Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-07-01 Transcription#2a Page 1 ITEM 2a PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS a. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ENTITLED "ZONING," ARTICLE G, ENTITLED "OFFICE AND RESEARCH PARK ZONE (ORP)" AND ARTICLE L, ENTITLED "PROVISIONAL USES, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, AND TEMPORARY USES." (SECOND CONSIDERATION). Lehman: (Reads item). Vanderhoefi I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to meeting at which is to be finally passed be suspended, that the second consideration and vote be waived and that the ordinance be voted on for passage at this time. O'Donnell: Second. Lehman: We have a motion and a second for expedited consideration. Discussion? Champion: Well I'd just like to inform the public that we seem to have a lot of expedited considerations in the past couple of months and that's because our meeting schedule in the summer is so sporadic that people would have to wait maybe all summer to have three readings. Lehman: Well and also Connie we should add that those things that are expedited are non-controversial issues. Champion: Correct. Lehman: Roll call. Motion fails. Karr: So want to give it second consideration? Vanderhoef: Okay. Move second consideration. O'Donnell: Second. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Kanner: I'm glad that it wasn't expedited because I'll be able to vote yes now. I feel that it does a disservice to the citizens when we do expedite these things. And Connie I think our meeting schedule is adequate for these kinds of things. Actually we probably should meet a little more, but that's another issue. But this gives a chance for people to come and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #2a Page 2 have their say if they find something wrong such as issues of the environment. There is some concern I heard about ozone from some of these transformers. And I'll be looking into it a little bit more. Right now I'll vote yes. But I do appreciate the chance to have a third vote on this. Lehman: Yeah this is very controversial. Roll call. Karmer: Good sarcasm Ernie. I'll vote yes. Lehman: Thank you. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #2b Page 3 ITEM 2b PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS b. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 1.1 ACRES FROM CB-2, CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT SERVICE, TO PRM, PLANNED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH DUBUQUE STREET SOUTH OF COURT STREET. (REZ03-00012) (SECOND CONSIDERATION). Lehman: (Reads item). Vanderhoefi I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to meeting at which is to be finally passed be suspended, that the second consideration and vote be waived and that the ordinance be voted on for passage at this time. O'Donnell: Second. Lehman: Motion and a second for expedited consideration. Discussion? Kanner: Ernie? Yeah I assume you'll be voting against this because this is quite controversial and this meeting was called with 24 hour notice and we had people that were elderly that were confused about meeting times in the past, opportunities to speak. And I think definitely we should vote no on this expedited consideration. Lehman: Other discussion? Vanderhoef: This is also one of those projects that happen in the summer time when we have construction and remodeling and so forth so it's up to the contractors to try to work this all in, in a good building season and we have been requested to this. And we also have been doing it fairly regularly for these reasons. Kanner: I think the process of City Hall moves a little bit slower for good reason. There's adequate time for people to get this in. But especially with a meeting like today called with 24 hours notice. It's not appropriate on this very controversial issue. Wilburn: I would add that these types of actions are allowable by state code, that on this particular item not only have residents had an opportunity to speak, but there was apparent dialogue between some of the people who were against this and the current property owner. And that there are times when in representative democracy that we've all been This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #2b Page 4 contacted about this and there are times when you are free to exercise that representation. So I think it's okay to do that in this case. Pfab: I'd like to make a...I don't know if the people involved here want to speak to it, but I think I'll have trouble expediting this although I believe the parties that are trying to sort this out are working well together. And I probably will support...I'11 be supportive of the second reading. I'm hoping that...I just don't this is quite the right place for the expedited. Lehman: Roll call. Motion fails. Champion: Move second consideration. O'Donnell: Second. Lehman: Moved by Champion and seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Roll call. Motion carries 6-1, Kanner voting the negative. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 5 ITEM 3 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND UNITED NATURAL FOODS, INC. Lehman: (Reads item). Champion: Move the resolution. Wilburn: Second. Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by Wilbum. Discussion? Kanner: Are we going to get a presentation by someone from our Staff on this? Lehman: I think they're here to answer questions. I don't know of any presentation. Kanner: Well usually on issues of much small importance we get a presentation. I think if we can get a brief presentation it would be appreciated for me and for the public - any public that is here. Lehman: Karin? Franklin: This is an application by United National Foods which is the corporation which owns Blooming Prairie Warehouse. The circumstances in this particular case have been one in which we have been competing with the State of Indiana to try to keep Blooming Prairie in Iowa City and also to provide an opportunity for the expansion of Blooming Prairie. We have been working with the cooperation for a few weeks now in trying to pull this together as they have evaluated the two different states. The state of Iowa has indicated that they are willing to provide financial assistance through a CEBA grant combination grant and loan - to the company that will be dependent upon Iowa City providing some financial assistance also. The state takes this position because they believe as with many of the state programs that it is appropriate that at the local level there be similar support for whatever the state is funding as well as the local support. What is being requested in this first resolution - and I'll hit the other parts as well since I'm up here...in this first resolution is support for tax increment financing which would be our local contribution to this project. The project consists of an investment of up to 9.6 million dollars in an expansion of the Blooming Prairie Warehouse. It is approximately 120,000 square feet now. They would add 140,000 square feet. Currently there are 238 employees. The projection is to add 130jobs. These are jobs that fall well within the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. ?43 Page 6 guidelines for our salary guidelines and provide a full package of benefits as can be seen in the CEBA application where a lot of the details presented about the actual project that will transpire. We have...excuse me...we have offered the TIF assistance and a six year 100 percent rebate. Again this is on the increment in value so taxes ~vill continue to be paid on what currently exits. And the increment in value will be taxed and then that...those tax revenues which we can put into the TIF account which is not all tax revenue - remember there is debt levies that are protected which cannot be touched. Those will continue to be paid even on the increment. That money then would go toward the tax rebate. This is very similar to what we have done with other companies in terms of TIF assistance - that is a tax rebate. After the project is completed their requirements for that rebate to occur are the completion of the project as outlined in the agreement, the minimum improvements and that on average there are 300 jobs beginning January 1, 2005 and that those jobs have an average wage of $11.75 an hour. They range from $10 to $30 an hour. So there's two aspects of this. One is growing the tax base. The other is retaining and increasing jobs in Iowa City. The next item which is a resolution for the community economic betterment account we are required by the state of Iowa to be the applicants for this. And this is the...one of the state pieces that requires then the local participation. We will not participate financially in the CEBA. Our participation is in the TIF tax rebate. The state then is being requested to provide $500,000 to support the increase in the number of jobs at Blooming Prairie. And then the last item relative to this project is an application under the new Iowa Values Fund which is the capital investment program of the Iowa Values Fund that was just passed by the last legislature. There's no application form for that at this point. This is one of the first...well probably the first project that will be considered by the Iowa Values Fund which comes into effect today. Again we are passing through this application to indicate that we give local support to this project and passing it on to the state. The monies - as I understand the monies that come to the business under the capital investment program have to do with sales tax rebates. It's not money that is given by the state, but either tax credits or sales tax rebates to the company. So that's the essence of this project. We have been working with this company under the guidance of the City Council to grow the tax base and to try to encourage commercial/industrial development in Iowa City. This company - Blooming Prairie - has been a very good corporate citizen in Iowa City. We have every expectation it will continue to be so. It's the type of company in natural foods which seems to be just perfect for Iowa City and the heartland. Any questions? Pfab: Is there a limit...I understand there is a limit on the amount of the TIF? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 7 Franklin: Yes. One million dollars. Again that's comparable to what we've done before. Pfab: And you just didn't state it. I was pretty sure... Franklin: Yeah. That's correct. Pfab: Okay. I'm finished with you. Franklin: Okay. Lehman: Thank you Karin. Kanner: I had some questions for Karin, some of which you might be able to answer. I talked to you a little bit earlier. Some you might not be able to answer. First... Franklin: Tom Diziki from United Natural Foods is here if you have questions. Kanner: Okay. In regards to saying Blooming Prairie is a good corporate citizen I would agree with you, but technically there is no longer a separate corporate entity of Blooming Prairie. Is that correct? They're now part of United Natural Foods. Franklin: That's my understanding. Yeah. Kanner: Okay. So it's subsumed under this new ownership. So that leads to my next question. What is the company's history? I...because of other things that I had to get to I was not able to read the whole packet. I read most of it. And maybe it was contained here. But I wondering if you could briefly tell me what the history of the company is in terms of following through on commitments and its labor history? Also we had in here - in the agreement it then notes that they have to follow...they can't discriminate based on our protected classes here in Iowa City. There are seven or eight which includes sexual identity. And do they give the same benefits for gay sexual partners...long-time partners that they give to spouses would be another question I have as far as their work history. And I have a few other questions along those lines. So I was wondering if you could answer that (can't hear) you can't. Franklin: I think those questions can be most appropriately answered by Mr. Diziki who represents the company and obviously would have a much more intimate knowledge of the benefits and the history of the company than I would. Kanner: Do we...let me ask you though...I'11 have some maybe some of the other questions for you and then you can defer what you'd like. But This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 8 do we investigate this? This is a big investment on our part and also we're standing up for them in front of the state. So that million and a half dollar commitment is a big investment and it seems to me that we should ask some of these questions before we go forward ourselves. And certainly they're going to give hopefully some honest answers, but they give it from their perspective. And I would hope that we would do some investigating on our own before we give out some of this potential money. Franklin: The state of Iowa through the CEBA program has requirements that a company as we do has not...is not in violation of any federal, state or local law. It's part of our agreements. It's part of the application to CEBA. We do not as I believe you are describing investigate the company. We do work on a good faith atmosphere as we're working with these companies. We don't have reason to believe that there are violations to either local, state or federal law. I do not believe that has been a direction of the City Council that we attain an investigative posture as we're working with these companies. If that's the desire of the Council we certainly will. Wilburn: I have a question for Council just to follow up on that. In the event that any of these types of disclaimers are made if something were to arise, something discovered, throughout the course of the contract would that be something that legally the City could follow up on. Holecek: Well I would say yes, but it depends upon how material that particular violation that comes to light is. Wilburn: But that is possible? Holecek: Yes because there are representations at least in the agreement that they are not currently in any violation. So... Wilburn: Another question for you Karin then. Of the financial assistance that's given to any of the human service organizations in Iowa City while they make those same statements is there any type of investigation done against the human service agencies? To my knowledge there are not. Franklin: No. Wilbum: Okay. Thank you. Kanner: I don't know if... Vanderhoef: Steven I was just going to respond to a couple of the things that you said. You probably didn't get this far in the reading, but I did read it... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 9 Kanner: Dee if I could just interrupt quickly, just if you were saying in response to me my question is not only legal, but beyond legal. Certainly I would assume that they'll comply with all legal things for the most part. Vanderhoef: That's part of the contract. Kanner: But when we give out money we can also ask for things beyond that for instance discrimination and whether or not they give benefits for people for equal health benefits equal to spouses which Dee might answer. Vanderhoef: That's what I'm... Kanner: But it goes beyond just the legal (can't hear) is my concern in terms of looking into it. And as far as human service agency they go through quite a rigorous process going before the United Way agency as you well know. That's quite an application and an interview process. And I think it's more rigorous than what these folks go through perhaps. Wilbum: But I would also add that within that United Way process there is no investigative body proactively as to whether or not that we make a statement that we are...and all of them make a statement that they do not discriminate for various reasons and classifications, but there is no investigation proactively by the United Way. Kanner: Well there's an organization that didn't receive funding anymore because they didn't meet certain criteria. So I would say there is a sort of affirmative investigation. Wilburn: I cannot discuss that particular organization, however I will say there is no - to my understanding of the process with the United Way in general is any action...there's a - what do you call it? - a probationary period that they enact when they do find something as opposed to any...so in that sense it's still reactive as opposed to proactive in the sense that's you're talking about. Kanner: Thanks. Dee? Vanderhoef: Okay. What I was going to tell you the CEBA application gives a lot more direction on what happens and what they must do. And then they offer all their information about benefits and one of things that I think you're inquiring about is that it is possible to cover domestic partners for benefits for health insurance. That was one of the things. Another thing that our Council has not had CEBA application in quite some time, but a strong interest to me is that in the contract they are giving 10 % of the jobs must go to qualified persons who qualify for This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 10 promise jobs. So it's another way - and obviously when you have this big of group there is job training so that allows persons who qualify for promise jobs who maybe need additional training that is also a possibility in there. Kanner: I didn't quite follow that. Ten percent of what? Vanderhoef: Ten percent of the jobs must be put out for participants who qualify for promise jobs. So that is our... Kanner: What is promise jobs? Vanderhoef: That is a workfome development product that provides training and support to persons of low- and moderate- income who qualify for the program. So it's a very positive in my mind for connecting these two together. Not only are we supporting construction and building our tax base, but we are also supporting jobs. So the job requirement is to maintain that average of 300jobs. And they are adding 130 jobs. But what we are really doing is we are saving also 170 jobs that were going to be going away if this did not continue. The other thing that we are saving as near as I can see is the assessed value of this property is 4.5 million. And in '02/'03 they paid $120,000 of property tax. So if this company chooses to move to another state not only does the state of Iowa lose, but all the potential workers in Iowa as well as our local tax base and corporate tax. So we have put together a package here. I would commend my Staff. I would commend my economic development arm - the ICAD folk - and also the business owners who came in good faith and gave us time to put together a package that I think is a win-win for everyone. I'm very excited about this. I think it's exactly what we're trying to produce through our economic development outreach products. And we certainly are encouraging local businesses to grow. And even though we have a new owner here it is growing a business that we presently have. And thank you. Lehman: Other discussion? Pfab: I'd like to make a comment. I don't think it's a secret that I'm not a great supporter of TIF. But I think this is probably as ideal a situation as where TIF fit's well. We've got a good company here. They have a history they've started here. And of course of all they've been bought out by a larger company. It looks to me like it's an industry that or a service that is certainly forward looking. I like the fact that there's a union representative there. And I understand that they just approved their contract for the next three years which I'm glad to hear that. So I will have no trouble supporting this and I look forward to much success on all of our part. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 11 Wilbum: Another thing that I add is that even though we're responding to a certain extent to a state deadline and we had to call the special meeting I do appreciate the Staff responding and the other branches responding. I think it was maybe a month ago, maybe two, where we saw in the newspaper about the question of whether or not Blooming Prairie was going to continue staying here in the community. So I think this is a good response to that and appreciate the effort and welcome them to stay in the community. Kanner: I think there...Mike... O'Donnell: Well I'm going to say that I'm going to support this happily. This is exactly the type of growth that this community wants. You have a company with a proven track record willing to grow in our community with this economy. These are jobs with benefits. They're good paying jobs. This is great for both communities. They've been a...for our community they've been a great community neighbor. And I'll have absolutely no problem supporting this. Kanner: There's two issues that I want to continue to speak to. One is the timeliness of our formal meeting and the other is the issue of the tax abatement and other financial assistance. In terms of the timeliness as you know I in general don't approve of expedited consideration. Something of this magnitude I think deserves due consideration and notice by the public. I did talk to just recently in the last hour talked to a representative from CEBA in the state. And although there is a state deadline for this meeting he said that it's no problem to ask that it be deferred and most likely we could be on the August agenda. And so there is a deadline for getting on the July 16th and 17th meeting of the board of directors of CEBA. But I said do you need it by the first...or the third of the month - first second or third. He said we need it before our meeting. And that was all he said. So I think it is possible from the CEBA point of view to defer it certainly until next month. I talked to the CEO of United Natural Foods - Steve Townsend - earlier today and certainly he would like it to go through mainly because of building opportunities. But he said it's up to us. And he said there's paperwork and things that need to be done. And I said what about if we discuss this at our next Council meeting July...I think that's 13th and 14th... 14th and 15th and even if he couldn't bring in his representative here that we could talk on speaker phone or even perhaps get a video hookup with the way things are going now at oar work session and have it a formal vote then. And the reason I think that's a good idea - and in a few minutes I will be asking for a deferral is that I think it's good for the public to be involved with this. I think there are some positive points like you said Dee and Mike. And the question is how much do we give up to get those. And that's the other This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 12 side of the coin. When we give a tax abatement we don't just give it for ourselves we give it for the schools and for the county. And the schools get some of that back, but not all of that. So if we're going to be increasing workers many of those have children. That means increased children in our school systems and there's less money to provide for them until 2012 1 believe or sooner if they reach that million dollars sooner. There's no guarantee that they'll stay after 2012. We hope they will, but we look at Rudy's which received significant amount of money up in North Liberty and financial assistance. So and also there's often increased human service costs which we heard from a group FAIR. And I don't if there are any representatives from FAIR here, but you would expect that that organization that spoke so strongly about some concerns with TIF - granting of TIF's - would be here. But there was no notice in the paper. I didn't have time to notify many people. And I would ask that...I'll make a formal proposal that we defer this resolution until our July... Lehman: 15th. Karr: 14th is your work session. 15th is your formal. Kanner: ...July 15th meeting. Lehman: Wehave amotionto defer to the 15th of July. Is there a second? Motion dies for lack of second. Champion: Well I appreciate what you're saying Steve, but I think...I personally think it's lucky for Iowa City that this is not your decision. It's a Council decision. And I think you're being picky in a grandstanding form. Nobody expects you to support this no matter how long they defer it. So I think we just should move on. Karmer: I have concerns about also in the agreement and I did have a question for Tom is it which I'll ask in just a minute. But in the agreement...let me get to that.., we characterize unavoidable delay includes strikes, boycotts, lockouts or other labor disputes. We did have a contentious union contest at Blooming Prairie. The union did vote closely to form and then Blooming Prairie did not negotiate some felt in good faith. But you're saying Irvin that a contract was signed between the new corporate entity and the union? Pfab: I understand it...there was a proposal that was rejected by the union a week ago Saturday. And Saturday it was agreed upon. I believe that's the understanding I have. Is that correct? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 13 Karmer: In a second perhaps you'll just answer that. I think that's moving the right direction, but still I have concern when you read in the national press how companies come in, take over local companies and one of the first things they often do is attempt to break the union. Maybe this they'll reverse of course, but that's one of the things I want to find out more about. And I don't think I've had the time to do that. And I think it's good for our govemment to take some time to do these kinds of things when we're giving out a million dollars from the City and a half a million from the state or we're passing along to the state. Vanderhoe£: You know I object to you saying giving a million dollars as though it's coming out of our general fund. What we are doing is deferring collection of taxes for the City. So it's money that they pay. If they follow their contract they will get that rebated for six years. So we are not losing tax base. We are building a tax base. We are just deferring having it come into the City coffers. Kanner: Our system is set up Dee...it's not the best system any of us would agree, but it's set up on the expectation that people will pay their taxes - their share - and that we'll have growth in a certain way and we'll collect those taxes to expand services. And so just as small property owners expected to pay taxes even though they build a house they're going to pay taxes I would expect businesses to pay taxes. So I would expect... Vanderhoef: And they are... Kanner: ...we shouldn't subsidize it or not paying the taxes on the addition. They are certainly going to be making we would assume a profit. That's what they're in the business. And that's okay. Vanderhoef: And they are paying taxes and if they live up to the contract some of that is rebated for the six years. So don't tell me that we're giving them anything. And we're not taking away anything that's already there. Your philosophy, my philosophy are different however to characterize this as giving them a million dollars is not correct. Lehman: Did you have a question for...that we could (can't hear) Tom? Kanner: Tom ifI could ask you about a few things. There was one mention of that I saw - maybe it was in another place for benefits for domestic partners for emergency leave. One was it mentioned in other places for medical benefits and two how do you define domestic partner. Thomas Diziki: For the record my name is Tom Diziki. I'm from the corporate office in Danville, Connecticut. I'm a manager of special projects. I've been working with United Natural Foods under their employee for about a This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 14 year now and part of that I was a consultant as an architect since 1995. I became familiar with this company through being an architect and doing some projects for them in Connecticut, Denver, Atlanta, Pennsylvania. We just finished a project in New Hampshire. And now I'm tasked with the project here in Iowa City. I am not an HR person. I'm an architect and a special manager. So how I define domestic partner I don't even want to get into that. I have an understanding of what I think that is. I think you'd understand what a domestic partner is as well. Whatever the politically correct way of saying that is my understanding is that we provide benefits to domestic partners. To the extent of those benefits I don't know. But the benefits package that we outlined in our application I think shows that we have a fairly extensive array of benefits that we offer to all of our employees which do include domestic partners. But I don't want to wrangle about a specific definition of what that means. Lehman: I don't think that there is a requirement in our process that you offer benefits to domestic partners anyway. Is there Steven? Kanner: I don't know if there is. Lehman: There isn't. Kanner: Well let me...two points. One again this is not necessarily a legal requirement. I'm saying it might be good to have it. Two though actually there is in the agreement saying that you have to not discriminate against certain protected classes and our protected classes include sexual orientation. And especially in light of the recent Supreme Court decision one could perhaps argue that if we're going to comply with this agreement from both ends that if you're going to offer benefits to employees and their spouses to a certain extent...legal spouses you would also have to give it to gay domestic partners also which don't have the opportunity for legal marriage. That may change with this ruling. But...so there are two different levels to that Ernie. So I think it does have importance. Lehman: Do you have any other questions for Tom? Kanner: Did you negotiate the union...did your company negotiate the contract and is agreeing to the contract or signed off on the recent union contract? Diziki: Yeah I personally didn't negotiate that contract. The people here in Iowa City - our management team did. It's my understanding today...I spoke with the general manager of the facility and last Saturday it was ratified and voted of and it was unanimous. And everyone in the union accepted the contract that's been put forward. I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 15 don't believe it's been signed as of today, but it's in the works and there are no issues. And we have a very stable and happy workforce. And I think we have a workforce excited to see us expanding here in Iowa City. And we're excited to be here to be quite honest with you. Kanner: And are most of your...when I say you I'm speaking in the corporate sense, not for you personally. I know that you don't do everything Tom. Maybe you do. Diziki: I do a lot, but I don't do HR stuff. Kanner: Do you know what the stance is on unionization is corporately. Are they accepting? Do they bring in...Blooming Prairie was very adversarial and made it very difficult by bringing in lawyers and teams that are known for breaking up unions and I was wondering what the stance of your company was. Diziki: Our company jus to give you a little bit of background is a conglomeration if you will of a number of companies like Blooming Prairie. The parent company where our headquarters is now used to be known as Cornucopia Natural Foods with a facility in Connecticut and Atlanta. There was a merger with another company out west called Mountain People's Warehouse. There was another company that joined forces called Stone Mills, Rainbow Natural Foods, Blooming Prairie, Northeast Cooperatives. So what's happened is over the years there's been a getting together if you will of smaller regional natural foods distributors that have realized that by joining forces we're able to go ahead and effectively have greater buying power in able to give our customers better value through greater purchasing power. Blooming Prairie is one of the companies that we've recently acquired. We acquired this company last year. We inherit whatever we inherit with these natural food companies. We have a facility in Seattle - I forget the specific town, but it's in the Seattle area - that to my knowledge is it's a completely unionized workforce. The facility here in Iowa City is obviously unionized. Those are the only two that I know about. We don't have a corporate policy that's anti-union by any means. But we have you know I think a fairly progressive way of dealing with our employees that you know quite honestly there's not a need for a union because we provide good benefits and good paying jobs and a good day's pay. And we try to be a progressive employer. Kanner: The...Blooming Prairie has been a pretty good neighbor in Iowa City and a good corporate partner. I am concerned though that an even closer to the City Hall an organization that founded Blooming Prairie - New Pioneer Cooperative which is a member of Blooming Prairie or was voted against your organization taking over and I was wondering why that was. I have some concerns. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 16 Diziki: I think that...I know it's interesting perspective give you...everybody has a different perspective. I look at our company...if you go to one of our warehouses and look at the products that are on the shelves you'll see things that you never see in your normal grocery store. You know there's all kinds of...you know special kinds of macaroni and cheese and tofu and soy milk and everything else. We're a pretty small company in the big scheme of things when you compare us to conventional grocery stores. I think from a small natural foods perspective we probably appear like a big, corporate giant. You know by no means are we. I mean again we are a combination ora number of regional natural foods distributors that can you know effectively purchase better by joining forces. Why those folks chose to go ahead and disagree with that vote I don't know. I know the vote passed by a majority and obviously you know since the acquisition we do own the company so a majority of the people that were member of the cooperative did agree with the move and it was a good one I think for everyone involved. Karmer: And I talked to the folks in Indianapolis and... Diziki: Who did you talk to specifically? Kanner: This was in the City. And I talked to a person in economic development - Margaret Banning - and as of yet in the City there were no proposals. You had mentioned that there's a proposal in Indianapolis that's competing against ours - or we had in our memo there was competition from Indianapolis. You mentioned it was outside the city proper. I was wondering if you could give us some details on what they're offering. Diziki: I could share with you... Vanderhoef: What does this have to do with what we're doing? Kanner: Well the question is why do we have to compete...part of this is we were told that we were competing with Indianapolis - that was in our memo. Vanderhoef: If you read the application that's in there they said very specifically that we were competing with them. Kanner: Well I'd like to know some of the details. It seems that if you're going to give away money - and I again use that term full intent - I think that you have to...you should know these things. What are the...all the players in the ballgame. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #3 Page 17 O'Donnell: You know what. I've heard this for a long time and you know I think five or six of ready, willing and able to welcome these folks to this community for growth and prosperity in the community. Ernie I think we maybe ought to see if there isn't support to move this thing forward. Champion: Just call the vote. O'Donnell: I'm not calling the question because I just think there's support here to do this. Quite frankly I've heard enough. Kanner: Mike I think it behooves us to give it (can't hear) consideration more than five minutes that you want to give it. Champion: (Can't hear). Lehman: Let me... O'Donnell: It behooves us to do what's right for this community and what's right is to grow and provide jobs with good benefits and tax base. That's how you keep a healthy community. Lehman: I think there's more than that too Mike and your comments were right on target. But we would not have this in front of us right now if there had not been a tremendous amount of effort that has been gone through by people within this community - ICAD, our own City Staff, whatever. This has been prepared and pursued in accordance with the policy of this Council that we believe in economic growth, that we believe in increasing our tax base, that we believe in what is good for this community. I have...I'm overjoyed atthe opportunity to do this. I mean I feel this is not just a matter of 9.6 million dollar investment - and I'm not sneezing at that. That's incredible. It's also about keeping 180 good jobs. It's a matter of keeping a facility that's been here for a long time and as Mike said have been very good neighbors. I absolutely don't see the down side of it. And I am somewhat frustrated when we have an opportunity like this that we sit hem and badger around with it. So I personally...is the Council ready to vote? O'Donnell: I'm ready to vote. Champion: Oh, you can call... O'Donnell: Roll call. Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries 6-1, Kanner voting the negative. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #5 Page 18 ITEM 5 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY APPROVING THE APPLICATION OF UNITED NATURAL FOODS, INCORPORATED FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING BENEHTS UNDER 2003 IOWA ACTS, HOUSE FILE 677, THE NEW CAPTIAL INVESTMENT PROGRAM. Lehman: (Reads item). O'Donnell: So moved. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? I am really, really proud that Iowa City will have the first application to be made under this new law. I mean I think it's kind of neat to be number one in this respect. O'Donnell: By helping such a strong company. Lehman: Yes. Roll call. Motion carries 6-1, Kanner voting the negative. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #6 Page 19 ITEM 6 COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS. Lehman: Item 6 are Council appointments. The Deer Task Force we've been asked to appoint Martin Jones for the At-Large position which it was approved at their last meeting. Do I have a motion to that effect? Pfab: So moved. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: A motion and a second. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. Now prior to adjourning the meeting. Do we do this? We need to set an evaluation meeting next week if we can. Do we do that before we adjourn or afterwards? Karr: Just scheduling a meeting. Lehman: Can we schedule a meeting for next week some morning. O'Donnell: Any time. Champion: Any time. O'Donnell: Just give us a call. Lehman: I don't have a problem... (End of Tape 03-57, Beginning of Tape 03-58) Pfab: ...next week. Lehman: Yes. Kanner: Tuesday is out for me. Champion: Well we don't want you to be there. Vanderhoef: Monday and Wednesday are fine. Karmer: Thursday is out. Karr: How about Wednesday. Lehman: Wednesday. Does Wednesday work? Vanderhoef: Yes. O'Donnell: That's wonderful. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003. #6 Page 20 Lehman: Alright. Wednesday we will meet at... Champion: 8:00 Lehman: 8:00 o'clock for evaluations. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of July 1, 2003.