Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-11-04 Transcription Page 1 Council Present: Alter, Bergus, Dunn, Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague Staff Present: Fruin, Lehmann, Goers, Grace, Lyon, Havel, Sovers, Sitzman, Nagle- Gamm, Hightshoe, Riedinger Others Present: Martinez, Alternate USG, 1. Joint meeting with the Housing and Community Development Commission: Presentation of the five-year Consolidated Plan, City Steps 2030 Teague: We're going to go ahead and get started. This is the City of Iowa City work session for November 4th, 2024, and it is right at 4:04 PM. Our first agenda item is joint meeting with the Housing and Community Development Commission. There will be a presentation of the five-year consolidation plan for City Steps 2020- for 2030. I want to acknowledge that Mayor Pro Tem Salih isn't here. Uh, she's recusing herself. And we have two commissioners that are here, and so I'm going to ask for a roll call for the two commissioners that actually, I can just do that because I know these two. Um,there are other commissioners that may join us in the process, and we'll just kind of welcome them when they get here. First of all,we'll just actually have you two introduce yourselves and tell us a little bit about you whatever you want to say in your role on the Commission. Vogel: Well, I'm Kyle Vogel. I'm the current- current chairperson, I guess, of HCDC. I've been on for three, four years, I think at some point, I know. Megan was on originally when I-when I joined, and Maryanne has been on, I think as long as I've been on as well. Uh,but yeah, I come from,uh,property management background. So I- I joined HCDC,really just as a means of being more in the middle of the- of the solution aspect of trying to define the solutions that-that is housing in Iowa City and it's- it's a constant battle,but I feel like we try to send you guys positive,uh,positive recommendations as much as possible,whether- whether you listen to us or not, at least we're trying. But, so yeah. So- Teague: Thanks and welcome. Dennis: Thanks. I'm Maryanne Dennis, and I'm retired, so I joined the Commission just to volunteer for something in the community. Teague: Great. Appreciate both of your service on the commission. We know that it's hard work. And I'll replace that hard word with heart work. So thanks for what you do. All right,we're going to go ahead and invite staff to get us started on this item, so welcome. Kubly: All right. I am Erika Kubly with Neighborhood Services. Thank you. Um,today,we have a preview of some proposed changes through City Steps 2030,which is our five-year consolidated plan. Uh,before I get started, I wanted to note that Commissioner Horacio Morgan is also recused from the conversation due to a conflict of interest. Um, our agenda for today, I'm going to start off by introducing our consultant,Mullin and Lonergan,who are on the Zoom call. They're going to provide some basic overview of a basic overview of our planning process, including public input we've received to date. They're also going to discuss observations they have as experts in the field about how we operate our federal programs This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 2 here in Iowa City. Mullin and Lonergan have helped prepare investment strategies for CBDG and home funding,which I will go over, and then we'll shift to AID Agency programs discussing investment strategies, city funding priorities, and some recommendations for our funding process. So the city has hired Mullin and Lonergan to complete our five-year consolidated plan through an RFP process. They are based in Pittsburgh,but work across the con- country. They are experts in housing and community development,having prepared more than 125 consolidated plans for 80 entitlement communities like us. They provide ongoing technical assistance for 40 communities. They're now providing that for Iowa City as well,which means that if we have a question about our programs and we can't get an interpretation from HUD,we have another resource to reach out to,which is great. They are also working on- excuse me, our analysis of impediments to fair housing and our regional housing needs assessment. The team includes Bill Wasielewski,the President, Hannah Genovese, and Emily Reilley, and we have Bill online today, as well as Hannah and Emily, and I'm going to pass it over to Bill for the next few slides. Teague: Great. Welcome, Bill. Wasielewski: Thank you. Can you all hear me, okay? Teague: We can. Wasielewski: Yeah, excellent. Although you might not be able to see me,which is fine. Um, so again,thank you, Erika. And yes, and thank you for hiring us to help the city prepare this important document. And so just want to briefly go through what a consolidated plan is and- and why it's important and why it matters. Um, if- so kind of an overview of the consolidated plan is,basically, a framework document that's required every five years by entitlement communities such as yourself. And the idea is to,uh, kind of every five years,re look at your priorities and housing and community development needs. Ali, looking forward,really,what has changed over the last five years and what-what are the new priorities, if any, looking forward. And more importantly, it helps focus the expenditures of your federal CDBG and Home funds,uh, over the next five years. Uh, for these consolidated plan consists of, basically, four main pieces. They include a housing needs assessment,housing market analysis,which we're currently working on. And then what we call a non-housing community development section,uh, and a strategic plan. The strategic plan is the most important document as it relates,uh,to the high priority needs that the city identifies,uh,that it- that it will use to fund priorities with your federal resources over the next five years. And just as a note below,we're also working on your,uh, once we complete and get sign off on the five- year consolidated plan,we also will be working to help you prepare your fiscal year 2026 annual action plan,uh, as Erika said an analysis of impediments to fair housing,which is basically a sister document to the consolidated plan. Um, and that's important because we use the results of the analysis of impediments to fair housing to complete a fair housing action plan,which will basically be used for by the city to help address any identified impediments to fair housing over the next five years. And then finally,we're working on a regional housing needs assessment. And that's important because we're going to supplement,uh,the consolidated plan housing and market needs analysis with doc- information obtained from our completing housing needs assessment. That's really important because the-the current template that we use to prepare the consolidated plan,housing and market needs assessment. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 3 Basically, a census demographics that are generated by Hud,we're going to supplement that with real world and real time housing market data to help again,provide the clearest picture possible to,uh,help you make decisions in terms of, uh,what your needs are and how to,uh, identify and, ah, focus your expenditures for the next five years for your CDBG home program. Our next slide. It's important to note that when we prepare these documents, it's just not in a vacuum. We actually have a- a very structured process in place,uh,that we rely on a number of different things, and we just wanted to kind of present to you,uh,what we've been doing since,uh,basically,this summer. Uh, so we went through a pretty rigorous public input process. Uh,we conducted four meetings, as you can see on the screen that were open to the public. They were in July of- last week of July, first week of August. We also did a virtual, uh,public meeting in the first early September. Again,that was to give people who weren't unable to make the in person meetings, give them an opportunity to provide input. In addition,we also conducted,uh, and invited stakeholders,uh,to the local stakeholders to what we call stakeholder input sessions. We did a total of six of them. Ali,you can see the actual flyer that we used, and we invited when we invited these stakeholders to the process. And you can see the topics that we again,working with the city, came up with city staff to come up with these topics-these very important topics. And again,these weren't just done out of out of thin air. These relate directly to,uh,what's required as part of the preparation of the Hud consolidator plan. So we talked with issues related to housing needs as they relate to underserved populations,housing assistance and barriers to safe affordable housing, experiencing people experiencing at risk of homelessness,non housing community development,workforce development and sustainable development. So you can see,these were various sessions that we provided an opportunity to invited stakeholders to provide input. We got general information from the public. And then finally,we actually did an online survey,uh, for residents, and we got the word out related to the housing needs survey for Iowa City. Uh, and that was open for, I think, 6-8 weeks, if I'm not mistaken. We had it, uh, available in various forms of Spanish,French,Arabic, and Mandarin. And the good news is we've got 336 responses to that. And so, our job- finally, and really important is probably a best practice. We're also currently doing a shelter survey for people who are, actually, homeless. We're working with here shelters locally to get people who have what we call lived experience to provide experience being homeless within the city of Iowa City. And again,the idea and the structure for this- for this purpose of these sessions and public meetings and surveys is really to give a broad perspective for people to comment- stakeholder comment. And we use this information to help identify what your priority needs are. And it relates directly to some of the things you'll be seeing a little bit later in terms of what we've distilled from all these sessions, and certain things rose to the top in terms of priorities along all of these three items. So Next step,next slide. So as I was saying, as part of these input sessions, and you can see,we have actual pictures of the sessions that we did when we were in Iowa City. We had some general themes that rose to the top from these public input,uh, sessions that we had, and these were common amongst all of the sessions that we,um,that we came across. And as you can see,basically,three of the- I'm sorry, four main things came to the surface in terms of general themes. The first one was expanded affordable housing opportunities, and that really related to the need for rental-to address rent cost burden and the need for rental assistance, expanded permanent supportive housing opportunities and the need to increase housing for persons below 30%FMI. The second theme that kind of came up was access to housing and services was-was stated over and over, specifically, transportation services,basically to get from their home to work,barriers for immigrants This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 4 coming into your community in terms of being able to access services, and some fair housing concerns, generally related to,uh, issues as they relate to potential barriers as they relate to the Fair Housing Act. Also,the continued and expanded public services. Folks really felt that since the pandemic,there was an increased need for mental health services. Also, an increased need for additional services in LMI neighborhoods as they relate to health clinics. And then finally,workforce development, improve access to opportunities. Those two things that you see at the bottom really came through all the sessions, a real need for vocational training opportunities. And really, this was one that came up over and over again, affordable childcare,uh, and that helps to pay that cost as as folks,residents go to work and are able to earn a living wage to help pay for childcare. So those are the main themes that we had during these sessions.Next slide. And then we were asked-we weren't asked,but we generally do this as part of our services to the committee. Again, as we said,we work in a lot of different communities across the country. And so we always take a step back and just provide some general opportunity observations of not only your funding allocations,but your administrative,uh, implementation of these programs, and just thought we would share with you some just general observations. So, as you can see, Iowa City is a relatively small entitlement community by federal HUD standards. They received 716,000 of CDBG chief funds last year. I'm sorry in 2025, and 384,000 in home funds. And really,that next bullet point is really important. These aren't ever increasing dollars, and in fact, over the last 5-7 years, federal allocations nationwide have either remained the same or decreased,uh, despite the increase in costs. And so what does that mean from a programatic and administrative perspective? We notice that the city allows funding of their federal resources to go to any eligible activity under CDBG and home. Um, and sometimes,uh,that's good and sometimes that's bad. But when you have a very small allocation and limited resources and limited,uh, staff capacity, sometimes it's hard for small communities to adequately administer all types of activities. And then under federal regulations-you know, federal regulations are ever increasing over the last five years, and both CDBG and Home have changed and required more focus. That also increases project cost, and when project costs increase,uh,you can do less with those dollars than you maybe could have previously. So when you add federal dollars to a project, it always increase costs. Um, and then again, HUD, continues to um, add complexity to the regulatory requirements. Specifically, as it relates to oversight and administration,monitoring,making sure they're living up sub-recipients who are living up to all the federal requirements. Um, and then really,uh, you have a city staff that is really too thin to administer, from our perspective,too thin,to administer every type of eligible activities, again, given the additional federal regulations and complexity. And so the good news is that you have a dedicated local source that can help go towards some of your affordable housing needs and public services. So we think that there's an opportunity for you to really use your federal funds and resources to priot-prioritize the highest priority needs and focus strategic investments and funding decisions based on these identified needs. And I think that's really what we're trying to communicate there the last sentence. We think that again,just because of the fact that you have these local dedicated,which is great resources that could go to other activities and priorities,really focus your federal resources on highest priority needs for eligible activities.Next slide. And then just to hammer on hammer home, but just to kind of provide a perspective. We did,kind of,provide some comparable entitlement communities just to show what they fund generally,what you all do,uh, in your allocation and what you fund, and then with some other similar sized communities with similar allocation amounts. Uh, in full disclosure,ML Lynchburg is a client of ML We know This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 5 their program pretty close. But you can see the difference there. Most of those communities focus their federal resources on- on certain high priority things,public services, infrastructure,mainly. Some of them use it for rental and owner rehab„uh, and in case of Lynchburg,public services and public facilities and infrastructure. So again,just something to consider,you may want to just consider focusing your federal resources to those high priorities,to get more bang for your buck and get more-more things done as it relates to identifying needs, addressing identified needs within the community over the next five years. Next slide. I'll turn it back over to Erika for this. Kubly: All right. Thank you, Bill. So I'm going to go through recommended investment strategies for-for our two grants CDBG and Home. In consideration of our Home funding recommendations,we know that Home regulations are more complex than CDBG, and also the Home funding levels have been a lot less stable than CDBG. Our allocation decreased substantially from FY24 to FY25. We're currently receiving about 384,000 down from 515,000 last year. With such a small allocation,we recommend the following use of Home funds in City Steps 2030. We're proposing a set aside for tenant base rent assistance or TBRA. A set aside means that we would budget for that activity each year rather than apply competitively for funding. So we're not designating dollar amounts for the set-aside. At this time,those details will be in our annual action plan. Our rationale for TBRA is that rent assistance has been identified by the community as a high need. We know that the Housing Choice voucher waitlist is currently closed, and there's more demand for assistance than can be provided with limited vouchers available. The Iowa City Housing Authority is uniquely positioned to administer a TBRA program. We are awarded funding in FY25 and expect to have that program up and running in early 2025. The set aside will create excuse me, the set aside will create a predictable budget and allow us to operate the program continually,which is really important when we're talking about rent assistance. We also propose a set aside for down payment assistance. This is another area consistently identified by the community as a high need. When surveying community members for this plan in ARPA, down payment assistance has been one of the top three prioritized housing needs for low-income households. If you look at the photo that we have here on the slide, at our public meetings,we did the prioritize-prioritization exercise where everyone gets three dots to place on the board for activities that they think are most important. Our board this was at the meeting hosted by Eschucha Mi Voiz our public input meeting. The line that you see that goes all the way across kind of in the middle,that's down payment assistance to buy a house. So that was one of the top categories. People also prioritize general affordable housing for low-income households. That's the one towards the top. And we had over 80 people participate in this activity at that meeting. So for down payment assistance, also, over the last three years, interest rates have increased significantly,which makes purchasing a home more difficult from an affordability perspective. The city currently operates a successful down payment assistance program through partnerships with Hills, GreenState, and Habitat for Humanity. We also offer down payment assistance through our south district program. So each of these different activities would fall into this down payment assistance set aside. Excuse me. Looking ahead through the pro-housing grant,we expect to provide housing counseling services in the future, and we think this will go hand in hand with our down payment assistance program. And again, creating an annual set aside will allow us to operate the program continually based on demand. Our next recommendation is to direct applicants for new construction of Affordable Housing to apply for funding through the Housing Trust This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 6 Fund of Johnson County. The City currently allocates about$700,000 to the Trust Fund annually. For affordable housing,this includes our LITAC set aside. Using federal funds for new construction, add substantial regulatory compliance to a project. Section three, Davis Bacon and the Build America By America Act get triggered by new construction projects, even if we're just funding a few of the units. These are administrative burden to both staff and the agencies applying for funds, and they also, as Bill mentioned,they significantly increase project costs. We propose directing new construction projects to local funding opportunities. The Housing Trust Funds'current funding round has 1.7 million available,which is more than four times our entire annual home allocation. Housing Trust Fund offers quarterly funding rounds, and projects can begin shortly after the award,whereas with federal funding, we're at the mercy of HUD and often experience delays throughout the program year. Finally, for home,we would limit our competitive funding to our CHDO activities. CHDO stands for Community Housing Development Organization. These are agencies whose mission is affordable housing, so they have a higher level of experience and expertise. We're currently funding the housing fellowship as our CHDO. The home program requires at least 15%of our allocation go to CHDO activities. So we're not proposing any changes to this aspect of funding, and we would work directly with housing fellowship on projects each year. Alter: Is Housing Fellowship the only CHDO. Kubly: HCAP is also a CHDO,but they're not. Alter: They don't do housing only. Kubly: So now shifting to CDBG, excuse me. In contrast to home funding,which is specifically for affordable housing. CDBG can be used for housing plus a variety of other activities to serve low-income residents. We currently have an economic development set aside for micro- enterprise technical assistance. We use these funds to support in-home childcare providers through partnership with 4 C's. We recommend continuing this program and focusing our economic development funds on micro-enterprise assistance for in-home childcare providers. So this one,we're just being a little more specific with our set aside. The rationale for this is that we know there are not enough childcare spots in our area. This program increases the availability of childcare and generates income for LMI households. General CDBG-funded economic development activities such as small business loans are extremely complex from a compliance and underwriting perspective, and Iowa City has other funding allocated towards economic development activities through ARPA and other local efforts.Next,the city has a longstanding owner-occupied rehab program. Preservation of existing housing stock is a continual high priority in our community. Right now,we have both CDBG and Home set- asides for owner-occupied rehab,which means we have two set of rules for one program. CDBG funds are more flexible for housing rehab and allows us to serve a broader range of projects, including mobile homes. Therefore,we recommend focusing our rehab funds under CDBG. We also want to establish a rental rehab set aside under CDBG for city-owned non- public housing rentals. As the city expands its affordable housing portfolio, it's important to have resources available to preserve those units. We've discussed this serving as a pilot project to expand to other landlords. Excuse me. At some point. But right now we propose it as an internal activity as we see how that works. And then for our competitive funding round through CDBG,projects would be limited to public facilities and rental acquisition only. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 7 Examples of public facility projects would be improvements at neighborhood centers of Johnson County or the Shelter Houses emergency center emergency shelter improvements. Funds can't be used for government buildings as the name sort of implies. Public facility- facilities and acquisition are two programs that we commonly fund now. We anticipate the need for funding to continue in the next five years. And then lastly,we can use up to 15%of our CDBG allocation on public service activities,which we will continue to do, and then we pair that with local funds under AID to Agencies. And so this is just kind of a kind of a table of our changes to CDBG and Home funding. So we have them listed out the different programs, and the green text are the changes in the City Steps from City Steps 2025 to City Steps 2030. Excuse me. My slides are mixed up. So um I'm missing your page. All right, so I'm going to run through again really quick. So no changes to admin and planning or public services. The most communities take those. Those are pretty standard. Economic development. We are just being more specific about how we're spending those funds. We're not attempting to do more complicated small business loans and that type of thing with CDBG funding. Public facilities,we will do competitively under CDBG. That's no change. Infrastructure,we've previously done projects through parks and engineering that we are no longer going to do. That's one that we eliminated to focus more on the impact. Owner rehab, we will continue to do a CDBG set aside,but not a home set aside. Rental rehab. We would have that limited set aside for our city-owned um housing units, and then CHDO projects might also include rental rehab. Acquisition would be eligible through CDBG and the CHDO set aside.New construction is the one that we don't want to fund-that we want to discontinue funding and defer those projects to local- local funding opportunities. And then down payment assistance and TBRA,we would do set-asides through the home program. And so our rationale for this,we have limited staff capacity, and we really want to focus our federal funds on the highest priority needs and kind of make strategic investments with these dollars based on those identified needs. Alter: Erika, can I ask a question? With the set-asides,have-has there been a roughed-out dollar amount or percentage of I mean, I know that the funds coming in are kind of always in flux year to year. Kubly: Yeah. Alter: But has there been some discussion roughly of what the set-aside percentages would be for both of these? Kubly: Yeah, so we have looked at that a little bit. It does depend. So we don't put that in our five- year plan. It goes in the annual plan. So,the-the owner rehab,we'd probably increase a little bit because we're taking the home funds away. We'd probably bump that up under CDBG. Economic Development,we would decrease because we really only have one agency eligible for those funds. Rental Rehab was about$75,000. That was kind of our neighborhood improvement set aside. We shifted to this,this city use. Um, down payment assistance and TBRA, I think we'll need to-will probably adjust each year depending on demand. So how we can spend that money. We're really trying to get the money out as quickly as possible. So we would adjust how we think we can spend it. And so um.Now I'm going to shift aid to agencies. So our general recommendation is to establish specific funding- establish specific public service funding priorities and direct Iowa City funding to meet those priorities. We This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 8 want to consider what core services do we need in our community and how can city funds make an impact. We've had substantial public input for this planning process, and generally, over the last few years with ARPA and COVID funding,we also have longstanding partnerships with agencies who are able to provide data and show how their work is meeting the community need. And this allows us to make informed decisions by focusing on impact outcomes and performance. So the recommended funding priorities for public services are on the slide. They include homeless and shelter services. This would include domestic violence shelters, food insecurity,which would include food or meal distribution and food pantries, health care, including mental health and behavioral health, childcare and youth services. Housing stability services could be eviction prevention,basic needs for housing, and removing barriers to affordable housing. And then transportation. We heard a lot about transportation in our stakeholder sessions. There was a lot of positive feedback about the Fare Free Transit,but there are still barriers such as getting a driver's license, getting to the DMV, transportation for caseworkers to help people get into housing, and transit for elderly and disabled residents. The priority needs that we've outlined are specific to the services being provided to low to moderate-income residents. There are also populations in our community that face higher barriers to accessing services that we would additionally want to prioritize. This would include,but is not limited to immigrants and refugees, elderly and disabled populations, and victims of domestic violence. So tonight,we're looking for feedback on these funding priorities. The other part of our general recommendation is to simplify the application or review process for AID agencies. We know it's a long challenging process to review these applications. This year's packet is over 500 pages, and that excludes all of the attachments,the financial statements, and that type of thing. Staff strongly feels that the time commitment for the application process is unreasonable for our volunteer commission. We're doing this outside of their regular employment and other obligations. We've observed that the amount of work is increasingly becoming a barrier to participation in HCDC. And so what ends up happening is that not all commissioners read the applications and submit scores. We've also seen low meeting attendance and high turnover in the past few years on HCDC. It's difficult to achieve a fair application process if commissioners are not able to be fully engaged. We feel this isn't a commissioner issue,but something we need to adjust internally. And we have great dedicated commissioners who are here tonight, and we want to-they're on the commission because they want to support meaningful change in the community. Once we get through our plan, staff will dedicate some time to consider how serving on the Commission could be a better experience for these volunteers. But in order to do this,we think we need to remove some of the arduous work of the aid-to-agency application process. So now I have some more specific recommendations for aid-to-agency process. In order to streamline our process for funding human service agencies,we recommend establishing a direct funding process for agencies who meet city priorities and other key factors. Agencies would ideally receive five-year funding in alignment with the consolidated plan. These agencies would not participate in the competitive review process. However,we would likely continue using their joint funding application for the data and the reporting purposes. Funding for these agencies would adjust based on the annual aid-to-agency budget, as it does now. Any agency funded through the direct process would meet the criteria for CDBG public service funding, so one or two of- of the agencies selected would receive CDBG funding as well. Direct funding is different from how we administer aid-to-agency now,but it is something the city is already doing in limited cases. The city currently provides core service funding for things like street outreach and winter shelter through Shelter House. We give This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 9 administrative funds to the Housing Trust Fund directly to administer affordable housing dollars. These agencies are not competing for those funds,however,they're meeting reporting and other requirements. So here we have outlined some eligibility factors for agencies who could receive direct funding,um, and I'll go through those quickly. Um,the agency provides a direct service that meets a City Steps 2030 priority,the agency has been operating for no less than 15 years in its current capacity,the agency's headquarters is located in Iowa City. Um, financial capacity is important,um,we want the agency to have,um, full time dedicated pro- financial-professional financial staff. Um,the agency should have a single audit annually or an equivalent process that demonstrates financial oversight. Um,the agency demonstrates sound operational practices,this includes factors that are regulated through 2CFR 200, such as internal controls and conflicts of interest. And then lastly, it's performance, agencies,um,must provide timely submissions of reports and consistently meet performance measures year after year. We'd also want to see that they're demonstrating an increase in the work that performed over time, so we don't have the agencies outlined in this presentation,um, that would be in a-we would put them in our City Steps 2030 plan,um, we'd expect to have five day agencies that are currently legacies shift to the direct funding rather than a co- competitive process. And so this is another,um,part of the presentation that we'd really like your feedback on these proposed changes, as well as the factors for eligibility. And so for- for current agencies who do not meet the criteria for direct funding, excuse me,the um, so for the current agencies,the competitive process will not change substantially. Um, all the other agencies that don't receive direct funding would apply through the United Way Joint funding process every two years. Um, so in the past a year and a half,we've had an HCDC subcommittee that developed recommendations for changes to the joint funding application, and those were implemented in this current funding cycle. We also have been meeting with the other joint founders, um, Johnson County, Coralville,North Liberty, and United Way,um, and are working to focus the outcome measures in the application for better data about how we're investing funds in our community for these services. The key difference,um,with our proposed changes is that we no longer have the legacy and non legacy agencies, our current process of defining legacy agencies and then adding more agencies into that category is really not sustainable. Um, so we want to go back to our intentions with this funding, and we want to focus on priorities and how we can make an impact and so as- as I mentioned,we also feel that the HCDC application process is not practical for all our commissioners. Um,we propose that for the competitive funding, staff score the applications and make a funding recommendation to HCDC. HCDC can revise the staff recommendations as they see fit,um,we will not request individual commissioner scores like we do now,but all the application materials would be available for review. And so our next steps,um, so the legacy AID to Agency applications have already been submitted for the FY26 joint funding round. So we're kind of looking at long term,um, changes, if we establish,um,new,uh,processes through City Steps 2030,this will be implemented over the next few years. It won't be immediate,um, for CDBG and Home,the new set asides,um, would be implemented beginning FY26,which is next July and then our timeline for our City Steps 2030 document,we expect to have a draft plan in November. HCDC,we have a tentative date for December 2nd for their review,um,we bring it to City Council for approval on December loth and then our applications for CDBG,um,would be available at the end of December, due in January. And then the process is a little funky,but our plan will be back before council in the spring because we'll have our FY26 annual action plan,which is actually part of city steps. So,um,we'd be back,um, around May with the plan and then, so, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 10 um,what-what-we could use help with today,um, is the-um, if you concur with our proposed changes. So within the City steps 2030,the home investment strategies,the CDBG investment strategies,the funding priorities and any, you know, direct funded agencies would be listed in the plan. So it'd be helpful if we could have feedback on,um, our proposed changes to those areas,um, anything specific in our aid to agencies process, or competitive aid agency process,we may also put in the plan. Um, if you- if,um,we'd also be interested in what guidance you have for us as staff as we work on the draft plan and then we have Bill still on the line. If you have questions from Mullin and Lonergan,um,then today would be a good time as well. Vogel: I'm going to go ahead and start if no one else will. Um, first off, Erika, Briana,thank you guys, everybody, for your work,um,the one thing, I- I have a couple of questions,may- maybe it's a question for Bill and for you as well,which is,were your recommendations on what eligible activities we were limiting for CDBG and Home? Were those coming from Bill's group or did they make recommendations on what they think an entitlement size city our size should be limiting to, or was it a combination of both? And- and then the follow up to that is,based on your guys'recommendations,what we would limit it to for the set asides, is it a way to look back at the last three years worth of CDBG and Home funds to see what programs would not have been able to be funded? If we would've been acting under those limits. Kubly: Sure. So,um, for your first question,um,the recommendations are coming from the public input,the priorities identified for the community,the data that we have,um, collected through the plan. Um, second part of your question, um, I don't have that in front of me,um, the-the thing that we would not fund-that we are not recommending funding is the new construction. So we've had projects for new construction, and then we also would just have, uh,more limited funding for,um,rental rehab, I guess, and,um,that kind of thing. And so some - some of the hou- specific housing activities that trigger the greater federal requirements would be more limited. Um, so we -we prioritize public facilities and acquisition,that's a lot of the projects that you guys see,um, coming through for your CDBG and Home and then some of the projects that we've, um, funded overtime, down payment assistance and TBRA were two,that we funded in the last two years,we're making those set asides. We're kind of shifting how our- our process is as well. Vogel: Sure. I- I'm just trying to get a- a realistic, I guess,practical idea of the kind of decisions we've been making for the last three to four years. How would something like this affect what is going to be seen and,you know,what is going to be coming our way? What-what will we simply not see anymore? I guess that's my question is,um,you know,we've had a lot of conversations recently about trying to expand new options for- for funds, for services and projects that we traditionally haven't seen. And I- and I'm just- I guess I'm concerned and curious of these new limits,how will that affect that conversation? You know,how will that affect? Um, I mean,how- obviously,we know there's a limiting pool- a limiting constantly limited pool of- of money available. I- I guess- I just I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the realistic aspect of how this would have affected us the last three years. How will this affect us the next three years or next five? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 11 Kubly: So,um, ideally, it wouldn't be a huge impact. It's really just how we're using specific funds, so we really want to focus our federal funds on these activities. I don't think we're going to stop,uh,trying to be innovative for our solutions to affordable housing,but we might be looking for,you know,partnerships with the Housing Trust Fund or other, like, our local affordable housing fund to fund those,um-uh,projects that maybe aren't as well suited for federal funding. Vogel: I hate to ask for you to do more work. How tough would it be to just look back at the last couple of years and even for our next meeting coming up at the end of the month,just to throw that on there? Kubly: Yeah,that'd be Vogel: With some numbers. Kubly: Easy. Vogel: Okay. Thanks. Moe: Regarding the,um, tough transition of Legacy Aid to Agency to direct funding,um, I understand. My exposure to that is actually through the United Way Process and I think I met Mayor Han Tennis on a United Way Site visit where we talked about that process and how, um,big, long, complicated it was, and it was a repeat every year, and it was they are trusted partners. Um, and so it seemed like it wasn't maybe,uh,necessary or appropriate to be doing that every year. However,there is a need for transparency and uh, count- sort of accountability,what-what does that process look like moving forward where it's a five year process? Are there yearly report outs? Um, and then, is it look more like the city is asking for x deliverables from these nonprofit partners and they're more contracting for their services? I- I-how do we-what's the time frame for feedback so that we know that they're actually continuing to do the work that we want? Kubly: So,how it works now is that all the agencies that do quarterly reports,um,through the United Way software. And so we're-they-they set,um, outcome measures kind of with their application, and then they report each quarter on how they're meeting that. So how it works right now is we're looking at first quarter report that looks good,we're going to pay out your second quarter portion of AID to Agencies. So that's how we're doing it now,um, I could see, um,we-we would have an agreement with these agencies, so we'd be outlining what the expected performance would be in that agreement, as well as the,um,reporting requirements that we'd want. So we could continue doing that through the United Way, or we-you know, we could use internal software or,you know, something simpler. Um, so we-we'd have a way to do that. Moe: Okay. Alter: So it sounds like it actually would be essentially,um, service done through a contract? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 12 Kubly: Yeah, it- it would be,um, so like,when we're doing,um,we do Aid Agency agreements now, so it would be similar. Alter: Okay. Moe: And I guess that- sorry I don't want to-just I kind of want. To continue on this line,just because I think this is to me the most interesting change,um,that I'm trying to get through my head. And that would be to ensure that,um,with- with these partner agencies who know needs in the community and it feels like they're frequently proposing what they think we need and there as they're saying, "Hey,this is what we want to provide." Does the - does the script flip a little bit or more the city is telling them what we want as a deliverable and asked, is this something you can provide? Obviously, it would be done in partnership,but,um,how-how does that work? The sort of what does the contracts look like or how-how are they written and how are they crafted? Kubly: Um, currently,they're based on their,um, application, as I've kind of mentioned. I think- I think this is the process,where we set our priorities, and then we see,um,how the agencies are fulfilling those priorities. So this is a really big part of that process,we've done the community input,um, so we kind of set our priorities that way. We're looking for your feedback on that tonight,um, so I think,um,this process is part of how we can,um, determine what we're looking for. Moe: Good. Dennis: Can- I- I also comment. I would think that for the,um, direct allocation for an agency that's been operating in this community for no less than 15 years. If they -most of those agencies, if you look at the applications that we're receiving,have pretty big budgets and a pretty big ask. Um, so I would assume that they all have independent audits. They all have a board of directors or a board of trustees that oversees that agency and their performances and their fiscal management and I would hope that most of us in this community could rely on the well established core agencies in this community that have been around for years,would be able to satisfy a contract with the city. And it would lighten up the load of the HCDC to get these 500 page applications. Dunn: I guess I - I have some concerns about the 15 year,um,thing as well. I mean, I think there's an,um, I think we need to have some sort of number, whether that's 10 years or something like that,but the 15 years,uh, itself,to me, seems,uh,maybe a little bit too much. Uh,we've got a lot of,uh,newer agencies in the community - community that would be like 10-years- old or close to 10-years-old,um,that I think could be good,um, in an eligible aspect of this, I understand what the -what the point of is -point of it is, and I - I generally agree with it. But, um,yeah,just my general thoughts. Alter: I guess that, another point to consider,though, is that this money is there's a pie and there's only so many pieces of it. So if we open it up to no doubt,very worthy agencies,but do not have that longevity,then the proportionality of the impact gets diluted even more. So, I mean, there's-there's that to consider, as well. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 13 Bergus: With the combination of a five year agreement and entities that have been in existence for at least 15 years,have you contemplated some kind of mechanism for sort of keeping the word out in the community for those that would then be rolling into eligibility? Because that's a- that's just a long time frame for, I mean, or is - is there just such an understanding that these types of funds and the strings attached to them are really going to be limited to - I think you said,you know, five entities, and we know who the ones who've been around 11 years,but not 15 are. Does that question makes sense? Kubly: So,um, I don't- I don't think- so we want to set them for five years and not adjust for five years unless there's kind of maybe some performance issues or something like that. I don't know that we're looking to roll agencies,um,kind of like the non legacy to the legacy, I think we want to get away from that. And the thing is we also- so this is just,um, a set number of agencies that get direct funding. We also have the competitive process that would be open for eligibility, it'd be open for new agencies,um, so if someone's not meeting the direct funding criteria,that doesn't mean they're not going to get funded. It's- it's possible they could get the same funding that they currently are getting, it's not- we're not,um, I- I think it will play out that,um, funding will be very similar to how it is now. Vogel: Erika? Can I just to head off a similar concern to the whole legacy aid agency,the legacy part that we ran into a couple of years or a year and a half ago,which is, do you see this as a this group as a solid. If we're saying these agencies, let's say we pick seven. Seven agencies for five years get guaranteed funding at that level for five years. I mean, is there a process every year where agencies can come in and ask to be added to that list. I mean, to-are-we, are we just going to say it's always going to be seven? Or does next er,we just ran into that issue with legacy where people were being able to apply mid season to become legacy because there wasn't really a clarity of what that time frame. I just trying to figure out, do, I mean, do we have some kind of rolling calendar where every year-every year two of the seven agencies are up for reconsideration against new agencies who may be submitting for that same funding? I think my concern is the five years,we're just stuck with these seven for five years. We're going to have new organizations that may be able to fill a funding role for a service that may pop to the top. We've talked about suddenly, senior services-senior services,when I started HCDC,was not as discussed as much, and we're seeing a much bigger need for senior services now. What if you've got an organization that doesn't focus on that but two years from now you've got an organization that I'm just trying to figure out how we roll that schedule of who's eligible or who gets that every year when we're giving away this five year guarantee. Kubly: So the answer is that any new agency would be part of the competitive funding round. The- the direct funding is going to be a five year set group of agencies. We wouldn't be looking to make changes throughout the five years. We've done the public input. We're setting our priorities with our plan and so with those priorities,we want to direct funding to those agencies. That's what we're saying with our plan. Um, so any kind of changes, any fluctuations with our-our I don't know,maybe immediate needs would be handled through that competitive process um, and the two year application cycle. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 14 Vogel: Got it. And that-yes and that was the question. We just want to make sure we're clear that this is it. Five years from now, everybody else can-can come hands out asking to be added,but for now, for these five years,these are the groups that are getting the direct funding. Kubly: Right. Yes. That's the intention. Alter: Is it fair to say that-that it's aligned to the five year city steps right. And so at five year,when you'd be re-upping it,you'd also be looking to see are there shifts and priorities and what not? So that would potentially also be a way in which it wouldn't just be like,well, great,we've got our five and it just sort of continues that way but it also is aligned to what the priorities are based on, I mean,this was great work to get the public input and the number of different focus groups. So thank you again. Um,but it seems like it is deliberately tied to that. Kubly: Yes. Alter: those activities. Okay. Teague: For me, the years of-years in existence is-is, of great concern. I think um we've heard that already. 15 years seems like a long time to expect a agency to be eligible. I mean, I would look more at seven years. The other questions that I have- first, I want to say thank you all for presenting this. A lot of work went into this. Thanks to the public that came out to um, participate and lend their voice in person or via Zoom. Also,we know that many of the priorities that were submitted, I'm looking at the funding priorities list and I do have a question about transportation. Um,what just explain what falls under there. Kubly: So currently, so we heard a lot about transportation in our public input meetings. I mentioned that. Um,this might be a transportation service for disabled and elderly right now through the emerging funds,we're funding Trail. Um, so it could be that. We also hear transportation as a barrier for case workers who are taking people to housing for,you know,trying to find a unit to rent and things like that. We don't currently fund that in any way but um,just-just general transportation as a barrier to accessing services has come up. And so we kind of considered that one but it came up so much at our public input that we included it. Teague: Okay. In the five legacy agencies that would get this direct funding um, I heard the number five. I'm assuming that they're falling under these funding priorities. Kubly: Yes,they would be under the funded priorities or it's not like, one for one, one from each but they would all meet the priorities. Teague: Okay. And then for, I understand that um, it'll be the competitive process once if the legacy agency should be ending,people still have an opportunity to apply. And I think what was asked by the commission-by the Commission is to present some of those past funds that would not qualify. Right now it's being limited to new construction, is what I think I understood where we go to CHDO um. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 15 Kubly: So right now,we allow basically all types of housing activities to apply competitively and we really want to limit that so we can focus our staff expertise on the compliance for certain programs. Right now, if we have to learn five different programs,that's five different sets of compliance. We also don't have the funding to do all bigger projects. Um, so we want to limit that a little bit um, and public facilities and rental acquisition are two that we think are the most commonly applied for um,we think we can make the biggest impact with those two. Teague: And then just because there's only one pot of money So CDBG and Home Funds will encompass kind of these five legacy Well,they're no longer legacy agencies but they will have that five year contract. The funding still will be coming out of this CDBG and Home fund annual um, awards from the FEDs, correct? Kubly: Yes. So we can use 15%of CDBG for public services. That's about$120,000. So that's usually like two agencies of funding um that are eligible for CDBG. It's not going to if we have five-it's not going to fund all five um, at our current funding levels but we kind of rotate which agencies after meeting the CDBG compliance but all-all of them would be eligible for federal funding. Alter: Is it fair to say I actually conflated the- in my notes, something that I'm not sure is actually in here. Under the recommendation on this slide, it says, Iowa City must prioritize, it's federal resources on the highest priority needs and focus strategic investments and funding decisions based on these identified needs. Is it fair to say, also, and I think I heard it in some of the presentation about just simply the dollars are spread too thin among too many projects,that on the one hand,there's administrative challenges. But on the other hand,based on our consultants work,that we're not using our dollars in the most impactful way, is that fair to say? Kubly: Yes. Alter: That's why we're really consolidating and focusing in more so that while it's not to as many agencies or to as many projects,those who will be funded will get a bigger. Kubly: Yea, ideally. Yes. Alter: Okay. Alter: Then I actually I have a question for HCDC Commissioners, as well. Sorry, I'm like,pivoting to a completely different topic here. But I was just curious um about the recommendation that staff goes through and ranks everything and then provides the recommendations to you. I think that's not entirely new, is that-it's just that you wouldn't have to also rank, is that correct? Kubly: So right now we're asking the commissioners to read the applications and do individual scores. We combine them kind of with an average for the meeting where we review all the applications. So we're basically not going to continue asking them to do that. The kind, if they want. Some people definitely will but we wouldn't-we wouldn't request that they do that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 16 Alter: Was there a time not too long ago where there were staff recommendations in the mix? Vogel: We do make recommendations. Teague: And will that remain? Vogel: This is really facing issue of-it's really a guilt thing. It's a I-I mean,there are absolutely members of our commission that are going to put a crazy amount of time and read through everything and there will be people that wait to the last minutes,um, and then there are absolutely people who want to be part of the discussion,but just don't have the time. I mean, I just don't have the time and I think there's a feeling that I mean, staff-staff does feel the need under the current standards to try to get everybody to feel like they have to do it because that's the current standards, and the thought here is, all that information is still available for those members who really do want to dig deep in the weeds. Alter: Sure. Vogel: But for the other commissioners who are looking to be more of a a surface- a surface view surface member, someone who's-who's, getting the staff and listening to the other conversations but maybe doesn't have the time to go through 500 pages and fill out the giant 4,000 by 5,000 spreadsheet grid. Yes, I mean, I,to me, I think it's a smart move. It's just a front facing idea of, like, listen,we want everybody to be involved but don't feel like you have to be at this level of involvement that means you know,not seeing your wife and children or whatever. Alter: So-so, I guess my question is, and maybe it's a conversation, an-an agenda item within HCDC is how to work through those staff recommendations because I know from times past, of even when we've averaged the commission's scores and then put them all on a spreadsheet and put them up, and it's an open meeting and they're a painful horse trading, if you will of prioritizing or deprioritizing in the moment and I just wonder, as well,maybe that's some- how the commission can deal with. Vogel: For the record,we've already been doing this. Alter: Well, I was just to working yeah working through the intricacies of staff recommendations as well as sort of the different inputs and perspectives that you have so that you're kind of working through the nuances of not either rubber stamping nor up ending an entire process. Vogel: So once again, like I said,that's basically,we have been doing that. They made changes two cycles ago for er,two different funding cycles ago that incorporated most of this with staff recommendations and our input. I feel like our last two funding cycles have been some of the most well understood easiest discussions, even the back and forth. I mean,yes, it's always hard to trim and make decisions on who doesn't get what they need. Um,but I feel like the staff recommendation coming down ahead of time as part of our discussion and part of our research makes a huge difference. Um,yes, at least I feel that way from the last couple of funding rounds. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 17 Teague: But the commission was still scoring and yes. Alter: Yes, I guess,my only small hesitation is, as you said,there are some people who may not have the time but they might come in and be like,this doesn't make sense to me at all. Let's flip it around and as a commission, everyone has a perspective and an opinion and has the-the ability to have their voices heard. I would just hope that there can be some consensus about how to work through making shifts and it sounds like you said for the past two cycles,there has been that back and forth. But um, I just know it's a-it's a tough position to be in, is all? Vogel: Yes. Harmsen: I had a question about timing. Uh,just like, looking at the calendar and um,what's ahead. So you had the couple of steps coming up. This was actually going to come back to us in terms of just these sets of priorities on December IOth or approving the. Kubly: Will be the full-you'll have a full draft of the plan, and we'll be looking for approval of the City steps 2025. Harmsen: Does that include 2025 or 2030? Kubly: Sorry, 2030. Thank you. Harmsen: No,no problem. Does that include like, the agencies themselves won't be picked yet or they will be picked or recommended,not picked,but recommended. Kubly: The thing that we want with the plan is the direct funding agencies. If we're going to put them in the plan,um, that should be selected and decided at that,you know by council,by HCDC prior to that,they'll make their recommendation then council will have it on December loth. The actual funding the competitive funding allocation that we do now that will come to you in the spring as an agenda item because we don't have our budgets yet um, either federal or local,we haven't finalized those yet. We haven't gone through our application process yet. Vogel: At that December 2nd meeting,where-where, we look-where we look at the draft plan. Will you have your guys recommendation in the draft for which organizations you feel should get direct? Kubly: Yes. Vogel: Can you have on the side for us,what other organizations at the 15,10 and 7-year level could theoretically be eligible? Is that possible just to have on the side so we can see who's being- who was in the mix as consideration,who did make the cut,who didn't? Is that possible just to have? Kubly: Sure. And when we're reviewing this,we're really looking at the legacy agencies that are current or like legacy and emerging agencies that we've been funding over the past five years so we can provide that data for those agencies. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 18 Teague: So when I look at the priorities,uh, funding priorities here, my mind goes to,um,Maslow hierarchy,you know, for as well as,you know,this-this-you know,the city steps,um, Council Strategic Plan. I think that,um,plays into this as well. Housing, of course, is,you know, one of the things that the Council has been hyper-focused on. We say homeless and shelter services,housing stability services. Um, so those are two that address housing. And under housing,um, I-when I look at additional prioritizations for agencies,you know,the, uh, immigrants and refugees,the elderly populations,person with disabilities, and as well as victims of domestic violence,they really do filter under,you know,the homelesh-homeless. Well, I would more say housing stability services,um, specifically or,um, and so I just think it's going to be a little,um, I- I'm hopeful that we will try to find the right balance for what we need as a community,um,but there will be some services that just won't be in this automatic five-year contract that still will have to be appling,whether that's every two years, or if we do something different. Is there,um, are you all recommending switching from a two-year award or will that remain? Kubly: We want to continue the two-year award. All of the joint fund- funders are on a two-year cycle now, and I think that is helpful for everyone. So I think we want to participate in that. To a couple of comments on. That's a really good question about just, like, general housing. Is that your question? Teague: Yes, essentially. Kubly: Yeah, general affordable housing. So these are the public service funding priorities. We typically don't fund affordable housing-related services in this funding category. Um,we fund like the housing fellowship. We fund them through our CHODO funding. Um, so in the plan,we will have other priorities,um,that are not public service priorities. So those affordable housing,um, specific priorities will be in the plan under a separate kind of category. But you guys? Dennis: That would be the Home Funding, correct? Kubly: Yes. Yeah. Kubly: Um, so this is not all the priorities in the city steps plan. This is really uh specific to the public services or aid agencies. Um, I would also know, if- if there's something missing here,you- you're thinking of something,um,that you think is missing from this list, let us know and, you know,we can-we can work that in. Moe: The only thing I- first of all I-the duration of how long an agency's been in service and how long the contracts are is something that I don't have strong positions on,but I really like the idea that is a re-centering of the services they're providing as opposed to the agencies themselves. It seems like that's the right direction to be moving, so I'm really excited to see that. Um, I am in my brain trying to map the exercise that our council just went through with the strategic planning and this secondary strategic plan,the steps 2030, and trying to map them together and how they're close,but not exactly the same. And not sure how that if that This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 19 matters,that,you know,this is maybe just a very much more focused version of that. And when you know, HCDC or you is making recommendations, are you laser-focused on the steps 2030 or do you also take into account the Council strategic plan? Kubly: Ideally, it'd be both of them. Um,the-the city steps is a HUD document. So we're really focusing in,um, on how we're spending our HUD dollars,whereas the City strategic plan is much broader. Um, so this is really more focus on our federal funding. But since we have some kind of programs that are related to our federal funding, like AID to Agencies,we include some information about that within city steps. Teague: Any other thoughts on this topic? Thank you, Erika. Dunn: Thank you, Erika. Teague: Yes. And thanks to the team that is still here, Emily, and Bill. Alter: Yes. Teague: Thank you both. Wasielewski: You're welcome. Teague: Great. All right. We will go on to our next agenda item. Uh,I believe Mayor Pro Tem Salih is the-yeah all right. That's the Mayor Pro Tem. But we'll wait for her to join us. Dunn: And I believe. I'm going to be. Teague: Yes,please. You're going to recuse yourself. Harmsen: Thank you guys. Vogel: Yeah,thank you-thanks for having us. Alter: Thank you for coming. Vogel: That was so nice of you. And I'll see the public. We here. Thank you. Bergus: It was great to see you. Vogel: Good to see Moe. We'll see you later. How you doing? Dunn: Good see. Salih: You guys just finished? Teague: Yes-yes-yes-yes. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 20 Salih: Okay. Teague: Just transitioning. Salih: How are you? Harmsen: Good how are you? Salih: Good- good. Vogel: We'll have everything I promise. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 21 2. Council Vacancy Discussion Teague: All right. We're transitioning, as you can see. Uh,thanks again to the commissioners that were able to join us today. A great conversation on a very important,um,transition that's happening here or potentially happening. We're going to move on to item Number 2,which is council vacancy discussion. Councilor Dunn has recused himself and is no longer in council chambers. And welcome,Mayor Pro Tern Salih. Salih: Thank you. Teague: Yes. All right. Um, I might just ask,uh, our city attorney to kind of start us off on this topic, please. Goers: Sure. Well, as counsel is aware,uh,you have two choices with which to fill this vacancy. One is by appointment. Uh,that's how we handled it last time, a couple of years ago,when it was actually Councilor Dunn,who filled a vacancy when Janice Wiener was elected to the State Senate. Or you can call for a special election. Um,we've been uh communicating repeatedly with the county auditor's office and working our way through some rather confusing and vague uh language and guidance from the uh Secretary of State's office. So we are not in a position to offer any dates for primaries or general elections at this point. Um,but certainly, uh,you should be aware that the state law requires that if you choose special election,uh, we're required to move forward with the,uh, earliest practicable,uh, date,uh which I had to look up to distinguish the difference between practicable and practical. Practicable means possible. Uh, so essentially the earliest possible date to fill. If,uh, council chooses to appoint, that person would serve only until the next,uh,regularly scheduled city election,which at this point would be November of 2025,uh, at which point,uh,the person,uh,who is ultimately elected at that special election would serve the remainder of Councilor Dunn's term, including the period of time between the November election and the January date at which other councilors who are sworn in, ah,would be seated with the council. If the council chooses to appoint,that person I'm sorry- I guess I just went through that. If you,uh, chose to have a special election, that person would serve the entire remainder of Councilor Dunn's term. Um, I think those are the basics,but I'd be happy to address any question, or at least, I'd be happy to try to address any questions you may have. Moe: Wanted to know the,um, legal and, I guess,practical implications of,um,having a vacant seat, um,how long, legally,we can have that vacant seat. Um, and also just sort of your guys' thoughts on what kinds of practical problems that would create by having an open spot for three, four, five months. Goers: Right. If council does not appoint someone within 60 days, it automatically goes to a special election. So you could not, for example, leave the seat vacant until the November election, something like that. Um,the election then, after that point needs to be-we need to give the, ah, ah, county auditor's office at least 60 days notice, 60 ah instead of a shorter period of time because our charter allows for primaries.Not all cities do. Uh, so we need to have time for two elections a primary, and a general election,that's why 60 days. Um, and after that, it's the earliest practical date. So,uh, it looks likely that the general would be, ah, in March, if you This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 22 were to do that with a primary four weeks and exactly four weeks prior to that general election date. Teague: I want to just,um,thank you for that. I want to just mention that of the council that's here now,um, it was just,um, Councilor Moe and Mayor Pro Tern Salih that wasn't on the council when we did the appointment. Some of the things that came up during that time as- as the council deliberated, should we appoint someone or should we go,um,you know, and- and allow for an election? Um,there was a lot of things that were happening. Uh,voter turnout was a part of that discussion,the cost,um,which we received in the, ah, attorney's memo,the estimates in 2022, for a primary should that occur. It would be 50,000 and,um, and then I think it would be 100,000 for the general. Goers: Well, 50,000 each. Teague: Fifty thousand each. Goers: And I should say they-they said it would be more than that,but they weren't sure exactly what. Something a little bit more than 50 for each of those two elections. Teague: Sure- sure. So I just wanted to bring that back to our memory as we had this discussion. And there were other elements to this as well. But I wanted to bring that backup. Harmsen: I mean, even last time around, I was never really all Gung Ho on the appointment process. And at that time,um, I think the fact that we were talking about a fairly narrow amount of time,uh,you know, in this case,we're talking about three years. So, I mean-. Teague: No-no-no. Harmsen: No-no-no, I mean, a left on his term.No,we couldn't appoint for three years,but I mean, there's there was only one year left on that term anyway. Um, of Janice's term as I recall. So in this case,yes,thank you for correcting me because I was- I was misspeaking that or I was, um,but you know, for me that's-to me,that's even just more. I mean, I'm more into the special election. Um, and,you know,we can't ignore things like cost,but I think that's the price of democracy and letting the people have a voice. And I think the other thing about this that's a little different than last time is we would be talking,uh,when that last time that happened,uh,that was,uh,now our current State Senator Weiner. Um,you know,the election was in November, and then,you know, so there was a little bit shorter window,these theory because uh our councilor Dunn will be with us until the end of the year. Um,there's a little bit more heads up. There's a little more time. I think there was some concern last time that a special election would happen in the middle of winter. Um,while now we're actually looking about late winter early spring,which I think makes,you know, it's not quite as bad as trying to say, do it in January. Um,you know, so, I mean- I think we have it's not on the agenda for a decision, and we're not voting on this,but for an inclination, I tend to be more inclined towards the special election route. Teague: Could I-.I. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 23 Harmsen: Go ahead. Teague: I- I just wanted to make one point that it would be for 11 months because, in November, it really is an election. Yeah. But-but in November, it really is an election,which the person, if there was someone appointed, may not apply or,you know,run for reelection, or may not be elected. So I just wanted to point out that the-what we're appointing for is not three years. We're only appointing for 11 months and- and that's a fact. Harmsen: Yeah no-no, I got you there. Salih: I just was trying to say I think this is just similar to Kingsley Botchway time kind of when he got off was, like, one year I think less than one year after he was being elected and-. Teague: Seven months. Salih: Seven months yeah exactly. And- and now-now I this is ten months same thing and- Teague: He served seven months. Salih: Yeah. Teague: And it was 3.5 years. Salih: Yes. Teague: Yes. Salih: Yeah. We you come up. And- I- I guess believe that yeah, it could be doable. Um, I'm not really decided now,but, like,whether I go with this or that. But I guess we-we done both. We done appointed,we done a special election for the similar thing. Teague: Yeah-yeah. Alter: My sense,um, is that I do think that it makes sense to have candidates make themselves known to the public. Um,we went through,what I think,was a really good process for the appointment. And yet, it was also them appearing before us,maybe having a sit down with us or what have you. But we're seven people. Um, and at the same time that we are appointing only for. If it were an appointment only for those 11 months? But then there is- if that person wishes to run,there is name recognition already put in and I think at that point, it makes sense for something,just let's allow candidates who are interested or people who are interested put in that extra and say, I'm going to be a candidate and actually campaign. That's my sense of it, so more for what it's worth. Moe: Um, I guess I have a unique perspective because I stood out there and asking for this in January and I can say from my perspective,when you ask for the job from council,the message is quite a bit different than when you're asking for the job from voters. And I think there's a good value in asking the voters. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 24 Salih: Yes. Moe: I think that- the other part of that, though, is I really worry about voter turnout and a very-very small sliver of people showing up to vote for that council member and so I don't know. To me,the solution is I- I support a special election as much as it bothers me for the cost, figuring out the best way that we can get people to participate. And I don't know how we do that,but that's the thing that concerns me most is making sure we get 6, 7, 10% of our citizens to show up as opposed to 1 and 2. Alter: And yet, it will still be more than six people. Salih: Yes. And it's really like look amazing if that person being elected by the people of the city,not by only seven council members or six actually, in this case. So yeah,myself as I can say now, I really would to like elections,too. Moe: Is there any way to economize on elections and get high turnout? Goer: No. I'm afraid not. Moe: Okay. The auditor just tells us what they're going to charge for an election, and we pay it. Goers: Pretty much. Yeah. Harmsen: Not like we can go shopping around for other auditors. Moe: Okay.Nor would I want to. Bergus: I also am leaning towards a special election for all the reasons that my colleagues stated. And I think there's also a little bit of an equity piece for me when I think about what goes into running a campaign,that having a shorter time frame will push, I mean, I think when people have, like that whole year,year and a half, it can sort of, like, spread out the field a little bit for those who have the capacity,particularly in their time to have an advantage. And so I think having it be a shorter window will actually encourage just a little more, competitive parity when it's a much shorter time frame, and hopefully less money spent by the people campaigning. Salih: Exactly. I agree. Teague: So I want to make sure that,you know, council realized that my comment so far was just clarification of facts. As far as my position on if we,you know, elect or apoint, I mean,there are pros and cons to it all. Tomorrow is a huge day, as we know.An election is happening, you know, in our country. And I don't know. Sometimes I think people get burned out. You know, election burn out. You know,we saw the numbers before,you know,when we have a special election is a very small percentage. Is the very representative of,you know,the community voice,will there be people that kind of rally the troops,you know,to go out and vote that might be one sided? I think those are real realities that happen. You know,more This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 25 welled machines that can,you know,produce candidates. Whereas in a November election, you know, it's already,you know, on the agenda. There'll be three seats up next November for this council, so already,we're going to have a greater turnout than a city election, and so while I'm all about the voices of the people. When I think about the small percentage that can come. And if we want to do a comparison,we're seven people who vote for the mayor. And there is 74,000, 75,000 people in this community that I really believe want to elect who is their mayor. So I am more leaning towards a special just an appointment because I really don't believe that the numbers will really represent the voices of the people, although I do acknowledge name recognition could be happening, right? And that is that's worth-that could be worth $100,000,right? Alter: I just don't know that anybody who wants to step up and do it would be like,but I only want to do this for a little bit of time. Teague: We certainly could do what Coralville did,which, I mean,they did it. And- and the person abided by it,regardless of,you know,thoughts after,but the person did only serve in,you know,that small period of time. Moe: I would love to hear the legality of that. Can we actually ask. Teague: No, we can't. Moe: Can we ask that somebody. Teague: We can't enforce it. Goers: For the members of the public, I'm not sure they'll know what we're talking about. Teague: Yes. Goers: The Coralville process was-the Coralville City Council was looking for someone who was not going to be looking to run for reelection. And so they appointed someone who indicated that he would just serve out the appointed term and not run for reelection. And it's my understanding he honored that. If the question from Councilor Moe is, could that be legally enforceable?No. It's not as though we could say,hey,you said you weren't gonna run, and now you're breaking your promise. They could absolutely do that. Salih: I don't know too. Yeah. Teague: So we're not-we're not voting on anything today. I guess the question is,what are next steps? Certainly,you know,this just happened. I do want to-want to acknowledge Councilor Dunn who isn't here,but,he,you know submitted his resignation, as was mentioned,will be at the end of this year. I do want to say that Councilor Dunn has,we know that he was very active in the community,wanting to always hear from the voices of the people. He ran for a state legislative role, and then he,you know,petitioned for his role to the council, and then did stand an election where he was voted on by the people. Right? Yes-yes. So yeah. So I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 26 just wanted to acknowledge his work and his commitment to the people of Iowa City. So that's my,you know,my thoughts are, I think it's all valid reasons,right? Alter: There's no perfect way. Teague: There's no perfect way. So,you know, I guess,next steps we can talk about. Salih: I think. Moe: Is council- so we have a time clock based on what the auditor has instructed us the 60 days plus 60 days. Is that a- did I get that correctly? Goers: No, I'm not- I'm not sure about the 60+60. They require 60 days notice for the general election. Primary is four weeks before then. So 32 days before the primary.No more- I'm sorry,no less than 32 days before the primary,no less than 60 days before the general. Teague: So we could be looking at a February and then a March? Goers: Yes. Teague: Election. Alter: And you said that- so the 60 days clock of, like,if we don't do anything, right, when is that triggered? Is that upon January 1st or? Goers: Yes. Alter: Okay. Goers: If you- let's say- let's call it March 1st. If the council does not appoint someone by March 1st, then it automatically goes to a special election. Alter: And then 60 days? Goers: Yes. Alter: Okay. Harmsen: That's by the same token,we could make this vote at the 1 st or 2nd January or 1 st February, and then that would start the 60 day clock at that time. Goers: That's correct. Harmsen: Not at January 1 st, and then- Goers: Yeah. That's one of the subjects that I've been discussing with the county auditor's office is it appears to be clear that if the council decides to appoint,you could formally vote on that and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 27 make that determination ahead of Councilor Dunn's resign,you know, ahead of January 1st. What's less clear is whether council can vote to hold a special election before January 1st. That is,have the vote before January 1st. One of the views is that,no,you need to wait until after January 1 st,when you actually have a vacancy. Only then can you vote as a council,we wish to hold this election or fill the seat by special. We're still trying to work that through. Yeah. Alter: So this is an absolute nuts and bolts question. What fund does the money come out of? Goers: I'll step back and let Geoff answer. Alter: Yeah, sorry. This is for Geoff. Fruin: It's just a general. It'll be a general fund expenditure out of the city clerk's budget. And we would have to do a budget amendment. Harmsen: Sorry, Kellie. Grace: Here goes the coffee. Moe: Just as a practical measure, it seems like if we can make it so there's not an election in-right in January. Goers: Yeah. Moe: That makes sense. Like,just people trying to campaign in January and February in Iowa would be pretty terrible. Alter: Right. And that's why I mean, for anybody who's listening, it's not that I want us to have a vacant seat for a long time,but certainly if we were able to sort of play the time game a little bit so that it would be more in spring when people would be more getting out,then our numbers might not be so low if it wasn't February,it's still crabelicious. Salih: I agree. Moe: If we are concerned about the quantity of voters and representation,but know that November will be more turnout. Can we have an election for a short duration? Can we have a special election for a councilor who would serve from March till November? Alter: But at that point. Teague: It would be,yes-yes. Goers: Well,if you have a special election,let's say in March,to fill the unexpired term,that person would fill the unexpired term. So that would be the remainder of- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 28 Moe: There's no such things as have a person that's voted on,but wait until there's a much larger turnout. Goers: No. You could do that-you could achieve that end by an appointment,but not by a special. Moe: I got it. Yes. Bergus: The public can force a sprecial election even if we choose to appoint. Goers: That's correct. In one of two different periods. Within the 14 days after council decides to appoint,that is to fill the position by appointment, and within 14 days after you actually make the appointment. So two different periods of time for voters to intervene. Alter: I mean, again,we're not voting on anything,but if I had my druthers, it would be that we would kind of time this out a little bit,push it out. Maybe we don't go the whole 60 days,but we push it out enough so that people, I mean,they're listening. They know that Councilor Dunn has resigned. They're like, something's going to happen, and they can start thinking about it, and then as spring comes up,then they're able to campaign. And I do think then for, you know,three years,they've gotten votes from people. It may not be as high as November. But then again,we're going to be in an off cycle,too, and the fatigue will last well beyond a couple of months. So, I mean,unfortunately,that's just a reality. So that's kind of, like, if we were to start talking about it logistically,my desire. Sorry. I completely turned my back on you. My desire would be to have it that we push it out making any declarations. Salih: Like March,kind of. Alter: Right. Before we're pressed to it, or we could just let it go its course, and then,the special election gets triggered. But this way allows for slightly better weather. Salih: Yeah. Alter: Few people will think about it. Bergus: The last time, I think we may have also received a piece of information of when a person would have to submit their eligibility to the auditor, like what the deadline of that would be working backwards from the election. I think that would be a helpful piece of information. Goers: You mean to submit their candidacy paperwork? Bergus: Yes. Goers: I can certainly look that up and provide it. Salih: Yes,I think that's good. Bergus: Helpful to know. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 29 Teague: Yeah. And so maybe given us some scenarios of what is the practical latest? We can hold a special election um,based on what- Saih: April, I think. Teague: Councilor,Alter just stated. Goers: Yeah. I understand that. Hypothetical. I think. Alter: March to April. Salih: March to April and April. Alter: Tonight. Salih: January to March. Harmsen: Or something. Bergus: I don't know. I guess I just want to weigh in. I don't like the idea of intentionally waiting much. I appreciate the weather question,but I think you know,the idea of planning and opening on council seems like not the best where we would have six people and we could deadlock and I don't know. I feel like filling the seat. Harmsen: I think there's- I think there's a nudge towards, like, okay, if we have a primary, it happens in March and not in February. A little nudge on the timing,but I agree with you. I think overall,we don't want to-there's value to having seven of us up here. Salih: But I think as you said, first,we have to ask the county because the date will start from January when we actually have a vacancy. So after that,we can come up with a time or just leave it like that to play itself out. Harmsen: Will we want to throw this on a work session mid December? Teague: I think what we're going to do is keep it on the work session. At least we'll have it on next work session because there will be some information that hopefully we will have an update. I think it needs to be we'll probably just keep this here for a little bit. And we'll continue the conversation. If I will, I will make my last comment. If a part of this is ensuring that voters are aware and engaged,um,you know,that's something we're going to have to consider because the special election when Councilor Botchway left. That was in July, and the special election was in September and October. A lot of the, you know, it was warm. Door knocking was,you know, a great opportunity. Farmers market, a lot of events happening in the community,where,you know, candidates were at some of those things,they'll still happen, but,you know, it may just be the small engaged folks. Salih: That's why to get primary because it was such good weather,that's what we have to have. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 30 Teague: Yeah. Salih: Yeah. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 31 3. Clarification of Agenda Items Teague: But yeah,we'll continue to have the discussion. All right? We're going to move on to item Number 3. Clarification,uh,we'll ask Councilor Dunn to come back in. Alter: Are they not here? Teague: They are not going to get through. Alter: Teague: Okay. Oh,that's right. Yeah. All right. Moving on to item Number 3, clarification of agenda items. Moe: Um, it doesn't matter when we speak to it. Do you want to talk about Economic Development during the last item of the work session or during the IP that it shows up on? Teague: Under the IP then it shows up on. Moe: Okay. So then I believe that that's the 1017 IP at Council Economic Development Committee meeting October 16th. Um,that was a meeting where,um,we heard from,uh, from Rachel, and she explained. Go ahead. Teague: One second. That'll be the next agenda item. So this is just clarification of our formal agenda. Moe: Sorry. 4. Information Packet Discussion [October 17, October 24, October 31] The following items need Council direction: • (10)131) IP6—Memo from City Clerk: Proposed City council Meeting Schedule, January—December 2025 Teague: No worries. But if there are no clarification on that,we're going to switch to item Number 4, which is information packet discussions. Um, I'm not sure what,um,we're going to start with October 17. Moe: Yeah. And that would be the economic development group. Ali, and that was a meeting where typically the economic development committee would make recommendations for our arts organizations and economic development organizations. Um,we got a presentation from Rachel Kilburg Varley about the applications. They all do great work,want to continue to do more work, also want more funding as their costs are going up. We got a second,uh, presentation from,uh,Mr. Fruin,who explained our income is not going up at the same level that expenses are going up. And the staff recommendation was to just wait until we had a better picture of what the city's budget was going to be. And at that point,we did not know what the state rollback number was, so we were really in the dark. We do know that number now. So I,um, don't know,uh,when that Economic Development Committee meeting item resurfaces,but probably,um,yet in a few months. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 32 Fruin: Yeah. Our intention was not to bring the funding levels back to the EDC,but to present them and be very clear to the full council during your January budget work session so you can make adjustments. As you see fit to that recommendation in the context of all the other budget recommendations. Okay. Moe: Well,just so you guys all know, like it was not a pleasant meeting. These organizations are ones that we love and cherish, and they our community lovable little place and grow our economy,but we just weren't in the position to make a recommendation, so we did not. So thank you. Teague: Any other comments about October 17th? We'll move on to October 24th. Moving on to October 31 st. Alter: I wanted to bring up,um, it was IP 4,which is the pending work session topics. Um, I would be interested in,um,based on all the budget prognostication and what we've learned from the state, I would be interested in talking about Lost and other alternative revenue streams? Moe: I would like that conversation also. Goers: Now, it's already on the other topic. Alter: Is it? Okay. Goers: Yeah. Alter: I'm so sorry. Goers: No,that's all right. I mean, maybe it should move up somewhere else. Alter: Is it moved up? Fruin: Di- did you want to schedule it? Is that what you're schedule? Alter: Yes. Fruin: For you all. Alter: I'm sorry. I mean yes,it's on the thing, and I was just saying, I want to move it to actually discussion. Moe: When is it possible for- is it a city manager's office presentation,probably? Fruin: Yeah. Um, I guess I'd ask that the soonest it be scheduled, it would be in the December meeting. I think that would give us enough time to prepare. Alter: Yeah. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 33 Moe: Soon as practicable, our new word. Fruin: Okay. Is there a consensus with the council to schedule that for December 10th? I think it is? Salih: Yeah. Fruin: Okay. Alter: Thank you. Bergus: On that same item. Just as far as scheduling the topics that are on that list, I think we're going to be- I think the MPO is going to be receiving the Bus Rapid Transit study at our November meeting, and so having a council conversation about how Iowa City wants to move forward relating to the use of the Crandic right of way, I think is imminent. Um, I know that there's been some conversations of how do we ensure,you know, all the stakeholders are involved and with authority and all of that. But I think even just this group making sure all 6 or 7 of us, depending on the timing,how that-how that conversation would be critical. Alter: I would agree. And,um,this is- I was just looking ahead at our pending schedules,um, calendar, and I know that we have an MPO meeting. I'm sorry,no, I want- I- a joint entities in January, and that might be a good topic. Anyway,that's slightly tangental,but I agree. I would definitely support that conversation for a work session. Bergus: And joint entities does get more people to the table than the Just the MPO. Alter: Yeah. Moe: For that conversation, is it in your mind, are you envisioning it to also include the sort of logistical or legal requirements of how you get multiple governments to work together? Bergus: You're asking me that? Moe: Yeah. Because that-there's the specifics of the proposals that we should be discussing,but then there's also the mechanism to engage multiple entities. To me,they're equally complicated questions. And I don't know whether they belong together or in the same meeting or as two separate. Bergus: Yeah, I mean, I think we need the sort of abstract commitment from the entities first. And then,you know,those who are better at herding cats through contracts like our city attorney. Goers: Right. I would- I would agree with Councilor Bergus. I think it's best to understand that there's an agreement in principle first. I imagine the- the legal structure would be through a 28E agreement. Councilor Bergus, is also correct,that that does involve herding cats, ah, sometimes,particularly with numerous public bodies. Uh,but- and that requires a lot of work, and that's why I say it's usually best to get the agreement in principle first before that work is done. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 34 Fruin: Okay, so I'm just kind of look for if there's consensus on discussion on the use of the Crandic Rail Line, if that's a scheduled work session or if that's going to other topics on the list? Teague: I think we would have to just put it on a future work session. Fruin: Unscheduled future work session? Teague: No. We can put it on a scheduled work session. Yeah. Fruin You want to pick this? Which one? Bergus: We can make it-we can put it under the-the vision for the transportation plan. I think we need to be a little more focused than that, given the proposals that we have in front of us,but I think it falls within that item that we've been-that's been on our strategic plan action item. Fruin: Right. We'll just need direction. Staff will just need direction on which date you want this on the work session. That's all we're going to need at this point. Alter: So- Teague: What I would suggest is that we just deter I mean we can look at. Alter: Maybe I mean, since- sorry,I told. Teague: No-no. Go right ahead. If council don't have,you know, a thought right now,we can look at it and kind of propose May Pro Tem and I a date with Geoff if people are okay with that. Alter: Well, it looks like we've just got two more meetings,right? So we have the 19th. Teague: Yes. Alter: And the IOth, and we've just scheduled the IOth to be sort of that lost discussion, correct? So maybe as early as the next meeting? Teague: Does that work? Yeah.Next meeting? People are okay with that? We'll do it the next meeting. All right. Anything else from 10/31? I don't know what I missed. Grace: Proposed schedule for the budget? Teague: Yes. Grace: That Saturday or Monday session. There were some proposed dates, IP6. Teague: Yeah. So what are people's thoughts? Harmsen: Checking real quick,Mr. Mayor. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 35 Teague: And are people okay if we go a little longer and allow USG? Yes. Harmsen: Okay. I'm available both Mondays of the proposed dates, so the January 13th and the 27th I should be available both of those days. Um, January 25th, I may have a conflict would prefer to avoid. Um,that's what I've got for you. Yeah. Salihh: January. Harmsen: I know last time, I think we ended up doing a Monday meeting, I think and that seemed to work actually well. Salih: Yeah. Teague: Yeah. So the two Mondays that he just mentioned,which would be the 13th and the 27th work for me. Alter: All four of those would be doable. Teague: Okay. Moe: Mondays work for me as well. I'm not available the 18th. Teague: Okay. Harmsen: So thoughts 13th to 27th? Any preference? Alter: Kellie gets to decide? Bergus: I look to staff. Teague: Yeah. Alter: Yeah. Overall first book there and work there. Yeah. Teague: Any issues with the 13th or 27th January,they're both on Monday? Salih: For the- Harmsen: Special meeting for budget. Salih: Special meeting. Yeah. Alter: Special meeting. Salih: I don't think I have anything for that to follow up. Teague: Okay. So, Kellie, it's going to be your choice. All right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 36 Salih: But he say the January- Harmsen: Do you have a feeling- Salih: There's a meeting- Harmsen: That can put it in my calendar now if we do. Teague: Oh,if-if you don't really-if it doesn't really matter. All right. Salih: the meeting. Teague: I'll say let's get it over on the 13th. It would be later in the day. This is at 8:00 A.M. We're going to do it January 13th. Salih: The only thing is it's gonna be two meeting on the same day, one in the morning, one in the evening. Teague: On January 13th? Salih: Like the joint entity meeting at 4:30. Teague: Oh, sure. Moe: Power through the day. Bergus: We did that before. Alter: We did do that before. Yeah. Bergus: Yeah. Harmsen: I'm okay with it doesn't make a difference to me one way or the other. Alter: I mean,but if we're doing, if we want to try to propose the talking to joint entities,having a conversation about Crandic,we might want to be sharper. Salih: Like coming in the morning and-How long did that budget- Teague: So the- Alter: I mean,we can grit through it. It's fine but- Salih: For me, like,I'm working during that time. What time will the budget meeting will be? Ali, how-how long-. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 37 Alter: It's all day. Salih: The meeting? Teague: Is- it's 8:00-5:00. Bergus: 8:00 A.M. Alter: Yeah. Salih: 8:00-5:00? Harmsen: Or 8:00-4:00 if we have a 4:30. Teague: 8:00-4:00. Salih: A long day? Teague: Yeah. Alter: Is Monday- Teague: Yeah. Alter: Not good. Is Monday not good. Salih: It's good. I don't have anything. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024 Page 38 5. University of Iowa Student Government(USG) Updates Teague: So we're going to go with 13th. We're going to power through. All right. We're going to move on to item Number 5,University of Iowa Student Government Updates. Welcome. Martinez: Hello, I'm going to keep it really short and sweet for you guys tonight. I just have one initiative. I'd like to update you all on. Our health and safety committee and our president have been working with some downtown partners in the nighttime mayor on this new coat check initiative,because we've noticed that during the winter months,we have a lot of students, specifically young women going out for nights out, going to the bars,things like that, and they just refuse to bring coats,um,because maybe they don't be burdened by them having to carry them around. Uh,but that can put our students in some really dangerous situations with excess alcohol consumption,walks home and freezing temperatures. So we're trying to see if we can establish some sort of maybe coat check program. By partnering with some downtown businesses or something like that. It's still very much in the investigation phases,uh,how we want to go about tackling it. Um, but that's being worked on right now. If any of you have any questions or inputs,we would always love to hear that. That's all I have for you. Teague: Great. Good to see you,And that's a great idea and initiative. All right. We'll save item Number 6, and we'll just add that,um, at the end of our council deliberations or comments at the end of our formal meeting. We are adjourned from our work session. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work session of November 4, 2024