HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-07-27 TranscriptionJuly 27, 2009 City Council Page 1
July 27, 2009 City Council Special Work Session 6:30 P.M.
Council Present: Bailey, Champion, Correia, Hayek, O'Donnell (left at 8:50 PM), Wilburn,
Wright
Staff: Helling, Karr, Purdy, Ackerson, Wyss, Dilkes, Moran, Fosse, C. Smith,
Craig, Dulek, Davidson, Rummel, Ongie
Others Present: Shipley - UISG Representatives (left at 7:20 PM)
Iowa City UNESCO City of Literature:
ITEM 14. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPOINTING THE MAYOR, CITY
MANAGER, AND LIBRARY DIRECTOR OR THEIR DESIGNEES AS
IOWA CITY'S REPRESENTATIVES TO THE IOWA CITY UNESCO
CITY OF LITERATURE NON-PROFIT BOARD.
Bailey/ Okay, let's get started. We have quite a long agenda tonight, um, so the first item on our
work session agenda is the Iowa City UNESCO City of Literature. Um, this references
agenda item no. 14. Dale, did you want to just, uh...
Helling/ Right. Uh, you received a (mumbled)
Bailey/ And...and Susan is here, the Vice President of the Board.
Champion/ She was here. Did she leave?
Bailey/ She's (both talking)
Helling/ And we wrote you a memo! Um, there's really two...two issues. One is the agenda
item which is the appointments to the City's representatives on the Board of Directors,
and then the...the last part of the memo addressed the, uh, seed money funding for the,
uh, Director, uh, position of Director for a period of three years. And uh, so I thought
we'd just kind of take them in that order. Susan's here and she'll talk a little bit about, uh,
what the executive committee has been doing and...and how we got to where we are.
Uh, just might point out we also included, uh, copies of the Articles of Incorporation and
the By-Laws, and if...the first page of the Articles of Incorporation, Section 2, if you
look through that section, that's probably in these documents, that's probably the best just
sort of thumbnail description of...of what the organization is about, and some of the
things we're looking forward to, uh, some targets as we start to move ahead. So...
Craig/ Well, as you know, last fall the, uh, Iowa City was designated the first UNESCO City of
Literature in the United States. It's a very great honor. The application was prepared
under the direction of Christopher Merrill from the International Writing Program at the
University of Iowa, um, but it included, uh, lots of information about the Iowa City
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 2
community, about the area, uh, the Library wrote a letter of support, um...this really is an
opportunity, I think, for the City of Iowa City and immediately groups started talking
about it, um, people started saying how can we be part of the UNESCO City of Literature
effort, um, I mentioned in the memo that, um, Summer of the Arts applied for an NEH
Degree Grant and got funding for that and they will be doing that this February, so get
out your Fahrenheit 451 and read it, um, and be ready to talk about it next February. Uh,
so there's a lot of things going on in the background, and at the same time, organizational
efforts were beginning and, um, groups of people that had been involved in the original
application were meeting, uh, conversations were held about how best to organize the
organization of this effort and it was decided that the best way would be to, uh, start a
non-profit, a 501(c)(3), because we do anticipate that a majority of the funding down the
road will come from gifts, and you need to have something that people can get a tax
deduction for writing you a gift to...an organization itself that will be able to apply for
grants, um, that will be able to receive gifts. Um, the...first organizational meeting, um,
we did approve a slate of officers. Christopher Merrill as the President, myself as the
Vice President, um, Josh Schamberger from the Convention and Visitors Bureau as
Secretary, and Rod Sullivan from the Board of Supervisors as Treasurer. So you see this
really is an effort that combines, um, all of the governmental and some non-governmental
entities in our region, um, but the...Iowa City and the University of Iowa do have an
opportunity to place three people, um, on the Board of Directors, and that is in
recognition of the importance that those two entities, um, play in the UNESCO City of
Literature effort. So...any questions?
Bailey/ Any questions about this resolution appointing...and it could be a City Council Member.
It doesn't have to be the Mayor. So...
Craig/ Well, it says 'or designee' so...
Bailey/ Or designee, so if somebody else is...
Craig/ If a mayor didn't want to do it...then another (both talking)
Champion/ Did you talk about, uh, when you were seeing these organization groups about
getting people from outside the area involved also? Like Cedar Rapids, um...
Craig/ There have been, you know, this...an announcement of this was made at one of our
Corridor Creative Economy meetings, and we certainly will reach out beyond this...there
are a lot of, um, seats, potential seats, on the Board of Directors that are not filled...yet.
And so we...there's opportunities there to involve, um, people outside of Johnson
County.
Bailey/ Any questions about this resolution then?
Correia/ Yeah, I think this is great; it's very exciting, um, to move forward on this. I have...I just
have a question, in the memo or maybe the resolution it talks about the $50,000 and I was
just wondering if (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 3
Bailey/ Right, I want to do that next. I want to just talk about the...the appointments, on the
agenda item. Any... any concerns about item 14 or questions for Susan about that?
Champion/ No (several responding)
Bailey/Okay. Let's move on and consider the $50,000 because as Dale said, that that's the
second part of the memo.
Correia/ Okay.
Bailey/ Go ahead.
Correia/ So I guess, um, I mean, I think you know we've been through the budget process, and
you know we've had to spend a lot of time reducing things and we certainly reduced the
Aid to Agencies this year during the regular process, um, and I know, and the Housing
Trust Fund started it...also is trying to get funding from...from, uh, governmental
agencies and it was quite a bit of work to try and get that, and so I just want to make sure
there's sort of an issue related to fairness, budget...budget, um, capacity, I suppose, uh,
and then also sort of the fit, um, you know - is it, are we thinking of this as economic
development? Do we craft it out of economic development? Is it cultural activities? Do
we craft it out of cultural activities? I mean, I think that, um, you know, is it Library? I
mean, I...I guess I'm not prepared to say $50,000 from the City at this moment, because
we haven't had a...planned process before (mumbled) it.
Helling/ That, this...from the standpoint of the organization, um, they're wanting to move ahead,
obviously, and they feel that the commitments, particularly from the two lead, uh,
agencies or organizations, which is the University and the City of Iowa City, are
necessary in order to go out and start to recruit for a Director, and they're looking for a
three-year commitment. Um, of course that's, you know, that's up to Council if you want
to, you know, pursue that, look at that or not, um, if as I indicated in the memo, if you do,
uh, agree to that, financing would come the first year from the...from the General Fund
balance because we don't have it budgeted for FY10, and then we would work it into the
budget for the next two years. Um, you know, how that relates to economic
development, um, obviously there's atie-in there, uh, again, we don't have the budget put
together yet obviously, uh, so we'd be looking at that later in the fall probably, in terms of
what...you know, what they, as we start to put that together so you can see what that does
to the overall budget, it certainly would have an impact on it. Um.. .
Correial I mean, when we went through out budget priority setting process.
Helling/ Uh-huh.
Correia/ Of a month ago or whenever that was, a few months ago, um, and we cut some things at
the Library that are events related to literature and culture and so it seems a little bit, I
don't know (mumbled) inconsistent or sort of not part of a regular process...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 4
Bailey/ ...isn't part of a regular process, but I think...and Susan and I have had quite a few
discussions about this, so...quite a few rigorous discussions about this, and it's a unique
opportunity. I mean, we were one of three Cities of Literature in the world, and I think
that there is an expectation, certainly by the University which has stepped up to put
$50,000 on the table. I think there is an expectation because this is Iowa City designated
the City of Literature that we help seed this, with the expectation, and I...you were on the
search committee, that the Executive Director will begin, um, looking for grants and
donors as soon as they hit the ground.
Craig/ Absolutely! I think that, you know, the timing for this could certainly have been better to
come and ask the City for money at a time when, you know, we're facing the kinds of
budget tightening that we haven't faced for some time. It's unfortunate about that, but it
is an opportunity, and there is a time factor associated with it. You know, I'm very
disappointed that we've had to cut some programming at the Library, but I hope when
things turn around I can come back to you and say, you know, we want to do Friday
Night Films again because we feel that that's something that we can bring back when
times are good. This is something I think you have to seize the moment because the
moment is now. And...you know, it's unfortunate, but that's what it is.
Champion/ It's definitely a seize the moment. I don't have any problems finding somewhere to
get that $50,000.
Helling/ And, you know, it's...in terms of the budget, you know, we can build it into budget. It
will have an impact, obviously. As Amy says, you know, we've been through, uh, some
cost cutting and we'll be continuing to do that, um, and it...the most direct impact will be
on the, uh, on the fund balance, but again,. it is...it's not an operational issue. It's a one-
time, or in this case athree-year, one-time commitment, uh, that's what you'd be doing at
this point.
Correia/ Where are we with our ICAD commitments for...we had increased them for, there was
a period of years that they.. .
Helling/ I believe we're in the fourth year of.. .
Correia/ The five-year.
Helling/ Five, right, where we went, I think, from $60,000 to $100,000.
Correia/ And where's the economic development, I guess I don't...concerned about taking it out
of the General Fund balance. I guess I'd rather see if there are funds that (both talking)
Bailey/ $50,000 to the Englert (both talking)
Correia/ Right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 5
Bailey/ I mean, I do see this as economic development, um, and I think that if we look, and I
don't think we'll see this impact directly, and perhaps you've talked about it with Josh, is I
think if we program carefully and market carefully that we will see an increase in our
hotel/motel taxes, especially with the improvement of the Sheraton and their ability to
raise rates, and eventually I think we can look at that source of revenue to support
something like this. Because I think it's directly linked to bringing people in, especially
as we expand that book fair and some other...other initiatives, and if we can program
carefully when, um, when there isn't such high capacity at the hotels, I think that that
would be a boon to downtown Iowa City and to the hotels, and help us with that
hotel/motel tax revenue.
Correia/ So we have a contract (mumbled) organization, like expectation, performance measures,
will it be reimbursed...
Bailey/ We haven't talked about performance measures, no. (several talking)
Helling/ I'm sorry?
Correia/ Will it be a block grant or a reimbursed, I mean, it could take a while, for example, to
hire an Executive Director. Would it be...
Bailey/ What's your time frame?
Craig/ Well...you know, in the best of all worlds, we would like to, uh, have somebody here by
late September, but um, that's probably a little optimistic, but by the fall. Fall goes until
December, right? Um, so by the fall. And I would hope earlier in the fall, I mean, a job
description is being drafted and we've had one conversation about places to advertise and
so, I mean, it's not like we haven't started. We...we have started that process.
Bailey/ And I think we could do performance measures, I mean, it's a little premature with a new
organization at this juncture, but I think performance measures would certainly be
appropriate once some, um, objectives and strategic planning occurs.
Correia/ And even in the interim, I mean, our Aid to Agencies, we have contracts for block
grants, very small amounts, that are...accountability is required (mumbled) reports of
activities, and I think that's...that this is a significant amount of...
Bailey/ Are there others who are interested in moving ahead on this $50,000 and what, uh, what
are you interested in seeing? (mumbled)
Champion/ I'm definitely interested in going forward with this. (mumbled) not going to pass up.
Hayek/ I'm interested, but...but I think, I mean, I echo Amy's concerns. I also think you have to
go beyond that and look at the context in which these arrangements were made months
ago. I mean, we're in a slightly awkward position here because some commitments were
made before, uh, this came to us and outside of the budget process that caused other
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 6
partner entities to be willing to step up, and if we don't...it could have an impact on our
relations with...with area entities. You know, governments and universities and so
there's a bit of that, um...
Correia/ There should be things in place that prevent that from happening in the future.
Hayek/ Yeah.
Correia/ I think that that's the best place to...be involved.
Wright/ Um, I'm very much interested in going ahead with this. I think the $50,000 (mumbled)
page (mumbled) what that means is we're going to have to make some choices.
Something isn't going to get $50,000 (mumbled) $50,000 to the City of Literature.
Bailey/ And I think of this as more event funding, not Aid to Agencies. I don't make that
analogy (both talking)
Correia/ (mumbled)
Bailey/ But I think once we look at the budget we'll be looking about where it comes from. I
mean, this is outside of that, yeah.
Wright/ I realize at this point we don't know where that $50,000 might draw in from. I mean...I
know next year, but in terms of where and what particular line, but...I think this is
important. This is a big deal, and I think we need to shift our priorities in order to make it
happen.
Bailey/ Ross, I mean...
Hayek/ Is the, sorry, is the understanding that it's three years and nothing, or are we, would you
anticipate that as the host city of an organization like this, this would be an ongoing
(noise on mic)
Craig/ I don't...I wouldn't say that it's anticipated that it's absolutely ongoing. I mean, the City
can...I would hope that after three years they're strong enough with grants and private
money, and other forms of income, that the City can certainly pull back from the
$50,000, and maybe do more in-kind and a lower amount of money. You know, I
wouldn't say that five years from now they're not going to be here asking for something,
but I...I would definitely hope, and it would be my work on the Board, to make sure it's
not to the tune of $50,000.
Bailey/ Well, and we've already sort of laid the ground work with the State Department in talking
to our Senators when we were in D.C. in February, because you know, clearly iJNESCO,
I mean, we just reactivated our participation with UNESCO and...and that makes a lot of
sense. Um, Iowa Humanities, um, is...is willing to step forward with some programming
dollars. We also think that that's a potential source. (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 7
Craig/ Jim Leach, we hope is someone that can be approached and, um, help out this
organization.
Bailey/ So I think we have communicated that we don't want an ongoing, um, I mean that we
will have an ongoing involvement, but funding we're going to have to have a really
diversified revenue stream.
Champion/ Well, I think any organization like this also, to get going, needs...
Bailey/ Seed money.
Champion/ ...seed money. I mean, you can't just pull it out of the air. And...it's a lot of money,
but it will get going and I think in the end (mumbled) payout a lot of dividends. And I
just totally support it.
Bailey/ Ross, you have a comment, 'cause you were so actively involved with this application,
so...
Wilburn/ Right. I...I just think it's a...it's an opportunity on a world-wide basis to, um, draw
people to this area, further distinction for the City, um, I mean, we will, uh, if things...if
things go right in the direction that, uh, you know, tourism, and you already pointed out
the fact that, uh, hotel/motel, restaurants, but also, um, other ways the people will, um,
either, um, circulate dollars around the community, but used to come here and...and
come and live and work here, and grow that, uh, there's a great capacity here for... for
building something that is an opportunity that maybe a, you have sometimes you have
one time to move on something. If we're the first, uh, in the United States it won't matter
if we were the first if the second comes along and, you know, out-maneuvers us in terms
of positioning themselves with, uh, the ability just to draw people to their area and
highlight, so L..I just think, uh, in terms of expectations, I mean, we've got three, uh,
people that will be on the Board and would, uh..um, I guess, as to...to uh, get a report in
our Info Packet, um, you know, in terms of the activities and aheads-up on...on, uh, on
activities (mumbled) we can build in those, uh, performance measures once we...it's truly
at a creative state here in terms of the directions and...and how to build it, um, and then
once it's...you know, I think, uh, even though there may not be certain goals in terms of
(mumbled) you don't know in what ways, uh, this will be a benefit to the community, uh,
(mumbled) reports back on those, would be an expectation.
Hayek/ I think we...I mean, we have no choice but to take it out of fund balance for this fiscal
year, but Amy raises a good point about deciding what pot to pull this from in years two
and three, whether this is economic development or events planning or...
Bailey/ Let's look at hotel/motel tax too. I mean...
Hayek/ Or hotel/ motel.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 8
Bailey/ Yeah, I mean (both talking)
Hayek/ ...is excited about this (mumbled) people in our hotels, um, so...
Wilburn/ Those would be the two sources that (mumbled) as we move on, in years two and three.
Correia/ I mean, I just...I think it's wonderful and I want the City to be able to participate at the
level that is reasonable, um, and you know, helps the organization because (mumbled) I
love literature, so I mean this is not about...about that, um, I...I would like to see that this
$50,000 comes with some type of accountability, that there are quarterly reports, I mean,
it's not...it's just sort of an equity thing. We have much smaller amounts going out to
agencies and they're required to jump through...
Bailey/ Well, I think we can...I think we can do that, and I think we should look at return on
investment, and I think we should figure out some ways to measure impact. I think that
that...I agree with you, I think that's very important.
Correia/ And that could be part of this first year, of the...of the commitment is for the new, to
hire a new executive director, and for that executive director to, you know, you could
initiate strategic planning to initiative fundraising, I mean, lots of things. It doesn't have
to be...
Bailey/ But Susan is Vice President. I don't think they're going to get away with not doing
strategic planning (laughter)
Correia/ Accountability back to the public, this is the, we put money here and this is what...what
we got.. .
Wilburn/ And I'm just saying, we can ask for those things. I think it's going to look a little
different in this first year. You're drawing a parallel with the agencies. They already
know who it is they're going to serve and what objectives. We don't necessarily have our
arms around, um, the, uh, the different arenas that this is going to...so I'm just saying
(both talking)
Correia/ Right, the first year would be different than what it might be down the road, because it
would be the building year, what would we want to get back, you know (mumbled)
Bailey/ So L ..I think we're all in agreement. I think that as we move forward we'll...we'll have
to make sure that we're getting information and... and looking at the revenue sources as
we can, and um, we should start exploring the hotel/motel tax option right now, I think, to
talk with Josh, um.. .
O'Donnell/ I don't think we'll have any trouble getting information from (mumbled)
Bailey/ I don't either.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 9
O'Donnell/ I...I (several talking) it's a great opportunity.
Craig/ Well, it is an exciting opportunity, and I really think it's an investment that will pay off for
the City, and it's great to see all these entities working together for something. I mean,
it's just...it's one of the first opportunities I've had personally to sit at the table with all
the different constituencies that are not libraries, and um, and get to do something
together with all of them, so (mumbled)
Bailey/ Thanks, Susan. You have what you need, Dale?
Helling/ We'll prepare the FY11 budget with...
Bailey/ Okay!
Champion/ Thanks, Dale.
Selecting Site of New Justice Center (IP3 of 7/23):
Bailey/ Thanks, Susan, for being here. Okay. Let's talk about the next item, which is selecting
the site of the new Justice Center, and Bob Elliott and Pat Harney are here. Um, we have
this on our agenda because there's some interest, um, expressed about...or potentially
weighing in on this site, and so um...we had the minutes of the meeting in the packet,
and so, think you guys can give us the sense of the timeline and perhaps the decision-
making points.
Elliott/ The last person to wear this must have been female. It was on the wrong side (laughter).
LJh, I'm Bob Elliott, and I have the kind of redundant title of being Coordinator of the
Justice Center Coordinating Committee, and you had asked that I come tonight, and that
Pat Harney, who is a Member of the Board of Supervisors and who Chairs the
Coordinating Committee. If I could take maybe five minutes and give you a bit of a
summary of where we are with the proposed Justice Center. This has been ongoing for a
number of years. That's because the County has outgrown both the Courthouse and the
Jail. We need expanded room in the Courthouse. We need a significantly expanded
in...for the Jail, and security measures at the Courthouse must be significantly increased.
In 2008, a firm provided us with a, uh, an estimate of a facilities and where they would be
located, they...uh, looked at a number of facilities around the County and determined the
best place for a combined Justice Center would be adjacent to or connected to the
Courthouse. Uh, we...we agree with that. The only problem with that is they were
estimating somewhere in the neighborhood of $60 to $80 million, which is about twice
the amount the County was and continues to be estimating that would be, uh, a realistic
and viable entity for..for the County. We, uh, have gone along with the, uh, with the
prospect of putting the combined facility in the area of the Courthouse. We think those
things need to remain in the downtown area with the Courthouse. However, a unique
opportunity has arisen within the past couple of months of the Press-Citizen structure and
property being available. The...there are possibilities of a significant savings in dollars if
the split site is at least considered. Savings from some areas have gone up as high as $10
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 10
to $13 million. What we think is more realistic is they might be more in the
neighborhood of $3 to $5 million. It might be that. The Board of Supervisors will get a
recommendation within the next week or so as to whether or not to explore the possibility
of savings with a split site situation. And, if they do, then it will go from there. Whether
it's split site or not, as soon as that is determined then a firm will be...there will be an
RFP. A firm will be hired to, uh, address the, um, final plans for a facility that would
include, uh, additional office spaces, additional storage spaces, significantly increased
security, expanded jail, and other elements of the combined Justice Center. It is
anticipated that if the Press-Citizen site is explored, and again, that is a unique
opportunity, because not only the property but because of the structure could be, uh,
remodeled and provide an immense amount of savings that it would be remodeled instead
of starting from scratch. That would...a exploration of that possibility would probably
take, um, four to six weeks. Whatever the decision is there, the Board of
Supervisors...then it would probably take six to eight months at least by the time you get
the RFPs for a, uh, a firm to decide on the, uh, final facility and moving forward with it.
And so, um, you asked for a kind of a summary and as briefly as humanly possible that's
it. LTh, I just will recount the need for this, is it is a not an idea whose time has come. It's
an idea whose time is way past coming. This county has outgrown the Courthouse. It
has outgrown the Jail, and uh, Pat has a lot more knowledge about some of the specifics
on those kinds of things, so he and I are here to answer any questions that you might
have.
Bailey/ Okay. Questions?
Wilburn/ I guess I just have a question in terms...I understand, um, well, that an opportunity
came up that wasn't foreseen in terms of, uh, the, uh...more detailed analysis and...and
design, that type of thing, uh, and you don't have as tight of figures on another site, but
either option appears that, uh, in some way, shape, or form there's going to be a request of
the Council whether it's rezoning something to public or, um, vacation of a street or, who
knows what other things may come up, um, I just don't know...have you, and I haven't
had a chance to check with Dale, have you, uh, had someone consulting with City staff or
Legal in terms of the options, just so that you have that information, um, as you're
making your decisions, because I...I noticed there were some points in the minutes where
there are questions about, uh, well, um, you know, in terms of law enforcement. Whether
Iowa City has certain facts and figures available, or, uh, even just a timing sequencing in
.terms of some type of rezoning or vacation. Have you been consulting with or do you
know which appropriate City staff to go to?
Harney/ Well, yeah, that's a difficult question to answer, uh, I have had contact with previous
City Managers and there was interest at that time to, uh, be perhaps a partner in vacating
the street or perhaps even including the Iowa City Police Department with it because it's
in the community. You run into some real issues there as to jurisdiction and how you
work through those issues. Uh, the overall thing that we're really looking at is trying to
get the court system, which the Bar Association is very supportive of...of keeping the
facility in the downtown Iowa City area for... for many obvious reasons. And I don't
think we would remove the court system at all from the downtown. We're looking at
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 11
about, uh, 43,000 square feet at the Press-Citizen building, and just slightly under 11
acres, which is probably that's really, uh, advantageous to a remodel or to actually do
retrofit that to the needs of the...of the County. Uh, you're right. There has to be some
rezoning in that and we have not approached the, uh, City officially. We've had some
contact with individuals about perhaps doing that. We have not actually, uh, asked for a
commitment because we weren't certain if that's the way we're going to go. Um,
the...once we get to the point where there's a possibility of...of, uh, looking more
seriously at the Press-Citizen facility, at that point we would come to the Council and try
to get a rezoning, uh, at least a feel for whether that could occur or not.
Wilburn/ Okay. And I'm sorry, Bob, you mentioned this, but can you remind me of, uh...um,
and political bodies can certainly change their mind in terms of when they want to make a
decision, but um, is there any general concept of sequence at...at what point do you...is
this next...meeting, um, well you've got the figures about the Press-Citizen site. Is it
likely that that's where, um, you know, it'll ....a decision will be made so that...I'm just
trying to get an idea in my mind where, at what point during our schedule, calendar, will
be a request to the City...of the Council for something.
Harney/ Yeah, and that's the difficult procedure, uh, it has to go before the Board of Supervisors,
uh, it would take at least three Board Members to not give the nod to go ahead and do a
comparison cost at the facility, at the Press-Citizen, uh, we don't have an exact figure on
what that would cost. That's why we want to recommend possibly hiring someone to
take a look at that, and/or look at, uh, doing some different things around the...the
County Courthouse. If we did that, there's two options at the County Courthouse. We
could pursue the facility from the GSA, the government, uh, parking lot there. If we
come up with something for exchange of them, or we could possibly, uh, just do
something surrounding the Courthouse if we could close the street to the south, and
perhaps build awrap-around of some sort behind the Courthouse and onto the street
there, which would accommodate our needs. The problem we run into there is, again, is
parking and facilities, but it would help us, uh, if we did remodel there as far as security
for the Courthouse and adding things to that.
Bailey/ So you make, the Board will make a decision...if you will hire a consultant to do a
feasibility study or a cost comparison study between the downtown site and the Press-
Citizen site, and court system remaining downtown.
Harney/ That's what the Committee (both talking) perhaps recommending.
Bailey/ And...and that decision will be made by the Board next week, if you're going to go
ahead with a cost comparison study?
Harney/ I think the recommendation would come next week, and the Board, uh, whenever they
put it on the agenda would make the decision.
Correia/ It wouldn't happen next week.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 12
Bailey/ Okay.
Harney/ (both talking) it could be a week out.
Correia/ That was my...
Bailey/ So if the Board decides not to do this cost comparison study...is the defacto site the
downtown site?
Harney/ That I can't answer (laughter and several talking). That's probably what would happen,
but I can't say that for certain.
Bailey/ Okay. I'm just trying to understand the decision (both talking)
Champion/ At last week's meeting, we...many of us were in favor of just doing the downtown
site, a joint facility, but we thought if there was a significant savings we're going to have
to answer to the taxpayers (mumbled) this money...why didn't you explore the possibility
of the Press-Citizen. And I think a lot of us felt we had to at least offer that option, if it
really was going to save $15 million. I mean, that's a lot of money, and if it'd be possible
for the City to work with that, but most of us felt they should all be kept together, but we
don't have any idea what the actual savings is going to be, or whether there'd even be
enough to make any difference, because our figures just came off the top of people's
heads, I think.
Elliott/ And, Connie, the, uh, the exploration process, if it is approved by the Board would, I
said, would probably take four to six weeks for some knowledgeable, professional,
experienced individual or firm to...to make those comparisons on a line-by-line, apples-
to-apples comparison, but one thing is there's a strong consensus that the Courthouse-
related functions of the offices and storage areas and additional courtrooms, if that's a
possibility, would be in the downtown area.
Bailey/ Okay. So that decision is essentially made.
Elliott/ Uh, as...this is a governing body, which as you folks know (both talking) yes!
Harney/ And one of the considerations we really need to make is if they make a comparison with
the Press-Citizen facility versus the facility downtown. We have to get an understanding
as to what transportation costs to and from the Courthouse would be over a long period of
time. If you're talking a million dollars more costs to go to the, or less cost to go to the
Press-Citizen, well, if you look at that over a period of years it's probably not...really the
right decision, but if it's considerably more than that then we certainly need to consider.
Champion/ And that's what Bob is saying when he means line-by-line, transportation, lots of
things, officer time, deputy time.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 13
Hayek/ It'll be interesting to see the comparison and all of the factors taken into consideration.
The acquisition of private property, which you wouldn't have if you stayed on public
ground, the loss of...I think the Press-Citizen building is assessed at over $3 million.
That goes off the tax rolls. Transportation, a whole slew of things.
Champion/ Well, and I think also there's...I've already had people call me that they don't want
the jail to be on a main thoroughfare coming into town. So I mean, you know, it's...the
public is interested (both talking)
Hayek/ We would hear about that, certainly. I mean, there are residential neighborhoods
adjacent to the Press-Citizen building.
Wright/ We're already hearing about (both talking)
Bailey/ What other questions do you have for Bob and Pat?
Wright/ One concern, and I don't know if you folks talked about this at all, is, um...right now
with the jail centrally located, it's pretty accessible to the whole county, including people
that might be coming in, um, more locally on public transit, and that's...that's, um, a little
less accessible out on the north Dodge area. Is that something you've discussed at all?
Elliott/ Certainly the Coordinating Committee has discussed that. The Board themselves have
discussed that, and there are differences of opinion among both bodies. Um, the one
thing to keep in mind is at the present time prisoners are being transported 100 miles one-
way every day, and that's not just transportation costs, although Lonny has acquired an
excellent arrangement that's, uh, very cost-effective at the present time. But, what a lot of
people forget is the civil rights aspect of that. These...these, uh, people being
incarcerated are 100 miles away from Iowa City. Probably 100 miles away from their
families. Probably 100 miles away from their, uh, legal counsel. And we don't know
what the future holds for that.
Bailey/ Any other information, I mean, our decision point was really should we weigh in on a
site, and so do you need any other information from them, regarding...our decision...our
discussion?
Wilburn/ Just a comment, it's helpful to have, uh, it will be helpful for the Supervisors to have,
uh, those conversations about some of the intangibles so they came up here and, you
know, either way, um, including, um, people have already had the experiences of the, uh,
the community political part about the, uh, not wanting something in their neighborhood,
but should it go out there then what will happen in the downtown area. Will it be an
effect of, uh, ancillary services trying to move out, you know, attorneys moving their
offices just for convenience...I don't know that they would or not, I mean, but uh...it's
helpful (both talking)
Harney/ You're exactly right, and some of the issues downtown is, basically it's parking. Uh, the
GSA wants parking space for parking space. In other words, it's going to cost
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 14
considerably to come up with a parking ramp or a close-by facility for them to park, in
order for them to give up the, uh, the lot, and we'd have come to an agreement in order to
make an offer to them. We have to know exactly where we can go with something and
know what to offer those individuals. Another issue with going to the Press-Citizen
is...uh, the argument that it's more accessible, that, uh, it's accessible to the State Patrol,
it's accessible to Coralville and North Liberty. I mean, you know, (mumbled) police
departments, and just off the interstate versus running emergency equipment through
the...through the community and downtown Iowa City, and there's arguments both ways,
but safety reasons and, uh, court appearances and so forth, it's very handy to have them
both combined.
Hayek/ Do we have any, uh, opportunity in terms of the parking demand with GSA if there's a
swap to look at our existing and soon-to-be new ramp in the vicinity of the Post Office, as
a means of contributing to that parking obligation?
Harney/ Well, that's (both talking)
Hayek/ ...those are City ramps. But, just occurs to me, we're going to have a lot of parking there
in a short period of time.
Helling/ Well, it's...yeah, I'm...we could look at that and throw it into the mix. Obviously we're
planning that ramp because of an already identified need, and so when you put that in the
mix it, you know, it shifts that somewhat, and uh, so it would have an impact, perhaps,
on...on parking we could provide for other purposes, uh, and also the timing on the...on
that ramp is...is, you know, critical too. I don't...I think we're probably...it sounds like
we're looking at maybe two to three years for completion, but again, after construction
started, I suspect that a lot of the parking for the feds would be lost and they (mumbled)
find a place for that, uh, you know, if they exist. But that's something we've, uh, Pat and
I've talked about it just very briefly, uh, in recent days, but uh, it's something we'd have to
an analysis on.
Harney/ The GSA is not only concerned about what their parking lot is. They...they're
concerned about having enough space as they do now for other offices in their building.
LJh, they want the people that rent from them, Social Security and whoever else they have
ample parking for their individuals without, uh, having them go rent space. Excuse me
(coughing) so they have some concerns as well, and they're willing to work with us, but
they want a letter from us, stipulating exactly what we're going to offer them and what in
exchange or what we're going to offer them in exchange for their parking lot, and that's
one of the reasons for getting this cost comparison, at least we'd get...we'd get it
narrowed down to exactly what we want to do and then perhaps get them, uh, moving
along, but they want specifics and they don't want to back out half way down the route
because they have such a long agenda to go through different channels to get this
accomplished.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 15
Bailey/ I know that governing bodies use a lot of criteria when they make decisions, but do you
believe, Pat, that cost is the primary focus of the...this comparison or will be the primary
factor in the decision? The cost.
Harney/ The cost of the study?
Bailey/ No! The cost of the site.
Harney/ I think the cost of the site (both talking)
Bailey/ Is that what it will come down to?
Harney/ I...I think that's going to be a big factor...
Bailey/ Okay.
Harney/ ...is to what the cost would be, uh, compared to going somewhere else.
Bailey/ Any other considerations that we should be aware of?
Harney/ Uh, I have nothing at this point, uh, that I have. Do you, Bob?
Elliott/ (both talking) I think Pat has already iterated some, there's some positives to being
located out near the interstate. There's some negatives to being located in a kind of a
residential area, um, those things have...transportationback and forth and whether or not
you have to set up a...aclnsed-circuit TV to handle some preliminary hearings, those
kinds of things.
Dilkes/ I just wanted to clarify since Ross asked about the rezoning issue and...and, when the
County might be coming to the City, is just, as you all know a rezoning is a process that
we have to go through and that we cannot...the City Council cannot commit to any
particular rezoning. The neighbors in the area have protest rights, etc., so that's...that's a
process that would have to occur at the Press-Citizen site.
Correia/ Did I read, oh (several talking) did I read in some of the minutes that there are plans to
do public opinion surveys...in...inpreparatinn for, uh, a vote on the bond issue and
would...would that sort of site be part of that?
Elliott/ There might be...we would have to be, I think and see if Pat agrees, but we would have
to be further along in a process, and we would have to know are there some distinctions
that need to be made so that you could ask, uh, people what are...what are your
preferences. What would you probably approve.
Bailey/ Matt?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 16
Hayek/ Um, I can only speak for myself, um, but wearing a Councilor hat and as a Member of
the Bar Association, I think...I think it's in the City's best interest and overall
community's best interest to be located in one...one place downtown. Um, I understand
the interest in looking at a split site for cost saving reasons and um, it'll be interesting to
see what that analysis shows. I think on balance it's uh, it's...it is more critical to have
the Courthouse, uh, downtown than the jail, although they're both served by many of the
same institutions, private, non-profit, public, um, but...taking the Courthouse out of
downtown would...would, uh, have a seriously adverse impact on a variety of property
owning and renting entities (mumbled) people, institutions who serve those who go to the
Courthouse, um, so I'm glad to see that that appears to be, uh, essentially a decided issue.
At a minimum keep the Courthouse and expand around it, or.. .
Elliott/ Yes, Matt, if there's...if there's any one thing, and you have to keep in mind, this is Iowa
City, so there are differences of thinking, but if there's any one thing on which there's a
strong consensus it's that. The Courthouse functions will remain in the downtown area,
with the Courthouse. The Courthouse will be retained. The Courthouse will be used.
Bailey/ Okay. Any other discussion for Bob and Pat? Thank you (several responding). We
appreciate it.
Elliott/ Thanks for the homecoming. Everyone has been kind, except Matt was his, er, uh, Mike
was his usual abusive self (laughter).
Bailey/ We count on that! (laughter) So...
O'Donnell/ Nice to see ya, Bob! (laughter)
Bailey/ We put this on the, uh, work session to determine if we wanted to weigh in with a letter
from Council. Thoughts on this? At this point is it premature?
Correia/ Connie's a Member of the.. .
Champion/ Yeah, and I've already voiced my opinion very strongly, that I...but I didn't say I was
speaking for all of us. So I...a letter might actually be a good idea, if there's a consensus
on the Council. I'm only speaking for myself when I'm there.
Bailey/ Thank you, Bob. Thanks, Pat!
Champion/ Um...but I also agree that they should at least look into that site, cause I think
questions will come from the voters. Whether I'm willing at this point to even think
about rezoning that land to public, it's another question. Um, but um, I think it'd be good
if we sent a letter expressing, um, if...it's our wish that the, uh, that we do the joint
facility, and it can be staged. It doesn't all have to be done at once. And it would
probably require, uh, the Council agreeing to vacate...is that Madison Street?
Helling/ Harrison.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 17
Champion/ Harrison Street, uh, because there's a possibility that in one of the designs to put a
ramp in there, so then they wouldn't have to worry about the federal government's
property. I mean, there are some possibilities, uh, that have been talked about, and I...I
think they can stage it, I mean, if they decide to go for this, they'll have to stage it.
They'll never get $70 or $80 million bond passed.
Bailey/ So we...do we want to send a letter now, or do we want to wait until they do this
feasibility study, do we want to send a letter at all?
Correia/ I don't even know that...it doesn't seem to me that there's been a decision on the, I
mean, even making a comparison (several talking) yet to be met, to meet, to make a
recommendation to the Board on that. So I...on some level it's a little bit premature.
Champion/ The Committee is meeting on Wednesday, this Wednesday, and that's where we're
going to tell the whole Coordinating Committee, which is going to have many sub-
committees, what our recommendation is going to be, and then that's going to be given to
the Supervisors next week. I'll be out of town...I think most of us are going to be out of
town.
Correia/ ...an informal meeting (mumbled)
O'Donnell/ I think the only thing we could say in the letter is we support the Courthouse
remaining downtown. That's the only thing we...that's solvent right now.
Wright/ I think...I'm inclined to agree with Amy - it's a little bit premature to, for us to send a
letter. We might well have some more information within the next month, at which we
could have some discussion and come up with a basis for communication, indicating X or
Y. But.. .
Bailey/ LJh-huh. Matt, you really were interested in this. What are your thoughts?
Hayek/ LJh, yeah, I mean, I think a letter is a close call (mumbled) probably premature, and I
don't know, I mean, we're only going to have so many opportunities to effectively weigh
in on the issue, and now may not be the best time to do that. Also don't know that we
want to jump into what appears to be somewhat of a controversy within the County
infrastructure, to put it mildly, um, and I think some of that controversy has to do with
how this has unfolded over the years and...and why...why not now look at other places,
even split the facilities that might be already County owned property, etc., and I don't
want us to...we've got plenty on our plate in that respect. I think the essential component
of keeping the overall Courthouse facility downtown is the more critical piece, um, I
think it makes sense to keep it all together, but I can see why they're pursuing that. I
guess I'd hold off right now.
Wilburn/ I think a letter's premature, but I...but I do, um, support the Courthouse staying
downtown. I think we just, I mean, Connie's on the (several talking) yeah...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 18
Champion/ The other thing (both talking)
Wilburn/ And you can make it clear that, just an informal conversation (both talking)
Champion/ ...somebody else looking at the Press-Citizen building, so my hope is that somebody
just buys it! (laughter) That's the evil side of me!
Bailey/ The point at which you think is the time...you might be (mumbled) to weigh in you'll let
us know and...and Matt, you're also with the Bar Association, keeping an eye on this, so
this can come back. So...all right.
Champion/ There's attorneys and judges on the Committee that are definitely in favor of keeping
it all there. Cause they just (mumbled) lot of time going back and forth.
Bailey/ Yeah, let's just keep an eye on it and then there's a point, I mean, there seems to be
consensus of what we're interested in seeing and, if there's a point at which we can have
an impact, we'll do so.
Helling/ We'll also try to get you the minutes up to date as they come out.
Bailey/ That's great!
Helling/ (several talking) should happen to (mumbled)
Bailey/ Good idea!
Wright/ If we need to we can get (mumbled) agenda at the next work session.
Bailey/ Yep, that's good. Okay. Let's go on to Planning and Zoning items, B and C.
Planning and Zoning Items:
ITEM 5. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS.
b) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A TWO YEAR
EXTENSION OF THE PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
PLAN AND SENSITIVE AREAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN (REZ06-00026)
FOR APPROXIMATELY 34.86 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED SOUTH
AND WEST OF WHISPERING MEADOWS DRIVE TO COINCIDE
WITH APPROVAL OF A TWO-YEAR EXTENSION OF THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WHISPERING MEADOWS SUBDIVISION,
PART 4. (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Davidson/ Good evening, Madame Mayor, Members of Council. (several talking) Okay.
Bailey/ I think there's something wrong with (mumbled)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 19
Davidson/ Is that all right...if I speak into it?
Bailey/ That's better. Yeah.
Davidson/ We have two items this evening - items B and C on the Planning and Zoning, uh,
agenda tomorrow evening. Uh, and I apologize. I have not had a chance to review these
slides. My staff set them up this afternoon, and I had left already. I assume they're
approximately what you have in your, uh, your Information Packet for tomorrow's
meeting. Item b is to consider a resolution, uh, that's not item B actually. Um, let's see if
these are in...yeah, there's item B. Uh, item B is to consider atwo-year extension of a
planned development plan. Um, for approximately 35 acres of land, which is Whispering
Meadows Part 4, and then eventually, uh, if...if you decide to approve the planned
development plan and sensitive areas development plan. They're both part of this, uh,
subdivision, then that you would approve the preliminary plat, as well, and I'll explain
kind of the process that we'll...we'll follow for that. Um, Whispering Meadows Part 4,
you see the location there, and there is the development plan. Uh, this was I think my
first meeting after I became Planning Director two years ago, and I have to say that, um,
and of course I've been here a long time - I don't recall a better, uh, sort of negotiation
process between staff and the developer to try and work through environmental issues,
clean up some things, I mean, I really think that there will be some things actually
improved, in terms of the natural environment, in this area by this particular plan, and
you can see that there's a range of housing types and lot sizes that result, uh, from t his
subdivision. Uh, the request again is related to, uh, basically the...the plat being expired.
Uh, here just shortly in August, and uh, you know, both the plat and the, uh, OPD plans,
uh, have a 24-month limitation on them for the reason of standards change and...and we
want to be able to consider...reconsider the new standards, uh, if...if they do change.
Uh, as has been the case with this one, because we adopted a new subdivision ordinance,
uh, since this was approved. Um...in taking a look at this, the...the most significant
variation in standards between what exists now with the new subdivision code and the
former code is in street widths, and in...in analyzing this, um, our determination was that
there was so much work put in to getting a plan here that took the environmental, I mean,
that was a combination of something that the developer thought could be a successful
development as well as take into consideration the sensitive environmental features, uh,
and particular of the wetlands. iJh, preserving the wetlands, having adequate buffer
areas, while accommodating the subdivision, and because of this, we are recommending
basically granting the approval, uh, of the extension that's been requested, without
adjustment to the street right-of--way widths. Basically, the whole subdivision would
have to be redesigned, uh, in terms of the lot sizes, uh, if you were to do that. So we are
not recommending doing that. Uh, the...the only other issue that was raised during the
reconsideration of this has to do with a change in engineering standards, uh, regarding
where sanitary sewer lines are located. Um, what...what has changed is that it is now
desirable to place sanitary sewer lines, uh, in a location that is not under the street
pavement, wherever possible, and the, uh, developer has indicated that at the platting
stage, which is where that would be determined, they will, um, they will try and make
those adjustments accordingly and the City Engineer and the Director of Public Works
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 20
have indicated that that's acceptable to them. Um, what we are recommending then is
that tomorrow evening you approve the first consideration, uh, and then at your August
meeting, uh, you collapse the second and third readings and approve them, and then we
will also have the plat, uh, I believe that's the 18th of August. On the 21st of August, is
when the plat expires, so we'll...we'll just be under the gun, because of your...you don't
have too many meetings, uh, obviously this time of year. Um, so that's the process that
we are recommending you follow, starting with approval of first consideration tomorrow
evening. Any questions about this?
Hayek/ I think those plats don't show the amount of work that goes into this kind of process. The
surveying to legal negotiations to City staff. And I don't see a compelling reason to
(mumbled) hold their feet to the fire on this (mumbled) and it's still a good product.
Davidson/ Yeah, we think it was...exactly what you say, Matt, that there was really a lot of
special consideration given to accommodating a really difficult piece of property, in
terms of the sensitive, uh, environmental features, and actually improving some things.
mean, there will be some things. The wetland experts believe that there will be some
things improved. Shall we move on then...
Bailey/ Yes, please.
ITEM 5. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS.
c) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY
PLAT OF STONE BRIDGE ESTATES PARTS SIX TO NINE AND RE-
SUBDIVISION OF OUTLOT C OF PART FOUR, IOWA CITY, IOWA.
(SUB09-00004)
Davidson/ ...to item C, which is to consider a resolution approving the preliminary plat of Stone
Bridge Estates, parts six through nine, and a re-subdivision of Outlot C of part four of
Stone Bridge Estates. Um, parts five through nine of Stone Bridge Estates, I guess I
could bring up the plat. There's the location map, uh, you have, um, Lower West Branch
Road, uh, Taft Avenue, uh, the new Catholic church is being built right there, St. Pat's.
St. Pat's is right there. And then the subdivision that we're considering this evening is
right here. Uh, it's approximately 36...slightly over 36 acres. Uh, and again, the issue
here is, um, that the only portion of Stone Bridge Estates, parts five through nine, which
has been final... final platted is part five, and so they're requesting an extension, again
with that two-year limitation, 24-months, of parts six through nine. Um, very quickly, in
terms of the things that we...there's the plat...uh, in terms of the things that we consider
with a subdivision like this, uh, this is in the Lindemann Hills neighborhood of the
northeast planning district. The northeast planning...the northeast district plan has some
very specific language in terms of the terrain of this area, and accommodating good
neighborhood planning principles. We do feel like, uh, this subdivision is a good
adaptation of a modern subdivision. It obviously does not have a conventional grid street
network as you find in the north side or Goosetown, but it does have...a good system of
interconnected streets. It has a good, uh, trail system, which will basically...run along
the stream corridor, right through here. Uh, there was formerly prior to the preliminary
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 21
plat here, uh, a school site that had been identified down in this area. The, uh, according
to what had been worked out with the developer, the School District was not willing to, in
the time span that had been identified, commit to that site, and so the site did, uh, go back
to the developer then and has been incorporated into the plat. Um...there are sensitive
areas, as I mentioned, with the drainage way that have been taken into consideration.
Um, a planned development overlay was required for that reason. Uh, this is kind of your
conventional, low-density, single-family subdivision. Minimum lot size of 8,000 square
feet, and all of the lots do comply with that. Uh, in terms of some public facilities, there
is outlot B right here, which is also incidentally -right there - is where the stone bridge is.
There actually is an old stone railroad bridge. This was the rail line that went out to
Elmira, uh, in northeast Johnson County. And that will be preserved. LJh, outlot B here
is, uh, scheduled to be parkland, dedicated to the City of Iowa City. Parks and Recreation
Commission have indicated that they, uh, will accept that, um, after it is developed. The
other outlots along the stream corridor here will remain with the Homeowner's
Association with an, uh, a public access easement over the trail. Um...and we also asked
one change with the, that we've asked for, that the developer has agreed to, if I can find
my arrow here...right there, we have asked for a trail to be extended from the trail that
runs along the stream corridor to the sidewalk system of the subdivision and the
developer has agreed with that. iJh, there is also a impact fee for the reconstruction of
Lower West Branch Road, which the developer has, uh, agreed to pay, which is
$100...slightly over $133,000 and this would be the developer's fair share of the
reconstruction of Lower West Branch Road. Um, oh, the final thing, you'll recall it is
also the, um, replatting of outlot C of Stone Bridge Estates, Part 4, right there is outlot C.
Here is part four, and this was formerly outlot C. It is now been platted into a lot for
development. The reason is apparently of all these lots in part four, uh, this lot here is not
able to be sewered along with the rest of these lots. It is from a sewer which comes up
and loops around, and will sewer that lot, and that was the reason it was left as an outlot.
It's now being platted, because that sewer will be extended, uh, with the...with the
subdivision here. Um...broken into parts like this will give the developer the opportunity
to plat them sequentially, uh, as they desire, I believe, part six is already come in for final
platting, so...subject to your approval, uh, of the extension for the preliminary plat. So,
we are recommending approval. Are there any questions?
Bailey/ I have a broader question about this area. Um, Taft Avenue is going to be along our, um,
industrial park, and I get a lot of questions about Scott, um, Boulevard and the truck
traffic. Are we doing careful buffering with residential along that particular avenue? I
see that it is, um, residential, and that concerns me, because we're going to get the same
kind of...of complaints and concerns with truck traffic, in the long run. If you go back to
the slide that shows the area, before, yeah...
Davidson/ Uh, L ..the answer to your question, whether or not it's being taken into consideration
is yes it is. I mean, our standards have a greater setback. The...Taft Avenue will be the
next arterial street, north and south, First Avenue, Scott Boulevard, the next one will be
Taft Avenue. Uh, so because it's in the JCCOG arterial street plan, when setbacks are
considered from that arterial, uh, greater setback which allows for greater buffering. That
is taken into consideration. Um, will there be complaints about truck traffic? That's
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 22
fairly ubiquitous, uh, certainly the...the complaints about truck traffic have increased
on...on Scott Boulevard. With our industrial park in the southeast area for a lot of good
reasons, uh, and the need to get access to Interstate 80, there will be truck traffic along,
um, well, currently Scott Boulevard. Eventually along Taft Avenue, um, and...and we'll
have to deal with that in terms of the design of the road, but we are taking it into
consideration.
Bailey/ Well, should we...my question I guess goes to yes, we're taking it into consideration, but
could...I mean to have a decent truck route without these kinds of complaints and
without the stop lights and those kinds of things, should we even be having residential
that close to Taft Avenue?
Davidson/ Um...
Bailey/ Would be my broader question. Is...is...
Davidson/ ...well, that's a very legitimate comprehensive planning question. As you can see, of
course what's under consideration tomorrow evening (both talking) is not adjacent to Taft
Avenue.. .
Bailey/ ...perhaps this is a discussion for (both talking)
Davidson/ But you will see that this...you obviously have some RM, multi-family residential
here. we don't typically have the same amount of complaints with multi-family as we do
with single-family. Uh, this however is IDRS, which would be slated for single-family
development, and it is one of those things where, um, you know, a residential unit along a
arterial street has a different character than one along a, um, arterial street, uh, local
residential street.
Bailey/ But...not only does it have a different character, but we get different requests and we
make different decisions and we put stop lights and we...we essentially destroy a truck
route, I mean, if we're actually envisioning a good, successful industrial park, I think that
we need to, and this might be a discussion for another...a later time, but I think we need
to maybe consider a different design approach along Taft Avenue. Um...I don't know.
Maybe I'll bring this up at a different time (both talking)
Davidson/ I mean, you would certainly have the opportunity to increase those setback standards
even further, if that's what, you know, you felt was the priority.
Bailey/ Are others concerned, I mean, I (both talking)
Champion/ I think it's a legitimate concern, I really do, Regenia. I'm not sure how you would
address it though, but maybe it's a discussion we should have later, cause people buy that
property with the intent of using the zoning that's there. And...so it's kind of...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 23
Bailey/ Are others interested in discussing this, from an economic development standpoint I
think we need a good, solid truck route, with limited number of stop lights and concerns
about, um, truck traffic, and...and we are responsive to that, and I appreciate the fact that
we respond to residents about that, but I...I think it's...I don't know. I think it merits a
discussion because it's a planning issue that we should consider now, rather than making
fixes later.
Wilburn/ ...work session discussion and what...one option is increasing setback. I doubt that we
could prohibit (mumbled) along (both talking)
Bailey/ I would certainly defer to staffs recommendation about what would...what would make
this feasible. I'm just suggesting that we should look at it, in anticipation of...of
that...actually having a successful industrial park out there.
Davidson/ And recall that with the recent subdivision standards, you increased the buffer area
from the interstate, uh, to 100 feet, and that was something that got quite a bit of
discussion with the Home Builder's, but that is...that's an example of exactly the kind of
thing you can do, uh, legislatively to...to address some of those issues.
Dilkes/ Well, I think what you're...you're also looking at asking...you're asking staff to look at
the zoning along there, because right now RM-12 is already existing zoning. If someone
came in and wanted to plat that area right now, you're not going to be able to take the
RM-12 away from'em. You could...you can do a staff initiated rezoning, if you thought
that was appropriate.
Bailey/ I am interested in looking at, uh, I'm interested in discussing this, if...if rezoning is a
recommendation that would come out of that discussion, I would be very open to that.
mean, we have three people who are interested. Do we have another?
Correia/ I mean, I guess we also know that we need RM-12 zoning, so I guess I'm not necessarily
interested in doing something that's going to (both talking)
Bailey/ ...along a truck route?
Correia/ Well, I don't know. I'm not sure, I mean...
Dilkes/ I think...
Correia/ ...there are plenty of places.. .
Bailey/ Is there another person interested in putting this on a work session?
Dilkes/ That's what you need to do, is put it on a work session. (several talking)
Bailey/ Let's do it then! And then, Dale, you talk to staff (mumbled) thanks. (several talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 24
Correia/ ...and then there are issues with the sound that truck traffic makes, based on the what
the street is made out of (several talking)
Davidson/ Yes, there are those...those issues, Amy, are typically with the higher speed traffic
that you get on the interstate. When you hear noise from the interstate, what you're
hearing is the trucks. You're hearing the large vehicles, uh, you're hearing the speed of
the trucks and the number of the trucks.
Correia/ No, I understand that on the interstate, but isn't Scott Boulevard constructed in such a
way that makes it sound louder? (several talking)
Dilkes/ Since we've decided to put it on a work session, why don't we.. .
Correia/ I just wanted to make sure that was (several talking) part of the discussion.
Hayek/ ...question before us, and that is, um, the, uh, the difference between this and the
previous request, is that...with the previous one they're getting to us prior to expiration
and this, they're coming to us post...
Davidson/ The other one has expired.
Hayek/ 1 thought it expires August something.
Davidson/ This one expires...wait a minute, do I have'em mixed up?
Hayek/ This one has expired according to (both talking)
Davidson/ I'm sorry, Matt. What I just said is the exact opposite. This one has expired. The
other one will expire in August.
Hayek/ Are there any concerns to, uh, revisiting something that has already expired? I mean, is
there any precedential.. .
Davidson/ Well, with the new subdivision regulations since then, basically we took the new
subdivision regulations and, um, took a look at...and I, you brought up something that I
should have mentioned, Matt, and that is that, um, again, the principle, the principle
change in the subdivision standards that would impact this subdivision, and it was a big,
big, big concern of the developer was the street width standards, and basically the
developer did not want to have to redesign the subdivision to accommodate street width
standards. What we determined was there are enough existing streets in this subdivision
that the new subdivision streets would tie into that we agreed that it was not necessary for
that reason to make...because you don't want to have a...an adjustment in the street
width in a mid-block situation, even at an intersection. You like to keep 'em to a
minimum. The one street that it doesn't impact, and that will be constructed at the new
street standard, 60 feet rather than, that's the right-of--way, 60 feet right-of--way, rather
than 50-feet, is Tames Drive, which is right there. Basically that's not...and that's a street
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 25
that will stub right here and then tie into a...a street in the adjacent subdivision. This will
be, uh, constructed at the new right-of--way width. Uh, the new street width in the, and
the, uh, appropriate right-of--way width, but the other streets will be allowed because they
tie into existing subdivision streets and were constructed under the old standards. They
will be required to, uh, stay at the old standard.
Bailey/ Okay. Any other questions about the item in (mumbled). Uh...did you get what you
need?
Hayek/ I'm fine with that. I just (mumbled) it occurred to me there might be an issue (several
talking)
Bailey/ Eleanor?
Dilkes/ Well, I don't think this is expired. This is just a preliminary plat of the next...next
sections. Only expiration issue we're talking about, I think, is B, right, Jeff?
Davidson/ Yes.
Champion/ That's going to expire.
Dilkes/ Which is going to expire.
Bailey/ In August.
Dilkes/ Right.
Bailey/ And that's why we...it's suggested that we collapse that one in August so we can get the
preliminary.. .
Dilkes/ But I don't think C...I don't think the Stone Bridge Estates one deals with a...does it?
Hayek/ ...preliminary plat, five through nine, approved in 2006, expired in 08 with only five, um
(several talking)
Davidson/ The plat expired in 2008 with only part five having an approved final plat.
Hayek/ Right.
Davidson/ Right.
Dilkes/ Right, but this is...(several talking)
Davidson/ Yes, this is a brand new plat.
Dilkes/ It's just a brand new preliminary.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 26
Hayek/ Right but...okay.
Bailey/ You were asking about...you were asking about (several talking) Okay. And if you
don't, you have everybody's phone numbers. (laughter)
Davidson/ Yeah, the...the big issue with...with this one was the new subdivision standards now
applied, which was going to mean the plat was going to be redesigned, if we required
strict adherence to those.
Bailey/ And there would be changes in street widths.
Hayek/ I do...as a general matter just to this group, I...I welcome more east side growth. You
know, we need it. It's going to impact us, uh, the entire community in terms of expanding
the tax base and that sort of thing, but it will also help with some of the issues the
community is facing, especially with respect to the School District. Correcting
enrollment imbalances and addressing boundary concerns and other things, and so this is
positive.
Davidson/ That is it, Madame Mayor.
Council Appointments:
Bailey/ Thanks. Um, Council Appointments. We have a application for the Library Board. One
opening, one applicant.
Correia/ Mark on the Housing Commission. I think he'd make a fantastic member (mumbled)
Library Board so...
Hayek/ Ditto. He's an excellent citizen and (several responding) did a good job on the
Commission.
Bailey/ Sounds like it's Mark then. Good! All right. Agenda items.
Agenda Items:
Correia/ I have one.
Bailey/ Okay, jump in.
ITEM 21. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A
PROJECT PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT AND RIGHT OF ENTRY
EASEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND THE
DEPARTMENT OF ARMY (ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS) FOR THE
SECTION 14 STREAM BANK STABILIZATION PROJECT ALONG THE
IOWA RIVER IN IOWA CITY, IOWA.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 27
Correia/ Item 21, um, what is...what is the City's funding for that? I mean, usually it says, you
know, City share is funded from. It looks like we requested this project in 2007, so we've
gotten word...most of the funding is coming from...$105,000, is that in our budget
somewhere? Is it...
Helling/ Yeah, it's in there. I can't tell you if it's GO bonds though or not.
Correia/ But I mean...will we have to do a budget amendment to put it into our...
Helling/ No, I think this was...this is in the (both talking) 2007, I believe.
Correia/ I know it's been in the works, but I don't remember...
Bailey/ Rick, do you know?
Fosse/ I'm sorry.
Bailey/ This is the river bank stabilization.
Correia/ It's the source of funds.
Bailey/ For our share.
Fosse/ For the local share?
Correial yeah.
Fosse/ Um...I think that's GO.
Karr/ Rick, do you have the mic on?
Fosse/ Yes.
Karr/ Would you raise it up a little bit? Thank you.
Correia/ Ah! Here it is. (mumbled)
Fosse/ Okay.
Bailey/ Okay, thanks. Other agenda items?
ITEM 15. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE JCCOG METRO
BICYCLE MASTER PLAN AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 28
Correia/ Um, it's exciting to see the master plan, the bicycle master plan. Item 15. We're seeing
the sharrows, so that's...
Bailey/ And Kris is here.
Correial I guess the question I more have is, how...the Council will use the master plan.
Bailey/ I have the same question.
Correia/ Through the, I guess...and maybe it's more initially how staff will use the master plan
and...putting our budget together, considering the Iowa City priorities. Um, do we
direct.. .
Ackerson/ The master plan is written so that the recommendations are, um, are options, sort of a
road map, so those recommendations (mumbled)
Correia/ I know they're not required. I mean, I guess I'm...if we're going to pass the master plan,
then I would hope that (noise on mic) organization that we would be using those
recommendations that we've approved, then as...as budgets are being approved, related
to bike issues. I guess that's...
Bailey/ I would expect to see some of those in our CII'.
Davidson/ The CIP is the big thing that staff...we try and use any adopted plan that you have,
whether it's the comprehensive plan or the bicycle master plan, or whatever it happens to
be, any of the district plans. When we're formulating the CIP we try and bring projects to
you that are consistent with that, and that still is ultimately a political decision because
there's way more needs than there are funds available, but we...we do try and do that.
Champion/ I think you have to do it just like the park plan. You have to approach it how you can
afford it and move...try to keep moving forward on it.
Correia/ Absolutely, but I mean, in more of the...the way the budget (mumbled) sort of to me
not, um, I won't be part of that, but it seems like it would make sense through the budget
process that's more articulated that these...this is presented in the budget to do X, Y, Z as
a way of meeting objectives of a...of a plan that (mumbled). So I mean, that's all. I
support that, is what I'm saying. So...
Bailey/ Other questions, since we have Kris and Jeff here?
Wright/ I have a kind of a specific question and it's not so much about what's in it, but something
that's not in it, so I was just wondering about if we...we're hoping to construct the
pedestrian on north Dodge Street, and uh, on Dubuque Street too? But there are no bike
trails going up there (mumbled) on here.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 29
Davidson/ I don't know exactly what you're looking at there, Mike, but the, I believe the JCCOG
trail's plan, which is adopted by the whole community does include...it does include the,
uh, Dodge Street pedestrian bridge, linking to a trail that then accesses the, uh, Northgate
Corporate park area. And eventually, I even think...eventually goes up to Oakdale
Boulevard and connects with the 8-foot sidewalk that then would take you back into
Coralville. So it is consistent with the regional plan.
Wright/ Okay.
Ackerson/ ...more on the on-street facilities (mumbled)
Wright/ Just curious, and I...saw that and hmmm...
Bailey/ Kris, I heard some discussion about increased enforcements, um, regarding headlights,
and is that actually going to occur, I mean, it's listed in here too. Is that going to happen
with, uh, within the City of Iowa City?
Ackerson/ It's something that, uh, we've discussed with, uh, the...the local chiefs of police, the
University, and there's some interest in doing a collaborative, uh, focused campaign, uh,
to increase compliance with that requirement. Um, but nothing's been decided at this
point, uh, the chiefs of police have, uh, sort of a coordinating meeting that they
held...that they hold, uh, every two months, and it's on their agenda for the (mumbled)
Bailey/ I would encourage that, I mean, just what I saw last night, um, in town. It's...when I was
out running, there were lots of bicycles and...and I did not see them until they were right
up, you know, right there.
Champion/ No, you can't see them. I'm always thankful when they have a light and some
reflectors, if they're coming, approaching (several talking) especially in the winter when
they have dark clothes on and no light. Or it's raining....oh! It's really scary.
Ackerson/ Yeah, the ideas that they've discussed so far are either doing it sometime near the
beginning of the semester, or uh, waiting until, uh, around daylight savings time when
there are a lot more people riding home and there's less light. Sort of a transition time,
so...
Bailey/ Whatever would work, but I think it would be a good idea. (several talking) I have said
it...again! (laughter)
Correia/ The other thing is, is...was part of the, uh, one of the reasons for doing that bike plan
was to be more competitive in application for the bicycle friendly community
designation, so is that...what is the application, is that a yearly application? How often?
Ackerson/ They do it, uh, every six months, and actually I'm working on the application right
now, uh, it's due at the beginning of August, which is why we've got it (mumbled)
tomorrow.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 30
Champion/ What do you call those things, those...
Correia/ Sharrows.
Ackerson/ Sharrows.
Correia/ They're great.
Champion/ They remind...remind motorists that there are bicycles there too. They're very good.
I like 'em.
Ackerson/ We've gotten a lot more feedback about those than we have the (mumbled) (several
talking)
Bailey/ Sharrows are nice.
Wright/ I did have one other question that I notice a reference in here made to, uh, parking
and...bicycles and mopeds fighting over some of the same spaces. Has there been some
discussion about, uh, addressing that in the future?
Ackerson/ There has. I think the Transportation Services Department is considering some
alternatives. Maybe creating some moped-specific parking downtown (mumbled) in the
summer. Maybe this fall.
Bailey/ Okay. Anything else on the bike master plan? (several commenting) Very nice work.
Thanks. Thanks for being here. Other agenda items?
ITEM 3. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED OR AMENDED.
g) Correspondence
8. Iowa City Burlington Street Median
Hayek/ There's a letter, uh, in correspondence from the Kum n' Go CEO to City objecting to the
proposed median on Burlington Street. I mean, my sense is that we just don't see eye-to-
eye on that public infrastructure improvement, but...
Davidson/ That is correct.
Hayek/ I mean, is there...(laughter)...uh...(several talking) but they, I mean, they are a good, uh,
they contribute a lot to the community and it needs...I don't know what sort of response
is appropriate to this letter (several talking) or some...
Davidson/ We have spent most of our time working with the local person who manages that store
and actually...gotten quite a ways. That store has an incredibly high percentage of non-
automobile traffic in it, and the individual who operates that store is, I don't want to speak
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 31
for him but relatively satisfied with what has been worked out in terms of their access. It
is the corporate office in Des Moines that very late in the game choose to send the letter,
and I don't believe we are going to be able to see eye to eye with them.
Champion/ And I don't think...when I think of using that store, I don't see crossing the highway
to get there anyway. Or to get out of it!
Hayek/ If you're on a beer run you do! (laughter)
Correia/ Well, hopefully you're not driving!
Davidson/ I mean, we...we feel that they are going to continue to have adequate access for that
to be a thriving business. (several talking)
Correia/ Exit on Gilbert.
Davidson/ Right, I mean, you basically will have full access from either direction from Madison
Street, which is (several talking)
Hayek/ Well, I mean the train has left the station on this anyway.
Bailey/ Well, and you've been working with the person locally and they...they seem to be, they
seem to understand the issues. That's...that's curious to me that there's such a disparity
that.. .
Champion/ Well, they would object to it no matter what you were doing. It's part of the policy.
Davidson/ I believe that's correct, Connie.
Bailey/ Other agenda items?
ITEM 8. RENEWAL OF A CLASS C LIQUOR LICENSE FOR ETRE LLC DBA
ETC., 118 S. DUBUQUE STREET.
ITEM 9. RENEWAL OF A CLASS C LIQUOR LICENSE FOR IOWA CITY FIELD
HOUSE CO. INC. DBA THE FIELD HOUSE, 111 E. COLLEGE STREET.
Correial About agenda items...I just have a question on process. Um, or state issues
actually...on the, uh...8, on the liquor licenses.
Bailey/ I think Eleanor was going to speak to this tonight.
Correia/ Oh, great.
Dilkes/ And I just...I wanted to just address that briefly, not the specific facts of those two
renewals, but just kind of the process and...and how it works. Um, the guidelines that
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 32
you adopted back in February for, um, renewal of liquor licenses are included in your
packet, and I would suggest that you take a look at those. Um, there's a lot of kind of
good information in there. Um, those of course were adopted some time ago and
amended in February. The big amendment and the one that's received a lot of the focus is
the PAULA rate, uh, the 1.0 PAULA per visit. Um...I think you just want to...to focus
on what your guidelines say about the purpose of that, which...and I'm just going to read
it, um, citations issued on the premises for PAULA which indicate that the licensee or
permitee knows that such activity is taking place on the premises and does not have
measures in places to adequately control access of persons under legal age to alcohol.
Um...another thing that I think you need to keep in mind is with your guidelines that you
adopted in February, you focused the renewal process that the Police Department goes
through. You attached a checklist that we had not used previously, and that's attached to
the guidelines, so that certain...things that can be measured are addressed, uh,
systematically each time there is a renewal. So that was all...also a big change and
you're getting additional information on that sheet, not just the PAULA rate, but...but
other additional information. Um...another thing to remember is the...a license renewal
is a civil matter. It's not a criminal matter. Um, generally the owner of an establishment
is responsible for the activity of, um, its agents or employees. And then finally, I think
there's been some information in the press that's...that's not been accurate about what
happens in the event the City Council denies, uh, renewal. Um, it...it clearly is your
decision. You've gotten recommendation from the Police Chief, but it is your decision to
look at all the facts and decide whether you think, um, they should have a liquor license.
But they do not, if you would deny a liquor license, they would not lose their license.
Um, unless they chose not to appeal to the Alcoholic Beverage Division. Um, if they
chose to appeal to the ABD, uh, they keep their license until that appeal process runs.
They keep their license if there is a subsequent appeal from the decision of the ABD to
the courts. Um, so it is not...if you deny the liquor license going to be an immediate,
um...uh, loss of a license. So, and I just urge you tomorrow to just, um, listen to
what...there'll be a presentation by, uh, the Police Department, uh, and then there'll be an
opportunity, um, by the establishment to respond, um...the, then you make your decision.
Bailey/ Any other questions about those particular agenda items? Okay.
Wilburn/ Um, I have a question, Eleanor, and this, um, again with the...it's sort of getting into a
specific, but I mean maybe it's just, uh, tomorrow I could hear, um...guidance on
this...on one of the applications, uh, the additional comments section, it talks about, uh,
the result of a charge that was dismissed by, uh, the court. How are we to view a decision
in the court, and I...I'm...
Dilkes/ I'd suggest that you hear the...hear the comments from, um, the applicant tomorrow with
respect to that, and then if you have questions about that for me, you can certainly ask at
that time.
Wilburn/ Okay, all right.
Bailey/ Any other questions about the process tomorrow night? Okay. Any other agenda items?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 33
ITEM 3. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED OR AMENDED.
g) Correspondence
9. GAR Bridges Resolution
Helling/ I just wanted to mention quickly in your correspondence you have a letter regarding
naming the, uh, U.S. Highway 6 bridge over the Iowa River. Um...that comes from a...a
private organization. We have, uh, contacted the DOT, State DOT, to try to determine
what our respective roles are on this kind of process, before we would ask you to take
action. If it's something that falls within the jurisdiction of the DOT exclusively, or if
they generally handle these, then I think we can either come back to you, uh, if you want
to weigh in, or we can let them take care of it as they would any other, uh, situation
where it is a State or U.S. highway bridge.
Bailey/ Thank you. Any other agenda items? Been requested for a break, 10 minutes we'll
(several talking) 8:05. (BREAD
Flood Relief Grant Applications -Summary & Update (IP2 of 7/23):
Bailey/ Let's talk about flood relief grant applications.
Davidson/ It was approximately a year ago that we started our flood recovery program, and I
think this is the...I think this is the fourth time that Rick and I have meet with you and
just sort of gone over sort of big picture, uh, strategy issues, gotten some decision making
from you, uh, in terms of where we were going with our flood recovery, uh, plan. Um,
you know, we didn't roll out a big...a big glitzy plan like some places did, but I think we
very successfully, uh, in incremental steps here, gotten ourselves to where we have a...a
very logical, cohesive plan that is going to really make some tremendous improvements
the next time we have a flood event, and we can all take some satisfaction in that. Um,
what...what's under consideration this evening, and then also with two items on your
formal agenda tomorrow evening are some flood recovery grant applications, in fact,
many flood recovery grant applications, and we want to kind of just step through all
these, uh, so there's...with...with the exception of the two formal authorizing resolutions
on your agenda tomorrow night, what we're basically looking for this evening is
concurrence with proceeding, and Rick and I will get into the, uh, exactly what that
means, okay? And answer any questions that you have. But that's basically what we're
trying to do, uh, this evening. Um, it...you will hear us say several times, and in the
memorandum you received, that this is an extraordinary once in a...well, won't say once
in a lifetime because it's obviously happened to us twice in 17, uh, years here, but...but
certainly an extraordinary opportunity to take advantage of some, uh, basically the ability
to access some State and federal funds that we really hadn't...had no idea we were going
to have, uh, such opportunity, and...and what we're doing this evening is...is if you
concur, continuing the process that will then enable us to continue making decisions in
the future, okay? We're doing nothing at this time that will commit us to anything that
you can't get out of at some point in the future, uh, if...if that is your desire, and...and the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 34
reason we're couching it in these terms is that the one thing...this process has moved so
incredibly quickly, staff has been focused totally, the Public Works Department and
...and the Planning Department in particular, has been focused on getting these grants
applications completed. The deadlines for these are, there's basically two programs -
CDBG, uh, public infrastructure funds, uh, are due this Friday, and the I-JOBS program,
which is a State program, the Governor's bonding program, those are due Monday, and so
we have really been cranking every single division of the Planning Department, including
JCCOG, has been working on these grant applications, and the Public Works staff has
been working, uh, we've been working shoulder-to-shoulder in getting these done. So,
the one thing that we have not been able to do, uh, the job that we need to do on, and that
is the public input part of this, and it's...it's critically important that we do that. We just
haven't had time to do it yet. Uh, that is something that if you approve the submission of
these grant applications, we will then -while they are under consideration, uh, by the feds
and...and the State, uh, we will undertake then the...the public input portion of this so
that we can ultimately determine...there...there are, the...the nine projects that we're
going to walk you through here, um, seven of them should be familiar to you. We've
talked about them before. There are two that you haven't seen before, so those two in
particular we want to make sure we get public input on, uh, and we'll elaborate more on
that as...as we walk through these. Uh, counting the...the I-JOBS program, the CDBG
public infrastructure program and the Economic Development Administration, uh, grant
applications that we were going after, nearly $100 million. That's the scope of what we're
considering here. I mean, just, you know, totally unforeseen, uh, amounts of money. Of
course the sales tax then is the other piece of the puzzle that will be...be augmenting
these funding. Um, okay, the first two we want to talk about are two that should be very
familiar to you, they're the ones that we'll be using the sales tax money for, and are the
two largest scope projects. iJh, the first one is the relocation of the north waste water
treatment plant, uh, and you can see the split there in the memorandum you received, $22
million from EDA, $10 million from I-JOBS, $5 million from CDBG, $26 million from
sales tax for a total project of...estimated at $63 million, and Rick will elaborate a little
on, uh, there's kind of two aspects to this. One is getting the new plant built and the old
plant shut down, and then preparing this area for the redevelopment plan that...that we're
also planning on doing.
Champion/ One quick question, and maybe you're already going to answer it. Since we're using
flood money, can that land then be developed or does it have to come back to natural
land? Or is that just for housing?
Davidson/ FEMA is the program, and also, well...both the FEMA buyout program and the what
we call the non-FEMA buyout with CDBG, uh, the...the FEMA program obviously has
the very strict rules on preserving it as open space. Uh, the CDBG non-FEMA buyout
program seems to be mirroring those rules pretty much, but the other...the other, um,
public infrastructure type improvements, in particular this area, no we will be allowed to
do redevelopment. Now we aren't...we don't intend to redevelop all of it. We intend for
the very most flood prone portions to remain green space, and then some type of
mitigation structures to be constructed to protect the remainder.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 35
Fosse/ This is a project that hasn't changed since last time we talked about it. LJh, we're still
moving all the facilities down to the south plant and then demolishing the old facilities
here. As Jeff pointed out, there's a few steps to this. One is getting new facilities built,
getting them up and running and then decommissioning this. And that's really a very
expensive component of the project. It's currently estimated at about $17 million to
demolish all of this and then prepare it, uh, for...for redevelopment, and also for
conversion of flood plain there.
Davidson/ Any questions about this project? As Rick said, it's pretty similar to what you've seen
before.
Hayek/ Is the $63 million inclusive of the start-up in the other's place?
Fosse/ The start-up?
Hayek/ The...I mean, you can remove it, but can you also build it elsewhere...
Fosse/ Yes!
Hayek/ ...for $63 all told.
Fosse/ Yes, that is in there. (several talking)
Correia/ $63 million includes demolishing the old site, as well as...
Davidson/ Preparing the site for redevelopment is included.
Correia/ Okay. That includes the whole...
Fosse/ LJh-huh, and that's really our funding safety valve in all of this. That if...if we don't, we
are unable to...to get the federal monies that we're hoping to get, and the sales tax won't
cover everything, it's...the demolition of the old site is something that can, doesn't have
to be done for the new plant to go online.
Correia/ Gotcha.
Bailey/ Right.
Davidson/ Any other questions about this project?
Champion/ Well, that's really a good one.
Davidson/ And once...once we move past these, can we...do you want to come back and
consider decision making on each one, or as we step through these do you want to give us
the go-ahead to...proceed?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 36
Correia/ Well, it seems like we have given the go-ahead on the relocation.
Bailey/ I think we're...I mean (several talking) yeah (laughter) I think you're good on this one!
Fosse/ Okay (several talking)
Wilburn/ I'm trying to remember the, uh, the Economic Development Administration, is
that...that's federal?
Davidson/ Yes, that's federal.
Fosse/ Yes, yes. That looks promising, but we're being cautious not to count any chickens before
they're hatched.
Wilburn/ And that's one that was discussed in D.C., at the last (several talking)
Davidson/ Yeah, I think that year...I think that year we went out, Ross, we...we took this project
and the...the next one, which we can go into now, um, Dubuque Street and Park Road
bridge. Again, not significant, in fact I don't think there's been any changes in the scope
of the project, uh, since the last time you...you've seen this. You see the, uh, the funding
make-up that we have landed on is something that we've recently landed on and, uh,
CDBG $25 million is the most significant, uh, piece of this one, sales tax $4 million,
EDA $3 million, and I believe, Rick, is it true the EDA portion is for design and...
Fosse/ Design only. Yes.
Davidson/ Okay. Uh, you will note, and we have noted in the memorandum that Rick and I sent
you that we have decided to not include I-JOBS in this. It just is not a good fit for the
program. Some of you may recall that when the legislation was being passed, it was very
controversial with certain members of the State Legislature about including basically
street and road projects in this. Um, it is eligible, but we just really did not feel like, uh,
we could adhere to some of the requirements that program, so that is not included. We
are going to make application, specifically JCCOG will be preparing the applications to
the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery. I'm sure it's just a
coincidence that TIGER is the acronym for that (laughter). Uh, we will be applying to
that program, as well. We're not, it's not a super candidate for TIGER funds, but we think
there's enough probability that we're just trying to incorporate some redundancy into this
in terms of being able to get all the funds we need.
Bailey/ When I...tell people about this or talk about this project, one of the, uh, most frequently
asked questions is how long will this project take. It hasn't yet of course been designed,
but once we get it designed, how long will it take?
Fosse/ It's probably atwo-construction season project.
Davidson/ And it will remain open to traffic during construction?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 37
Fosse/ Not completely.
Davidson/ Not completely.
Fosse/ The best we can! LJh, but there'll be times that...that, uh, it'll be necessary to shut it
down.
Bailey/ (both talking) move into design as soon as we have funding for design. Is that correct?
Fosse/ That's right. That's right. Since we're looking to the EDA as...as a funding partner for
design, we want to wait until we...we understand the obligations with that money before
we seek engineering services. So we follow the right steps.
Bailey/ And when will we know from EDA?
Fosse/ Uh, for this project, we hope to know within one to two months.
Bailey/ Okay.
Davidson/ This is a project that is also supported very significantly by the City of Coralville and
the University of Iowa. They both, uh, believe there are direct benefits to them...from
this project.
Champion/ There should be.
Fosse/ You may recall that we're working with the Corps of Engineers to do reconnaissance
study of various projects in Iowa City, and...and the two big ones -Dubuque Street
and...and, uh, the waste water project really have a disconnect with that funding source,
uh, from a timing perspective. If we go with their funding, it might be a seven to nine
year process, versus these other funding sources that are available for both of these
projects. Want to see something happen now, as do the sales tax payers. So...
Bailey/ As do...does the Council!
Fosse/ Yes.
Davidson/ Yeah, you might recall the..the I-JOBS program the State's program is a combination
of disaster recovery, both flood and the tornado that hit, uh, Parkersburg and that area,
and then it's also economic stimulus program. So...so as Rick's indicated, the...there are
some very strict, you gotta get going and really get going to get the money circulating in
the economy. So...um, and speaking of I-JOBS and the economic stimulus portion of it.
These next two projects we...we labeled this, the memo you received flood recovery.
Okay, we have two projects that aren't strictly speaking flood recovery, but they are good
I-JOBS candidates so we are asking to, uh, your permission to apply for some. First it's
fire station 4, um, and this is a project that we currently have locally funded in the budget,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
Jul 27 2009 City Council Page 38
Y
but we're really...really hoping to...to get some State or federal funds for this, and we've
actually applied to two sources. I-JOBS is one of them. Um, and uh, because it is not a
disaster recovery project, we would only be eligible for 50/50 funding rather than 75/25,
which is the share for the disaster, uh, recovery, uh, projects, and I would say that I do
want to bring to your attention that David Purdy was very instrumental in getting that in
the legislation, and thank you, David, for doing that. It had all been 50/50 until that was
suggested, uh, by David, and ultimately was, uh, was incorporated into the bill. Um, we
are also going to apply fora 70/30 grant from the federal economic stimulus program.
They have a...a program specifically for fire stations, and it's...it's not a huge amount of
money, uh, I think it's $200 million, $210 for the entire country, but we're going to at
least give it a shot. It does appear that we would be able, because one source is State and
one source is federal, we would be able to match those...those two funding sources, so
uh, we...we are hoping to have at least 50%, and maybe as much as 100%, which would
then free up about $3 million in the local budget. $3 million would reflect 100% funding.
Um, any questions? I think you're all fa...very familiar with fire station 4. This is a
rendering of it here (several commenting).
Bailey/ Get money for it -yeah!
Davidson/ The other project you...you've heard us, the other project for I-JOB funding that
you've heard us talk a little bit about, and there's been some good media coverage of it is
the homeownership program in, uh, older neighborhoods or Univercity program. LJh,
Sarah Walz came up with that acronym. We haven't figured out how to pronounce it
really but uh (laughter) at any rate, it's a program that the...it's a joint venture between
the University and the City. The University has committed $200,000 to it. We're going
after a million dollars here through a special section of the I-JOBS program. It's not part
of the discretionary, we're competing against everybody else in the State. We're not
competing against everybody else in the State, but within a pool just for affordable
housing projects. We thought about this for the affordable housing aspect of our St. Pat's
multi-use parking facility. Again, couldn't meet the time schedule requirements of the I-
JOBS program, so we're going to try and get some seed money for downpayment
assistance and for, uh, rehabilitation assistance. We think maybe we could do 20 units,
uh, $50,000 a piece, get a million bucks, so uh, the University has committed their funds.
There'll be a lot more to come in hearing about this, but this will be seed money for the
program.
Correia/ It's very exciting.
Bailey/ Questions?
Wright/ I just absolutely...
Bailey/ This is a great program.
Wright/ ...thrilled that you got this opportunity for this money.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 39
Wilburn/ Just want to point out the, uh, the, um, staff of the Governor's office had reached out to
the Metro Coalition for support in getting I-JOBS passed too, so...
Bailey/ Yeah.
Davidson/ Before we leave the...those are the four, excuse me, go ahead, Amy.
Correia/ What's...how's an older neighborhood defined?
Davidson/ We've defined it as the, um, neighborhoods surrounding the University that are...that
are affordable in terms of the income...incomes that you see in the area, the household
incomes that you see in the area, and our achieving an imbalance between renter and
owner-occupied. So it's Northside, it's, uh, Goosetown, it's Court Hill, it's, um, Miller
Orchard, and Melrose. I think Melrose is (mumbled). Melrose may not have the
imbalance between renter and owner-occupied, but those other neighborhoods do, and so
those are the ones we're focused on. The University's interest, I must tell you, is in the
Northside neighborhood. That's, especially the Dubuque Street corridor. That's...that's
their big interest. Uh, before we leave the I-JOBS applications, cause you...the three I-
JOBS applications are the fire station, the one we just talked about, and uh, the north
waste water plant. It will be...it has been emphasized to us by our State legislators that a
very concerted lobbying effort by...by the State legislators, by us locally as staff, and by
any of you who are willing to help is critically important for the I-JOBS applications. It
will be a very, very politically charged process. New...covering new territory,
everybody, we're covering new territory. Um, so we just need to prepare...be prepared to
jump in and compete with everybody else in the State basically. So, anybody who's
willing to help, we appreciate your assistance.
Bailey/ And we are setting up, um, Dale is setting up a meeting with the legislators and um, I've
invited Ross and Matt to be part of that meeting, but we all have relationships with our
State legislators and so please talk to them, and if you have any questions or need
materials, um, Rick and Jeff or Dale can get you information. So I think it's really
important, um, strong advocacy, and then look at the I-JOBS board and if you know
people on that board too, um.. .
Davidson/ They're advising us to lobby the Governor's office and the I-JOBS board.
Bailey/ So...use your connections (mumbled).
Davidson/ Uh, let's move on then to the CDBG public infrastructure projects. The first one is the
west side levee. You have heard about this project before. The principle motivation, uh,
is the, uh, protection of the Baculis and Thatcher neighborhoods, as well as the
commercial court, uh, commercial area, and this would replace the temporary levee,
which was constructed and was successful in the flood last, uh, summer. Rick, would
you like to talk about the engineering of this?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 40
Fosse/ Well, the...the engineering actually is already underway. You approved a contract for
that a couple weeks ago, and what you can see in this picture is...is the temporary levee
actually doing its job along here, and it'd be refining the alignment for that, especially in
the northerly end where it really was just throwing up and...and uh, putting together
something that could be, hopefully, certified by the Corps, um, which...which provides
some additional advantages for us in the long term. And this, are you all oriented, uh,
this is the railroad up here and McCollister down here.
Davidson/ Bridge across the river there now. Any questions about west side levee? Okay, well,
let's move on to the east side levee. Now this is a new project. Uh, and it, uh, comes out
of some discussions that we have had specifically with Hills Bank, although it is certainly
not exclusively...it's much more extensive than...than just Hills Bank. It would...
essentially it is north of where you, in fact I guess the railroad is...yeah, the railroad
bridge is on there, Rick. Can you point that out? Right there's the railroad bridge, so it's
the southern end of this project. It was the northern end of the project you just saw, and
basically from that area up to the intersection with, uh, Gilbert Street, right there, is...is
where this levee would be, uh, constructed, and um, you know, you have the
costs...we've tried to come up with a cost estimate for the purposes of the application, but
we...we have not done any engineering in terms of this. We'd obviously work very
closely with the property owners in this area, uh, and...and need to have more
discussions with them quite frankly, uh, if this is something that you want us to go ahead
and...and as we emphasized earlier, what we're doing is preserving our ability to
implement this project, if we're able to get grant funds, but it is not actually...you're not
approving doing it yet. You're approving continuing with...with the...trying to get the
ability to do it.
Hayek/ Two questions, and one's not really so much a question. I guess I assumed for purposes
of our discussions that we're, um, that our assumption is that the hydrology and
engineering are not problematic in that we, you know, in terms of creating a problem
elsewhere by creating a...a levee in another spot. I mean, you guys handle that at the
appropriate time.
Fosse/ Right. That's where that model that the University built will...will come in very handy.
Hayek/ Um, and the second point is, I just...more out of curiosity. Does...what does the
underlying legislation say about the use of public dollars to protect private property, in
addition to public infrastructure? Because it seems like these are...are aimed at both.
Davidson/ Um, I'm going to just ask...
Hayek/ I mean, is there any obstacle to that?
Davidson/ David...nod, I mean, is it intended to protect both?
Purdy/ It is.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 41
Bailey/ David, would you come up and use a mic please. Thanks.
Davidson/ Everybody knows David Purdy, Flood Recovery Coordinator.
Purdy/ LJh, it is the, it's designed...it's aCDBG program so that it's designed to, um, target low,
moderate income, but in this particular supplemental CDBG, it's a supplement...it's a
supplemental so that it's more disaster related. To answer your question, um, it will cover
both commercial and residential, uh, you might get a higher scoring if it's more of a, uh,
for example, the west side levee that we have here.
Davidson/ Uh, as Matt pointed out, this would protect both private property and the City's
Parks...Parks' facility, and uh, Streets facility.
Fosse/ Yeah, let me elaborate on that a moment. There's two versions of this project, and....and
both are represented in the memo, so it might seem a little confusing, and if you go to the
drawing, uh, that's in there, the version that you see appear is represented. That is the
scope taking it from Highway 6 down to the railroad. Now what's talked about in the text
is actually a longer version. It extends it all the way down to McCollister. And, uh,
that...that may not be, uh, a feasible thing to do or necessary thing to do, depending on
the level of protection that we want to get out of it. Um, certainly our interest in this
northerly corridor is keeping, uh, south Gilbert Street open. That's...that's avery
important arterial street for us, that we lose, uh, when the flood is going on.
Davidson/ Yeah, and this is...this picture certainly illustrates better than any of us talking could,
to the extent of what happened last summer and... and the...the extent of what would be
protected by the structure that's being proposed. Any questions about this project? Any
further questions?
Bailey/ You need us to indicate we're interested, I mean, I know that (both talking)
Davidson/ Since this is a new project, and there is not a...the CDBG projects do not require, you
know, basically your approval comes at the grant agreement stage, that the application
does not require an authorizing resolution. So, I guess we are looking for a concurrence
that you would like us to apply for funds, again, not committing us to building it, but
apply for funds, see if we can get funding for it.
Bailey/ Are we interested in moving ahead? (several responding)
Wilburn/ Will there...for that, uh, levee will there be negotiations. You may have said this
already -with the private property owners if...
Fosse/ Yes.
Wilburn/ ...easements and...
Fosse/ That'd be the only way we could do it.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 42
Wilburn/ Yeah. Okay.
Davidson/ Right.
Bailey/ Okay.
Davidson/ Okay. Thank you. Uh, the next one you may have heard referred to as the Riley lift
station, that was because of the Tom Riley Law Office. We've changed the name to
Rocky Shore Drive lift station, and this is a project which Rick will outline. It is one
we're coordinating with Coralville and the University of Iowa on.
Fosse/ Yeah, this is one where...I mean, it just makes sense to coordinate. In fact, we're in a bit
of an odd position in that we only have one, two and a half properties that are within
Iowa City there, but because of the...the strategic key location of our incorporated area,
we have a major drainage area through here and also the railroad underpass, uh, the bulk
of what will be protected by this project is University property and then, uh, an area that's
within the City of Coralville. So we'll be working with them on a...a funding
arrangement that's appropriate for that, but for now we're taking the lead and trying to
round up federal money to partner with the local monies for this. It's...it's a fairly
substantially...expensive project because of the size of the lift station that will need to go
in there. There's...there's alot of drainage area, uh, once...once you put a flood control
system in place, you need to handle all the local rain fall that falls on the back side of that
and this...this drains, um, all the University sports complex, as well as areas south of the
railroad tracks and Finkbine Golf Course, uh, also find their way through...through part
of this.
Davidson/ And, uh, you...you maybe aware, I mean, Coralville has a...a flood recovery strategy
that's portioned into six specific projects. This project is their number one priority.
The...the rebuilding of the CRANDIC, uh, it'll basically....rebuilding the railroad bed
into a flood wall structure, a proper flood wall structure that will protect this area, that is
part of a strategy that is their number one priority.
Fosse/ And that is a project that they have already entered into the...the model that the
University built and they've...they've got the...the findings are coming...or soon will
have that.
Hayek/ How does that get resolved ultimately, if the modeling shows...
Bailey/ Impact?
Hayek/ ...impact? You know, between or within adjacent jurisdictions, municipalities, Imean,
is there...
Fosse/ That'll be, uh, an interesting issue to work through, because there...there (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 43
Hayek/ ...to the bottom, I mean (laughter). You know!
Fosse/ There are limits, regulatory limits, of the impact that are...that are set forth by the State of
Iowa. Now, but there can be...and that's roughly a foot...foot of impact. Um...now
there can be impacts from the project that are something less than that, that...that may not
be palatable to the adjacent jurisdictions, and that will need to be worked out between the
bodies on the local basis. I don't think the State is going to referee that. Because
they...they've got their thresholds that they've had in place for...for many years
and...and they're unlikely to vary them for these projects.
Davidson/ Yeah, the model won't tell us what to do and not do. It'll give you as local decision
makers information on which to make those decisions.
Hayek/ The model will tell us that X, Y, Z structure or levee is anticipated to cause.. .
Davidson/ Correct me if I'm wrong, Rick, but the model gives us our measurements of the water
surface profile at various points along the river, is that right?
Fosse/ Yes. Yeah.
Davidson/ So basically shows, Matt, if doing something that incrementally raises or lowers water
surface profile at any point you want to look at along the river.
Hayek/ And I assume that the calculus would also look at particular levee in concert with another
planned levee, up or down stream.
Davidson/ Right. That's why the model's so great, is you can put any combination together like
that.
Champion/ I have a question. Some reason I'm having trouble...this is Park Road, right? And
(both talking)
Fosse/ Park Road is here, and there's Rocky Shore.
Champion/ Okay. Now, when I drove down that road at the beginning of the flood, the flood
was coming onto the street and there was a pump there. That's what you're talking about,
another pump. It's going to pump the water? Can it pump enough water, because you're
not going to elevate the streets.
Fosse/ No. Rocky Shore will still go under water, after this project. In fact the gate that will go
underneath the railroad is to keep that water from finding its way out onto (both talking)
Champion/ Okay, I just didn't quite understand that.
Davidson/ There'll be a gate that'll close off the railroad underpass basically, and keep the water
on that side.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 44
Bailey/ Keep the river on the (both talking)
Wilburn/ But essentially the question you're bringing up, Matt, in terms of that study, I mean, it
will give real tangibles to, um, the conversations that maybe JCCOG might be a format
for those discussions, uh, you know...Hills, um, this is going to impact you in this way,
uh, is it worth it to you to have access to Iowa City, up Sand Road, in order to, you know,
if...if, um, we know this farm will be flooded, um...do you, is that, you know, is that
okay. If not, do you understand you won't be able to get into Iowa City that way. I
mean, that's the level of conversation that...where's the water going to go and...and uh,
what's acceptable to folks.
Champion/ Now does this...this...what are you calling this? The Rocky Shore Drive lift station
and flood gates.
Fosse/ Yes.
Champion/ So...is that going to make flooding worse in the Normandy area?
Fosse/ Based on what Coralville's reported to me in their findings is no, it will not, and that's
consistent with what I would expect. Typically (both talking) in a river system like this,
if you...if you constrain an area, the impacts are upstream, not downstream.
Champion/ Okay.
Fosse/ So...I think that the real conversations that we'll behaving around the table are the
impacts of our projects on our...our city. That's what we're going to need to think
through.
Hayek/ It's not so much Coralville on Iowa City or Iowa City on Coralville or other
communities.
Fosse/ Right. (both talking) certainly has a strong interest in what we do. Uh, now the converse
will be less true.
Hayek/ Okay.
Fosse/ And...but again, I want to review the report on the model before I reach that conclusion.
Wilburn/ So then the internal conversation is where do we, you know, which areas, um, do we
want to continue to have access to and cost benefit to not doing...if we know certain
areas are going to be impacted. Is that acceptable, um, given that it gives us continued
access to blank, a major arterial, um...
Davidson/ That's going to be a subsequent step, Ross, is that before we build anything, we have
to have the information from the model showing what those impacts are going to be, so
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 45
that all of you as local decision makers can then determine if it's something that we
actually want to build.
Bailey/ LJh-huh.
Davidson/ Shall we move on to the final project? The final project is also one that you have not,
uh, seen before, and that is because there's been an evolutionary process that has, uh, got
us to the point we...we are now, um, we had originally, you will recall and Rick, maybe
you can highlight where the two building pads were approximately that we were
attempting to acquire in Idyllwild -yeah -right in that area there. There were two
building pads in the 500-year flood plain. There was also a third one, out of the 500-year
flood plain, that we were not trying to acquire. Um, with, uh, community disaster grants,
is that the name, David, um, because of the, I think Eleanor termed them the complexities
of the, uh, homeowner's agreement with Idyllwild, it finally became apparent we were
simply not going to be able to...to actually do that. At the same time that we were
coming, reaching that conclusion, we were looking at the what was going to be the
impact on Taft Speedway from the intersection with, uh, Dubuque Street. When that was
elevated then, how much of Taft Speedway was going to have to be elevated, and it was
looking like, you know, depending on the ultimate elevation that's agreed to, uh,
Dubuque Street that it was going to be quite a bit of Taft Speedway that had to be
elevated, and in our staff discussions we got to thinking, well, why not just continue, and
Rick, maybe you could highlight it with the pointer, continue that elevation to the
intersection with No Name Street, and if anybody wants to know, that is officially the
name of that street. It's platted as No Name Street, and I can tell you the story sometime
if you're interested. But...but elevate Taft Speedway, and then from the intersection with
No Name Street, north to Foster Road. Rick, maybe you can just do the 'L' there kind of.
Basically create a levee with the street system, with the street still then reconstructed on
top of the levee, and what that would enable us to do is basically protect the Idyllwild
neighborhood. We really don't have another strategy for protecting it. It is, you know,
it's, uh, I don't know the exact number, but I believe between 200 and 300 people, 92
units I think, 200 and 300 people and about $22 million in property tax base. I mean,
that's what's achieved by protecting that neighborhood. Would also protect Parkview
Church. Um...so, so that's...that's what it...would be able to accomplish with it.
Obviously, there are negative impacts to the, uh, the people that would be on the wet side
of the levee and you'll recall when we did the FEMA buyout program, all of the people
who were apprised if they turned down the buyout that they might be subject then to
subsequent decision making that would put them on the wrong side of a flood mitigation
structure, if it was determined that the larger public interest was served by creating some
type of flood structure. This is a perfect example of that. Uh, we did want to point out,
and is pointed out, uh, in your memo that any one who's been offered a FEMA buyout,
they are still eligible for until...is it October? Eleanor? Or David?
Purdy/ iJh the, uh, talking to the State officer today, um, September 15th would probably be a
good time if people are still interested.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 46
Davidson/ Okay, so anyone still has the ability who is on the so-called wrong side of the levee,
and in terms of the, and David, correct me if I'm wrong. In terms of the Taft Speedway
property, there were 12 and we were able to buy out...
Purdy/ ...a vacant and then two others, and then we bought out one with community disaster
funds.
Davidson/ Okay, so a total of how many buyouts?
Purdy/ We have four of the...
Davidson/ Four of the properties on Taft Speedway bought out, and how many remaining then?
Eight?
Purdy/ Eight.
Davidson/ Okay, so that's the situation on...
Correia/ Of the remaining of those eight...eligible for FEMA buyouts? I can't...
Purdy/ Yeah, the properties along Taft Speedway are eligible, with the exception of the one that
we bought with (both talking)
Correia/ Okay, that's what I thought.
Hayek/ A couple have elevated, so you know they're not going to go for that.
Correia/ So tell me, just because of the way I'm imagining this, and I'm sure I'm not imagining it
the way...it is. So if you're elevating Taft Speedway, the houses on the river side now
they use Taft Speedway to access...if it's up high, it's high driveway, I mean, how are
they...how are they getting in and out of...
Davidson/ We'll have to work through those access issues. Yeah.
Fosee/ Now this is one of the projects that was identified in that Stanley report last winter, and if
any of you went to the neighborhood meetings, this is one that was discussed, with both
neighborhoods, and at that time, uh, it seemed quite unlikely, just because of the expense,
uh, these funding sources had not materialized yet and...and now it appears that there
may be a funding source for this. One thing to point out about this project is it's a two-
fer, if you will, in that it protects this portion of Foster Road here, which we need to
address independently if we don't pursue, uh, this project.
Davidson/ But we would not have to do that project, if we did this one. The elevation of Foster
Road. (several talking)
Champion/ ...how many inches of water were on that part of Foster Road?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 47
Fosse/ Uh, it was deep enough that we couldn't get through it with a...with a tractor or anything
like that. We had to go up...we had to go up north and get across.
Davidson/ One other piece of information that I wanted to...to give, that we wanted to give you,
in conjunction with your decision making to proceed or not proceed with this project is
that, we have been quite successful in...in accessing funds and having people accept the
what we've been terming the non-FEMA buyouts, uh, Doug Ongie has been coordinating
that in our office, and it now looks...as of today, we have 33 people in Parkview Terrace
in the 500-year flood plain who have accepted non-FEMA buyouts. So we now have
over half of the properties in Parkview Terrace, um, we had...David, what were the
numbers? 37 from the FEMA buyout program, and now 33, so um, 70 properties in
Parkview Terrace, which is just about half, um, that are...and more than half of the flood
impacted properties, because remember the cul-de-sacs were not, the homes were not
really impacted in Parkview Terrace. So...different sides of the river completely
different strategies, but strategies nonetheless for how we're dealing with, you know,
basically trying to, our long range plan is to get as much as we can of Parkview Terrace
in the 100 and 500-year flood plains. On this side of the river, because of the
condominium regime, we don't have the ability to do the buyouts and so we have this
different strategy of the levee system with the streets.
Champion/ Well, we better be careful or (mumbled) seems silly.
Davidson/ Say that again, Connie.
Champion/ Said we better be really careful (mumbled) condominiums be built.
Davidson/ Oh, yeah. That was something that I...I can't remember if we mentioned or not, but
those three pads that could have an additional 12 units built could be built now, and...and
basically there are at least some members of the condominium association who are in
favor of that because it adds members to the condominium association. We do feel like
this would provide protection for those units to be built.
Hayek/ How high a levee are we talking about under that road then?
Fosse/ I'm trying to remember from the Stanley report. It...it, I think it varies from eight to ten
feet along there. LTh, because to get the Corps certification for...for that, you need to be
if I recall, three feet above the 100-year flood level. Um, with...with the top of your
levee, so that you have...
Champion/ Can I ask a really frank question?
Fosse/ Sure!
Champion/ (laughter and several talking) What if we said the condominium association, we're
not doing anything unless you give us those pads that are in the 100-year flood plain?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 48
Correia/ Why would we want them if we're going to be protecting them?
Davidson/ I guess there is the question of what public purpose would it serve on the other side of
the levee. It would be difficult to...that was one of the issues we had with the
condominium association, is how would we provide public access to that area, which,
um, would be public property basically.
O'Donnell/ Jeff, how many houses did you say in Parkview Terrace? Are in the...
Davidson/ There's 137 total. We will, and we will have people voluntarily taking buyouts
totaling 70.
O'Donnell/ Everything I've seen here is...is not going to affect Parkview Terrace in any way, is
it?
Fosse/ This project may have some impact, and that's one of the things we'll want to evaluate
with the model.
O'Donnell/ But it's going to happen behind it, isn't it?
Correia/ You're talking about Taft Speedway?
O'Donnell/ Behind Taft Speedway.
Correia/ Right.
Fosse/ Yeah, but this (several talking) this project here could have some impact on the other side
of the river upstream, and that's one of the things...it's likely to be much less than that
foot that we talked about, but...but more than zero.
Davidson/ And we'll have the model information to...evaluate that with, and remember, the most
flood prone properties were all offered FEMA buyouts in Parkview Terrace. They can
still accept FEMA buyouts if based on this decision making, all of a sudden they think it
would be something they would want to do.
Champion/ We did talk about being on the wrong side of the levees. (several responding)
Bailey/ And we were pretty clear about that.
Hayek/ We did but...but this levee is different from the other ones we're talking about. None of
the other ones leave people on the wet side. So to speak. Um, so it's more complex. 1
mean, it's not if you're north of, um...
Bailey/ We talked about...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council
Hayek/ No! I know we talked about it.
Page 49
Bailey/ No, we talked about the possibility of wanting Parkview Terrace and people on the river
side, if Normandy Drive were elevated for example, and people would be on the wet side
potentially. We talked pretty explicitly about the possibilities.
Hayek/ But we are pursuing funding for a specific one, and I think that's the distinction.
Wilburn/ Well, I think the other thing, again...my understanding of the Council's decision related
to all of this is we are going to pursue options so that we have choices, uh, so that, you
know, well, in the...for example, in some of the modeling we included all of the
properties and people could chose or not, so that we had options when it came down to
funding and programs and, um...you know, uh, projects, and so I view, you know,
including this...we're keeping the option of possibility there so that as we continue to
work through this, um, recovery, that uh, there will still be options, not only for the
Council, but for individuals, the community will have options. You know, there...there
have been and there will continue to be hard decisions along the way, but why close
something out, you know (several talking) and I...and I think just, I mean, you began
your presentation with a little flurry about, uh...um, some communities pursuing some
type of grandiose and I think, um, and the staff here trying to be methodical, keep our
eyes open, keep ourselves in the position to make, uh, choices in projects, I mean, it's...I
think that we're in a better position.
Davidson/ And that's exactly what you're doing, again, to...to, and I was going to indicate this in
the conclusion. What we're doing, you're not approving this project because we don't
have money to do this project yet. What we're trying to do is see if we can get money to
do it, and then you will decide. And in the meantime, once the application is submitted,
we will apprise Idyllwild, the eight remaining properties along Taft Speedway, and
Parkview Church of this project, as well as all the properties on the Peninsula. That's the
thing we haven't mentioned. What this achieves then is keeping, remember we had to
evacuate the Peninsula, even though all those homes were high and dry, we had to
evacuate them because they were cut off from emergency response services. This
achieves that, as well as protecting, uh, the properties that we've outlined, um, but we
need to hear publicly what, you know, we're assuming that this is a positive thing for the
90, uh, the 92 units at Idyllwild. I want to hear it from the Idyllwild people as to what
they think about it. Rick and I were talking about this today and...and Rick said, uh, that
some of the people maybe upset that their view of the river would be cut off...from
Idyllwild. So again, we need to hear that input. You need to have the benefit of that
before we implement this project, but we are asking if you're even interested in pursuing
funding for it.
Bailey/ And we...when we do the Dubuque Street project, some portion of Taft Speedway will
be elevated anyway. Correct?
Fosse/ Yes, probably out to...somewhere in here.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 50
Bailey/ Okay. All right. So this is just...taking it (mumbled)
Hayek/ What does...what do levees and the resulting change in hydrology do to buyout
eligibility? I mean, for example, if you're on the Normandy side and this goes in, and we
can...we can estimate with reasonable (mumbled) certainty that that's going to increase
the flood on the other side, does that put certain homes into a 100 or 500-year plain that
aren't there now? Changes, man-made changes to the flow of the river, I would think,
would change potentially what homes are in or not in those zones.
Fosse/ The, um, the likely combination of...of this project, Dubuque Street, and the Park Road
bridge would be a lowering of the water surface profile through there. So it.. .
Davidson/ We've been able to figure out from the models already, Matt, is that the Park Road
bridge is the most critical factor, getting that elevated will have more positive impacts,
will at least have significant positive impacts.
O'Donnell/ Do we know how much that backs up the water behind it?
Fosse/ Yes we do, because we use that model, this model is very easy to take components out,
it's harder to add them back in. That's what's more expensive and more tedious, but took
the Park Road bridge out and, as I said, it made about 14 inches of difference at the
bridge location, and I'm working from memory here, but about, uh, 11 inches here and
about 10 inches at Parkview Terrace, and about 6 1/2 or 7 inches at Coralville strip.
Lower.
Champion/ Wow!
O'Donnell/ Wow, that's incredible. Thanks. That's acting as a dam. (several talking)
Fosse/ A constriction, yeah.
Bailey/ Okay, so regarding this one, are we...willing to move ahead and seek funding for it?
(several responding) Okay.
Davidson/ Real quickly then, um, I mean, we're under the impression you're comfortable with all
these applications going in. You'll have the two formal authorizing resolutions, uh,
tomorrow. You've heard us indicate we're moving very quickly here. The applications,
the CDBG public infrastructure applications will be submitted Friday. The I-JOBS
applications Monday, uh, we'll then begin the flurry that is lobbying for, in particular, the
I-JOBS projects, and we will then begin a more formal public input process that we
simply haven't had time for yet.
Hayek/ I assume because the funding sources are different, we're not going to be in this situation,
but what if we're in a position of having to prioritize between projects, that benefit only
private property and those that benefit the public? Through public infrastructure.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council
Fosse/ We'll seek your input on that.
Hayek/ Yeah (laughter) okay.
Bailey/ We look forward to that discussion!
Fosse/ Yes.
Davidson/ This is not the last time you will see us!
Page 51
Champion/ Well, my number one priority is that waste water treatment plant. That's a horrible
(mumbled)
Fosse/ So, one thing to keep in mind is (several talking) depending on our success getting, uh,
getting these funding sources, uh, it maybe necessary to shift some other things around
in the capital program, just so that we have the capacity to get these things done within
the time frames that are required by these funding sources, so (mumbled) capital program
this winter, you may see some of that.
Helling/ One other thing that we will keep in mind is that you do have a commitment on your
local option sales tax. That has to be public infrastructure.
Bailey/ Right (several responding) Okay. Do you have what you need? Great, thanks!
Fosse/ Anything else? Move on.
Davidson/ Thank you.
Correia/ Thank you (several talking)
Bailey/ And we're going to talk about snow?
Snow Emergency Parkin:
Fosse/ Yes! Let's go from floods to snow! Um...one of the things we're doing this summer in
addition to the flood recovery efforts is...is debriefing on our snow ordinance. We had
our first winter of it last year, and we're looking for opportunities to improve that.
And...and certainly what we want to do is reduce confusion. That seemed to be the
number one problem out there, and uh, one area of confusion is...is where we have local
parking restrictions that essentially preempt the snow ordinance and they prevail over
that, and...and one of those, or pretty much the one is...is where we have calendar
parking. Where you have Monday, Wednesday, Friday parking, or Tuesday, Thursday,
Saturday. And, the...the fix for this confusion in other communities that have snow
ordinances is that you go to calendar parking in those, or excuse me, go to...odd/even
parking.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 52
Bailey/ Back to odd/even.
Fosse/ It's...
Champion/ Oh, I thought that's what we were doing!
Fosse/ Well, that's what we're talking about doing, is switching over the...the areas that are
calendar parking. They're shown in blue on this map here, and changing those to
odd/even parking, so by default they're consistent with the snow ordinance. So that it...it
just works that way. And let's zoom in a little bit here. It's, and I apologize for the low
resolution PDF, but it's primarily in the...in the near northside. Got a handful on the east
side, and...and a few on the south side. And, um, that's where...these are areas where we
had a lot of tows occur last winter. Uh, if this is something that you're agreeable with and
want to consider, what we'll do during the next few weeks is...is get information out to
these neighborhoods about the proposed change and...and by August 18th when...when
you would act on this, we...we'll know what kind of feedback we're going to get from the
neighborhoods on that. Um...
Bailey/ We used to have odd/even, and then we moved to calendar. Why did we do that?
Fosse/ I don't know.
Bailey/ Okay.
Champion/ I don't know either!
Bailey/ Because when I, you know, first moved, well, no, years on the north side it was
odd/even, and then it switched over, and L..do you know, Dale?
Helling/ I don't recall, um...it's more consistent, it's more convenient, because you always know
what day of the week it is, but the calendar parking you have to think of the number...uh,
so (both talking)
Hayek/ Tall order for some college kids.
Bailey/ It's a tall order for some (laughter)
Fosse/ Yeah, and one of the things (several talking) yeah, uh, Amy just asked about Sundays, and
that's a good point. Right now Sundays are free parking. Both sides, and we would look
to continue that, because we...we don't have bus service on Sundays, we're not picking
up garbage. It works for the neighborhoods now to have free parking on both sides on
(both talking)
Correia/ ...snow emergency and it's a Sunday it would revert to whether it's an odd or even
which side of the street.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council
Fosse/ Correct (both talking)
Page 53
Bailey/ I was asking about the switchover because I was wondering if that was motivated by
neighborhoods, and if we got a lot of concern when we switched over, but apparently if
ya'll aren't remembering it, it wasn't a packed hall.
Correia/ And besides we've got a lot of people wanting us to have the snow emergency.
Bailey/ Oh, yeah, yeah, no, so I think (both talking)
Wright/ Yeah, I think...this will correct some of the confusion that we had last winter, um, I
know I actually had a neighbor come to my door one time, said, basically saying, you did
this, where am I supposed to park?
Bailey/ yeah.
Fosse/ Yeah, and it's confusing for staff too that's enforcing it, because as they move from
neighborhood to neighborhood they've got to look to see if it's preempted by certain
signage.
Hayek/ yeah.
Bailey/ Okay.
Fosse/ So, if you're all on board with this....
Bailey/ Are we in agreement? Okay.
Fosse/ We'll make the contacts.
Bailey/ Yeah, that's great. Thank you. That was quick.
Wright/ We like quick!
Domestic Partnership Benefits (IP4 of 7/23):
Bailey/ Yes we do. Domestic partnership benefits. This is, um, a memo in the Info Packet.
Number 4.
Dilkes/ You've got a memo from, um, Sarah and Karen, uh, Jennings on what the staffs
recommendation is with respect to, uh, our healthcare benefits, and our domestic
partnership registry, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Varnum vs. Brien, which
as you all know, uh, legalized same-sex marriage in...in Iowa. Um, Iowa City's
healthcare benefits are currently provided to persons who are legally married persons
who are, chose to sign an affidavit of common law marriage, and same-sex domestic
partners. And the reason for the provision of healthcare benefits to same-sex domestic
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 54
partners has been because they, until now, did not have the opportunity to marry. So,
given that that is the case, we're suggesting that we eliminate the domestic partnership
benefits, um, effective July 1st of 2010 to be consistent with our collective bargaining
agreements, in light of the decision. (several talking)
Wright/ I have one question about that. Does...probably new territory, but common law
marriage, will they be applying to same-sex couples as well as anybody else is my
assumption?
Dilkes/ Yes. I mean, that's my interpretation of the decision, because basically they said...the
opportunity to marry, uh, must be provided equally to same-sex and opposite-sex
partners, and I...it doesn't matter whether it's legal marriage or common law marriage.
Wright/ There's still going to be an affidavit of a common law marriage...
Dilkes/ Yes, I mean, if it...if the same-sex couple that are currently domestic partners and get
benefits that way could chose if they wanted to not to get legally married, but for benefits
purposes to sign an affidavit of common law marriage.
Champion/ What is a common law marriage? I mean, how long do you have to be...
Correia/ Apparently in Iowa there's not a.. .
Bailey/ There's not a year...
Dilkes/ There's not a number of years, but it's basically if, I mean, when I was in private practice,
I have represented a common law spouse in a divorce. Um, so you have, basically you
have to show that you've held yourself out as a married...as a married couple.
Champion/ (mumbled)
Dilkes/ You know, and...in the way that you present to other people and that kind of thing.
Um...but, we do for purposes of providing benefits, when we, um, when a couple wishes
to sign an affidavit of common law marriage, and thereby access benefits, uh, we remind
them that...one of, one member of the couple could chose to initiate divorce proceedings
if they don't, you know, if the couple splits up. So...and there'd be a good evidence of
common law marriage, had you signed an affidavit of common law marriage. So...so
that's the recommendation with respect to healthcare benefits. Um, with respect to the
domestic partnership registry, that has always been available to, and Marian can speak
more to this because she runs the registry out of her office, that it's always been available
to same-sex and opposite-sex couples should they chose to use it. It is completely
separate from our benefits situation. Um, we recommend that that remain the same. It's
not effected by the decision. There are some entities that may chose to provide, uh,
benefits, healthcare benefits, to domestic partners, same-sex and opposite-sex. I believe
that's what the University does now. Um, and so the University's benefit system is not
going to be affected by, uh, the Varnum vs. Brien decision. Um, and I guess we just
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 55
think because there really, it's always been offered to same-sex and, uh, opposite-sex
couples that there's no reason to change it in light of the decision.
Wilburn /So there's no special class created through the registry, but since there's a special class,
essentially singled out or "discriminated" with the same-sex partner registry, we're getting
rid of that one? Right? I...I don't think I said that quite...
Dilkes/ I'd say it a little differently, but yes.
Wilburn/ Say it essentially, yeah (laughter).
Champion Be nice to think about this.
Wright/ Why couldn't we just have...domestic partnership benefits, rather...and not specify
(several talking) sexual makeup of the couple?
Dilkes/ Well, and Dale can speak more to this because I think there's a real opportunity for
abuse. Um...you know if you...if you're living, I mean, if your girlfriend or boyfriend is
living with you and needs healthcare benefits, and all you have to do is sign an affidavit
of, um, domestic partnership, um, it increases the liability for benefits of the city under
circumstances when it's not necessary. Because the opportunity to marry is available,
um, and if...you can do it legally, you can do it by common law, but you have...you can
demonstrate that commitment and thereby get benefits, but we don't want to open up our
benefits to couples who are not, do not have that commitment. And the only reason that
we had domestic partnership benefits previously is because we needed to create that in
order to provide benefits to same-sex couples because they did not have the opportunity
to marry.
Champion/ So we're not really...we're not really getting rid of the benefits. We're just changing
how you go about doing it.
Correia/ You have to be married or (several talking)
Bailey/ ...because you have the opportunity to be married.
Champion/ Okay, all right.
Dilkes/ If you did not get rid of the benefit right now, then you would need to provide healthcare
benefits to same-sex and opposite-sex domestic partners.
Champion/ Okay, all right, I understand now.
Wright/ What cost is that to the City directly? For partners, spousal coverage.
Helling/ It'd be the difference between single coverage and family coverage, which is
probably...uh, difference between about, $400 and $500 versus about $1,200 a month.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 56
Well, I mean, you got to back out the $60 so, you know...(mumbled) something like that.
Um...so it's substantial. It's more than twice the amount. And the other thing is that
for...for, uh, you allow...if we continue to provide it for all domestic partners, um, keep
in mind that once somebody's on the insurance and then they go off because the partners
split up or whatever, they still have the COBRA for another 18 months, that they can, you
know (mumbled) if they buy it.
Bailey/ iJh-huh.
Helling/ So it really opens it up much, much broader than (mumbled)
Champion/ Well, okay, I...
Dilkes/ I think this is also consistent...it's...we have had situations with, for healthcare benefits
in the past where we, there have been, um, opposite-sex couples who wanted to access
the domestic partner benefits, and we have told them no because the only reason we have
those benefits is because same-sex couples cannot marry.
Champion/ I see, okay, I'm...
Dilkes/ And it would be inconsistent, I think, at this point then...
Bailey/ what you're saying is it is our intent to...to provide benefits to married couples, and since
everybody can marry now, then we change this policy. It's not our intent necessarily to
provide it to domestic partners.
Dilkes/ correct.
Bailey/ And, what you're suggesting is perhaps a consideration of our intent. Okay. Is anybody
else interested in considering intent? In looking at domestic partnerships? I'm
comfortable with the intent of the...the, providing to married couples.
Champion/ Well, we're not forcing, well, you're right. You're right. I...I had to think about it.
I'll probably have to sleep on that a little bit.
Correia/ It seems like there's two different things though. It seems like that, the way this...the
way our currently policy has an intent.
Bailey/ Yes.
Correial The current policy's intent is to cover married couples, cover couples who aren't allowed
to be married, same-sex couples. So to be consistent with this policy, we would change it
so that it would be all married, legally married couples or the affidavit of common law
marriage with, which both opposite-six and same-sex couples can enter into...
Bailey/ Right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
Jul 27 2009 City Council Page 57
Y
Correia/ ...and that then if there's a...enough of us that want to talk about intent for healthcare
benefits, do we want to open...and that's a separate conversation. It seems like to me.
Bailey/ I think so.
Dilkes/ So is...is the Council majority in favor of the recommendations in this memo, or...
Bailey/ (several responding) I am.
Correia/ Yeah.
Dilkes/ Is that four?
Wright/ Connie, you and I ended up on the same side of something!
Champion/ (several talking) on the School Board and the City Council to give benefits to the
same-sex couples. I feel betrayed by this new law! I want...(several talking and
laughing)
Correia/ But...how are you betrayed...
Champion/ I know, I just can't (several talking)
Bailey/ ...to get the benefits just like everybody else, yeah!
Correia/ ...fairness!
Wilburn/ Well, and I think also the potential for abuse and the expenses, especially given that,
uh, I mean, uh, you and some others have expressed concerns about cost that we can't
negotiate directly with, that are negotiated in Des Moines and not here, and so uh, I think
it adds...I think maybe it puts in the line maybe even more potential for, um, abuse and
again, since someone can COBRA for X number of months, the cost of, for someone that,
um, may have gotten someone that they've been with for a few months, you know...
Bailey/ Perhaps that underscores the need for healthcare reform?
Champion/ You don't...Ross, you don't see an equity issue with this?
Wilburn/ Well, I mean, if you think it's your, I'm trying to think through this. At your business,
if um, you know, whether...businesses across the board make a distinction about, a lot of
them are willing to provide, uh, well some of them have provided a full benefit for, uh, a
single policy, but uh, some have made the decision, but if you want your family in it,
you're on your own, uh, others have paid the, a portion of that, so I think there's existing
practice of trying to, uh, provide a benefit, but, um...you know, put some guidelines
around the amount of benefit, additional benefit, that you can provide, beyond the direct
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 58
employee. So I guess...yeah, so I don't really see that, because you're, I mean, we're
providing it for the employee. We're providing some parameters around the family or the
partner or whoever else, um...
Bailey/ Philosophically Iunderstand where you're coming from, but it's consistent with what
we've been doing, and that's why I'm comfortable with doing it. I mean, we can have a
long discussion about philosophically forcing people to marry or...or the whole
institution of marriage. I don't think that that's what this is about. This is about what
have we done and let's be consistent with our policies, and I think that.. .
Dilkes/ Look at it this way. The University in the past has provided benefits to domestic
partners, whether they were same-sex or opposite-sex, so the Varnum decision doesn't
mean anything. It doesn't matter to them, in terms of their benefits. We have only
provided benefits to domestic partners when they're same-sex couples be...only because
they couldn't marry.
Champion/ Right, right.
Dilkes/ And therefore the decision has an impact on us, and the...our policy, and so that's the
difference.
Champion/ Okay.
Bailey/ And we're doing a great thing by just bringing our policies in line with the recent
decision and getting things all consistent.
Wilburn /And so then it goes to how much of an additional benefit or option do you want to
have...to.. .
Correia/ I think that's if...if enough people want to talk about that, we'll talk about that
separately.
Bailey/ Right, I think...I think that we're in agreement (several talking and laughing) Do you
have what you need, Eleanor?
Dilkes/ Yes.
Bailey/ Okay, good! We're moving along. (several talking) Yes! Let's!
Wilburn/ I'm curious to what you were going to add.
Dilkes/ Uh...(several talking and laughing)
Information Packet Discussion (July 16 & 23):
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 59
Bailey/ This is a discussion for another venue, I think. Um, info packet discussion. From July
16 and the 23rd, and I also see that some people brought budgets so...I would assume
there are questions. Okay. Do we have any info packet discussion items? No? I'm
moving, if we don't. Council time.
Council Time:
Champion/ I...am really concerned, and I don't know what we can do to help out the situation in
the Grant Wood neighborhood, but I'm really getting concerned with the increased crime
over there, and how can we work with the School District, I mean, they had bombings on
the school grounds, for crying out loud! And, are we doing any joint effort with them or
is it being brought up by the School Board or the School District or...
Correia/ well, there's been a lot of, um, joint efforts this summer, youth activities.
Champion/ To make activities, but that's not stopping the crime. I'm concerned about the crime.
Helling/ Well, I think...and just from my experience in the Broadway neighborhood, I mean,
over time, the School District's been very involved in those meetings, although they don't
have any, you know, public safety entity within the School District, but certainly working
not only with law enforcement, but also with Corrections. Uh, and I think a lot of that
element was brought in after the...after the situation a couple of months ago, um,
Corrections, and again, the City, the school district were all very... and the neighborhoods
were very involved in...in working through it, and I think that, you know, that's still
taking place. In terms of, uh, public safety, if you're talking about committing more,
more resources there, we, you know, where do we take them away from or do we add
or...
Correia/ Well, and I know I've talked to Sam that, you know, he's had challenges this year in
being able to be fully staffed, and you know, there's extra positions he hasn't, because of
retirements and deployments and injuries that haven't been able to, um, fill some
positions that were, um, that he was going to direct for community service, or community
policing, and I think that's something that (both talking)
Bailey/ So we don't get into a lengthy discussion, I mean, your concerned...talk with Dale, I
mean, is there something specific that you want to be addressed.
Champion/ I mean, I'm thinking about, I mean, should we put...we should work with the School
District, can we put cameras on that playground? Um, can we.. .
Bailey/ (both talking) add this to the agenda when you meet with Lane and...because our staff is
going to meet with the School District...
Champion/ what about the possibility of curfews, I mean, I'm really getting concerned about
what's going on. Gangs of kids running around the streets in the middle of the night!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
Jul 27 2009 City Council Page 60
Y
Wright/ Is there not something (several talking) I'm thinking of...this is probably (mumbled)
something that Sam's idea of some kind of, not a curfew exactly, something he sent to
you for review (mumbled)
Dilkes/ Yeah, we're having...he...kind of...it's kind of complicated, but he's...he's interested in
pursuing a...a...delinquencybehauior ordinance, um, and we're in the process of working
through and I'm trying...getting him to identify, and getting the neighborhood services
people to identify what behaviors they're talking about, and then we're going to go
through them and we're going to look and see whether they're already addressed by
particular crimes, or are they simply a curfew, you know, I mean, a curfew could be
structured in a way that, um, targeted specific ages for specific activities, you know,
and...and could address the parent's behavior and that kind of thing too, so yes, we are
having those conversations.
Champion/ Okay.
Bailey/ Okay, thank you.
Wright/ ...ongoing discussion.
Hayek/ And Connie, this is not just happening down there. It's happening in my area. I'm the
guy...I was the person who called 9-1-1, uh, the non-emergency number on that...that
sledgehammer, meth crime two weeks ago. They parked in front of my house. Uh, you
know, it's...
Wilburn/ Stuff going on (several talking)
Hayek/ Public safety issue, I think it's a number one issue facing the community. I think it's a
stealth issue, in terms of growing unease across the community. It's hard to talk about.
It's the biggest issue in my opinion.
Champion/ It is. It's a bad issue.
Bailey/ Other Council time items? All right, any budget priority items? Questions?
Budget Priorities:
Hayek/ Um...yeah, I'm not sure why this was on there, unless it was because we got this...
Bailey/ No, we put budget priorities on every work session. Just in case we want (both talking)
Hayek/ Um, okay.
Bailey/ Just in case you know there are additional questions as we move forward through it. We
agreed to do that a couple months ago.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 61
Hayek/ That's fine. I mean, this, uh, this is excellent (several responding) but it leads to some
questions I have about the next six to twelve months, you know, when do we take up the
franchise fees, is that in connection with the budget. Does this Council (both talking)
Bailey/ I think we agreed to do that.
Hayek/ Does the next Council do those?
Helling/ Yeah, I would anticipate another discussion franchise fees in September.
Hayek/ Okay. Um...I...at some point I'm going to want to talk about debt service. There's some
concerning trends there. Doesn't have to be tonight; we've been here a long time. But,
whenever the next logical discussion point is.
Helling/ And keep in mind as we go through our year-end FY09 that some of those trends may
change, uh, because that's kind of old news. It was put together several months ago and,
um, so there are...there are things that by the time you get the budget it's kind of out of
date to a certain extent in some ways. Particularly in terms of (mumbled)
Hayek/ As I recall, we have essentially apre-budget season discussion where we try to give you
more instruction as we go into it.
Helling/ Uh, that's kind of what...certainly the priority or the budget priorities, and when we
talked about it in May, served that purpose, but again, we'll talk in September. I want to
talk about the, uh, franchise fees, um, and you know, any other sorts of issues. Generally
we address a lot of those when they come up, like we talked tonight about the UNESCO
thing. Um, but there maybe other issues that come up, but I think we've got pretty good
direction for putting in the FY11 budget together.
Hayek/ So you mentioned September?
Helling/ Yes.
Hayek/ Okay, so that's a stopping point for discussion, pre-budgets. Okay.
Helling/ Yeah, hopefully by then we'll have all the answers that we couldn't give you before on
the franchise fee, uh, what we can do and what we can't. I think we have most of that
now.
Schedule of Pending Discussion Items:
Bailey/ Good. Okay, which leads us into schedule of pending discussion items. Um, which is in
the Info Packet. Any questions, comments, additions? I just noted franchise fees,
September. Okay. Um, any upcoming community events or Council invitations that we
should be aware of? I apologize about the train consideration. I had understood that
Rebecca was contacting all of you via your personal email. Apparently she contacted
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 62
you via the Council address, so...I think Mike made it very clear how to best contact
Council Members. Yes. Anything else coming up that people should be aware of?
Okay.
Discussion of Meeting Schedule:
Bailey/ Let's talk about meeting schedules, um...interesting timing to talk about it at the end of a
long meeting. Um, Marian put out some...some possibilities, um...let's just walk
through these. I think...broadly, um, let's do it in sort of a linear fashion. We're looking
at October, and I...I will just say at the outset the October 12, 13 combination won't work
for me. Um, is there concern about having...
Correia/ And just so, September is the 29th and the 15th for formal? Regular?
Karr/ 15th and 29th.
Correia/ Okay.
Bailey/ And then, um, is there any concern of having, uh, our regular first and third on the
Monday, October 5th, and the Tuesday, October 6th, which is a primary election night, if
it's needed? We tend to avoid those. Connie will be involved with.. .
Champion/ I don't have any problems with having, uh, a meeting on primary night.
Bailey/ Does anybody e1se...I mean we typically try to avoid those and.. .
Wright/ Be nice to avoid it if we could, but if we need to I'm fine.
Bailey/ Or we can combine on, I mean, I'm suggesting, and I can be gone on the 12th and 13th,
but I just can't work that out. The 12th is Jay's birthday and the 13th I'm at Vision Iowa.
So, um, we could combine on the 5th. We could do it 5th, 6th, what's your preference?
Champion/ Doesn't matter (several talking)
Wright/ 5th, wait a minute...
Bailey/ Combine on the Monday. Of the 5th.
Karr/ Do you want a combined one on the 5th, or just stay to your regular schedule of 5/6?
Bailey/ Yeah, we either avoid the primary by combining on the 5th, or we, um, have a meeting
on the primary election night, if needed. If the primary's needed, there may not be a
primary needed.
Correia/ Yeah, I say keep it.. .
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 63
Karr/ 5/6?
Bailey/ 5th and 6th?
Karr/ 5/6?
Bailey/ Does that work? (several responding) Okay.
Karr/ And so then the next question becomes do you want to keep the 19th, 20th? Is there any
problem with 19, 20?
Bailey/ So go on the first and third...
Karr/ We stay with the first and third.
Bailey/ Okay.
Karr/ Okay.
Bailey/ Speak now.
Karr/ I'll revise the schedule and get it out to you tomorrow.
Bailey/ Okay. Um...
Karr/ November.
Bailey/ Any concerns about the November...
Hayek/ Do we drop 26, 27 then?
Karr/ Yes.
Bailey/ Yes.
Karr/ I'll revise it and give it to you tomorrow.
Wright/ Do you want to do a combined on the...on the 2nd? To avoid election day.
Champion/ We're not going to be needing that anyway. That just says...we're not meeting that
day.
Karr/ Well, that's not the proposal. The proposal is that you meet November 16th and 17th.
Champion/ Right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 64
Karr/ So now the question becomes...(several talking) do you want to just leave November the
same, or is there interest in changing November's schedule?
Bailey/ Do we anticipate any need for...addition...arneeting on the 2nd?
Wright/ That's only, basically that's only (several talking)
Bailey/ Right.
Correia/ Excellent! Works for me!
Bailey/ Uh, Dale's face does not look very encouraging about that schedule.
Helling/ I'm just wondering about legislative priorities and...
Bailey/ I'm wondering too!
Karr/ Can we...
Bailey/ No, we decide them.
Correia/ Oh!
Bailey/ We have to decide them before we invite and talk (several talking) How about a
combined one on the 2nd?
Champion/ Sure.
Bailey/ Okay.
Karr/ So we're going...
Champion/ But we're going to have a meeting October 27th? And (several talking) just, I'll get
the revised schedule. I can't look at that. It's too late.
Bailey/ First and third in October, and then first and third in November, essentially.
Karr/ So you are back to the first and third in November then?
Bailey/ Right. Yeah, but combined on Monday, the 2nd. All right? All right, we've moving...
Karr/ So it's not the first and third. It's a combined on the 2nd and the 16th and 17th.
Bailey/ Yeah. Um...okay? Moving along, we will also need, do the December dates
look...okay. You don't have to celebrate those holidays but they are holidays of the City.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 65
Um, and we will meet...a date for, uh, orientation. Marian, did you have a suggestion for
that?
Karr/ I'm sorry. Are you going then from the 17th in November, um...to then the 30th and the
1st then?
Bailey/ yes, I did not hear any problems with that. So do you have a suggestion for orientation?
Karr/ No I do not. I think your legislative is probably going to be (both looking) 9th or 10th, it
depends...it hasn't been set yet. No earlier than the 9th, no later than the 10th.
Bailey/ So can we run an orientation with the work session on the 16th?
Karr/ LJh, generally we don't run orientation the same night as the work session. It's a separate
night.
Bailey/ Okay. I don't even...
Wright/ Having been through the orientation relatively recently, I don't think that'd be a great
idea.
Bailey/ I don't even remember the orientation, so please feel free (several talking)
Karr/ It's usually attended by both.. .
Champion/ That's why...I've had so much trouble. I was never orientated!
Karr/But, it might (several talking)
Bailey/ Well, we'll make you attend this one! (laughter)
Karr/ But, what impact if any did you plan for the legislative meeting? Did you want the, uh,
incoming Council involved in that discussion as well, cause that could be the same night
as orientation.
Bailey/ Yeah (several talking) although that gets very late.
Karr/ No, we typically, the orientation.. .
Bailey/ ...in the decision making process for legislative priorities. We would have to have it the
week, um...
Karr/ We could have it the 10th.
Bailey/ I couldn't have it the 10th.
Karr/ Okay, that's right. Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 66
Bailey/ I can't meet on the second Tuesday. Um...but, didn't you say we needed to back that up?
Okay.
Champion/ And...I know this is...a big problem, but...
Bailey/ We could have it the 9th.
Karr/ If...if the...
Bailey/ Oh, the (mumbled)
Karr/ It can be no earlier than noon the 9th or later than the 10th, but it hasn't (mumbled)
Bailey/ Thought it would be smart even though (both talking)
Karr/ We could set it the 9th. That, I mean, if you want to.
Bailey/ The 12th?
Champion/ Can we please...can we please, my only request is that we combine the 14th and 15th
of December.
Karr/ Combine the 14th and 15th?
Champion/ That's just too close to the...holidays.
Karr/ It'd be the last...your last meeting.
Champion /I mean, I'm sorry, but I got two retail businesses and 18 grandchildren.
Bailey/ I don't care.
Karr/ So combine.
Wright/ So it's our fault you got to deal with 18 grandchildren? (laughter)
Correia/ You made those decisions yourself! (laughter)
Bailey/ (several talking) I don't think this is anything we can solve tonight (laughter).
Wright/ At least not on the record!
Bailey/ No!
Champion/ And this is the year they all come home!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council
Bailey/ Okay.
Correia/ So we're combing on which day?
Karr/ The 14th.
Bailey/ The 14th. Um...I guess we could combine the 15th. She didn't say which!
Champion/ Oh, I don't care!
Karr/ Do you want the 12th as a possible orientation?
Page 67
Bailey/ How does the 12th work for orientation, legislative priority meeting? It's a Thursday
night.
Wright/ Fine.
Hayek/ Probably fine.
Bailey/ Fine.
Karr/ Orientation, legislative meeting.
Bailey/ Put it in front of us.. .
Hayek/ Send something out and I'll be sure to torpedo anything.
Karr/ Okay. But then.. .
Bailey/ Then we need...an area legislator's meeting and I was thinking the first week of
December, looking at that Wednesday the 2nd or the Thursday the 3rd.
Karr/ And we would act on, then you would act on the resolution the 1st?
Bailey/ I guess we would have to. You guys have that schedule figured out. You said that you
back it out.
Karr/ Because then they wouldn't have it ahead of time. You wouldn't have anything to go out
ahead of time.
Bailey/ Oh, that's not good.
Karr/ So then, if you're going to meet the 12th we would have it on the agenda as a blank
resolution and you'd firm it up the 17th because the agenda'd be out.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.
July 27, 2009 City Council Page 68
Wright/ I have no life, so any of these days...
Bailey/ Marian and I will...we'll talk with Dale. They'll back out this thing and we'll figure out
some options for the legislative meeting. Okay? You guys are all exhausted and aren't
thinking.
Karr/ Is the first full week in December a possibility, the 7th or 8th?
Champion/ The first week in December.. .
Karr/ No, not for Regenia, the 8th, but the 7th? (several talking) I'm saying for the legislative,
that would give you...
Bailey/ Yeah, I think that would be fine.
Karr/Because the sooner we get out to the legislature some dates and they reserve it.
Bailey/ So how about the 10th that week too, it's a Thursday? The 7th or the 10th? Or even the
Wednesday night works.
Karr/ I'm sorry?
Correia/ (mumbled)
Karr/ No, I'm talking December. 7 or 10. We could offer those two options.
Bailey/ Wednesday would work too. I'll be back.
Karr/ 7, 9, or 10.
Champion/ You mean for the legislators?
Karr/ For the legislators. 7, 9, or 10?
Champion/ (mumbled)
Bailey/ Right. No.
Dilkes/ I kind of miss having speakers (mumbled)
Bailey/ Well, you can take that role over! (laughter) The scariest part of any meeting is when
people get out their calendars. Go home. See you tomorrow.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
special work session meeting of July 27, 2009.