The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2025-06-03 TranscriptionIowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at httos•//citychannel4.com/ci-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:00:20] It is June 3, 2025. So we're going to get started with the City of Iowa City work session, and the first item is clarification of agenda items. And then I want to make sure it's- no. Okay. All right. Well, we're hoping to ensure that Councilor Weilein is going to join us. We're not sure yet. But if so, just jump on and say something at any point. All right, we'll keep moving right along. We're going to go to item number 2. Information packet discussion, May 22. We're going to move on to May 29, and there is IPS, the memo from the IDS director. So invite any comments at this time. [00:01:34] 1 would comment on IP four. There's no one who wants to comment on five. [00:02:031 Yeah. Go right in. [00:02:04] Um, I want to say thanks to the city manager's office for continuing with sort of updates on sort of nuggets of information on housing in Iowa City, and the May 29 has some specific data on household size. So as we go through the comprehensive plan process, um,1 think last time we learned that we're not only thousands of units short in Johnson County and hundreds in Iowa City, but we need to build 360 new units each year. Um, the update that we got on May 29 has some specifics about household size. And I just would note that 37%of households in Iowa City are one person in 35 or two people. So I think that says a lot about the kinds of housing that we might need, and I'm looking forward to sort of merging all of this data together as we again, work through the comprehensive plan and come up with strategies for the next 30-20 years of planning. 100:03:001 Councilor Moe, can you remind me? Um, has the group done projections because I know that we have talked a lot? I mean, certainly it's a family friendly city as well, and so one to two- those are small units for families. So I'm just wondering, do you remember if there was a projection about the size? I want to say that there was a pie chart. [00:03:22] Yeah, they did in the- in that- in that study indicate what our current composition of household size is. And I think they assume that our composition of household in Iowa City continues to grow at the same rate. But I don't know if there's any more. That's just a projection, I don't think. [00:03:37] Proportionally. [00:03:38] Proportionally growing with what they were assuming, yeah. Page 1 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at httl2s,//citychannel4.com/city-cQuricil.htmI) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:03:40] That it's going to grow incrementally and- the need will grow incrementally, roughly the same proportion. Okay. 100:03:45] That is what we were- we learned last time, yeah. 100:03:55] Anything else from May 29? All right, we'll move on to item number 3, University of Iowa Student Government updates, which I don't see them in the room. And USG, as we know, um, at least this summer is here. So we'll get some updates, I'm sure, in the near future. We'll move on to item number 4, which is local option sales tax presentation and discussion. We're going to invite up Kirk Lehmann. Welcome. [00:04:35] Thank you, Mayor. Kirk Lehmann, assistant city manager to talk to you about LOST. 50, this has been a topic that we've been discussing for some time. And since the last time we talked about it, you know, it's really become more and more important for a number of reasons. And so I just wanted to lay some groundwork for you, give you some stuff to think about, and then we can decide whether to move forward from there. So in terms of the way that we've been discussing this, like I said, this has been something that's been floating around for a while. In 2022, when you first- Recording and progress. [00:05:15] Sorry. [00:05:16] No worries. When you first updated your most recent strategic plan for fiscal year 2023 through 2028, it did include a financial strategy to grow the tax base, consider alternative revenue sources, and leverage outside funding to maintain core services and to pursue community priorities while maintaining equitable property tax rates. Within that section, it also included a specific action step, which is found at 7.9, and it specifically says to consider alternative revenue sources such as a local option sales tax that can help achieve strategic plan goals, fund infrastructure and facility needs and reduce reliance on property taxes. So the target date that we had set for this was sometime between fiscal year 2026 and 2028. I'm bringing it to you on the forefront of that time frame, and that's largely because, as you know, we've been facing some recent financial headwinds that have really brought this to the forefront as an important strategy that we need to be considering. So in terms of the things that we are facing that really boost the need for revenue diversification away from property taxes, uh, you know all of these. We've been discussing all of these, but it is worth highlighting again. So the first is that, as you know, the state has been tinkering with property taxes, with, uh, comprehensive property tax reform. The most recent, uh, change that they made included a ratcheting down of our property tax rate over time as we phase out our library levy and also our levy that we use for climate action. Um, that is paired with a penalty on growth. And as a growing community, that's something that we've been working through Page 2 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4.com/city-cQLincil.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. over the last couple of budget cycles, which really leads to that second headwind, which is limited growth in taxable property valuation. So while we are a community that's growing, we are a community that's developing, we're not able to capitalize on it in the same way that we have in the past, where we've been able to grow out of some of these property tax reforms that we've seen at the state. So as a result, the net effect is really a stagnant property tax valuation that we've had, and we've even seen decreases in recent years, most recently in both FY 23 and FY 24, we had a decrease in that property tax valuation. So compounding that issue are really those higher than typical inflationary pressures that we've been facing where dollars don't go as far, and that really does chip at our ability to generate adequate funding for services. So as a result, we've had some issues with maintaining and expanding our partnerships with external organizations. At the same time, it's been creating challenges for us maintaining our core service levels, just keeping at the same service level. But what we see LOST is, LOST is really a revenue source that can expand what we can do, and it can also provide stability in the event that there are future impacts that will affect Iowa City over time financially. So what is LOST? Uh, I say LOST. It's local option sales tax again. Technically, it's a local option sales and service tax, so it does apply for more than just your consumption sales. But in Iowa, we do have a 6%sales tax that's imposed by the state, uh, along with the ability to locally have an additional 1%. So that additional 1%that can be used by cities and counties, that's what I'm referring to when I refer to LOST. So as a consumption tax, uh, it is somewhat regressive, but there are a number of exemptions that are built into our loss provisions that really help mitigate some of those, uh, considerations, and they're really targeted at life necessities. So you think of things like housing expenses, which are one of your largest housing costs, things like rent, mortgage and utilities, LOST does not apply to that. Think of things like transportation expenses. So vehicle payments or gasoline. That's also something that LOSTgenerally doesn't apply to. And then you also have those expenses associated with daily needs, things like groceries, prescription drugs, health products, uh, that includes feminine hygiene products, which were added in 2022. So there are a number of things in addition to hotel and motel and some other smaller categories of expenditures. [00:09:44] I'm sorry, can I interrupt really quick? [00:09:45) Yeah. [00:09:46) With hotels and motels, is that because it already has? [00:09:491 Yeah. So there's different taxes that do apply to different categories in this. Hotel motel is one of them. There's a separate hotel and motel tax that can be levied by communities, but LOST would not apply to that. [00:10:02] Right. That was- and that was my question about why was it part of the exempt when it really - Page 3 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https-//citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:10:07] It's exempt from LOST [00:10:09] Right. In some circumstances, I can certainly see how this is a necessity. On the other hand, it's not necessarily something that you would think that is like a necessity. [00:10:16] That one isn't really a necessity but it's one that's exempt. [00:10:181 I mean, for some- for some situations. But- but- I think you answered it. It's the- it has its own tax. Correct? [00:10:25] Yes, that is correct. And there are a number of other things that aren't mentioned here. They tend to be smaller, not kind of these major daily life expenditures. But the- the state has really looked at these expenditures over time and has continued to expand them. So this year alone, they discussed adding toilet paper, laundry soap, and vitamins to this list that is exempt. That has not passed the state house, but they are constantly having these discussions. And, in general, the trend that we've seen is exempting more items rather than less overtime. So that's- that's something to keep in mind. In terms of the way that LOST is adopted, it can be added to a ballot by a petition of either local voters or by city council action. And then once it's added to the ballot, it would need to be approved by a 50%vote of the community. So on that ballot language, it does require that you include the uses that you're going to spend LOST on, and that does include 50%for property tax relief. I'll talk a bit more about kind of those proposed uses later on, uh, but that is something that- that is important to this. Really, the overall trend that we've seen across the state is that it's an incredibly common funding source that local communities use. 93%of jurisdictions that are eligible use it. That's more than 1,000 different communities. And it's become more common over time as property tax has been reformed by the state over time. And that does include nearly every major city with the exception of Iowa City and Ankeny at this point. So what might LOST look like in Iowa City? Well, it really is collected at a county region. So the way that it works is that jurisdictions that opt in to participate with the local option sales tax pool all of the sales taxes together, and then it's reallocated at the county level based on a calculation of population and property tax valuations. So as jurisdictions are added or removed, it can affect the amount of LOST revenues received by participating jurisdictions. If we zoom out in Iowa City, we have around $1 billion in real sales for about the last decade and a half, it is a relatively flat source of, um, revenue that would potentially be there when you adjust for inflation. And one thing to note about sales tax is that sales tax can be pretty volatile. So you will see changes over time, especially as economic circumstances change. So on this graph, you can we in 2009, 2010, the effects of the Great Recession, and Iowa City never really saw those property, uh, excuse me, the sales valuations come back from that amount. However, this is based on storefront, so there are some online sales that are part of this graph, but, uh, generally, Page 4 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https-//citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. it can be volatile, and it does change over time, which is important. So how does this pencil out, given our understanding of the revenue formula then for Iowa City? We would expect that loss could bring in somewhere between $8 million and $10 million in revenue for the city. That number could change depending on what other communities participate as well. So right now, we know that other communities- there are many- I'll go through the communities that have already adopted LOST, but we also know that there are communities such as Coralville and North Liberty that are also exploring LOST currently. So whether they opt in as well, uh, could change that formulation. And again, I would like to add that that tends to be a somewhat conservative estimate just because online sales is not included, um, but that's the best estimate that we have at the moment, somewhere between $8 million and $10 million. [00:14:17] 1 had a question, just for clarification. You stated that each community that is a part of this, of course, they have to determine, well, they would go to the voters, and it has to be 50%or more to be passed. And I just heard you say that, um, whoever is a part of this, there is a portion. It goes to the county, and then there's a portion that each jurisdiction that's a part gets. So University Heights right now, I understand, has a LOST. So if the city of Iowa City becomes a part of that LOST, their funds and our funds are in the same pool? [00:14:58] Yeah. So it's all collected at the county level and then reapportioned based on that formula. And so we can also, depending on who- which jurisdictions are participating, it can affect other Johnson County jurisdictions LOST allocations, as well. From what I've seen, if we join since we produce such a large amount of sales within the county, it's likely going to raise all boats. And Coralville is similarly positioned where they have a large number of sales and so the expectation would be that if they joined, it would probably increase most jurisdictions LOST allocation. [00:15:351 1 might be a slide behind, but I did have a specific question about actually University of Iowa and how they fit into this, specifically ticket sales and alcohol sales. Is that something that is within the purview of Iowa City's sales tax formula? [00:15:52] That is a great question, and I have a very detailed list of things that are exempt to taxable. I would believe that ticket sales would count. [00:16:02] If this is something you can't answer on the spot I understand. [00:16:04] 1 believe that alcohol would count. I don't know if because it's affiliated with the university, if it's exempt. So I can get back to you on that. 1 believe that they would contribute to it. I mean, the- the Page 5 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https•//citychannel4.com/city-cQllncil.html This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. amounts that I'm talking about are based on what's reported to the state and that's the estimate that we used. So I'm not sure what's all a part of that, necessarily. [00:16:26] And then I have a question going back when you were to- to the mayor's point the University Heights just passed one. If we pass one, is this, like, automatically a collective? I mean, would- because they've - they did this on their own, right? And they're like, okay, and so currently, whatever they're garnering is theirs. But if we were to pass, if we were to say, we're going to get this on the ballot and it passes, then because the county, I mean, does that automatically mean that the pool is University Heights no longer controls their own destiny as far as their LOST? [00:17:04] No, so it's collected at the county level allocated based on formulas, but each community that are participating adopted a revenue purpose statement that says how they use it. They can still use it. They still have full control. Each jurisdiction has its control over the funds that they're allocated through the formula. [00:17:22] Oh, but the allocation itself, the more people that join, I mean, like you were saying, although- [00:17:27] It- it affects how much they're getting. [00:17:30] Okay. That's right. So it's corned off. [00:17:33] Not like we're preempting someone else's jurisdiction or anything. [00:17:37) No. But it's a matter of it just affects the amount of funds that are pooled and then allocated by the formula. [00:17:43] Okay. Okay. So they're not cordoned off, and I understand what you're saying. Thank you 100:17:491 Yeah. [00:17:501 All right. Page 6 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https�//citychannel4.com/ciiy-council.html] This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:17:511 Any other questions where we're at this moment? Okay, because I do want to high light- [00:17:56] Can y'all hear me? [00:17:57] Oh, yeah, we can. [00:17:58] Yes. Welcome. [00:17:59] Am I just, uh, a scary voice from the sky right now? [00:18:02] No, no. [00:18:03] Yes. [00:18:041 Okay. Okay. Um, so, I, uh, just wanted to make it clear [00:18:10] out there for the record. [00:18:11] Um, when you said that LOST could potentially bring us in 8 to $10 million, uh, that effectively means 42, um, or that effect, that effectively, that effectively means 4 or $5 million because half of it has to go to property tax relief, is that correct? [00:18:32] Uh, uh, I would say it's 8 to $10 million because there's flexibility in what property tax relief can mean. Um, I'll cover that as I kind of delve into staffs recommendation for uses of funds, um, but I'll cover that in a bit more detail later. I- I would say that it means 8 to $10 million in revenue for the city. [00:18:561 Thank you. 100:18:59] Page 7 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. And to highlight kind of that volatility that I was talking about, what, what that really means is that it's important to keep in mind that loss doesn't provide the same steady growth that we see with property taxes. Uh, so again, in economic, uh, downturns you do see a decrease often in sales, and so it is a relatively stable funding source. That volatility does need to be considered as we're looking at uses, as we start to talk through some of those things. Uh, so, for example, it, it can be challenging to rely on loss for operational expenses. It tends to be better suited to things like capital projects or things like that, uh, just based on some of those considerations that come into play. So that, um, I did want to talk a bit about what we're seeing or what we've seen in Iowa City, what we've seen in other communities. Um, in Iowa City, we've actually had LOST in the past. So we collected most recently from 2010-2013, uh, when we collected $34 million for Flood mitigation projects. Now, that loss was established with the sunset, which puts a date at which the collection of that local option sales tax ends, but it was really intended to help us accelerate some of our flood mitigation projects. So it was a key that unlocked some really transformational projects in Iowa City, including our Dubuque Street Reconstruction or the Gateway project, as it's called. Uh, our expansion of our South Wastewater Treatment Facility and then also our Riverfront Crossings Park. And those first two are actually some of the largest projects that we've had, uh, in Iowa City. So without LOST, it, it really is, uh, not possible that these could have been done at the same pace that we completed them in. Uh, so it, it really can be a transformational tool. It's been a transformational tool in Iowa City in the past. Uh, in 2014, uh, we also looked at reestablishing LOST. So at that time, we did put it on the ballot for the entire county where every jurisdiction in Johnson County had the opportunity to vote for LOST. Um we did initiate it, but at that time, um, contiguous cities in Johnson County had to vote it up or down as a group. So that law has since changed, which is why University Heights has been able to do it separately, and we're able to do it separately, even though the allocation formula still exists. So at that time, we had really focused our LOST on looking at streets and trails, property tax relief, and affordable housing. Um, it would have narrowly passed in Iowa City. There was a 50.3%yes vote to that. Uh, but because we were voting with other contiguous cities, it did not pass. That being said, several other jurisdictions did pass LOST at that time in Johnson County that were not contiguous with us, uh, and many of them adopted it with a 10 year sunset, which I'll discuss when I get to what we see in other communities around Johnson County. [00:22:00] Just so I've got my math it's, that's been 10 years ago, and, uh, it actually looks like probably would have been worth more than 8-10 million back then because the sales dap- dipped at some point. So just so I've got my math correct, that means potentially we would have had 80 to $100 million over the last decade for some of those projects listed here, the streets trails, property tax relief, and affordable housing, correct? [00:22:231 Uh, potentially. [00:22:27] 1 guess I want to ask you for 2014, you said like the attempt has been failed. Is this the only time after the 2013 we attempt to do it or we did after that? Have we done it again? Page 8 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4 com c/ci y-cQuncil.htmt This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:22:37] That was the most recent attempt. So how are other communities using LOST currently? What we see in other large metro communities, um, almost all of them are using it. Like I said, currently of the largest communities in Iowa. It's really only Iowa City and Ankeny that are not currently using LOST. Uh, what you'll see in front of you is a chart of those different communities when it was adopted, the amount of revenue that they're getting from it, and then also their purposes. Uh, er, as you look at these, uh, you'll see that there's a lot of common themes that kind of come to the forefront. So first, is that LOST is really used for a lot of similar types of projects. One of the most common is property tax relief, as you might expect, uh, given the fact that that is a state requirement as of 2019. But you'll also we that it's very commonly used for infrastructure and public facilities expenditures. So you'll see things like streets, capital projects. Uh, and again, because of the nature of LOST, its volatility and because it's one of th- those few levers that can really unlock large scale projects, uh, it makes it a really common funding source for those types of projects. You'll also notice that there are some pretty flexible categories that you'll see cities use that allow them to address local priorities, um, things like community betterment, quality of life, neighborhood improvements. Those can be used for a variety of projects based on, on what, uh, councils deem important at that time. Uh, and then another common use can be public safety. Um, so it can be incorporated into those other more flexible categories. Sometimes you'll see it separately. A, a lot of the time, that's just due to it being a large part of city budgets. The second thing that you'll notice is that most of the other large cities no longer have a sunset on their LOST. Um, this is really, uh, so when it comes to sunsets, some people view that as a way to provide accountability to the public, uh, because it would have to come to a vote again to be re-established. Um, however, it does mean that it's harder to use LOST for long term planning, long term projects, uh, and to really focus on those long term priorities. Um, so when, when we look at LOST without a sunset, uh, you'll see communities that make sure that they're accountable through their budgeting processes, through, uh, public outreach, and then ultimately through their elected representatives who make those decisions about how to use funds within the realms of that, uh, revenue purpose statement that you'll see them adopt. [00:25:081 1 have a question. [00:25:09] Yeah. [00:25:091 Oh. [00:25:11] Um, so I see that it says Waterloo has 20% property tax relief. I'm assuming that's because there was probably a law change since 1991, and they're like, grandfathered in, is that correct? Page 9 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:25:251 Yes, that is correct. Many of these communities that established LOST established it long before 2019 when that 50% property tax relief became a requirement. [00:25:35] Okay, thank you. [00:25:37] But now is only 50%. It'd have to be 50%for the property tax relief [00:25:43] Correct. [00:25:43] Yeah. [00:25:44] And I'll talk. [00:25:44] Cannot be less than 50, right? [00:25:46] Correct. [00:25:471 Okay. [00:25:48] And you'll also we Johnson County. Uh, many communities have implemented LOST at this time. Uh, you'll notice that many of them did it in 2015 when we put it on the ballot, and those communities that are non contiguous, er, established their LOST at that time. Uh, a lot of those did have a 10 year sunset associated with them, so they have since gone back and, uh, re -determined that LOST is something that they want to continue, and a lot of them have eliminated their sunsets. Uh, in fact, all of them have eliminated their sunsets at this time. [00:26:20] Did they have to go back to the public for that? [00:26:22] Yep. Page 10 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at httos�//citychannel4.com/city-council.htmIJ This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:26:22] Okay. [00:26:23] So anytime you change a revenue purpose statement or, or amend, you know, what you, what was voted on it would have to go back to the public. [00:26:29] What, what is the mechanism for, uh, eliminating one that does not have a sunset? [00:26:34] So you would go back to the public and say,. [00:26:371 Have a referendum to eliminate the LOST? [00:26:39] It, it would just be like you're implementing it, but it doesn't have a sunset, and then they vote if they [00:26:441 Okay. 100:26:45] Vote it up or down, essentially. But you'll, so you'll see that they've moved away from sunsets. You'll also see, um, kind of the same uses. Uh, one thing that's, that's unique with a lot of the communities in Johnson County that you don't we in the large cities, uh, is that many of them have any lawful purpose. So again, that's kind of the ultimate flexibility and how to use LOST. Um, it doesn't dictate specific uses, but it does allow that maximum flexibility to address changing circumstances, especially for communities that don't have a sunset affiliated with it. So in, in some cases, communities will have a statement of intent about how they plan on using those funds. Sometimes it'll be formal. It's a resolution. Sometimes it's just this is what we're going to use it for. Uh, but at the end of the day, again, that accountability really comes from your elected officials, uh, and then also just from your annual budgeting processes. So I've kind of talked about these special considerations already, but it really does facilitate those large projects that otherwise require greater reliance on property taxes or utility rates if, if it's, uh, tied to, like, an infrastructure project, uh, and sometimes voter referendums, as well. So again, streets bridging utility projects, parks and trails, development of modern facilities, uh, and then also government facility renovation, uh, just reacting to the demands of a community. And then I've already talked enough about, uh, th- the volatility, but I just want to drive that home. So in Iowa City, we've been looking at LOST as a funding source for a few years now and have identified some potential uses for it, uh, through various plans and through, uh, city council strategic priorities. Uh, the first is our pavement condition or excuse me, pavement management program. So in Iowa City, we have 237 miles of streets, and we generally have a pretty well conditioned network that tends to perform above peer Page 11 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https-//ciiychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. averages. Um, however, over time, we're projecting a long term decrease in our road use tax, which is really what helps us maintain our pavement quality. So based on our current projections, we're expecting our pavement quality to degrade over time, uh, and we just don't expect to have enough funding to maintain current levels. Uh, as you do delay projects that can increase their cost over time. So in terms of the, the degradation that we're, uh, projecting, you can see the black line. I believe that's black on the graph, which is obviously the lowest line where you have the largest decrease, uh, in the, the pavement condition index. So in, in our pavement management program, we have identified LOST that could potentially be used to help stabilize some of this funding, uh, and maintain current conditions. So there's a range of, uh, funding proposals that could occur, uh, that are all present on this graph. That top line is basically if all of LOST is used for it, plus current stuff, or plus current funding levels, uh, and then a variant in between of what that might look like if certain percentages are allocated. Um, obviously there are different options, uh, to approach that, um, and it's not to say that we can't, uh, use property taxes to, to fund streets as well, um, but it does require a considerable increase in property tax rates. So what LOST helps us achieve could be, uh, increasing our pavement or maintaining our pavement quality without going into greater debt or raising property taxes. Uh, and in some ways, uh, this is property tax relief, since you are avoiding the issuance of debt if that is the route that you are going. (00:30:201 I'm sorry. Can you repeat that? [00:30:221 Yeah. So if you are foregoing the possibility of debt that would otherwise be funded by a property tax debt levy, that is a form of property tax relief through property tax avoidance. [00:30:351 And that counts under loss as that 50%. So some money of Okay, I'm seeing not only you but several audience members. Shit. [00:30:42] Yelp. [00:30:43] Thank you. (00:30:45] Some other needs that have been identified, er, for capital projects are really public facilities. So in the strategic plan, uh, you note that design replacement and renovated facilities for operational efficiency, capacity for growth, employee safety and health resilience, alignment with climate action goals and civic pride. So that's Action 5.6. [00:31:051 Page 12 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at httns,//citvchannel4 com/city-council.htmll This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Uh, so that is really also included in there, [00:31:08] since there is a great need for public facilities. Now, with public facilities, they do also face an increased, uh, challenge if they are funded through property tax, uh, debt because above a certain dollar threshold, they often trigger an additional 60%voter approval to borrow those funds. So those are the types of projects that you often see communities use LOST for. So it, it, it's, it's a good candidate for those types of projects. And in Iowa City, I mean, we've listed them 1 million times, but things like improvements to the Senior Center, uh, the land acquisition and construction for a new Fire Station 1, a recreation center modification, um, joint Public Safety Center, City Hall modernization and expansion. And there's numerous small projects that come up, including roof replacements, generator replacement, HVAC, lighting, et cetera. Uh, all the things that are needed for, for a city to operate and, and to provide the services that it requires. [00:32:04] When LOST is used for public facilities, I assume we want the facility now and then use LOST and the long term to pay back debt on that. Is, is that how we would structure that? And is that, er, is that. Okay [00:32:18] It can be structured in a number of ways. But you can use it for debt, yeah. [00:32:201 But it doesn't have the same rules as general obligation bonds as far as breaking them into the, the groups and voting on them, right? [00:32:28] That's correct. [00:32:29] Okay. Thank you. [00:32:32] We also did go out to the public to identify communities as part of our community survey. So this has been important in shaping staffs recommendation to approach LOST. Uh, when we look at the priorities of the public, uh, through this statistically valid survey, uh, the highest category that got voter approval or that would generate voter support, according to this survey, is streets, bridges, and sidewalks. That was 72%approved of that as a use. Uh, we also saw some other top categories being affordable housing, parks trails and natural areas, and social services. So you'll also notice that generally property tax relief was not a priority, but again, that is, that is a state law requirement and can be approached in a number of ways. [00:33:121 Page 13 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychanne]4.com/city-council.htmi This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. And where was this take it? [00:33:14] This was last fall. And then the final logistic piece that I wanted to talk about before delving into staff recommendations, and then I'm going to open it for questions for you and then keep going. [00:33:27] Sorry. [00:33:27] You've been asking questions the whole time, so it's fine. If we don't have anymore, that's great. So in terms of timeline, er, it's relatively tight if we want to get this on the November election. Um, there's really only three meetings that you would have one in June, one in July, and one in August, and we would need a resolution, uh, at your August 19th meeting to get this on the November, uh, ballot. Uh, that being said, uh, there are other opportunities, uh, to get this on ballot. So there are special elections. You can do it on future ballots. Uh, but to, to get it on the November ballot, you, you would really need to, to execute this quickly, uh, and we'd need to notify the auditor by August 29th, uh, and then it would be voted on November 4th and would potentially be in effect July 1st. So any questions kind of on that background stuff? Since it's a lot of information that I'm throwing at you, you've been asking throughout, so 1 don't know if you have any more, but just wanted to take a second to pause. [00:34:271 1 just have one on that timeline again. You were saying, you know, we would have to act relatively quickly because it has to be, um, adopted end of August. But you said there'd be three opportunities, and that's simply it's not that we have to go through the same thing as we do, like, a P&Z where it's three readings. It's simply that our actual meeting times, like we have to decide on this, craft it. [00:34:47] And, and it's really. [00:34:48] Okay. [00:34:49] That amount of time to collect any public input that you need to collect? [00:34:521 Absolutely. [00:34:521 Is that amount of time for you to deliberate on the language, for uses. Those are really the two things that are, are going to be without the big. The most challenging. Page 14 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at httns�//citychannel4.com/cilX-council.htmI) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: M-Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. (00:35:01] Okay. And I forget, actually. Um, I know that in the PLCo survey results, you know, there was sort of a prioritization. But was there an overarching question of, are you in favor of LOST? (00:35:15] No. The overarching question was, how much would you support, if at all, a local 1%sales tax for the following public purposes? That was the question. [00:35:24] Oh okay. So, I mean, so that. [00:35:26] Er, we intended on getting to both. [00:35:27] There. Okay. Got you. It wasn't just, like, what do you think is important? It was attached to that there's. [00:35:34] Yep. [00:35:35] Okay. Thank you. [00:35:39] Regarding the timeline, the steps basically between now and August 19, is it realistic to at our August 19th meeting vote for resolution and expect there to be enough time to actually get people excited and go out and vote for that, or does this need to happen, uh, faster than August 19th? [00:36:001 So- [00:36:02] This is the worst -this is the last-minute option. [00:36:04] That's the last minute. [00:36:05] This is- this is the ask- our working backwards calendar might start sooner than August 19th. 100:36:09] Page 15 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at httos-//citychannel4.com/city-council.htmI) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. The- the county auditor would recommend the sooner, the better, but we want to provide the opportunity, or we wanted to provide you an understanding of kind of that last possible timeline, um [00:36:21] This is a hard deadline, not at all. [00:36:231 Yeah. Yeah. And I would also add that the city's responsibility in this is to educate, really. So we- we as the city, uh, can't advocate for a ballot measure, but we can, uh, educate, and that's really, uh, a lot of what our role would be. [00:36:411 Thanks. [00:36:45] Okay, so with that, now we can get into the exciting stuff. So, because of that timeline, we thought it would be easiest for staff to provide a recommendation or a starting place for you to begin your considerations about what ballot language might look like and what that distribution might look like for the potential use of lost. And we really did base it on a number of factors. So, you know, we're basing it on your strategic plan, on the public input that we've received to date, uh, and, uh, on some other factors as well that I'll get into as I dive into it. Um, but this is kind of the -the overall distribution with 50%dedicated towards property tax relief, uh, 20%for housing initiatives, 20%for streets, parks, and public facilities, and 30%for community partnerships. All of a slide on each of those in a minute. Uh, that 50% is really because of the state requirement. Uh, again, there's some flexibility in how that's implemented. Uh, the 20%for housing initiatives, uh, really came about as a discussion that was started by Greater Iowa City, uh, who's currently advocating for Iowa City, North Liberty, and Coralville to adopt lost and to use it for regional priority. Now, as may not be a surprise to any of you, housing is our top regional priority for many. And so they provided some language, uh, and since it's strongly supported by our strategic plan, we felt comfortable adding that into our loss distribution. Uh, as far as the other communities, it's really up to them to determine what their priorities are and how they want to implement lost, if they want to implement lost at all. So for that final 30%, then, again, we looked at the other council priorities, taking into account the special characteristics of lost funding, as well as the results of our community survey and the need for flexibility, since we're also recommending that there not be a sunset, uh, and we really settle on 20%for streets, parks and public facilities, uh, as a flexible way to address multiple priorities of council, uh, in addition to many of those capital project priorities that counsel has identified. Uh, and then finally, that 10%for community partnerships. Uh, as you know, we've been facing budget pressures that have affected our ability to expand partnerships in the past, uh, especially with those external agencies that we tend to work with through things like ACT agencies, or arts and culture grants, and other efforts that we like to, uh, provide. So this is a chance for us to really expand those partnerships. Um, that being said, again, none of these are really set in stone until you adopt a resolution that lays out your proposed uses. Uh, so it's intended to be a starting place. So now I'll go into each of those slices in a bit more detail to just discuss what that might look like and some Page 16 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at httos,//citychannel4 com/city-council html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. proposed ballot language at the same time. First, property tax relief. That's the simplest since the percentage and the language is basically dictated by the state. However, again, it can be flexibly implemented, so it can include property tax reductions, where the property tax rate is reduced and made up for by lost funding, but it can also include property tax avoidance, uh, which could come from, uh, either minimizing future issuance of debt through our debt service levy, uh, or it could also be forgoing the use of other levees that we have the ability to utilize. So both of those things could be considered property tax, uh, avoidance, and we do see other communities that commonly utilize both of these strategies, uh, to provide that property tax relief. Uh, in general, we think that that combined approach is probably going to be best, since it can help us accelerate our investment and necessary infrastructure while simultaneously, uh, meeting some of our goals of reducing reliance on property taxes and making our property tax rate more competitive. In terms of housing initiatives, uh, the language and percent that we utilized is based on the, uh, greater Iowa City's, uh, request. Uh, as you'll notice, the language is pretty inclusive, so it's flexible in its appro- in its approach, which allows counsel to really dictate, uh, the best way to increase the housing supply and improve housing affordability, while also supporting housing more generally at any given time. Um, you'll- uh, for this one, I don't really feel a need to get too far into the rationale, since it is such an important topic that has been discussed at Iowa City for so long, uh, other than to say it supports multiple strategic plan items, uh, and is one of the categories that got the highest level of support in the community survey. [00:41:19] 1 do have one question, um, in that list, it talks about, um, shelter supports. Um, is there sort of cross- pollination then with- [00:41:30] Partnerships. (00:41:31] Community partnerships. [00:41:33] So there might be some project that requires funding that could fall into multiple categories. Uh, realistically, the way that this would be allocated is we would have our use statement. Every budget cycle, we would very clearly delineate what we plan on spending our lost dollars on. Again, that's really where that accountability piece comes in. So it could be in multiple categories. [00:42:001 Okay. I00:42:04] That next piece is streets, parks, and public facilities. So you'll see that we have proposed language. This one I will read because it is a little different. So maintenance and construction of streets, sidewalks, trails, parks, and public facilities that support arts, culture, learning, recreation, and public safety is Page 17 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4.com/city-councit.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. designated by city council. So this proposed language is pretty flexible. But it's more defined than you'll see in a lot of those other communities that use language like any lawful purpose. So we did want to provide some guidance as to what we plan on using it for, uh, but the intent is really to list things that are strong strategic plan priorities, uh, and that are also supported by the community survey results that we've seen. Um, again, there is an opportunity to tweak language as you discuss it over time. This is realty intended to be a starting place, on, but what this does is, without a sunset, it is important for counsel to have flexibility to address issues as they come up throughout the community. Uh, and it's really up to counsel to determine the best way to meet those needs. So we try to make it broad enough to be flexible but also focused enough that it is facing priorities of counsel. And then finally, community partnerships. Um, this is really a reflection of the strategic plan value in your strategic plan of partnerships and engagement. Um, it is more externally focused than some of the others, though the other ones can be externally focused, depending on the projects identified. Um, but it's really a reflection of the fact that we have so many great social service, arts and culture, economic development, governmental partners, and we wanted to make sure that there's a way to expand those partnerships, uh, over time. And really does allow us to do more than we have in the past, and it creates a more stable, dedicated source of funding, uh, that might not otherwise be there if state or federal policies change over time, as well. So we see this as providing some stability to some of our external partners that we work through. So with that, any questions about kind of our proposed starting place that might help facilitate your conversation a little bit? 100:44:19] Kirk, could you maybe just reconcile those last comments about the stability of funding for some of these partnerships with the volatility of the funding source, right? Or maybe just be more specific as to what you mean. 100:44:31) Sure. When I- when I'm talking about the stability of the funding source, I mean, there's a dedicated source of funding for community partnerships. 100:44:42] Okay. Rather than just general fund, how we do it now? [00:44:45] Correct. (00:44:461 Okay. All right. (00:44:49] And then I have questions about the broadness of the language? [00:44:521 Page 18 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4.com/city-council.htmi This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yeah [00:44:531 Can you just maybe speak to that, especially when it comes down to housing initiatives? Um, you kind of spoke about the streets, parks, and public facilities, but just wanted to go back to that one. [00:45:071 Yeah. So- so for the housing one, that's really the language that was provided by Greater Iowa City. Um, and again, it's pretty broad and flexible in the way that it can be used to support housing currently, as it's currently worded. Um, there's an opportunity for you to fine-tune language, or if you wanted to tighten up the language. Uh, there's always the opportunity for you to do that, as- as you would determine your resolution. Uh, but this is really to be able to support any kind of housing initiative throughout- throughout the region. [00:45:36] How would this work? Let's say, you know, the broad language is on the ballot. That's what the community has agreed to. The council actually votes annually on how those funds are distributed under that broad heading, is that correct? [00:45:52] That is correct. [00:45:53] Okay. Thank you. - [00:45:55] Mayor, if I may, uh, one of the reasons I think we're leaning towards broader language, uh, is that we're also coupling that with a no -sunset. Um, if you were to bring that sunset- introduce a sunset and you say, you do a 10 year lost or a 20 year lost, I think you could fine tune that language a little bit more, but, um, I'd encourage you to think about what the needs of the housing or public facilities, uh, may have been 20 years ago. And then think about what those needs may be 20 years from now, because that's really the time frames that we're talking when you don't have a sunset. So we want to keep that broad. Um, we also don't know what curveballs come our way, right? We just- we had to work through the pandemic, uh, several years ago, and the housing needs changed overnight with that pandemic. So, um, we want to make sure that there's enough flexibility here. The language that Greater Iowa City has- has provided here, uh, I think, does a good job of indicating the types of programs that we intend to fund, but it also has a catch-all at the end, you know, for transparency here. It says, other housing projects designated by the city council. And I think that's important, not only in the short term, but again, 20, 30, 40 years from now, when hopefully this funding source is still around aiding the city and whatever those strategic priorities may be. [00:47:151 Page 19 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at htti2s,//citychannel4.com/city-councit.htmI) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. But I think, while we are saying it is, like, broader and just general, it's still there specific things here, which is I don't understand it like maybe rent rehabilitations. What do you guys mean by that? Is this something the city will be doing it or like, you know, home improvement. And there is specific- even though you're saying this is general, but it's not generate. It's really specific things here happening. And I don't know, like, who's going to be taking care of those things. Is this a city? Is this like another entity? [00:47:501 So- so that would be up to city council in any given year. So typically, what you would do, again, is- is through your annual budgeting process, just like you do now, you would say, this is our pot of funds that we have forjust to call it generally for our housing initiatives that we can spend these monies on things such as housing supply and access, workforce housing, housing improvements, rental rehab, it doesn't mean that city council has to do each of those things. It means that city council would say, okay, we're going to dedicate X percentage of this towards rental rehab. We're going to do X percent towards land acquisition for affordable housing. We're going to do X percent towards shelter, uh, support, for example. It can be any of those things, but it would really be through that annual budgeting process. [00:48:44] Um, I had a question, or I suppose, just a comment if y'all can still hear me. [00:48:491 Yep. [00:48:501 Okay, thank you. Um, I guess my only concern specifically with some of the broad language, specifically with housing, is that I feel as though if God forbid, we have a less cool city council in the future, it leaves it open to letting the city, uh, subsidize, um, market -rate housing with it. And so I would really- I don't know, it concerns me if there's not, um, maybe a specific, uh, thing in there about like, these need to be units that are not, um, that are non -market or something like that. That's a very- that is still extremely broad, but, um, it makes sure that we are not, uh, giving the ability for anybody to just kind of use this money to, um, just kind of, like, give housing supply and say that they're doing something, uh, without, um, without really doing the thing that we want to do, which is provide as much, you know, affordable housing as possible. I guess it's more of a comment, and definitely we'll be talking about it later. But that's just what I've been thinking. [00:50:15] 1 think just an observation on the proposed, uh, distribution where it's very, very broad, but it's not any lawful purpose, right? So we're taking the 50%that's not property tax relief with the understanding that that can include avoidance, which would free up other dollars, so it's somewhat fungible. To me, this sounds like, uh, of that 50%, we believe that housing initiatives and streets, parks, and public facilities in whatever way we delineate that in the ballot language is twice as important as community partnerships. And I appreciate that, you know, it was already raised there could be overlap in what we consider housing and partnerships, or, uh, probably even public facilities and partnerships, and thinking of some Page 20 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https�//ciiychannel4 com/city-council htmi This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. of the things that we've done in the past. But I- I just wonder if- um, if in this recommendation, how you gave consideration to the let's just stay with, like, the POLO results, and, like, those definitely over 50% categories, maybe not being similarly ranked for lack of abetter term in this distribution. (00:51:34] Sure. So what I would say is we did our best estimate of, you know, based on council priorities, the POCO results, that's really how we determined these percentages. Um, the- the community partnerships one was one that we added in because we saw that as something that was important. And it's somewhat reflected in the POLO survey results, but not really. Um, so we wanted to add that in. It's somewhat related to the Social Service Agency one. Um, but it's not just social service agencies. It can be used for a variety of things. Part of that is also the ACLF that's coming, that we expect to be, uh, impacting other agencies as well. So again, as it comes to the distribution, we did our- our best to come up with a recommendation, but it's really a starting place for your conversation to help facilitate that, given the short timeline. So, uh, that is just like, uh, council line's comment, I think, are- are important considerations as you- as you look about how you're going to distribute things. [00:52:42] And the basic idea for not having the other 50% be any lawful purpose is just to give the voters more information of our intention. [00:52:50] That is correct. [00:52:52] Okay. [00:52:54] It is there a strategy to that? I mean, as far as, like, people want to understand what they're voting for and want parameters then, I mean, yes, we have broad language, but that's really broad. [00:53:07] Yeah -yeah. [00:53:08] And would be legal. [00:53:09) Well, and it seems also that that is a certain buffer ah to- to Councilor Weilein's point about the intentionality of how these funds are going to be put forward. If on- if it's any lawful purpose, then, you know, we could have a massive swing of the pendulum, and that counsel could say some theoretical counsel could say 100% property tax relief, right? So it seems like this is a way to kind of shape, um, if I'm understanding it correctly. So but I liked what you brought up, Councilor Bergus. Page 21 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at httlis,//citychannel4.com /city-council.html This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: M-Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:53:46] So I'll just say that I- I do believe that this is a, we need to do lost to moving forward and especially if we have future property tax reform. So I don't know if we've actually said that publicly, but I think, yes, we probably need to do loss. So am- I'll be supporting it. As far as this first staff recommendation, I think it's very good and very close to where we should probably be. The one piece that we maybe haven't talked as much about because we all want to talk about housing because it's so important to all is that 20% streets, parks, and public facilities. And we- we had pulchal results that said the community wants those. Just wanted to throw in the other dimension of that, and that would be with some of these. We have a really growing list of CIP projects that are unfunded and big CIP projects coming up with fire stations and city hall things. And we have just exhausted almost all the $1 million of our- of our reserve fund. And the process for us to get to those facilities through general purpose obligation or central purpose obligation funds is going to be expensive. And like, this is a really great way saving a lot of money and getting money to do those important projects we have to do. So just at that 20%, 1 know we haven't talked much about it, but I want to say that I think that's really important for us to be responsible moving forward to deliver as much services as we can for the least amount of costs. [00:55:19] Right. I think, counsel, we can just have our discussion at any point. I mean, this. [00:55:24] Sorry. I think l just did. [00:55:26] Yes, no, it's. Yeah. And so I invite you to remain there because there might be some questions that will come your way. [00:55:34] Perfect. [00:55:35] But Counsel, yes, please feel free [00:55:371 The only other thing I would say is next steps. I'll jump in and say that now before we get into discussion [00:55:44] Sure. [00:55:441 Is- is really the first step is making a decision and- and setting a date for lost. So if- if you are looking at that November election, obviously, that's going to be the most readily apparent. There's already an Page 22 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https-//citychanne[4.com/city-council.html This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. election there. Um, then you would need to look at finalizing ballot language relatively quickly and those percentages for uses as well. From there, it's a matter of preparing educational materials, since that is really our role as the city. And then once a resolution is adopted, we would inform the county and would move forward with the- the ballot that you so chose. So I'll sit down now. I'm happy to answer any questions but with that, I can happy to let you guys discuss. [00:56:28] Thank you. Alright, counsel discussion. [00:56:361 1 mean, first of all, thank you for- to all of the greater Iowa City and staff and everybody else for- for, you know, giving us a lot of thought. Thank you, staff, because this is the first time we had a presentation December. December back in December, we talked about this, which was really helpful. And so that thank you for all the work that went into this. Yeah, I mean, I think the categories makes sense to me. The percentages, I mean, we could talk about. I was doing, like, just to kind of put things in perspective. Um, you know, if we're talking about eight to 10 million each, you know, as a projected value. So that means roughly four to five million the property tax, housing- at the current percentage to 20 2010. So the 20%would be 1.5 to 2 million each year. The community partnerships would be 800,000 to a million somewhere in that ballpark. Um, and, you know, kind of just keeping in mind. We probably don't want to add. I don't think I'd be in favor of adding in any categories because at a certain point, you create those pie slices are too small to make a big impact, so I wouldn't want to, you know, do that. The other thing to- is, you know, just sitting here thinking about, you know, again, thinking back if this had passed ten years ago, you know, that would have been another, you know, $20 million for affordable housing uses that we would have had over the past ten years. I mean, so that's- to me, that underscores the importance, even though you look at this and say- you might say, Well, our need is so big. This is, you know, not going to do it, but it's every year. It's a repeating kind of funding stream, which, to me, makes a lot of sense, especially when you start thinking out, you know, at the speed of city, which is, you know, measured more in decades than years, right? So- [00:58:23] Yes. [00:58:24] Just my- my original thoughts on this. I don't have any specific language. I do think striking the balance between specificity and generality is going to be important and also not making it too complicated. I mean, you know, I mean, I've seen ballot issues in other places fail just because the language got so convoluted, nobody could, you know, you need- you know, you'd need to have, you know, three law degrees in order to understand them, and we don't. You know, that's too much to put on a voter or me, for that matter. I'm- Sorry. I'll dive in and just say, I think August is too late to- for us to make that decision. I think the education component needs to start as soon as possible, which means I think we should work faster if we're- if this council is willing to work faster. I know I have been talking about this for over a year with people, and so I feel like the- the community members that I've spoken with, not Page 23 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. everybody likes it, but understands. Some are against it, but overwhelmingly, I hear people saying, yes, this is something we- we do have to do given the way this state has changed the way property taxes work. So I think it's the specifics of how it's divided. I agree with your comments on it. It should not be too specific, but needs to have some flexibility. But my only comment is, I think we should work faster than August so that we can start the education component. [00:59:52] For me, I would like first to highlight why do I think taxis not the best option. It is an option, but it's not the best option. I think I believe it's regressive hurt the poor the most. Because, you know, sale tax really take a big bit of the income of people who are already struggle. Low wage workers and new immigrants is spent most of their income on basis needs. A sale tax makes grocery- like grocery, maybe it's not taxable, but still the other supplies like school supply, clothing more expensive for them. Even if the dollar amount is not the same as someone with higher income. I think it is increasing the cost of living in a time of high rent, utility bill and inflation, even a small sale tax added pressure on family living paycheck to paycheck. It is risk depending in equality. I think the immigrant refugee family, especially those newly arrived, often do not qualify for federal aid or depending on heavily on local affordability. So sale tax work against their stability and integration. And also sizing it sends the wrong message to the public. Public policy should say we see you and we hear you, and we help- we will help you to get ahead. Not just to- we need to tax your needs to balance the budget. While I understand the need to raise for the revenue and I understand we need this, I just feel really taxing poverty to- to fix poverty does not work. So if I just does not believe a sale tax is the best or most equitable option because it puts its greatest burden on those, you know, who are really low income. However, if as decided to move forward, I will support it, and we can move forward with it, but I wanted to make sure it's not, ah, business as usual. First, revenue must directly benefit low income residents, especially the immigrants, single parents, and seniors and people of color. That means, you know, also I would like to take about the percentage that we just have the 20 and 20 and 30%. 1 just believe, you know, this is -we need to change this percentage to reflect the needs if we're going to really tax, so again, we cannot tax the poverty to fix the poverty. So 1 just believe that, you know, maybe we can look at the percentage and change it. And also, like I say, just housing, I don't want to say housing since we are taking this for the people who are really affected by this is a low income people, I think we need to highlight very high, very clear, very bold, affordable housing and childcare access, job training, mental health, and social services. Those kind of thing that I want to we being highlighted. Second, the tax should include also sunset for me so it does not become permanent without a review. We need to reassess. It is effectness and impact after about three or four to five years. And after that, we can see if there's something going to be permanent. That would be my position. [01:03:34] Thank you for delineating the concerns because I know that this is something that at first blush, people who are not familiar with lost are not aware of the regressive components of it. And so I thank you for that, Mayor Pro Tem. I've struggled with this quite a bit, because I know that it does disproportionately can disproportionately affect those who are most in need. Another facet that I do think is important to consider is, and I have heard not you, others who have talked about its regressive nature that what Page 24 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4.com/city-council.htmi) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: A[ -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. additionally needs to bethought of is the amount of people from outside the community who come here to spend their money every weekend, and that there is a great deal of money that we are leaving on the table that is not just, it's a yes, and yes, there are regressive components of it, and there are people who are coming here, spending a lot of money, and none of that is coming back into the community other than for, you know, it's helping restaurants, it's helping, etc. Given the headwinds of property taxes and the fact that this is by no means done, the next legislature wants to do more property tax reform. I feel that this is a way and because of the categorization, and I also agree that there should be some discussion about the proportionality of the percentages that we are signaling to the public what the priorities are and how to build back into the community to strengthen it for those who need it most, as well as for the- I mean, at the same time that roads are not sexy and roads are not social services, everyone uses roads. And even if Iowa City's road condition has been deemed good, that is not what any single one of us have heard. So in terms of general improvements and perceptions of improvements, this is part and parcel. Um, I think that there is some work that we need to do as counsel to look at the percentages and the proportionality. Um, I like that there is a kind of a um, there's a connection and a correlation between the community engagement survey about what matters priority wise. Um, but I think that there is some room for us to discuss how that works. At the same time that I just touted, yes, everybody uses roads and would like their roads improved. I personally am a little troubled by the fact that property tax bucket can go towards roads. I think that's awesome, in fact. But then to have another category that talks about parks, rec, and streets, I- I don't want there to be too much weight put on street repair, essentially. So those are, I won't say that they're small, but they're more detailed than I mean than perhaps the discussion right now. But with a lot of struggle and a lot of conversations about lost, ever since I started running, like, you know, several years ago, let alone before I got onto counsel, I know of its regressive nature, and yet I think that the conditions right now are such that this is a way that we actually can feed into the community and that there is money that is coming from outside the community that we are not able to tap into right now. So I also think that we need to do a check and balance to say, how is this working? Are we getting the improvements that we are, you know, that we want to through the annual budgeting process with these monies to see if lost is worth continuing? So I agree with you on many points, Mayor Pro Tem. But I'm coming out of it slightly differently to say that I- I do support it, recognizing there has to be a lot of education and a lot of recognition of what this tax is and isn't. [01:07:581 That's a fair point. Actually, yes, thank you for that, ah, to both of you because, you know, the regressive nature is actually one of the reasons I can't remember exactly, but I probably voted against the loss back in 2014 for that exact reason. And had it not been for the incredible amounts of property tax mismanagement in terms of what's coming out of De Moines over the last several years, I don't know that I would be in the position of considering it. You know, I think that would be, I would much rather have us be funding this through the property taxes that we should be getting from things like the landlords and who got that 50%tax break over the last ten years thanks to the- the legislature. That would be my first choice. They've taken that away from us, and so I think that's kind of one of the reasons why, you know, I'm now considering this as- as a possibility. But had the situation been different, you know, I think I'd feel differently about that. I think one of the things, too, and you don't Page 25 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https://citychanne)4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. know this hindsight being 2020, but, you know, had we as a city and a group of cities had passed it in 2014, we wouldn't have to be talking about 50%for the streets or for the property tax relief. We could be talking about 50%for affordable housing or whatever, but we wouldn't be, you know, and still have 50% leftover to do the other things. So, you know, second guessing maybe what I probably did ten years ago, but again, I think that it is a regressive tax. It is not a first choice, but if our choices are limited and we still need to provide funds to help people that need the help that might be, you know, that's got to be something we got to consider. So. [01:09:38] 1 think for me, the regressive aspects of this tax suggest that we want to ensure that the uses are supporting those who are impacted by it. And I think the categories that we have will help do that. I do agree that the housing component maybe could be more limited in terms of- [01:10:011 Affordability. I think it still could be very broad, but we have other tools for, um, providing funds for market rate housing, and I think this particular bucket, because of the regressive nature, um, maybe should be limited for that aspect. Also, um, it's hard to talk about uses. Like when, you know, the public wants to know, will this fund social services? Will this fund, uh, parks and trails? You know, will this fund many different things that we could be talking about, but are the way in which we spend money isn't always tied to the funding source, right? And so I know that, um -thank you for the presentation, Kirk, and just kind of talking about how we can take what are different revenue sources and how they've been impacted. But well- well, like, this conversation is really about how it's going to be spent. So I'm just- I don't really have a fully formed thoughts as to how we address that, but I think that's important in any education that we're doing for the public, that when it comes to our budgeting process, we're, you know- we have to consider available revenues and their allowable uses and the way in which this Pi is divided up looks- you know, will be different than other available revenue sources, right? [01:11:32] Does that become its own, you know- we have the general fund, and then we have enterprise funds. Would this become its own funding pot? [01:11:41] Yes, we would probably have distinct sections, so during your budget review, which takes place January through March, we would specifically go through lost and walk you through how each dollar is intended to be spent. Um, one- one- thought that we had, knowing that this was going to be a struggle when you're- when you're talking again about a no sunset loss, having to have broad language, or not having to- like, I think it's wise to have broad language. One thing you can do to signal to the public on how you expect to spend that in the short term, at least, is to do some sort of resolution of intent, right? So that you develop this ballot language that you think is going to serve the city long term, and that's an important responsibility that you have. Perhaps the most important responsibility that you have is making sure that this will serve the city long term. But you as seven counselors can also say, for the first two, three years, this is how we intend to use it, and be very clear. We are going to fund social services Page 26 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at haps'.I/citychannel4.com/city-council.htmI) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through VerbiC AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. at this level. We are going to use streets to do more resurfacing. We are going to invest in the Senior Center interior project. Whatever that is, you can be more clear with the public through some sort of other resolution that doesn't show up on the ballot. Um, now, we're working up against a tight deadline. It's going to be hard enough for you to probably get this ballot language and the percentages split. So um, you have to weigh that into mind, uh, whether you could do just that. Could you do the ballot language and then immediately turn around and do some sort of resolution of intent, so that the voters know, at least this council right now plans to do X, Y, and Z. [01:13:25] That's helpful. I think, especially, you know, um, mentioning things like the Arbor Cliff and how, like, the needs that we're seeing right now in the immediate future. Thank you for that. [01:13:381 So, I agree with my fellow counselors that it is definitely a regressive tax. We are well aware of that. Um, and I think we have to be intentional at how we're going to allocate the funds to make sure that it is those that are most in need, and I've heard that as well from my fellow counselors that are receiving the benefits of these funds. Um, certainly, anytime we're talking about our public transit, you know, right now, it's fare free. We just heard about the Arbor Cliff. That is absolutely going to happen, not just for some city services, but for some of our community partners out there that provide critical services to many of our community members, but even those that are most vulnerable. And so I think, um, when we do move forward, we want to make sure that it is very clear of our intent of who we're going to be helping, because I think it can, you know, kind of get sidetracked, um, potentially if we're not just recognizing the opportunities that we have that can really impact those that are, um, needing the most support. Again, um, I do think that loss has a great benefit to our community overall, and even to those that are at risk of having low income. Um, this can improve their lives. Um, we have, as we, um, we just heard from Counselor Alter, folks coming into our community from all around the world. Um, that aren't, you know, they're really absolutely enjoying the community, but there's an opportunity that we have to receive some of those funds to really better the quality of life for those that are living here. And so I think that is the opportunity that we have. And from that lens is why I'm going to support this and kind of signal to staff. I sound like there are enough support to signal to staff to kind of move forward. Now I hear the broad language, and and one of the reasons I wanted to ask that question specifically about the Housing Initiative is because, we know that the council's strategic plan and the heart of this council and the needs in this community is affordable housing. Without a doubt, it is absolutely necessary. This council is taking some bold actions and zeroing in on our efforts when it comes down to affordable housing. And I think because of the positions that we're placing ourselves in becoming developers ourselves, we may be able to really move the needle quite a bit through this housing initiative. And so I do think that, yes, it is regressive, but I think that if we are intentional on of how we're going to allocate these funds on an annual basis, I do think that folks will benefit that have been negati- negatively or actually have had to pay this tax that really struggle, um, financially on a large basis for some folks. So I will support this, and I do recognize definitely My Pro Tern concerns. And I appreciate it hearing some of those ways that you think that we should move forward, because I would Page 27 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychanne]4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. agree that we need to make sure that those that are really negatively impacted or have some challenges by this, that they are the ones that are receiving the benefits from him. [01:17:361 Just a little one. Go ahead. [01:17:38] Sorry. It's kind of hard to chime in when you're the person in the sky. So I guess, you know, I agree with so much of what Mayor Pro Tern was saying, which is that, this is clearly not the first choice for anybody up here. And it just goes to show, I mean, like, let's just, like, look at the situation. This is just one example of the ways that working people and, like, our communities are left kind of struggling fighting over scraps, you know, we produce so much wealth. Working people produce so much wealth in Iowa City, and so much of it goes into private hands that did not produce that, and it goes outside of our city a lot of the time. And I think this is just a prime example of, like, I think people should kind of, like, take this and say, we are left with one of this. This is one of just a handful of tools that are left for us to try to provide for basic needs for our community, and it has intentionally been done like that. Uh, because, you know, there are people in power that want to maintain that power, and they think that, you know, this is what we deserve to fight over scraps amongst ourselves. So I think this is a good time to sit in that and how much bull crap that is. And on the other hand, I do see, you know, the potential for this to to help if done correctly and done in a way that I think I think we can get to a good even point where the messaging is broad enough, but also specific enough. So we make sure that this money that comes from working people does not go to make anybody else wealthier, um, who is not a working person. So I, you know, and the fact that it's a ballot initiative, you know, I want to educate, you know, working class people of Iowa City as much as possible about this, and then they can make their choice because, you know, people are not going to feel the same about it. um, and, you know, I'm just looking forward to these discussions going forward. There's a lot to think about. Um, but yeah, I guess that's all I have to say. [01:20:26] I just want to ask today, are we just, like, talking in general or we need also to decide about the language and the percentage and sunset and all this? Is it today or are we just talking in general today? [01:20:39] 1 think I would I think what we need to do because of the type deadline is really to direct staff to move forward, and if there is a language change that the majority of council wants to go with that we have that discussion now if we can. Um, certainly, we can come back and refine some things because, you know, we'll have a couple more meetings before that language is final. So I don't know that we need to focus too much on that, but if there's some proposals at this moment, certainly, that can go forward. One thing I will say about the housing initiative, as I'm thinking about it. So sometimes leverage, we may need some funding to leverage opportunities that are right before us in the moment. And I know that market rate rents, and I don't know if there will ever be a scenario where we would have an opportunity to provide some funding where we can have some market, you know, where we would have to buy a Page 28 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https�//citychanne]4.com/city-council.html This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. property or someone wants to buy a property that has market rents, but also will produce affordable housing units that is of the appetite for this council. And so that's where my caution comes in. If we're changing the language too much, again, it is the council that will make that decision on an annual basis during our budget time of how this money will be allocated. So with that in mind, I do find comfort in knowing that it is whomever is up here will make those final decisions. And so if we get into limiting the language too much, I think that that could not be in our best interest as a community. Um, but again, I think the controls are with us as representatives of the people of this community, where we do make that final say of how we'll use the money in that moment. [01:22:441 Mr. Mayor, that brings to mind and correct me if I'm wrong, just so I understand your point. Like how we do with TIF, where we have a requirement that a percentage of housing units in a TIF project are affordable, but not 100%. Is that the kind of thing that you're so I'm unclear. Yes, it's more. So we don't know what opportunities will be before us. And if we need it, you know, we're coming up on a budget year, and there's a great opportunity, and we need to have some cash available to acquire it for our community. Where on the opposite end, it is, um, whether it's it has to have I'm sure it'll have a component where there's a benefit to those that are most in need. I think we don't want to limit our language to exclude those opportunities. So it's more so I would leverage opportunities. [01:23:37) 1 would that- um, oh sorry. I would say that I totally understand what you mean. I guess what I would say when it comes to non -market housing is not necessarily non -market rate. So you can have a organization, it could be the city of Iowa City, it could be housing fellowship. It could be shelter. Anybody that wants to, um, make permanent, uh, affordable housing, um, that's not based in profit, right? So that's what- that's what makes it non -market. And they can still have more market rate units within them to subsidize the other units. Um, but I suppose maybe a better way to put it would be for its permanent affordability as opposed to say, um, we are giving money to, uh, a developer to create a development, and then 30%of those units will be, uh, affordable for 30 years. Um, I- I- I just think that we should be prioritizing a more permanent solution, which would be to create as many non -market or nonprofit motivated units as possible. So that doesn't mean that you can't have units in those projects that are, uh, like 80 AMI or up closer to 200 AMI, even. When places that have really good social housing, like, 80% of their population qualifies. So it's not necessarily about rates. It's just about the profit motive. That's what I would say. So I would- I would maybe be behind it if we could ask staff to try to put into- put in some sort of language about permanent affordability. Um, and yeah, that would be my suggestion at this time. [01:25:37] Yeah. Um, I want to make sure I'm not losing the thread of the conversation. Are we talking about changing the actual ballot language, or are we talking about generating a resolution of intent, like the city manager recommended? What- what- what direction are we instructing them to do? I just want to be clear. Page 29 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4 com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:25:53] Yeah. [01:25:54] 1 just want to be clear. I am not- I- I- I put out a- a what if situation that I don't think will actually happen. Um, but when it came down to the language of us trying to go through and- and maybe, um, be more specific, that's where I was trying to illustrate that I think broader language will be in the best interests of this city. And where we come, um, back to vote on what projects we do, that's where the council responsibility is. And we don't want to miss out on an opportunity that we wish we had the funds for, um, because it wasn't something that would- because it was too restrictive and we couldn't do it. And it would actually really, uh, um, make a huge impact, uh, in our strategic planning and all of our efforts. So that- so it was more of a- I think the broad language will be in our best interest is what I was really trying to get across. [01:26:591 1 agree with you, and I think broader language is good, but I don't think this is a broader language that I see here. I just see this is- is still specific language. And I want to we more broader language and also say, like, a housing project designed by the city council. That's- that's good, you know, b but I still see like there is specific stuff here that highlighted. [01:27:23) And also, I want to talk about the- the 20%. 1 don't know if everybody agreeing for the 20%or do we have to change that tonight or somewhere else? Because I believe giving, like housing initiative 20%and street and bark and public facility 20%. That's like, we cannot say, like the need of bark and the need of all public facilities equal as the need of housing. I guess and also, from my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, you know, the public facility and the street and everything, like we have this budget it every year from general fund for the capital improvement. And we never have as much as we spend on those. We never have spend it in, like, affordable housing, for example. We have only, like, you know, I think um, we budget $1 million for that and other stuff. But I- I just believe that we need to change this percentage. [01:28:17] 1 have one question for you, real quick, Ma'am Pro Tem. So if we're talking about proposed language, um, so it seems like the examples that are there are just that. They're possible examples. And so if the language in the proposed language um, excluded, where it starts to say, including but not limited to affordable housing funding all the way through the rental rehabilitation, um, maybe that is where that is too specific, and that list can go on and on and on and so as we know. Is that where you're- [01:28:541 When we talk about housing initiative, and if even I said we have to highlight affordable housing, and many of you talk about housing in general, okay? Let us do it housing on general and affordable housing and leave it at that. Yes, it will be housing in general and affordable housing, highlight affordable Page 30 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https•//citychannel4 com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. housing, and live it at that. We don't need like, and after that, maybe another housing project designed by the council. [01:29:19] So maybe programs and initiatives that increase housing supply and access, including affordable housing funding [OVERLAPPING] or affordable housing and leave it at that and then- and housing projects designated by city council. [01:29:33] Exactly. [01:29:36] Because- because even at that, all of the other stuff and beyond, which aren't even listed here are still included. [01:29:43] Exactly. It's it will be- those was the one that we just mentioned here, it will be included and something that we don't mention here also it will be include- [01:29:511 Absolutely. [01:29:52] So to that end, I would say that that then becomes the, what? Was it the statement of resolution or the resolution of intent? Or I- I'm sorry, I'm getting that wrong, but the- what happens after when we say, this is what we're going to be spending. (01:30:07] Well, the city manager talked earlier about passing a resolution- council passing a resolution (01:30:12] Right. [01:30:12] Saying, This is how we intend to spend [OVERLAPPING] 101:30:14] Right. And this- Yes, exactly. I'm just saying that becomes much more. Well, it's important, period, right? But that's where we dial in and say, This is what it's going to be. [01:30:261 1, 2, 3,4, 5. Page 31 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at httos-//citychannel4 com /city-council.html This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:30:26] Right. And I see what you're saying. At first, I was Iike, Well, I mean, but, you know, neighborhood reinvestment programs. Like, that is definitely the South District neighborhood, right? But to your point, maybe the simplicity of saying it's about affordable housing. (01:30:39) Yes. [01:30:39] Makes sense. One question that I have really quick is does staff feel like you have direction from our various comments to be able to work on language? Because I know we have gotten bound up, and if counsel agrees or disagrees and says, No, we- we need to be responsible for wordsmithing this right here right now, we can do that. But I'm also wondering, is it possible? Do we feel comfortable that we have signaled what matters to us in this language that we can say, Staff, can you go do this and staff, do you feel like you have the direction to be able to it? [01:31:20] I- I think the question I asked, [01:31:21] Sorry I'm like [OVERLAPPING] [01:31:22] No, I think- no, I think it's great. I think the- it seemed to me that afford- the Housing Initiative was probably the one that gave us a lot of conversation re- revolving the language. Um, if people are comfortable, maybe with that edit that we just kind of did on the floor, maybe I'll just ask folks if they're comfortable with that. But back to your point of, um, are we have we given the- the staff enough information? Is there any other uh, topic that is here that the council feels strongly about um, wanting to change language on because I haven't heard that yet. [01:32:04) I- I do have one just uh, apologies in advance for a- adding a layer of complication. Um, nothing- I don't- er, just making sure that as we do this, we also keep in mind that whatever ballot language we use, we want it to succeed. So I think there's probably some- and something I have to, I mean, I'll think about, like myself, I don't have an answer right now, but striking that balance because I really appreciate the simplicity. I think that's really good. But is there also an advantage to listing out a few of these things in terms when people look at it. Like, what is it, you know, if affordable housing feels vague to somebody who is not dealing with it as often as we are, is there any; and I don't know if I have an answer to this yet. It's just- it's kind of wayward question I'm asking myself. Is there any, um, you know, advantage to putting in some of these things just in terms of a kind of another informational piece for the public because at the end of the day, you know, if we support this or we want to move forward with it, then Page 32 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at ems•//citvchanne[4.com/city-council.htmll This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. we have a vested interest in it succeeding. And so, in addition to making sure the ballot language and we put in there is what we want for our values, I think, just again, another layer of complication. We also want to make sure that it is uh, appealing to the voters. So I- I don't know what the answer to that is. But- [01:33:19] But I saw that's going to be in the resolution. When we have that, we're going to have a lot of details. [01:33:24] Right. I- I agree. I think that we either get this- the language is here, if we make it simplified, we absolutely must have a resolution. And the vice versa, if we keep with this more specific examples, then we may not need the resolution, but I'll be supportive. [01:33:41] Yeah. Anyway, just go to give it some more thought which of course [OVERLAPPING] 101:33:451 And I think to me, the resolution and the specificity of it is tied to if we sunset or not, which we haven't really talked about it that much yet. And I- I am very mixed, I'm sure all of you are, too, about the right way to do that. And I don't fully understand the process of undoing a loss, what it really looks like, okay I can't think of or do we know of examples of cities who've tried to undo one and how complicated that was? Maybe, I see Kirk getting up. (01:34:16] I'm not familiar with cities uh, undoing lost, but what you do see is communities that have one set of- or they have a revenue purpose statement that was on the ballot and approved by voters, and they want to return to that and change that language. And typically, what you see is as they change that language, they also remove the sunsets rather than add it. [01:34:40] Okay. [01:34:411 Uh, the- but otherwise, it's yeah, ballot initiatives are how it's approved. And so there's always the opportunity to, you know, in the future, if it's something that people want to discontinue, it'd be the same process as continuing it, I believe. [01:34:55] Right. The way you get it by the ballot initiative, you would repeal it with the ballot initiative. [01:35:00) Correct. Page 33 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https�//citychannel4,com/city-council.html This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:35:00] Okay. [01:35:021 Can I ask a question while you're up here. It's- it totally unrelated, but I did I marked I was like for Kirk. And maybe this is something that is just not even possible. Um, under the bit that has to do with the property tax relief that stated 50%. Is it possible? Do we have any home rule left to be able to require some relief dollars pass through to renters? I mean, because they are ultimately. They're sort of paying property taxes through their rent, right? I mean, I know there's the profit, but it's, like, part of this proportionality they're paying, essentially. [OVERLAPPING] Or am I- am I being way too simple. And this is a question of, like, IT write you a memo. That's fine. [LAUGHTER] [01:35:50] Uh, I can research that further if you like. My initial reaction is probably no, because it just affects the property tax levy. [01:35:571 Right. [01:35:57] Uh, that is, you would need to reduce the levy. Um. [01:36:01] Okay. I just- I thought about it and I was like, you know, in the big scheme of things, [01:36:06] Right. [01:36:07] Renters are [inaudible 01:36:08] [01:36:081 Yeah. [01:36:09] It would be wonderful. 101:36:09] Also I looked into that and before this meeting, and it seems like no, but I'm not a lawyer, but um, but, yeah, it's uh you know, it really um, it really suck except that's not the case. Because, you know, who Page 34 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4.com/city-council.html This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. actually pays the mortgage and the property taxes of a landlord. It it's not the landlord. I'll tell you that So, um, yeah, uh, I wish it was, but I don't think it is. [01:36:381 Okay. So I think for the discussion at this time, um, I'll ask one last question before we need to just move on, and I'll tell you what I'm thinking at this point um, after this. Any other- I know that the sunset question is still there. Are people comfortable, um coming back to that, I think we can probably have the direct staff to move forward with the sunset and we can change that in a future meeting. Without a sunset- sorry. Without a sunset. Well, we're going to meet about this again unless there are strong feelings right now about that part, or are we comfortable just coming back to that in a future meeting? And then outside of the Housing Initiative proposed language, are we comfortable with all of the other languages? Again, we'll be coming back to all of this. [01:37:421 Next meeting. [01:37:43] Next meeting. Are people- is there any big thing that folks want to highlight? I think is the question. [01:37:49] And the percentage. 101:37:51] And the percentage, um, yes and the percentage. I- I think are we comfortable leaving 'cause I think that can lead us into a long discussion. Are we comfortable leaving the percentages right now as they are and coming back unless folks really want to zone in on that? We'll still have more opportunities. [01:38:111 1 mean, we only have five minutes until. [01:38:13] Yes. 101:38:13] So- I mean, I would say, let's put a pin in it so that we can determine what percentages will be at the next meeting. (01:38:19) Well I think- yeah. And I think this will be a nice opportunity for the public, many of whom who are here tonight, and thank you to give us some feedback. [01:38:261 Page 35 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yeah [01:38:27] That I'd- I'd love to consider before moving to the next stage of decision making. So and when you think about percentages, too, if you think about, you know, uh, at least among us, like, if we say we're going to increase one, where -where you decreasing, so we should probably make sure that we're holistic with that. Not just, you know? At least I would appreciate that. And I- I'll- if I have a change, I'll bring that - that way to council in whatever next meeting, two weeks, whatever that is. [01:38:51] So it does sound like what we'll do is we'll kind of pause this at this time. We'll come back, and of course, all of it will be up for discussion. But we're going to pull out the percentages discussion, the housing initiative language, as well as the sunset discussion. Are people comfortable with that? [01:39:11] Yes. (01:39:11] Well we coming back tonight or you mean next time? [01:39:141 Well, we'll, we'll come next time. I- I think for now, we'll allow the public to kind of- [01:39:211 Okay. [01:39:22] Share some thoughts, and then we'll come back next time if people are amendable to that 101:39:26] Sound good. [01:39:27] And when we come back next time, we will have specific proposals for us to talk about. [01:39:321 Yes. [01:39:32] Yes. [02:39:33] Page 36 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at hh7> ps�//citychanne]4.cl2m/ci-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yes [01:39:33] If we want to change anything [01:39:35] Yes. That is the hope. [01:39:351 Specific pro- proposals from [OVERLAPPING] members themselves (01:39:39] Council members for consideration. [01:39:42] Okay. [01:39:42] So it'll be added to the work session agenda on June 17th. Okay. Yeah [01:39:48] Thank you. [01:39:491 One request that I have maybe in- as you're looking at the um, the housing language is um, maybe to reach out to some of our housing partners, um, you know, whether it's the Affordable housing Coalition, housing fellowship, I mean, you know, just to kind of- especially since now we're honing in on the affordability piece, I think that um, Greater Iowa City did a really nice job in giving something to- for us to dig into, and that the- the- the spirit of it is there. Now if we want to kind of hone it, it's like, let's get some additional input. That's all. [01:40:251 1 might reverse that um, I might suggest that we reverse that the staff reach out. But- but yes, those partners reach out to us. [LAUGHTER] [01:40:36] Okay. And also there is anyway [01:40:37] we can find out about, [01:40:39] Page 37 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychannel4.com/city-council.html This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: M-Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. for example, if we agree to the 20%for housing, do we have a specific language, or it will be somewhere like with the percentage for, like, non affordable housing and like market price housing? Is it is like 50,50 or is it- is it- is there a specific language for that? [01:40:581 I- I think that would be up to the council to decide if you can absolutely get as specific as you want with that ballot language or you could choose to just implement that yourself uh, or as long as yo as long as you- [01:41:13] Later. (01:41:131 Correct. [01:41:13] You can do that even later, say, Hey, now we want to do it 40,60 or something like that. [01:41:18] At the end of the day, it's a question of whether you want to bound future councils at this moment in time with specific language. Um, you can pledge to the community how you intend to spend it, but eventually these seven seats and the staff seats are filled by different people. And do you want them to be bound to specific percentages, definitions, those types of things? Or do you want to preserve that Flexibility for them in the future? [01:41:441 Yeah, I'm just saying that because really, when- when you start, like, telling us exactly how much is it, that come to my attention. Because if we- even if we get, like, $5 million and we did it the same percentage, that means affordable housing. Sorry, the housing section will be uh, you know, $2 million. And this $2 million even if we did it like 50,50, we're talking about $1 million every year toward affordable housing. Oh, okay. Even if we did it like 50,50, 1 mean. But still, if we don't have a sunset for that, that means we're going to like continue, like, taxing the poverty or the poor for just $1 million for affordable housing. Haw many housing were gonna have for that for one year. I really don't know. I just struggle understanding this or digest this, not understanding. [01:42:35] And to that and also, I mean, the other piece is that even, you know, you- you'd signaled that, you know, if the rest of council goes with it, you're like, Okay, but let's ensure that there are these guys-these- these- these requirements so that we are doing the most good that we can. If we don't pass the I'm worried, as well, it's always a balance with we have to get the language so that it's enough that the public will vote for it. I'm afraid that if it gets to your point about like, that we need to simplify the Page 38 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https�//citychannel4.com/city-council,htmi) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. language about housing, that then if we started touching percentages, unless I'm completely misunderstanding you, which I could have, you're talking about it on the ballot language or-. [01:43:20] No, no, no. I'm talking [OVERLAPPING] [inaudible 01:43:21] us to discuss this. [01:43:23] That's my bad. [01:43:24] Because you know, I think people need to know exactly what's going on (01:43:28] Oh, no, no, no, no. [01:43:29] We don't have to put it on the ballot, like every single thing [01:43:31] 1 understand what you are saying. When they hit us, like the way that we talk about it, even though for this current counsel, maybe next time, the counsel will be completely different and they are not going to go with what I said. [01:43:39] 1 misunderstood you. [01:43:40] Alright. So this is a great discussion that we're going to continue to have [LAUGHTER] at our June 17th meeting. So I just wanted to make mention that Items Number 5 and 6, if the council is amendable for us to not have that discussion today, but to have that on a future work session. Are you all comfortable with that? [01:44:011 Yeah. (01:44:021 Yeah, there's nothing pressing. I'm okay with that [01:44:04] Then okay. All right. So um, we will have Items 5 and 6 on a future work session. And then we will move to Item Number 7, which is council updates on assigned boards, commissions, and committees. [NOISE] Alright, consider ourselves adjourned. We will be back for our formal meeting at 6:00 PM. Page 39 Iowa City City Council Work Session of June 3, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https,//citychanne]4.com/city-council,html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:44:29] [MUSIC] Page 40