residential
customers that, for example, are eligible or receiving the low-income heating and energy
assistance.
Bailey/ That was my question too, is what provision regarding franchise fees for...are there for
low-income residents? I mean; are there any?
Helling/ That's not...
Dilkes/ It's not addressed in the, uh, in the statute. I...we have asked MidAm to tell us, it's
unclear to us at this point what classes you can...we know you could make distinctions
for instance on the basis of industrial, commercial, residential, um, I...I know there are
some cities that, for example, exempt schools, um, but I don't know how far that classing
can go. I don't think that we can just...specify...divide up that group as we wish, but um,
I need...we haven't gotten that information from MidAm yet.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 Ciry Council Page 25
Bailey/ And I am very interested in how we can divide up the classes, because one of the reasons
this was pursued and um, many of the cities were interested in pursuing is it enable us to,
um, have franchise fees from people who are, or organizations, institutions that don't pay
a property tax. And so how can...and I'm sure we can't parse those out necessarily, but
I'm interested in seeing what classes we can.
Hayek/ I would urge caution if we're going to talk about creating different classes in terms of
the.. .
Bailey/ There are classes already, but I want to know what leeway we have.
Hayek/ Well, but that doesn't mean we...we say...that doesn't mean we have to say this class
pays X and this class pays Y.
Bailey/ Right.
Hayek/ That would...that would greatly politicize the whole...fee structure, and I think we need
to be really careful about that.
Bailey/ I'm just interested in what possibilities we have. This...I just want to know how we can
use this, and how we best use this and best approach it.
Hayek/ Now, if we...I don't fully understand the math. I called, uh, Kevin earlier today and tried
to walk myself through some of this and...he probably left with a better understanding,
but...but I'm not sure I convinced myself. Um, if we just went with a 1% fee, and based
on the very rough initial calculations, um, that would kick up about $900,000 roughly.
Helling/ $840,000.
Hayek/ Okay. And if we did not...reimburse the local option sales tax, it would essentially result
in an almost equal diminution in the revenues we're getting from that...about 10% off of
$9 million?
Helling/ Yeah, we're...told by MidAmerican that it's one for one exchange so... l% on sales tax
versus the 1% that would come off the local option tax is $840,000.
Hayek/ Okay. So, uh...and we've also got new information in the last, just month or two, about
new sources of funding, potential new sources of funding, for some of the flood
mitigation work, um, and I wonder whether we ought to think about, uh, going with a
1%, uh, not reimbursing the sales tax side, and that would result in essentially, just for
lack of exact numbers, $900,000 less on the capital infrastructure side, and $900,000
more on the operational side. As I understand that, that would be revenue neutral. You
still have to factor in the regulatory costs.
Helling/ Right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 26
Hayek/ Am L ..remotely accurate about this?
Helling/ I think what we would probably...the way we should approach it would be to start by
calculating our regulatory costs, and then look at the additional costs, whatever guidelines
you give us for...if you're talking about full funding for the fire station, that's about
$950,000 or uh, yeah, $950,000, um, and then in terms of just tell us, you know, roughly
number of police officers and we can put that package together. The other question is
then, is the offset in or out for the local option sales tax, and under your scenario it would
be out. Um, we can come...put that together and tell you then what, you know, what that
revenue would be and then you can...you can do a 1%, a 1 1/2, a 2, you know, you could,
there's no specific, uh, limit, other than you can't go over 5%.
Bailey/ I would like to see scenarios with both the offset in and out, because by the time we're
making this decision, we'll have a better idea of those other funding sources, and I think
we have to be really smart about that, because those projects, they have to get done,
and...and you know, that affects the timeline and how we...how we meet those, um,
financial obligations. So, if we looked at both scenarios and made a decision when we
had a little bit more information. We'll never have perfect information about funding, but
that would make me more comfortable.
Correia/ Well, and I'm particularly interested to see if we have options related to some type of
rebates or vacation from the tax for persons on limited or, and fixed incomes.
Dilkes/ I don't think there's a...I don't think there's a rebate option. There may be a way to assess
the franchise fee against some and not others, but I think...I'm not...I think that's
probably fairly limited, and it's dependent on the classes of customers that MidAm
maintains.
Wilburn/ I think we need to, um, given where we have come from in terms of, um, costs of City
services, City service paid for, um, current and past budget, um, limitations, restrictions,
you know, having kept property taxes relatively flat in a couple, two or three years,
keeping the property tax rate level. I think given the historic concern expressed to
Council by community members about property, you know, about property taxes not
going up to further explore this revenue, uh, alternative, um...I mean, the Council's going
to continue looking at, um...that um, General Fund side of the budget, um, but you know,
I mean, and some of those costs...some of which are out of our control, like some of the
health care and the, uh, labor-related costs that are decided at the state level, um, we...I
think it's...it just behooves us to continue to look at, um, at this alternative so we've
got...we have the, it's fine to have certain philosophical beliefs related to tax and things
like that, uh, but we also have to put, um, we have to, uh, take care of the logistical
responsibilities and services that people are willing to ask for, and where you, um, where
you may have to shift a...a tax burden, and clearly a clear message, uh, from some in the
community and...and some on this Council, Councils past, related to, uh, what some feel
is an imbalance related to property taxes, which has been our only option in this
community. I...I think we, uh, we have to look at this as an option. We can discuss what
the nuances might be or...or um, you know, in the end, but we've got to get something
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 27
to...to say yes or no to, in an informed way, and uh, taking a...taking a strict, uh, you
know, no-new-taxes approach, and I don't think it's helpful at the local level, in particular
when you're looking at police and fire and all the other, you know, services that we
provide.
Bailey/ So I hear a majority is interested in pursuing this, and for public safety and we would like
some additional information, and I think you tracked what we have asked for. Is there
any, are there any other questions or additional information that we want, as staff, um,
prepare to move us forward with this?
Shipley/ Well, just please remember I definitely share Amy's concern that this is going to be a
heavily regressive fee, and it's going to hurt those on fixed and limited incomes the most,
so keep that in mind.
Wilburn/ I think we just said that we'd (mumbled)
Bailey/ I think there is interest in pursuing what we can with that, and... and we'll get the
information from (mumbled)
Dilkes/ One piece of information that I think's important to have. I don't think it was included in
Dale's memo, is...is for you to understand that residential utility customers do not pay
state sales tax. They only pay the local option tax. So...if you look at your bill, for
instance, your residential bill, you are not paying a state sales tax. You will pay the local
option sales tax, but you don't pay any of the state sales tax at this point, which his 6%.
We still have that issue about the, um, school SILO now that it's a state tax, but...but
that's I think important piece of information when you're thinking about how this affects
different people.
Bailey/ Okay, thank you.
Champion/ Are we going to stick to 1 %? Uh, that would be a really small amount. You know, if
we use (mumbled) utility bill.
Wright/ I think that would be ideal, but I'd like to know what our...what our management fees or
managements costs are...before we start talking about the...the actual percentage.
Bailey/ Any other questions from you all about information? Will this get us to a next decision;
we'll begin to get a sense of the percentage and what the revenue looks like and what we
can do. Okay. So...
Hayek/ We've got to...we've got to bring personnel costs under control, and that's what...that's
what's killing our budgets, um, and I know that our hands are tied behind our backs in
some respects, but they are not in others and uh, we've had these discussions, but
we...we've got to do that, and...and the next budget cycle will be our opportunity to do
so.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 28
Bailey/ Okay. We're going to take aten-minute break. (BREAK) Well, let's get the next item
and go to info packet discussion until Ross gets in here. Are there items in the...either
info packet or...there he is. June 18th through the 25th.
Information Packet Discussion (June 18 & 25) /Council Time:
Correia/ Um, I don't know if this is related or not.. .
Bailey/ First and foremost.
Correia/ (laughter and several talking) Um...
Bailey/ Which packet?
Correia/ Uh, the 18th.
Bailey/ Okay.
Correia/ Related to the, uh, drawing to select buyers for the new home program. That must have
been exciting to be there.
O'Donnell/ It was very...
Bailey/ Thank you for doing that, Mike.
Correial Can we...I'm wondering, we were selling homes on Longfellow, um, as part of the
affordable dream home program. I haven't heard lately the status, have we sold them? If
we could get an update on that, at some point?
Helling/ Okay. We'll...
Correia/ Okay.
Bailey/ All right, other info packet items? (several talking) Anything? Going once...all right.
We're going to pop back up...
Wright/ I was just moving in my chair.
City Manager Search:
Bailey/ It's time to...okay, so, nothing there. Let's go back to City Manager search. All right,
um...we have a couple of options. Obviously, I think it's pretty obvious we've could
engage in a search right away. We can wait for a new Council, but I'm sure there are
other variations in between. I asked that this be put on because we're getting a lot of
questions, and we agreed that after we addressed the budget items this summer we would
talk about this, what we wanted to do next with this. So, thoughts regarding what next?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 29
Should we begin a search immediately? Should we wait and what would be the
benchmarks for waiting? (several talking) Yes?
Wright/ I've actually been thinking about this, off and on, and uh...spoke with you about this
Sunday very briefly, and thought about it a little bit more after that, and I'm coming
around to the opinion that I guess I really would prefer that we wait on starting a search
until after there's a new Council in place, and I think that's kind of a 180 forme from a
week ago, but I did remember the feeling that I had, and I think Matt may remember
some of this too, of uh, coming on to the Council with the search already going, that you
needed to understand and buy into, but you did not necessarily have any input.
Bailey/ LTh-huh.
Wright/ Into, uh, and...it was a combination of being kind of difficult to come up to speed and it
was also kind of awkward.
Bailey/ That's a really important perspective.
Champion/ I think it's logical that you wait for the new Council. LTh, I think the only problem
with that is that Dale's really doing two jobs now, um...he's got a lot on his plate, unless
he wants to be a city manager, then can hire an assistant city manager and reduce the
burden, um...
Bailey/ That's the only option you're going to give him for reducing the burden...okay.
(laughter)
Helling/ Well, just to respond to that, I have been waiting for, you know, this discussion to...to,
so I know what, kind of have an idea what to do, but I do have some ideas as far as staff
and...and bringing together and...and uh, ways to...we'll all be sharing, you know, we'll
still be a person short, and then it's...it'll be, uh, heavier work load for everybody, but I
think, you know, given your preference, if that's your preference to wait, I think we can
get through that. We...the last time we went through a budget cycle was uh when I was
the interim a couple years ago and you know that seemed to work out so it's...I think it's
doable.
Bailey/ Matt, you were going to say something?
Hayek/ Well, this kind of follows up on what Mike said. I see us as having three options - do a
search now with the current Council and complete it; wait until a new Council forms in
January and start at that point; or start it now and end it in 2010, and I think that last
option is one we should not follow. It's essentially...that essentially is what we did last
time around and I think one of the flaws in the search process we followed in 2007 and
2008 was that one Council created the set of job criteria and another Council applied it to
a pool of candidates, and um, I think there were problems with that. I don't think they
were anticipated, but...but in my estimation that...that's uh, one of the things that did not
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 30
go well. So I would prefer to see us either do it all now or do it all, uh, after the first of
the year.
Bailey/ Do you lean one way or the other, do it all now, do it all later?
Hayek/ Yeah, on the one hand I feel like, uh, this group...should...should do the heavier lifting.
On the other hand, we have potentially three out of seven, um, seats changing hands.
That's almost half, and uh, I'm...uh, I think I'm leaning toward having the new Council
take this up after the first of the year.
O'Donnell/ And we don't have to discuss this much farther. I think we're all on the...total
agreement with you! (laughter)
Bailey/ Ross? Did you want to weigh in?
Wilburn/ Um...actually my, I certainly understand the perspective you share and there's some
pieces where, um, I could, uh, justify either way. There's pluses and minuses to
proceeding now or proceeding later. I agree that, uh, it's either done now and completed,
or start by the next Council, being completed. I think the benefit to, an additional benefit
to doing it now, is that uh, you know, this group has been through that experience before
and has the sense of what the others would be looking for, so there's the experience of
that group working together. The new Council won't have the experience of working
together, but they will have the opportunity of working together, and that's why either
now or later would be, uh, one of the two options that I put forth. Um, you know, some
other reasons, potential reasons to...to wait and allow the next Council to do it, um,
would just be related to, uh, I guess just some, I mean, there's always something going on
with the City and uh, there's lots on everybody's plates, uh, but uh, just some
decompression time (mumbled) um, you know, another intense set of activities, um,
related to a search and putting this together, um, so...but I...you know, if a majority want
to allow the next Council to pursue it, I...you know, I don't have any, um, objections or
strong objections to...just I personally would rather begin it sooner rather than
(mumbled)
Hayek/ You make some good points, and...and you know, one of the risks of waiting until next
year is that three of the seven will have just started City Council tenure and that...that
poses some challenge. You don't...you don't know to look for the same things after, in
my case having served, you know, not even a year and a half. I know much more now
than I did in January, February of 08, um, but my...I think that is outweighed by the lack
of appetite within the institution, within the community, to go through this so soon. Uh,
I...things are operating very smoothly right now. As I said before, the trains are running
on time and uh, there's a sense of relief, that things are progressing, and I think that
outweighs the...the other stuff.
Wilburn/ Again, I think you can make arguments, justifications, both ways. The only other
piece, uh, and Connie mentioned, that uh, you know, uh, on a short-term basis, um, the
uh, the other duties can be...everybody's carrying an extra load, but uh, duties are divided
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 31
up and people carry an extra load and that's...that's alonger term drain on the
organization, so I guess, you know, again, if a majority wants to wait, I'm not going to
fight against it: I've stated my personal preference to be to start and get it done.
Bailey/ I think we're in a fortunate position with Dale and also a very seasoned and capable staff,
despite the additional burdens of the...of the flood and that continuing, but I feel like we
are, and thank you that we are in a fortunate position. And I think...I thought that this
was a group that could go t through it because we've been through it and we're a good
team and we know kind of what we're looking for. It would be an easy dance to do, but I
do think waiting is probably the better, and that's what I would lean towards, and I would
also suggest, let's get through the budget with the new Council. That's an exercise in
working together and learning about each other, and um...(several talking) take it on in
March when we put the budget to rest, and the budget can be our first sort of activity
together. I think that that would be (several talking) first bonding experience. And given
some of the challenges, that will be a good...a good sort of opportunity. So I hear people
saying that we're willing to wait. Also want to thank you.
Helling/ That's fine. Um, yeah, you typically (mumbled) budget work by the end of January
(mumbled) February so seems to me that we can, you know (both talking) take a break,
and then, yeah, start, but we could have some of the things in place. I don't know how
much we'd have to go through, but we could maybe even get an RFP out so that you'd
have people to talk to maybe starting in late February or something.
Wilburn/ Yeah, and also, I mean, making the decision and getting it out now, as to the
approximate time we're going to start, uh, if it's going to be...then that helps get the word
out for potential candidates that, you know, Iowa City is going to be looking for a City
Manager next year and so it gives them a chance to...get themselves or consider job-wise
and family-wise if they have family, to make a good consideration on whether or not they
can apply.
Bailey/ Okay. So we're in agreement.
Wright/ ...to decouple the timing of the manager search from the timing of our budget
discussions.
Bailey/ Yeah, and I think we can do that. I think that's probably smart, uh, time management for
the new Council. Okay? All right. Good. Thanks. Okay. Um, Council time.
Anything?
Council Time:
Wright/ Yeah, I've got, uh, oh probably about a month ago I brought up the issue of the FBI's
infiltration of the peace group that was meeting openly here at the Iowa City Public
Library, um...the last thing I ever expected to come of that was to be talking to an FBI
agent, or FBI supervisor, on the telephone, uh, about a week or so after that. Sam
indicated that he was waiting for that to happen. I knew nothing. I didn't expect that was
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 32
going to be the case. But I did have a conversation with the supervisor from the Cedar
Rapids' office of the FBI. Um...I certainly didn't learn very much that I didn't learn from
reading the article in the Des Moines Register. Uh, we have received a request from the
Johnson County Democrats for, uh, a resolution in regards to a opposition of the FBI's
efforts. I don't know that I want to do a resolution. I would like to see the Council
consider a letter, uh, to the FBI indicating that, you know, this was a legally operating
peaceful group, um, meeting openly and above-board at the public library, and that type
of federal infiltration can have nothing but a chilling effect on freedom of speech. There
was no direct violation of freedom of speech that I can discern, but you know, we haven't
seen any Freedom of Information files or anything else. Um...but that...that type of
infiltration is...can be nothing short of intimidating to a lot of people.
Champion/ I guess (mumbled) budget for the year and they wanted to spend it. (laughter) I
mean, I wouldn't put it past them. (several talking)
Bailey/ Are there others who would be interested in writing, we talked about a resolution. Mike
brought this up, and now he's proposed a letter. I think that that's a good solution.
Wilburn/ Um, someone had put, um, someone had mentioned at that meeting that someone had a
Freedom of Information Act request. Do we know who (several talking) and have they
received their results?
Wright/ I don't believe they've been received yet. Now, one of the individuals was, um, from the
peace group, he contacted me individually and has a Freedom of Information, uh, request
and said he would be in contact as soon as he heard something, and I don't believe...I
know I haven't heard from him, so I'm assuming he hasn't heard anything on it yet.
Wilburn/ I could be supportive of a letter, but...
Bailey/ You want to wait for the...
Wilburn/ ...before, uh, this is a personal preference, before I start commenting and critiquing,
um, and you have knowledge of a group that I don't know, you know, so knowing
what...if there is information available, the Freedom of Information Act, it seems to me
that that would...assist with directing of a...a letter so that we knew what exactly what it
was we were objecting to and...and what, um, may have been the perceived threat or
(mumbled) so...
Wright/ I believe the Register did, uh (mumbled) I have no idea if that's been answered or not.
Hayek/ I...I don't support this. L ..I think at this point we hare largely uninformed about what
went on. Um, there are a few newspaper articles, and...and some blogs and that's about
it, and for me to take a position on whether this body should take a position, uh, without,
uh, either an internal investigation that we conduct or an external one that we pay for,
um, is uh, I don't think an appropriate move for us to take, and I...and I, uh, I don't want
us to spend the time and the resources on this, given the more pressing challenges facing
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 33
the City. But the biggest thing for me is I'm not going to take a position on something
that...that we just don't know much about, and wouldn't, unless we undertook either an
internal or an external review, and that...by someone who reported to us.
Wilburn/ Before other Councilors, in terms of resolutions and letters, um, for things external to,
uh...
Dilkes/ You know, I'm sorry, I'm going to interrupt.
Wilburn/ (mumbled)
Dilkes/ I gotta because we've talked about this once at Council time. It is not been.. .
Bailey/ It's on our pending list though, I mean, can we talk about it in relation to.. .
Dilkes/ well, you can talk about scheduling it, but...
Bailey/ Okay.
Dilkes/ But I don't think we should have an extended discussion about it when it's not been put
on our work session.
Bailey/ All right.
Dilkes/ Um, I can tell you that when...when Gary Sanders asked me if I would mind him asking
the Council forme to review 800 pages of material. So we're talking about a lot of
material.
Bailey/ I don't think we'll get to that place, but we'll talk about it on Monday. I don't think we'll
get to that place. Okay? Can we...
Hayek/ Monday when?
Bailey/ During our work session.
Karr/ Work session on the 6th.
Bailey/ 6th, yeah. Okay?
Dilkes/ I mean, unless we're taking the position that everything on our pending list is on our
work session list, which I don't think we've taken in the past.
Bailey/ Okay, that's fine. I just (several talking)
Wright/ That's a legitimate point, Eleanor, and I...I probably, I stepped out of school on that one,
so excuse me.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 34
Wilburn/ So that's on a pending list or that's on a work session list?
Bailey/ It's a pending work session item. We've just scheduled it for July 6th.
Wilburn/ Oh, okay.
Bailey/ Okay? All right. Any other Council time?
Correia/ Um, I was at Napoleon Park a couple weeks ago...the softball park at a softball
tournament, and we've talked multiple times about getting a concerted recycling going on
in the...in the youth sports parks, and I think there are maybe one...I was only in one
little area of five fields. And there's one recycling container, up near the concession
stand, but most of the discarding of items takes place at the field, and there's a garbage
can at every field, and I would really like to see some way to get plastic recycling
containers at every single garbage site.
Wilburn/ It's not consistent there, depending on whether it's a local group or not, uh, at some of
the local...there is the permanent one out there, but some of the local ones they put out
some temporary garbage cans with the label, but then some of the Cedar Rapids'
tournaments they held here, there's nothing other than the permanent ones, so it's not
consistent (mumbled)
Bailey/ Okay, are there others wishing to, I mean, I don't think we have to talk about, I mean,
Dale, if you can just (several talking)
Champion/ ...try to train them for the future.
Correia/ Well not only...training youth for the future, it's that most of the consumption are
plastic bottle drinks, so I mean, I was sitting right next to a garbage can that was filled to
the top with plastic bottles.
Bailey/ Okay.
Correia/ And when we talk about being a "green" city I think if we could get a plastic recycle
that would be good.
Budget Priorities:
Bailey/ Other Council time? Okay. Um, under budget priorities I would like to bring up the
memo that I included in the Info Packet. I guess I could have brought it up under Info
Packet discussions. Just some ideas for reducing the Council's budget. I know that these
are nominal, um reductions, but um, I just presented those for discussion and wondered if
there were thoughts.
Hayek/ Um, I don't have a problem with that, but I thought we already discussed that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 35
Bailey/ We didn't.
Wright/ I think we very briefly discussed (several talking) some point, but we didn't make any
decisions about it. But I'm fine with it.
Champion/ Me too.
Bailey/ And I didn't make any assumption, I mean, I don't know how Council Members use the
IT or the computers. I know how I do, so I...I want to just put it out there, if this would
really hamper somebody in their ability to read the packet or get information that they
need. I certainly wouldn't be supportive, but I see a lot of hard-copy packets so I figured
that a lot of our IT dollars weren't being used.
Wilburn/ I...I considered I primarily used it, um, over the weekends and when I'm gone, when
I'm out (mumbled) folks to have that available, and I also would not like to see, uh, some
Council Members have a personal computer and/or segregate, you know, files and
information in cases of Freedom of Information so they're not looking at personal stuff,
but uh, I would not like to see that option removed for a future Council Member who may
not have access to, um, the computer that's (mumbled) personal (mumbled)
Bailey/ Do you think that we need to keep eight personal computers available, or could
we...could we reduce the budget items, or you want to continue as we've been doing?
Wilburn/ I would think if...if there are...if someone comes on Council who would like to use
that as a, have that available for resource, but they...that they should have, so...um...
Bailey/ I mean, because right now we're paying for eight, and...
Wilburn/ (mumbled)
Bailey/ Yeah, I mean, that's the challenge. We're paying for eight, regardless of their use. And,
we aren't, I mean, we're using (mumbled) I don't know what others are doing. I mean,
not that there's anything (mumbled)
Hayek/ With...
Bailey/ Computers, laptops. With the Council laptops.
Hayek/ I use mine. Regularly.
Bailey/ All right. So is, I mean, perhaps there's no opportunity to cut this, um, IT charges. I, I
mean.. .
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 36
Wright/ I bought a new personal laptop that I think is a lot more lighter... a lot more lighter, that's
good English! (laughter) It's a lot lighter, and it's a little bit more mobile, and so I
haven't used the City one. In fact I keep forgetting to turn it back in.
Champion/ I don't have any (mumbled)
Bailey/ I don't necessarily know...how to approach this, but...
Karr/ Let me just ask something. If I'm understanding this correctly, is there interest on the part
of Council, if not to eliminate all, if you will, eight laptops, primary (mumbled) is there
an interest then to go back and possibly look at the stipend angle for those who want it,
and that would not be through our IT department. It would reduce the overall count of
eight, but allow individual Council Members to customize and be independent. Is that
what you'd like to take a look at?
Wright/ That'd be fine.
Champion/ (several talking)
Karr/ Right now you don't have a stipend. Right now what you have is the ability to, uh, be
reimbursed for Internet charges. Okay. What we talked about some time ago is
removing all IT and you would get a stipend to go purchase your own individual ones.
You would not have the same equipment. You would customize your individual needs.
Correia/ which is something you brought up.
Karr/ Right, but that would be, and I just want to clarify, that would be, uh, a taxable
compensation benefit. The stipend.
Dilkes/ So in other words you need, if you're thinking about freezing compensation, you need to
know that that takes the stipend off the table.
Bailey/ Right.
Dilkes/ Okay. Because a stipend is compensation. If...so if for instance you said we want to
reduce our IT budget by, I'm just saying...let's just say 50, or let's say reduce the whole
IT budget. And then we give each Council Member a stipend of X, that perhaps is in
total less than the whole IT budget. So those are the different options, but if...if you
decide to freeze compensation, you're taking the stipend off the table.
Bailey/ Okay, so let's start with, uh concept of how we want to approach IT. Do we want
stipends? Do we want to leave it as is, which I'm perfectly open to, I just wanted to put
this on the table, because we hadn't really looked at our budget. So...
Hayek/ I tell you what. It's...it's, uh, for all the work we do, I'm glad not to have to spend an
extra hour, uh, messing with getting a computer set up, and um, I just want a computer
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 37
with Internet access, a City computer to do that work. I have it. If there's another way to
get at that, I suppose that's fine but.. .
Bailey/ It probably wouldn't be through a stipend, because that would be your computer and IT
here wouldn't work on it, so the IT budget is important from your perspective. Okay, so
um, other thoughts? Cause I don't want to (both talking)
Correia/ ...compensation or just no raise? (several talking) I don't know. I could...and you
could continue...
Dilkes/ Amy, right now there's an automatic cost of living adjustment in the ordinance.
Champion/ Isn't the cost of living a minus 1 % this year? (laughter)
Bailey/ We're giving money back!
Dilkes/ Um, so, you're right. Normally it used to be that Council compensation was set each,
every...you'd set it for the next Council, every budget cycle, and so, but then the Council
put that automatic cost of living adjustment in it, and so it...it's not necessary to act to
give an increase.
Bailey/ Right.
Dilkes/ So...
Karr/ To stop that automatic increase, you would need to (mumbled)
Wright/ I'm fine with doing away with the increase. That's actually a good idea.
Bailey/ Okay. I mean, it's virtually no savings, but I figure if we're looking at everybody's
salaries, we should look at our own. Our stipends. Whatever they are. Yeah, okay.
Okay, um, IT? Leave as is? It just, I mean, leave as is? People are using it. (several
talking) Okay. All right.
Wilburn/ Looking at keeping some options for future, potential future (mumbled)
Bailey/ Okay. Looking at keeping options open for future Council Members. So we're going to
leave as is eight laptops, eight printers, IT support for maintenance, and replacement
charges.
Champion/ Why do we have eight of them when there's only seven of us?
Bailey/ We have a loaner.
Karr/ We have a loaner.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.
June 29, 2009 City Council Page 38
Bailey/ Okay. All right. Thanks. All right. Schedule, okay, schedule of pending, we scheduled
one next...
Karr/ Is the compensation then, I'm sorry, what did you decide...
Bailey/ We'll need a resolution to freeze the compensation. Yeah. Schedule of pending
discussion items? Anything else? We don't really need to add to the list. Um, any
upcoming community events? Any Council invitations? I know Shelter House
groundbreaking is...Wednesday.
Champion/ Wednesday, 4:30, program starts at 4:45.
Correia/ 4:45?
Champion/ Yeah.
Bailey/ Anything else? Okay. Any...
Champion/ There's going to be ice cream.
Meeting Schedules
Bailey/ Excellent! Dinner! Any need to discuss meeting schedules, Marian or Dale or.. .
Karr/ ...with October, November, or October, November and December (mumbled)
Bailey/ You'll come back with those next week. All right.
Karr/ Not next week. I think we're going to wait two weeks because of the 4th of July. And if
there's, there are a number of scheduling conflicts so, if you're looking at October,
November, December and want to drop me an email or give me a phone call before we
do a proposed schedule.
Bailey/ And if you're not, please do look at October, November, December, right? Okay. All
right, see...
Helling/ For your meeting next Monday.. .
Bailey/ Yes.
Helling/ Typically we start at 5:30. We'll take a look at what's on there and then maybe be able
to bump that back to like 6:00.
Bailey/ Okay, so just note that we have 5:30 scheduled, but it could be 6:00.
Helling/ Take a look when the new agenda comes out and that gives you (mumbled)
Bailey/ Okay, thanks. See you tomorrow.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of June 29, 2009.