The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003-12-23 Info Packet CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY December 23, 2003 www.icgov.org I MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS J IP1 Memorandum from City Manager: Council Meeting on Priorities/Facilitation IP2 Memorandum from City Manager: Policy Discussion of Scattered Sites for Affordable Housing IP3 Copy of letter from Mediacom to City Clerk: Notice of price adjustment effective on or about February 1, 2004. IP4 Letter from Lavon Yeggy RN BSN Elder Services, Inc.: Compliments to City Staff IP5 Memorandum from Housing Authority Administrator, Steven J. Rack/s: Resident Opportunities and Self Sufficiency (ROSS) Program. IP6 Memorandum from Associate Planner, Shelley McCafferty to City Manager and City Council: Historic Preservation Handbook IP7 Letters from Gloria De/Lutheran Church to City Staff: Shelter House IP8 Memorandum from Brian Boelk to City Manager: Waterworks Park Butler House/Amphitheater Trails IP9 Email from Irvin Pfab to City Council: Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors IP10 Iowa City Police Department Monthly Liquor License (OFF PREMISE SALES) Report November 2003 IPll Letter from An/ssa Williams JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner to Petsel Place Residents: Neighborhood on-street parking during snow events IP12 Memorandum from City Clerk: Absence IP13 Meeting Materials: December 17 City Council Economic Development Committee IP14 Economic Development Committee Approved Minutes: December 4, 2003 IP15 Proposed Financial Plan Fiscal Year 2005-2007 (Budget) i MATERIALS DISTRIBUTED 1/5/04 WORK SESSION I Telecommunications Commission: Draft minutes of January 2, 2004 A Plea for a Positive, Productive Council: Written by Dee Norton distributed by Bob EIliott to Council December 23, 2003 Information Packet /continued/ 2 I PRELIMINARY/DRAFT MINUTES I IP16 Public Art Advisory Committee: November 6, 2003 IP17 Human Rights Commission: November 25, 2003 IP18 Historic Preservation Commission: December 11, 2003 IP19 Police Citizens Review Board: December 9, 2003 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF [OW,& CITY December 23, 2003 www.icgov.org IPI Memorandum from Assistant City Manager: Council Meetington Priorities/Facilitation i IP2 from City Manager: Policy Discussion of Sca~ered Sites for Affordable Housing IP3 Copy of Mediacom to City Clerk: Notice of pri~ ustment effective on or about February 1, IP4 Letter from Lavon Ye< RN BSN Elder Services, Inc. )liments to City Staff IP5 Memorandum from Authority Administrator J. Rackis: Resident Op :iency (ROSS) lm. IP6 Memorandum from Associate ~ner, Shelley I to City Manager and City Council: Historic Preservation IP7 Letters from Gloria Del f Staff: Shelter House IP8 Memorandum from Brian Boelk to City IV lager: Waterworks Park Butler House/Amphitheater Trails IP9 Email from Irvin Pfab to City Council: Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors IP10 Iowa City Police Department Liquor (OFF PREMISE SALES) Report November 2003 IPll Letter from Anissa Williams Planner to Petsel Place Residents: Neighborhood on-street during snow IP12 Memorandum from City IPI3 Meeting Materials: D~ City Council Economic )ment Committee IP14 Economic Committee Approved Minutes: 4, 2003 IP15 Proposed Fine Plan Fiscal Year 2005-2007 (Budget) ~ PRELIMINARY/DRAFT MINUTES IP16 Publi ¥Committee: November 6, 2003 IP17 Human Rights Commission: November 25, 2003 IP18 Historic Preservation Commission: December 11, 2003 IP19 Police Citizens Review Board: December 9, 2003 City of Iowa City r~_ MEMORANDUM Date: December 22, 2003 To: City Council From: City Manager Re: Council Meeting on Priorities/Facilitation I have confirmed with Jim Swaim to be our facilitator at the Council Goal/Priority session scheduled for Thursday, January 8, 2004 at the Water Plant Community Room. cc: Jim Swaim City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: December 22, 2003 To: City Council /LL. From: City Manager ~/'~ Re: Policy Discussion of Scattered Sites for Affordable Housing During Council's discussion of the Garden Prairie project, which is seeking Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs) from the Iowa Finance Authority, the issue of scattered sites was raised again. At that meeting a consensus of the City Council requested staff research this issue and bring back options so a formal policy could be discussed. I have met with staff to discuss this issue and to outline a plan of action. We will be focusing on the acquisition or development of affordable housing in which the City has a funding role or decision- making function (e.g. CDBG or HOME funded projects, Public Housing, or Low Income Housing Tax Credit projects). Given the dynamic nature of the Section 8 program, and that, it is based on a "housing choice" by the tenant, we are not anticipating including it within the scattered site discussion. Attached to this memorandum is a letter from the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) indicating their desire to participate in the development of a scattered site policy. We believe involvement by HCDC at this early stage will benefit the process. As such, staff will be recommending HCDC appoint a subcommittee to work with them on addressing the Council's request. This working group will be researching the availability and application of scattered site policies within other communities and collecting local demographic and housing information. The subcommittee, along with staff, will work to formulate options. HCDC will then be presented these policy options for discussion. Ultimately, the policy options and HCDC's recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council and their consideration. A rough timeline for the process is as follows: January - March Information collection and research April Focus group meetings and form policy options May HCDC discussion and recommendation June City Council consideration In early 2004, Iowa City will also be starting the process to rs-write the Consolidated Plan (a.k.a. CITY STEPS), which is our five-year plan for the provision of housing, jobs and services for Iow- moderate income persons. This provides us with an opportunity to review, discuss and direct the City's vision for the use of federal, state and local resoumes. Within this debate we can include a scattered site housing policy and link it to the overall mission of the CiTY STEPS plan. The Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC), as well as many others will play essential roles in assisting the City Council and staff in developing the new CITY STEPS plan and a scattered site policy. cc: Housing and Community Development Commission (memo only) Karin Franklin, Director of Planning and Community Development Doug Boothrsy, Director of Housing and Inspection Services Steven Nasby, Community and Economic Development Coordinator Steve Rackis, Housing Administrator Attachment Mgr~mmo\scatteredsites.doc City of Iowa City Housing Community Development Commission 410 E. Washington Strcct Iowa City, Iowa 52940 (319) 356-5230 COMMISSIONERS: Matthew Hayek Chairperson December 3, 2003 September 2002-2004 Dear Council Members: Jerry Anthony Vice-Chair The location of federally=assisted homing in Iowa City is a topic of increasing discussion September 2002-2005 within our communiw. The Commission is senskive to the fact that the placement of subsidized housing and services may impact area schools and other institutions. Erin Barnes September 2003-2005 The Commission is informed that Iowa City's scattered site and housing density policies maybecome the focus of renewed attention bythe Council. The Commission Lori Bears encourages the Council to undertake an evaluation of its current policies regarding these September 2001-2004 issues, and would welcome an invitation to participate in such a discussion. Clear-cut policies would assist the Commission in evaluating housing and service applications and John Deeth making funding recommendations in the future. September 2001-2004 Thank you for your attention to this matter. Mark Edwards September 2002-2005 William Greazel Sincerely, September 2003-2006 Ma~he~w ~ye~ Shellie Mackel September 2003-2006 Housing & Community Development Commission Jayne Sandier September 2002-2005 STAFF: Steve Nasby Deu~prrm Coordm~or Steve Long A ssOaate plarraer Tracy Hightshoe Associate Planner 2003 DEC 1 9 PM 2:02 CFF¥ CLERK December 18, 2003 IOWA CITY, I©WA CERTIFIED MAIL Ms. Marion Karr City Clerk City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, Iowa 522.40 Dear Ms. Karr: Mediacom is committed to providing the City with advanced notice of pending changes in the cable system serving your community. We are writing to inform you of a price adjustment effective on or about February 1, 2004. The price of Family Basic service will increase by $3.00 to $43.95. A modest realignment of channels and/or channel additions will occur in the same period. A copy of the channel line- up and rate information is attached for your review. Customers will be notified via messages on their upcoming monthly invoice. Mediacom understands that increased cable prices are not popular. We do, however, want to explain why the increases have continued and provide you with information on the direction of our business as a local investor in the City. This company entered and expanded in the cable business with the specific goal of providing the best cable services available anywhere to non-metropolitan areas that had been left behind by previous cable operators. While some cable companies either did not reinvest in the communities they served or reinvested mostly in only their biggest markets, Mediacom strives to give ali its communities access to robust channel lineups, digital cable and high-speed Internet services as well as the next generation of broadband products. Mediacom also believes that customers should be able to enjoy those services at fair and reasonable prices. Mediacom has invested the hundreds of millions of dollars necessary to provide those services as well as allowing for expansion as new technologies emerge. We have worked diligently to keep rates very close to the national average as determined by the Federal Communications Commission's .national price survey. The amount of programming and the overall pricing of cable services have risen substantially and it has been difficult for many previously underserved customers to comprehend and accept the size of price increases over this period. Mediacom Communications Corporation 6300 Council St. NE · Cedar Rapids, IA 52402 · 319-395-7801 Fax 319-393-7017 Heavy capital investment and programming increases have been noted in previous rate adjustment notifications. Despite customer sensitivities to further rate increases, programming companies continue to increase their pricing to Mediacom at many times the rate of inflation. It must be noted that although wages and benefits normally comprise the greatest expense for most businesses, programming expenses make up the single greatest operating expense for Mediacom. The significance of these types of increases is put into proper perspective when one considers that this one expense has been increasing at rates in excess of 18 percent per year. Mediacom has strenuously objected to thc continued rate of escalation by programming companies and will continue fighting to reduce cost acceleration. Most importantly, the City should know that the total increase in costs that Mediacom incurs from programming, wages and benefits, marketing, training and other items exceed the amount of increased revenue received from increased pricing. The percent of operating margin, or rate of return, for core video services has been decreasing year over year. The decline in margin for the company is the equivalent of an employee earning less real dollars as happens when their salary increases by less than the rate of inflation. There are great opportunities for Mediacom in your community despite the challenges we currently face. Mediacom cable systems are superiorly positioned to deliver exciting new products and services such as high definition television, video on demand and telephone service. The growth of high-speed Internet service and other products continue to fuel future investments in your community. A presentation detailing the effect of increased programming costs and programming policy impact on customer choice will be provided upon request. Please contact me directly at (319) 395-9699, extension 202, if you would like to discuss the rate adjustments or if I may be of any assistance in responding to customer inquires. Sincerely, Jori I<oebrick Sr. Director of Government Relations Mediaeom sab30274 12/2/03 5:48 PM Page 1 ~ -1 1 Products & Services Price List Serving Iowa City Effeccive February I, 2004 Dear Valued Customer, EQUIPMENT CHARGES Mediacom constantly strives to bring you new products and better Monthly RentaJ programming choices. Base Digital Converter with Remote ....................... $ 2,00 71 Health Network Digital Link (Digital Converter P, equimd) ...................... $ 3.C0 As par~ of our Ongoing c0enmionent, v~ continually seek ways to keep High Definition (HDTV) Converter with Remote ............. $ I 1.00 increased cable programming expenses and operational costs ha~e continued to Cable Modem ........................................ $ 3.00 to monthly rates be~nning with your February 2004 billio8 s~ternent. DIGITAL PACKAGES Oigkal Value* ......................................... $ 23.00 J[~--~/~ ~ ~/~L. (Indudes ~ou~ choke of two Muki-Screen Premium Geoups) Total Digital .......................................... $ 38.00 VIDEO INSTALLATION CMARGES* Di~;t~Variety lac (aad m ,~y O~i ~ack~e) .................. $ 5.95 Unwired Aerial ~nst~llarJon (One outlet) .................... $ 41.99 MEDIACOM ONLINE Transfer of Service (One oudet) .......................... $ 14.50 Mediacom Online Service ............................... $ 42.95 Field Change of Service ................................. $ 33.48 I~lediacom Online Ser~Jce ............................... $ 52.9S Electronic Change Of Service ............................. $ ~3.49 Additional Dynamic IPAddress ........................... $ S.OO Call Center 24 hours a day/7 days a week: DIGITAL A LA CARTE PREMIUM SERVICES 1-800-332-0245 (Di~l c0n~ener require~) sab30275 11/30/03 12:04 PM Page 2 ~ 200 G4 STARZ! ! ENCORE GROUP FAMILY CABLE 210 Tech ~Y 401 STARZJ 2 KGAN (CBS 2) Ce~u Rapids 211 fl~e Goff Channel 402 STA~ West 3 WGg 212 FOX Spo~tsWodd 403 STAF~ 2 Theaser 9 ECRG (ABC 9 Cedar L~pds 217 I~ph'a~onal He 41~ STAR 5 Qnema West 16 DIGITAL VARIETY PAC 426 Mys~ry 22 HSN 256 G~ne Show Iblwork DIGITAL PAY-PER-YIEW 25 wOxy~a~ 262 YHI CounT 030 ESPN New 22 ~S#BC DIGITAL MULTI-SCREEN PREMIUM GROUPS ss~ Husure n ~ame HBO GROUP SSS A~ 36 TNT 302 fiBO We~ DIGITAL MUSIC CHOICE 49 Nickelodeon CINEMAX GROUP 712 ~ Radc 62 Uavls~on SHOWTIME I TMC GROUP 726 0i0 Baflcl & Sw~ng ~-. 67 EWTN 3SS ShowdmeShov~case 731 0eggae "-~L"~ 69 Outdoor Ufe NEW to Fami{y Cable? ~S7 Show~ime Exueme 733 Classical I~sterpieces .__/T~ 70 TBN 350 Show6rne ExstemeWest 734 Opera ~ DIGITAL SPECIAL INTEREST To whom it may concern My name is Lavon Yeggy, and I am an RN, working with people who have memory problems, through Elder Services, Inc. Last fall, I came into the city water department, with Sarah Mathiasen, BSW, our legal case manager, due to a client having water problems. Roxanne helped us, and we left our cards, and said that staff sbould call us, any time, with issues affecting the elderly in our area. We are here to help folks stay safely in their homes, and link them to needed services. This year, I believe in January, city staffnotieed that clients on Page Street, had a huge water bill (>$600), and Roxanne called us, due to a disconnect notice. She noted that they had lived at the property >40 years, and thought they were elderly. Thanks to this referral, we were able to help these people, and in fact, saved the gentleman's' life. Since the husband was ill, and refusing to seek medical attention, his handicapped wife had been trying to survive for months, with only neighbors helping. She could not read her bills, and did not have a clue about the huge water bill or the fact that her bathroom sink was dripping constantly, wasting gallons of water every day! Because we were able to enroll these folks in case management, and stay in the house, we were able to finally get her husband to the hospital where he received life saving treatment. This summer some wiring on their home burned, and again, we intervened, to help them stay safe. We also tracked down some distant relatives, who did dec/de to be involved, and help this family. Due to the safety haT~rds, and no electricity, this couple is nokv residing at a local nursing home, where they are well cared for, and safe; plus they are both happy! I have absolutely no doubt, that if Roxanne had not referred these clients to Elder Services that the husband would have died in his chair and been one of those stories on the front page of the newspaper. We get referrals from postal employees, the police, neighbors, and many community folks, who notice something wrong at a home where someone elderly lives, frequently alone. Both Sarah and I offer services that are no charge to the client. I work in 4 counties, with Alzheimer's clients, and anyone who seems to be having memory problems. Please encourage your staff to call us with any concerns affecting folks who may bc over 60 years old. We Van always refer them to someone else, if they are not appropriate for our agency. We would be happy to do an inservice for your staff, if that would help, and give some education on Elder Services, elder needs and memory problems. Thank you and Happy Holidays. A BIG THANK YOU to Roxanne!! Sincerely, ~ Memory Loss Education Spe~flfst Elder Services, Inc. 319-338-0515 City of Iowa City IP5 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Steven J. Rackis, Administrator, Housing Authority Mary Copper, Self-Sufficiency Programs Coordinator DATE: December 18, 2003 RE: Resident Opportunities and Self Sufficiency (ROSS) program On Wednesday, December 17, 2003, the Department of Housing and Urban Development announced $44 million in grant awards. The Iowa City Housing Authority (ICHA) received a total grant award of $250,000 over 3 years to continue our Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency (ROSS) program. The ICHA collaborates with Goodwill Industries of SE to deliver the employment services offered through the ROSS Program. This program is designed to link Housing Authority clients to services that promote economic self-sufficiency by encouraging participants to gain or maintain employment, seek opportunities for better employment, and to change the behavioral patterns that lead to ongoing poverty. The ROSS Program admits and graduates residents on an ongoing basis, with 163 referrals since June 2001. This number far surpasses the original grant goal of serving 130 residents over three years. The ROSS program provides ICHA families with the services of a Employment Specialist that include: job seeking skills (interviewing, resume/application development, etc.); job/career exploration (researching different employment options, investigating requirements for self- employment start up, interest inventory); job development (initial employer contacts, facilitating follow up contacts) and employment support. Examples of services include a series of free computer classes (one that included giving away-donated computers) and budgeting/credit classes. To address the transportation issues the ROSS program developed a "Bike to Work" Program that resulted in seven (7) participants receiving bicycles and safety helmets. Further, the ICHA acting as a referring agency and case manager for the Goodwill Industries' "Wheels to Work" program has resulted in over thirty families that have received donated cars. City of Iowa City IP6 MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager and City Council Shelley McCafferty, Associate Plann.~...~ FROM: DATE: December 19, 2003 RE: Historic Preservation Handbook In the near future, the Historic Preservation Commission and staff will be recommending to you revisions to the Historic Preservation Handbook. Due to the length and scope of information contained in the Handbook, a copy is being provided to at this time to ensure you have adequate time to thoroughly review it before it is placed on the Council agenda for consideration. The first Historic Preservation Handbook was adopted on June 20, 2000. The purpose of the Handbook is to provide guidance that is specific to Iowa City and is based on the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Since the adoption of the Handbook, the Commission and staff have identified a number of deficiencies and is recommending the following revisions: · Reformat the Handbook so that it is more user-friendly and easier to locate information. · Expand the portion of the Handbook that explains the historic preservation process and administrative procedures to ensure that the scope and requirements of the historic preservation regulations is clearly presented to the public. (Sections 1.0 through 3.0) · Add the "nonhistoric" property classification and allow exceptions to all the Iowa City Guidelines for these properties provided the proposed change does not detract from the historic character of the district; does not create a false historic character; and is compatible with the style and character of the nonhistoric property. · Clarify and explain the Iowa City Guidelines (Sections 4.0 through 7.0) as necessary. Incorporate those portions of the Neighborhood District Guidelines that apply to all districts into the Iowa City Guidelines. · Divide the Iowa City Guidelines into four sections based on project type. These sections are: 4.0 Guidelines for Alterations 5. 0 Guidelines for Additions 6.0 Guidelines for New Construction 7. 0 Guidelines for Demolition · Add guidelines for site development and landscaping (Section 4.13), and decks and ramps (Section 5.2). · Add guidelines for the design of additions and new construction. · Add examples of multifamily buildings in 11.0 Residential Architectural Styles of Iowa City. December 19, 2003 Page 2 · Indicate nonhistoric properties on district maps and provide a map showing all districts. · Move definitions to the appendix and add additional definitions and architectural terms. Add a list of available historic preservation documents as resources. At the October 27 work session, you requested revisions to the partial draft of the Handbook that was distributed to you. These revisions have been incorporated into the final Handbook and are as follows: · Add flow chart illustrating the historic designation process. · Add flow chart illustrating the historic review process. · In 1.4 Classification of Properties in Districts, change "The demolition of existing nonhistoric buildings and construction of new, more architecturally compatible buildings is encouraqed," to "The demolition of existing nonhistoric buildings and construction of new, more architecturally compatible buildings is allowed." · In response to Mr. Kanner's request for a property classification appeals process, the following paragraph was added to 1.4 Classification of Properties in Districts: 'q'he Commission will determine the classification of properties in districts. If a property owner feels that a property has been incorrectly classified, the owner may submit a letter to the Preservation Planner requesting that the property be re- evaluated. Likewise, if a property has been substantially altered, the Commission may change the classification of the property." · In response to Ms. Vanderhoef's question regarding how a property is treated relative to its classification over time, I would like to point out the following statement on page 6: "Nonhistoric buildings are buildings constructed after a district's period of significance and were generally less than 50 years old at the time the district was desiqnated." Therefore, a nonhistoric property will not be reclassified. However, if a noncontributing property, which is historic, is substantially improved, it may be reclassified to contributing. In addition, you requested that the Historic Preservation Commission address the issue of economic hardship due to the historic preservation regulations. At their annual planning meeting held on December 13, the Commission set this as a priority for 2004. The steps identified to address this issue are: · Conduct a study to determine the cost differential between the exterior rehabilitation of a house using historic preservation techniques and conventional techniques. · Consider adding an economic hardship and demolition-by-neglect ordinance to the historic preservation ordinance. · Explore and implement one or more of the following funding strategies: - Promote use of existing funding programs such as TARP and State of Iowa Historical Property Tax Exemption Program. December 19, 2003 Page 3 - Establish urban revitalization area for the purpose of rehabilitating historic properties. - Partner with private organizations, such as Friends of Historic Preservation and local banks, to establish a grant program. Establish a modest revolving loan fund for historic preservation. · Provide technical assistance to contractors and homeowners regarding economical rehabilitation techniques. Once these issues are addressed, information regarding economic hardship, demolition- by-neglect and financial incentives will be added to the Handbook. In the revised Handbook, substantive additions have been underlined and deletions are crossed out. Where necessary, explanations regarding changes have been added in parenthesis and are italicized. Because a large portion of the text that explains the historic preservation guidelines on pages one through six of the original Historic Preservation Handbook was completely rewritten, these deletions are not indicated. The Historic Preservation Commission and staff have worked extensively revising the Historic Preservation Handbook and feel this revision is a substantial improvement and will provide additional flexibility, particularly for nonhistoric properties. Cc: Karin Franklin Bob Miklo Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Adopted June 20, 2000 Revised January XX, 2004 Contains guidelines for the historic review of properties in historic and conservation districts and historic landmarks, and an explanation of the historic preservation process and regulations. Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Table of Contents '1.0 Historic Preservation and Conservation in Iowa City 1.1 "Why should a community like Iowa City care about historic preservation?" 1.2 The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission 1.3 Districts and Landmarks 1.4 Classification of Properties in Districts 1.5 Historic Designation Process 2.0 Historic Review 2.1 When is Historic Review Required? 2.2 Historic Review Process 2.3 Application for Historic Review 2.4 Major Review and Certificate of Appropriateness 2.5 Alternative Review in Conservation Districts 2.6 Certificate of No Material Effect 2.7 Appeals 3.0 About the Guidelines for Historic Preservation 3.1 Iowa City Guidelines 3.2 Exceptions to the Iowa City Guidelines 3.3 Exceptions for Nonhistoric Properties 3,4 Additional Historic Preservation Guidelines 3.5 Building Code and Zoning Ordinances 3.6 Alternative Designs 4,0 Iowa City Guidelines for Alterations 4.1 Foundations 4.2 Masonry 4.3 Wood 4.4 Mass and Rooflines (includes dormers) 4.5 Siding 4.6 Paint and Color 4.7 Windows (includes shutters & storm windows) 4.8 Doors (includes garage doors) 4.9 Porches 4,10 Balustrades and Handrails 4.11 Gutters and Downspouts 4.12 Chimneys 4.13 Site and Landscaping (includes fences, parking and access) 5,0 Iowa City Guidelines for Additions 5.1 Expansion of Building Footprint 5.2 Decks and Ramps 6.0 Iowa City Guidelines for New Construction 6.1 New Primary Structures 6.2 New Outbuildings 7.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Demolition 1 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 8.0 Neighborhood District Guidelines 8.1 Longfellow Neighborhood 8,2 College Hill Neighborhood 8.3 Woodlawn 8.4 Northside Neighborhood 9.0 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation 10.0 Design Guidelines for Multi-Family Buildings 10.1 Mandatory Compliance Items 10.2 Design Point Items '1 '1.0 Residential Architectural Styles of Iowa City 11.1 Italianate 11.2 Queen Anne 11.3 Colonial Revival 11.4 Craftsman 11.5 Craftsman Bungalow 11.6 American Foursquare 11.7 Prairie School 11.8 Period Revival Cottages and Houses 11.9 Vernacular 11.10 Eclectic t 2.0 Historic Landmarks 13.0 Historicand Conservation Districts t4.0 Longfellow Neighborhood Districts 14.1 Governor-Lucas Street Conservation District 14,2 Summit Street Historic District 14.3 Clark Street Conservation District 14.4 Longfellow Historic District 14.5 Dearborn Street Conservation District 15.O College HilI Neighborhood Districts 15.1 College Hill Conservation District 15.2 College Green Historic District 15.3 East College Street Historic District 16.0 Woodlawn Historic District '17.0 Northside Neighborhood Districts 17,1 Brown Street Historic District Appendices A. 1 Definitions A.2 Architectural Terms A.3 Historic Preservation Documents 2 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 1.0 Historic Preservation and Conservation in Iowa City I. I "Why should a community like Iowa City care about historic preservation?" "The simple answer is that consen/ing old buildincis and neiFihborhoods makes a qood commanity bette~ Iowa City is blessed with a collection of fine, well-maintained older neiqhborhoods and individual landmarks which are recoqnized and appreciated by the entire communit~ Historic preservation has the potential to enhance the quality of life and economic well-being of current and future residents." Marlys Svendsen Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan In 1992, the Iowa City City Council adopted the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan that was prepared by architectural historian Marlys Svendsen. The plan carefully and thouqhtfully evaluated Iowa City's historic buildinqs and neighbor- hoods and set forth a plan of action for their stewardship. Historic neighborhoods and buildinqs are protected by the designation of historic districts, conservation districts and historic landmarks. Desiqnation provides for the careful manaqement of these resources by the Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission throuqh the historic review process. The purpose of historic review is to preserve or conserve historic architectural resources by discouraqin~l alterations that either destroy the unique characteristics of a buildinq or alter the character of historic neiqhborhoods. 1.2 The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission was created by local ordinance in Becember 1982. Its mission statement as described in the Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan is "To identify, protect, and preserve the community's historic resources in order to enhance the quality of life and economic well-being of current and future generations." Its members are citizen volunteers appointed by the City Council. Many of the members reside in historic districts and have expertise in fields related to historic preservation. The Commission is responsible for surveyinq historic neighborhoods and recommending to City Council neiqhbor- hoods that should be desiqnated as conservation or historic districts, as well as individual properties that should be designated as historic landmarks. Once districts and landmarks are identified and desiqnated, the Commission reviews proposed changes to the exteriors of these properties through the histor c rev ew process. 1.3 Districts and Landmarks Historic and conservation districts, and historic landmarks, are desiqnated by ordinance by the Iowa City City Council with recommendations from the Historic Preservation Commission, the State Historical Society of Iowa, and the Plannin.q and Zonin;i Commission. Recommendations for the historic desiqnation of districts and properties are also received from professional architectural historians following an intensive survey and evaluation of a nei.qhborhood's historic properties and resources. Historic Districts Historic districts are geoqraphically cohesive areas with siqnificant concentrations of buildinqs and other resources that possess a high degree of historic integrity. Historic districts are typically first nominated to and listed on the National Re~ister of Historic Places, and then designated as local historic districts. Designation as a local district provides the Historic Preservation Commission with the authority to review changes to properties that may affect the historic character of the property and the district. The overall character of a historic district must convey a distinct sense of time and place. 3 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Conservation Districts Conservation districts are neiqhborhoods that appear similar to historic districts in character. However, because they have fewer properties that retain a high deqree of historic integrity or contribute to a distinct sense of time and place within the neighborhood, they do not qualify as historic districts based on State Code. Because they are still consid- ered worthy of protection, City Council may designate these neighborhoods for historic conservation. ~ Iowa City Historic Landmarks '-~ Historic landmarks are buildinqs that are individually significant for their architectural and/or cultural merits. Like ~ , ~ historic districts, these properties are typically listed on the National Register of Historic Places, or are eligible for § lisfing on the National Reqister. o~ 1.4 Classification of Properties in Districts "~ Properties in conservation and historic districts are classified based on their historic and architectural siqnificance *~ and inteqrity. Because neiqhborhoods chanqe over time, these districts typically have some structures that are not ',' historic or that have been severely altered. Buildinqs in historic or conservation districts may ranqe from outstandinq ,:,- historic landmarks to architecturally incompatible, modern structures. Depending on the classification of a property, ~ certain exceptions to the guidelines or financial incentives may be applicable. To determine the classification of a specific property in a historic or conservation district, refer to the Table of Contents to locate the appropriate district map that indicates the property's classification. To determine if a property has been designated a historic landmark, see section 12.0 Historic Landmarks. Contributing and Noncontributing Properties When districts are evaluated and nominated for preservation and conservation, individual properties are classified as either contributing or noncontributing to the historic character of the proposed district. Contributing Properties In historic districts, to be classified as a contributing property the primary build ng must (1) have an architectural style and character that is clearly evident and (2) was constructed durinq the district's period of significance and relate to a significant historic context in the neiqhborhood's history. The period of significance and the historic context(s) for each district are determined by professional consultants prior to desiqnation. Contributing properties in historic districts may be eligible for Federal, State and local tax incentives for substantial rehabilitation. Conservation districts tend to exhibit a greater variety of building styles from different time periods and are less culturally cohesive, so their historic contexts are more loosely defined. The primary determininq factors in classifyinq a property in a conservation district are (1) the historic integrity of the primary buildinq and (2) the aqe of the primary buildinq, which typically must be at least 50 years old at the time a district is desiqnated. Noncontributing and Nonhistoric Properties Properties that are not classified as contributinq are classified as noncontributinq. Noncontributing properties have a primary buildinq that has been significantly altered or that is nonhistodc. Nonhistoric buildinqs are buildinqs con- structed after a district's period of significance and were generally less than 50 years old at the time the district was designated. These properties are NOT exempt from historic preservation regulations, but exceptions to the guidelines are appli- cable. The rehabilitation of noncontributinq historic buildings is encouraqed. The demolition of existinq nonhistoric buildinqs and construction of new, more architecturally compatible buildings is allowed. 4 Iowa City Historic Preservaticn Handbook The Commission will determine the classification of properties in districts. If a property owner feels that a property has been incorrectly classified, the owner may submit a letter to the Preservation Planner requestinq that the property be re-evaluated. Likewise, if a property has been substantially altered, the Commission may chanqe the classification of the property Landmarks and Key Properties Landmarks are proped es that are individually siqnificant because of their architectural quality, inteqrity and historic or cultural significance Iowa City has over 40 local historic landmarks that are subiect to the historic preservation . requlations. Properties classified as key are either landmarks or are eliqible for desiqnation as landmarks. Key properties are subiect to the same historic preservation quiddines as contributinq buildings in historic districts Key properties and landmarks may be eliqible for Federal, State and local tax incentives for substantial rehabilitation. See section 120 Historic Landmarks for a complete list of landmarks. Key properties are illustrated on the district maps in sections 140 throuqh 17.0. For a list of properties located outside existinq districts that are eliqible for landmark desiqnation contact the Preservation Planner. 1.5 Historic Designation Process Neighborhoods surveyed & evaluated District & landmark recommendations Architectural & cultural Neighborhood or research Commission initiation Property classification Prepare district guidelines & maps Reconnaissance survey I (districts only) * Neighborhood * Neighborhood meetings (2-3) * Historic Preservation Commission meetings (1-2) I public hearing * Letter from State [ State recommendation State & Federal approval * Planning &Zoning C.ommission public discussmn ** City Council public hearing * Notification of property city C~UtiCll votes (3) owners by mail. PaSS & adOpt ** Public notfcation pr nted in newspaper. 5 Iowa City Hisloric Preservation Handbook 2.0 Historic Review The historic preservation quidelines contained in this handbook will be used by the Historic Preservation Commission to determine if a proposed chanqe to a landmark or property in a district is compatible with the historic character of the district and property. The intent of the historic review process is: · To ensure that chanqes to landmarks and properties in districts do not substantially alter or destroy the defininq architectural character of the buildinq, site or neiqhborhood. · To provide property owners, contractors and consultants with technical assistance and alternatives to ensure that proposed projects conform with the historic preservation guidelines. 2. I When is Historic Review Required? Historic review by the Commission is required for all construction projects that require a regulated permit, and change the exterior features of any property in a historic or conservation district, or any historic landmark. The proposed project must be approved by the Commission before a building permit will be issued by Housing and Inspection Services. Examples of common projects that require a regulated permit and historic review are: · Application or reapplication of new siding. · Replacement or addition of windows (including sash replacement). · Porch construction, reconstruction or replacement. · Construction of new dormers. · Construction of additions. · Construction of decks and ramps. · Addin~l skyliFIhts. · Removal of porches, trim, brackets, chimneys, dormers or other defining architectural features. · Demolition of a qaraqe or other outbuilding. · Construction of a new qaraqe. NOTE: The application of sidinq, window replacement, and demolition of portions of a buildinq require a buildinq permit for properties within districts and landmarks. For properties that are not within a historic or conservation district, and that have not been desiqnated landmarks, these actions do not require a permit. Examples of common projects that may not require a regulated permit and need not be reviewed by the Commission are: · Exterior painting. · Reapplication of roof shingles. · Installation of new storm windows. · Replacement of external qutters and downspouts. · Window repair (excluding sash replacement). · Construction of fences that are less than 6 feet hiqh. · Construction of accessory structures, such as qarden sheds, less than 144 square feet in area. A complete list of work exempt from permit can be found in Amendments to: International Residential Code, Interna- tional Building Code, which is available through Housing and Inspection Services. 6 iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 2.2 Historic Review Process The Commission strongly recommends meeting with the Pre-application meeting Preservation Planner prior to submitting an application An application may be obtained from the Planning Deparb~ent Submit application or on the City's website at www icqov or~ Planner evaluation The Preservation Planner will determine the type of Historic Review required Repair - No change in Major Review Intermediate Review Minor Review appearance Meet with staff as necessary Applicant notified of meeting by mail Historic Review Subcommittee Review by Review by recommendation Commission Chair Planner and Planner Review by Review by Commission Chair Historic Preservation ~. ...................... and Planner Commission May De May be forwarded for torwarded for ntermediate Review Major Review OR Resolution of Denial Copy transmitted to: Owner & Contractor HiS City Clerk Appeal if a Landmark or ifin a HistoPc District, may appeal to City Council Ifin a Conservation District, may Enforced by Housing & Appeal to the Board of Adjustment Inspection Services 7 Iowa City Historic Preservalion Handbook 2.3 Application for Historic Review An application for historic review must be submitted to the Preservation Planner. The application should include dimensioned drawings, sketches, photographs, text, product samples, or other exhibits that accurately portray the work to be done. The Commission may request additional information if it cannot fairly evaluate the application as submitted A pre-application conference with the Preservation Planner is recommended to help ensure that a pro- posed prelect will comply with the guidelines. Application forms may be obtained from the Planninq and Community Development Department, or Housinq and Inspection Services. 2.4 Major Review and Certificates of Appropriateness Most applications for landmarks and propedies in historic districts, and applications for significant changes in con- se~vation districts, will require major review. These applications will be reviewed by the Historic Review Subcommit- ~ tee, which is composed of three members of the Historic Preservation Commission. The Subcommittee will make ~- recommendations to the Historic Preservation Commission and a quorum of the Commission will vote to approve or ,:, deny the application at its next regularly scheduled meeting. If a maiority of the Commission votes to approve the := application, a Certificate of Appropriateness will be issued to the owner and contractor, and will be filed with Housing ~ and Inspection Services and the City Clerk. 2.5 Alternative Review in Conservation Districts In conservation districts, there are two alternative types of review that are intended to shorten the historic review process. Intermediate review and minor review may be used to approve Certificates of Appropriateness for certain types of projects. The applicant, Preservation Planner, or Commission members may request that a minor review be treated as an intermediate review or that an intermediate review go to the full Commission. Intermediate Review For contributinq properties in a conservation district, the followinq items may be approved by the Preservation Planner and Commission Chair or the Chair's desiqnee: · _ Alterations: All alterations except chanqes in window type, pattern or dimension, and addition of dormers. · Additions: Decks located behind the primary structure. ! New construction: New outbuildinqs, provided they are located behind the rear plane of an existinq primar~ structure. · Demolition: Nonhistoric outbuildinqs and nonhistoric buildin;i features. · Certificates of No Material Effect. 8 iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Plinor Re¥iew For noncontributinq properties in a conservation district, the followin;I items may be approved by the Preservation PLanner: o Alterations: All alterations except changes in window type, pattern or dimension, and addition of dormers, · Additions: Decks located behind the primary structure and ramps. · New construction: New outbuildinqs, provided they are located behind the rear plane of an existinq primary structure. · Demolition: Nonhistoric outbuildinqs and features of a primary building, · Certificates of No Material Effect. 2.6 Certificates of No Material Effect The Commission Chair and the Preservation Planner or their designees may issue a Certificate of No Material Effect if the work contemplated in the application will have no effect on the appearance of significant architectural features and review by the full Commission is not required. 2.7 Appeals Applicants may appeal decisions of the Commission to the City Council for properties in historic districts and land- marks, and to the Board of Adjustment for properties in conservation districts, The Certificate of Appropriateness, or the Resolution of Denial, which states the reason for the decision, will be filed with the City Clerk within five days of the decision. The applicant has 10 days from the time it is filed with the Clerk to file a letter with the Preservation Planner requestinq an appeal. The City Council or Board of Adjustment will determine if the decision of the Historic Preserva- tion Commission was arbitrary or capricious, but neither the Council nor the Board has the authority to override a decision by the Commission if it is determined that it was not arbitrary or capricious, 3.0 About the Guidelines for Historic Preservation The purpose of the historic preservation guidelines is to: · Provide comprehensive design guidelines for construction projects to landmarks and properties within each district. · Provide property owners with design criteria that will be the basis for approving or denying Certificates of Appropriateness. · identify the defining characteristics of each individual historic or conservation district. In writinq the historic preservation quidelines, the Historic Preservation Commission has made every effort to clarify the criteria for historic review. However, not every situation can be anticipated. The Commission, at its discretion, may allow some flexibility for unique properties and situations. The Preservation Planner is available to answer any ques- tions, assist an owner or contractor with their project, and provide additional preservation information. 9 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 3. I Iowa City Guidelines These guidelines were written by the iowa Historic Preservation Commission to address specifically the historic preservation issues in Iowa City and to provide more detailed guidance to property owners and builders as they design their construction projects. The guidelines are based on The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, ~ which can be found in section 9.0. The Iowa City Guidelines are the guidelines that will be used to evaluate most ~ proiects. If there are issues that are not addressed in these quidelines, then the Historic Preservation Commission will ~ use Tile Secretaq/of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the Guidelines for Rehabilitatinq Historic "'o Buildinqs, which are guidelines for interpreting the Standards.. .~- Typically, there are four types of proiects that modify the exterior of landmarks or properties within districts. The Iowa City Guidelines are divided into four sections that correspond to these project types. These are: 4, 0 Iowa City Guidelines for Alterations 5.0 Iowa City Guidelines forAdditions 6. 0 Iowa City Guidelines for New Construction o 7.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Demolition Alterations Alterations are modifications to a site or to the exterior of a building that do not increase the size of the building's footprint. Most maintenance and remodelinq projects such as siding repair, reconstruction or repair of historic porches, addin.q dormers to convert an attic space to a living space, and replacing doors and windows are considered alterations. These proiects will be evaluated using 4.0 Iowa City Guidelines forAIterations. Additions Construction that results in a larger building footprint, increases the building's overall height, or adds an attached structure to a building are additions. Additions include construction of a new room, porch, or deck. These projects will be evaluated usinq 5.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Additions as well as 8.0 Neighborhood District Guidelines. Setback Additions A setback addition is constructed behind an existing building, opposite the street facade, and is set back eight inches or more from the side walls. The roof of a setback addition can be no higher than the roof of the existing building. This results in an addition that is narrower and no taller than the building to which it is attached, and is therefore not highly visible from the street. Setback additions are encouraged because they have less impact on a historic building and district. Therefore, the guidelines for these structures are less stringent. Setback additions will be evaluated usinq 5.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Additions as well as 8.0 Nei.qhborhood District Guidelines. New Construction Although most lots in conservation and historic districts are developed, there may be occasions where a new primary building or outbuilding is constructed. Outbuildinqs include qaraqes, qarden sheds, qazebos and other accessory structures that require a buildinq permit. Under most circumstances, nonhistoric buildings and structures may be demolished and the lot redeveloped. However, the new buildinq and the demolition must be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission before any building or demolition permits are issued. These projects will be evaluated using 6.0 Iowa City Guidelines for New Construction, 8.0 Neiqhborhood District Guidelines and if applicable 7.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Demolition. Demolition Demolition involves the complete removal of a buildinq or a portion of a buildinq: Removal of dormers, decorative trim, porches, balusters, chimneys and other significant features requires a buildinq permit for demolition, and therefore historic review. Demolition projects will be evaluated usinq 7.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Demolition. 10 City Historic Preservation Handbook 3.2 Exceptions to the Iowa City Guidelines In order to provide flexibility for changes to properties in conservation d str cts, noncontributing properties in historic districts, and setback additions1 a number of exceptions to the Iowa City Guidelines have been created. These exceptions are intended to provide additional flexibility in cases where a proposed construction project does not significantly affect the architectural character of a historic structure, These exceptions, where applicable, are listed at the end of each section of the quidelines. 3.3 Exceptions for Nonhistoric Properties The historic preservation requlations are ntended pr marily to protect the character and inteqrity of historic properties and districts. The great maiority of properties located in historic and conservation districts are historic properties, and , were constructed in or before 1945. For the relatively small number of properties that are classified as nonhistoric properties and were constructed after the period of siqnificance of a district, the Historic Preservation Commission may grant exceptions to the Iowa CitF Guidelines. In order to qualify for an exception, the proposed chanqe to the exterior of a nonhistoric property must comply with the followinq criteria: Does not further detract from the historic character of the district. 2.=Does not create a false historic character. 3.Is compatible with the style and character of the nonhistoric property. Examples of exceptions that may be granted for nonhistoric properties are: · _ Use of vinyl and vinyl clad wood windows and snap-in muntin bars for replacement windows. · Installation of slidinq patio doors or other modern-style doors. · Use of synthetic siding on existinq buildings provided the replacement sidinq is similar in appearance to the oriqina[ siding. · Use of synthetic sidinq on new accessory structures. · Use of concrete for a porch floor provided the floor is less than 18 inches above qrade. · Use of dimensional lumber for porch floor boards provided the qap between boards is no more than 1/8 inch. ! Alternative baluster and handrail desiqns. 3.4 Additional Historic Preservation Guidelines Neighborhood District Guidelines The size and location of a primary buildinq on a site is one of the defining characteristics of historic and conservation districts. The size of buildinqs, lots and yards, as well as the architectural character of the buildinqs varies by district. Section 8.0 Neiqhborhood District Guidelines deals specifically with site, scale, structure location, and architectural style for properties within individual historic or conservation districts. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation The Secretaq/ of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the Guidelines for Rehabilitatinq Historic Buildinqs are national standards for historic preservation. The Secretary of the Interior defines rehabilitation as "the process of returninq a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural, and cultural value." The qoals of the Standards can be summarized as follows: 11 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 1. Identify and preserve those materials and features that are important in defining the building's historic character. Undertake routine maintenance on historic materials and features. Routine maintenance qenerally involves the least amount of work needed to preserve the materials and features of the buildinq. 3_: Repair damaged or deteriorated historic materials and features. 4~ Replace severely damaged or deteriorated historic materials and features in kind, The Iowa City Guidelines is base on the Standards, but they provide more specific guidance. Occasionally alterations are proposed to properties that were not anticipated in the Iowa City Guidelines. When this occurs, the Historic Preservation Commission will refer to the Standards when deciding on a Certificate of Appropriateness. The Start- dans are located in section 9.0. Design Guidelines for Multi-Family Buildings in the Central Planning District These guidelines are based on the Multi-Family Residential Desiqn Standards in the Central Planninq District of the Iowa City Zoninq Code and apply to the construction of buildinqs with three or more dwellinq units. Typically, a new multi-family building would be evaluated by the Staff Desiqn Review Committee. However, if it is located within a historic or conservation district, the Historic Preservation Commission is responsible for desiqn review and has adapted the oriqinal guidelines to be more applicable to districts. Within districts, more weight is given to the architectural style of the proposed building and its compatibility with other historic structures. The Desiqn Guidelines for Multi-Family Buildinqs are located in section 10.0. 3.5 Building Code and Zoning Ordinances The requirements of the building code and the zoning ordinance must be met in addition to the requirements of the Iowa City Guidelines. For certain requirements such as mass, scale, size, siting considerations, and setbacks from the street, the Iowa City Guidelines may be more stringent than the building code or the zoning ordinance. Thee Historic Preservation Commission does NOT review proiects for compliance with the buildinq code or zoninq ordi- nance. Please consult with Housinq and Inspection Services to ensure the project is in compliance with these regulations. 3.6 Alternative Designs Alternative design solutions or exceptions to the Iowa City Guidelines, the Design Guidelines for Multi-Family Build- ings, or the Neighborhood District Guidelines may be considered by the Historic Preservation Commission. The intent in considering alternative designs is to allow architectural flexibility in exceptional circumstances. The intent is not to reduce the scope or quality of work required by these guidelines. 12 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 4.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Alterations Most maintenance and remodelinq proiects such as sidinq repair, porch reconstruction or repair, and chanqes to the doors and windows are considered alterations. Alterations to both contributinq and noncontributing properties, as well as landmarks, should be done in a manner that is appropriate to the style and aqe of the building, as well as its neighborhood context. The historic character of older buildinqs should be maintained by usinq traditional materials and techniques Likewise, buildinqs that are not historic should be treated in a manner that does not create a false historic appearance. 4. I Foundations Foundations provide a base for a building and make a transition from the walls above ground to the walls or supports below ground. The amount of exposed foundation varies with historic structures, but is typically 12 to 30 inches. On brick or stone structures the foundation material may be different in color and texture than the wall material, and the two are often separated by a belt course of yet another material or pattern, Recommended: Disallowed: Historic foundations Historic foundations · Correctinq all sources of moisture and other circum- · Covering exposed brick, stone, and .......... ma stances that may cause damaqe to the foundation scm-/textured concrete block foundations with a ce- wall and footinqs, merit plaster or stucco. · Repairinq historic foundations rather than replacinR them. Not Recommended: · Repairing or replacinq foundations with materials Historic foundations that ............... ~,,,al appear s~mdar to the ex~st~nq · Raising the adjacent grade at the foundation to cover materials in size, color, texture, composition, and joint profile, what was historically exposed. · Painting masonry or concrete foundations that were · Repairing stucco with a mixture that matches the originally unpainted, v,,~,,,,..,~"~' cxistinq, in texture, color, and composition, · Retaining the size and shape of..,,~,,,~,, h~stonc door openings, window openings, and storm cellar en- trances in the foundation, If new window wells are ok,~,,l~ ~,.-.*,-.,., Appliesto:Historic Districts Noncontributing required, the materials used ............... must ap- Con servation Districts AIl properties pear similar to the existing foundation material, New foundations · Removing all ..... ;";""~ nonhistoric materials, · For replacement foundation walls and piers, con- . Maintaining a slope away from the foundation to pre- crete or rock-face concrete block may be used in vent standing water or drainage toward the founda- tion, place of masonry units that match the oriRinal. 13 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 4.2 Masonry Masonry is designed to resist weathering without paint or any other protective coating while retaining an appealing appearance. As such, it is a relatively maintenance-free material. When there is deterioration of masonry, the single most important step is to locate and repair the cause of the problem before going to the expense and trouble of repairing the masonry. When repairing masonry, three four important properties should be considered: color, texture, dimension, and hardness of the masonry units. Recommended: Disallowed: Historic masonr,( Historic masonry · Removing all vines. Vines cause the masonry to · Sandblasting, water blasting, or any other abrasive retain moisture. Their root-like holdfasts can cause cleaning method. Blasting can cause very serious damage to mortar joints, damage by destroying the protective exterior surface and exposing the softer interior to rapid deteriora- · Removing deteriorated mortar by hand. Raking the joints with hand tools "'~" not is less likely to damage tion. This damage cannot be repaired. the ...... masonry. The Historic Preservation Corn- o ~ ..... ; ....~"'~+~' electric ~ .......... hammer.,. mission may, at its discretion, allow for the use of ~o" '''~ ~"'"~' *"".'- ~'~"'~o +,- "~'~',',; .... ~ ~*-~-- '~ electric qrinders by a qualified professional to re- move mortar · Pointing soft historic masonry with a strong Portland · Replacing deteriorated masonry units with ones that cement mix or synthetic caulking compound. Hard match tho appear similar to the existinq masonry mortars will damaqe soft historic masonry such as units in color, texture and size, and that have an ap- brick. propriate hardness. ^~ +~-~ · Painting or sealing historic masonry that has not · Using mortar that is similar in hardness to the origi- been painted, nal mortar. A recommended mix for historic ma- sonry contains 1 part white Portland cement, 3 parts lime, and 9 pads sand. If necessary, color dye may be added to the new mortar to match the color of the original mortar. This mix is suitable for both laying and pointing masonry walls. · Making mortar joints that match the dimensions of the original joints. Old Historic mortar joints are of- ten narrower than those commonly used today. ·Cleaning new mortar smears from the masonry face with a mild acid designed for that purpose. · Cleaning oki-historic masonry using a natural bristle brush and mild, water-based detergent. Sometimes a gentle chemical method may be appropriate, but only if it does not damage the masonry. 14 iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 4.3 Wood Most of the structures in Iowa City's historic districts neighborhoods are of wood frame construction and have wood siding. Many dwellings have wood elements such as trim, windows, doors, porches, cornices, decorative elements, and pediments. While most wood is relatively inexpensive, durable, and easy to work with, it must be maintained properly to have a long life, Recommended: Disallowed: Historic wood Historic wood · Repairing historic wood elements rather than re-· Covering original wood siding, soffits and eave placing them. boards with another material such as vinyl or alumi- · Usinq epoxy products, such as Wood Epox and num siding. Liquid Wood by Abatron, to consolidate deteriorated · Using destructive and dangerous paint removal meth- wood components, and fill or reconstruct missinq ods such as sandblasting, water blasting, or burning wood. with a propane or butane torch. · Duplicating and replacing historic wood elements· Removal of historic wood elements such as trim, when they cannot be repaired, porches, cornices, and decorative elements. · Replacing damaged wood.,~,,,~";'~"" components with Wood substitutes new or salvaged wood~,~,,,~;~;-~ components that · Substituting a material in place of wood that does match the ".";";""~ historic ones. not retain the appearance, function, and paintability · Monitoring woodsurfacesforsignsofexcessivewater of the original wood .................... ~., ~, ...... damage, rot, or pest infestation. Keeping all sur- faces primed, painted and appropriately caulked in order to prevent wood deterioration, · Eliminating excessive moisture problems such as leaky roofs, gutters, and downspouts. The improper venting of baths, kitchens, basements, and dryers may cause moisture problems. · Removing vegetation that is growing against the wood elements or siding. Wood substitutes · Substituting a material in place of wood only if the substitute material retains the appearance and func- tion of the original wood. The substitute material must be durable, accept paint, and be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission, For many applications, fiber cement board is an approved sub- stitute for wood. 15 iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 4.4 Mass and Roofline$ Mass and roof ' " .... p~tch are .......... in defining characteristics of historic .architectural styles. Most of the roofs in historic neighborhoods were originally sawn cedar shingles, although standinq seam metal was sometimes applied. The texture of the wood shingles on the steep-pitched roofs was a prominent feature of historic neighborhoods early in this ¢~r~t~y durinq the 19th and early 20th centuries. A building permit is not required for simply replacing shingles and required, the ............. ~ ................. Recommended: Disallowed: Oriqinal roofline and mass Oriqinal roofline and mass ......... ~ Substantially aIterinq the roof pitch of~a · Preserving the original roof pitches and spans. · DA,4,,~ · Preserving the original walls and vertical corners historic building on one or both sides of the roof to that define the massing of a historic building, gain headroom below the rafters. New dormers Materials Adding dormers that are wider than ones commonly · Preserving origin=l historic trim such as crown mold- found in the neighborhood or on buildinqs of a simi- lng, skid and frieze boards, and decorative metal. lar architectural style. · Replacing a special historic shingle with one of a · Adding dormers that extend above the existing peak similar style when the old shingles need replacing, of the roof. · Using asphalt shinglesthat resemble thetexture and color of weathered wood shingles for roofs that had Not Recommended: · Installing antennas, vents, solarcollectors, skylights, · Painting metal roofs dark colors, usually dull red or or other mechanical devices on prominent street green, or a natural metallic silver color, elevations. New dormers · Designing new dormers to be of a size, scale and proportion that is consistent with the architectural style. Applies to:Historic DistrictsNoncontributin9 Con servation Districts AIl properties · Designing new dormers such that the face of the dormer is primarily composed of window area. Bormers · Adding dormers to an existinq roof in a manner that · Dormers may be larger than those commonly found does not significantly alter the character of the his- ~on historic buildinqs of a simi- toric building, lar architectural style provided that the dormer does · Addinq dormers that are in proportion to the roof's not seriously alter the character of the building. overall size. The width of the dormers in proportion to the roof on which they are located should be con- sistent with the architectural style. · Adding dormers that are n.._~_o closer than 3 feet to an existing gable end or hip. The intent is to avoid sig- nificantly altering the original roof lines. · Constructinq qabled and hipped dormers that have roof pitches similar to the pitch of the main roof. 16 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 4.5 Siding Wood siding is prevalent throughout the historic neighborhoods in Iowa City. Most often it is plain ~ clapboard siding with an exposure between 3 and 5 inches; however, it is sometimes tongue and groove, shiplap, or wall shingle typc~sidinq. Wood siding along with the trim details and a variety of paint colors combine to make one of the most important defining characteristics of th6~historic districts. This display of detail and color is essential to the character of the o d neighborhoods, and therefore siding must be protected by the design guidelines. The primary threat to the traditional appearance of the oldLr neighborhoods has come with the application of syn- thetis siding. This has been installed in an effort to avoid periodic painting. While synthetic siding may last longer than a paint job, it does deteriorate over time and does need to be replaced when it fades, cracks, dents, or deteriorates. The application of synthetic siding covers many architectural details of a building, damages the historic siding and trim, and in some cases, necessitates the removal of historic elements altogether. For all of the reasons stated above, the covering of historic properties with synthetic siding is not allowed. Recommended: Disallowed: Historic sidinq Historic trim · Repamng ......... ~ historic wood siding and trim. · Removing_historictrim pieces such as door and win- · Replacing deteriorated sections of wood siding withdow trim, skirt and frieze boards, and corner boards. new or salvaged wood siding that matches the origi · Covering historic trim such as door and window trim, hal historic wood sidinq, skirt and frieze boards, and corner boards. · Removing synthetic siding and repairing ~,i~i,,~, his- Synthetic sidinq toric wood siding and trim. · Applying synthetic siding such as aluminum, vinyl, Wood substitutes or false masonry siding. · Substituting a material in place of wood siding only if the substitute material retains the appearance and function of the original wood. The substitute mate- Appliesto: Conse~,ationDistricts Noncontributing rial must be durable, accept paint and be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. In many vi applications, fiber cement board is an approved districts wood substitute. · Synthetic sidinq may be used provided: Synthetic sidinq · All sources of moisture that have caused dam- · Matching synthetic siding may be used to repair aqe to the structure are corrected and the dam- damage to existing synthetic siding, aqe repaired prior to the application of the sid- inq. · Historic architectural features such as window trim, brackets, moldinqs, rafter tails, columns, balusters and similar details are not covered, removed, cut or otherwise damaged. Unless severely deteriorated, historic wood siding must not be removed. · To the extent possible, the synthetic sidinq ap- pears similar to the oriqinal wood siding in ex- posure, texture and desiqn. · Trim boards extend in front of the face of the siding. 17 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 4.6 Paint and Color ................... ~ ........................................ 6c ........ ually enough~ Colors should be selected to complement the style and period of the building. The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission has literature that recommends historically appropriate paint colors and schemes. For information please contact the~Preservation Planner. A building permit is not required for painting an~d historic review is not required. Recommended: Not Recommended: · Removing loose and peeling paint and cleaning the · Dry sanding, sandblasting or using high-pressure surfaces to be painted in accordance with pertinent sprayers to remove paint from masonry or wood. State and Federal guidelines. Practices that help · Using high heat or open flames for paint removal. reduce the potential for the creation of lead dust, such as misting surfaces with water when scraping, · Using paint strippers containing methylene chloride. are encouraged. Old paint that is sound and rea- · ~ Using other methods that~n' "~""' ..... sonably smooth should be left in place as a founda- with a high potential to create lead dust that are dis- tion for the new paint, couraged by State and Federal guidelines. · Takinq all recommended safety precautions, includ- Paint color lng using a proper respirator to avoid breathing the fumes or dust from lead-based paint. · Choosing bright, obtrusive colors. · Collecting and properly disposing of paint chips and · Painting a building entirely white. other waste. · Priming, caulking, and finishing with high-quality products. ·Removinq any grayed surface of weathered wood by sandinq. · Treatinq dry wood with linseed oil and priminq with an oil-based primer. Paint color CC ......... ',C · Choosing a color scheme of 2 or 3 ~-" "'"+ app, v~, ........................ ~ .................... tectural sty e of the building. Typically, this would be one color for the body of the buildinq, one or two colors for the trim, and black or dark qreen for the storm sashes. If a horizontal board delineates the upper floor of the buildinq, a second color may be used for the upper floor walls. 18 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 4,7 Windows Windows are one of the most important elements that define a building's architectural character, Important window characteristics are the window type, size, proportion, trim, and pattern of divided-lights. Most often, historic windows are double-hung, but tho *,~ ..... ;.~- .4 .... .4~ .... +~. .... h~,,:,.-,,,r,:~ ~-~,,~,~ -.,..~ ~,~+~,~;,~o ,.~ +~.,=, buiidin casements were occasionally used. Except for small decorative windows, historic Ge~ windows are generally considerably taller than they are wide, and the lower and upper floor windows they-are often aligned vertically. Recommended: Disallowed: Historic windows New and replacement windows Preserving the ........ ~__h~stonc windows by repair- · Installing modern types of windows including slid- ing sashes and frames, lng, awning, casement, and bay windows when they · Retaining,.,,~,,,..,"'~"~""' historic window frames l~y-and were not original to the building or consistent with replacing badly deteriorated sashes with new sashes the architectural style. that match the historic ones, · Installing metal, vinyl clad or vinyl windows when Replacement windows they were not original to the building, · Replacing badly deteriorated windows with new · Using snap-in muntin bars to achieve the appear- ones that match the type, size, sash width, trim, use ance of divided-lights. of divided-lights, and overall appearance of the origi nal historic windows. Not Recommended: of ':;ccd. Using new wood windows and sashes to Storm windows replace historic wood windows and sashes, The · Installing exterior metal or vinyl storm windows, use of metal-clad, solid-wood windows is accept- Shutters able. Replacement windows and trim must accept · not v,,~,,,~,,j paint. Divided-lights may be created with muntine Installing shutters on windows that did bars that are adhered to both sides of the glass, but historically have shutters, not with snap-in muntin bars. ! Replacing a bedroom window, if required for eqress by the Buildinq Code, with a new one that matches the size, trim, use of divided-lights, and overall ap- Applies to: HistodcDistrict Noncon[dbutJng pearance of the previous bedroom window or other Conservation Districts All properties windows in the house. ! Vinyl or vinyl clad wood windows may be used for New windows replacement of basement windows provided the · Adding windows that match the type, proportions, foundation wall is no more than 18 inches above trim, and appearance of thev,,~,,,.,"';";""~ historic win- grade. dews. The sash width must be similar to that of the original windows. · Adding new windows in a location that is consistent with the window pattern of the historic buildinq or buildings of similar architectura style, Storm windows · Installing traditional wood storm windows and screens on older buildings. · Installing wood-frame combination storm windows with screens that resemble traditional wood storm windows. The use of metal-clad, wood-frame com- bination storm windows is acceptable. Storm win- dows must accept paint. 19 iowa Oily Historic Preservalion Handbook 4.8 Doors The original size and shape of door openings should be maintained, Many e~dor historic entrance doors are of panel- type construction or solid frames with glass lights in the upper part of the door. Historic el¢storm doors are often wood doors with removable sashes. These ekt historic door styles should be used when it is necessary to replace original doors. Historic e!Cgarage doors often possess distinctive design features and should be retained if possible. Recommended: Disallowed: Historic doors New doors · Repairing erigina! historic doors rather than replac- · Installing flush entrance doors or other modern door lng them. styles. · Replacing badly deteriorated doors with new or saF· Installing sliding patio doors if they were not original vaged doors ones that are similar in size, material, to the buildinq or consistent with the architectural style, and appearance, style, New doors · Installing natural aluminum storm doors. · Installing a wood screen door that accepts sashes · Blocking down dooropeningstoaccommodatestan- with glass or screen, dard door sizes. · Adding new door openings that are trimmed to match other doors and windows in the building. No~; Recommended: · Substituting a material in place of wood for doors · Installing a double-car garage door where two single- and screen doors only if the substitute material re- car doors are possible. tains the style and appearance of the historic doors and screen doors, The substitute material must be durable, accept paint, and be approved by the His- toric Preservation Commission. Garaqe doors Applies to: Conservation Districts All properties · Retaining and repairingv,,~,,,~,""~"~'~"~ historic garage · ,,,,..~.,,.,~"o~""~"'~ Sliding patio doors or other modern-stCe doors where practical, doors may be installed on the rear of a primary build- . Installing new garage doors that ,,m!,,mic resemble lng provided thatthe openings are trimmed to match the styles of ............ historic ones, or installing the existing doors and/or windows. new garage doors that are simple in design. Smooth or simple panel-type doors may be used · Adding trim to garage door openings that matches that of other doors and windows in the garage. 20 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 4.9 Porches Porches are the focus of many historic buildings and help define their overall character. In historic residential neighborhoods, front porches help to establish a sense of community, Front porches and sun porches should be preserved for both their architectural and social value Recommended: Disallowed: Historic porches Historic porches · Repairing historic porches and conserving as much · Removing a historic front porch. the v,,~,,,~l-hlstonc material as possible · Changing the original roof pitch. Newer materials · Replacing badly deteriorated ~icccs components including EPDM rubber sheeting and heat-sealed with new ones that ^"~";""~°. match the ..,,~ ...... historic corn- asphalt products make the maintenance of low- ponents in design and material, Custom fabrication pitched roofs easier than in years past. of columns, brackets, pedestals, and moldings may · Enclosin;I front porches or other porches that are be necessary, but many porch components can be hiqhly visible from the street with permanent win- ordered through lumber yards, dews and/or walls. · Using vertical-grained fir porch flooring for its resis- New materials tance to weathering. · Using wrought iron elements unless they were part · Constructinq or replacing missing balustrades and of the historic design. handrails using historic photographs or in a style that is ,~.~.,v~, ....... consistent with both the build- Using unpainted treated wood for elements that in_g_and neighborhood (See section 4.10 Balustrades would have been painted in their historic applica- and Handrails for more details), tions. · Using wood steps for a wood porch and tile, brick, or· Using precast concrete steps on the front or side concrete steps for a masonry porch, elevation if the steps will be hiqhly visible from the street. They are acceptable on the rear elevation. ,,, .....~ ,.+,; ..... ~.a*;,.~ ,-~,,,,,,~, ,,..¢a;,.,,,,,~ Wood substitutes ......... ~. ........ eawnq exposed the support piers · Substituting a material in place of wood that does below the porch columns. Skirting must be added not retain the appearance, function, and paintability to fill the space below the porch floor and qrade if of the original wood. this space is 24 inches or qreater. The skirt must be located between the porch piers. · Constructinq porch skirtinq usinq a 3-6 inch wood Appliesto: HistoricDistdcts Noncontributing frame with slats fastened to the back of the frame in Conservation Districts All properties a vertical or lattice pattern. New materials · Enclosing only a portion of a front porch with screens · Porch floors may be concrete if the floor is no more to provide a sitting area that is to the side of the steps than 18 inches above grade. Porches wit__h floors and front entrance of the house. The screens should that are more than 18 inches above grade must be be set behind the columns and balustrades to pre- built using traditional porch construction with wood serve the ,,,,~ ..... historic appearance of the porch, joists and wood flooring. Wood substitutes · Pretreated porch deckinq or dimensional lumber may be used for deckinq provided the qaps between · Substituting a material in place of wood only if the the floorboards do not exceed 1/8 inch. substitute material retains the appearance and func- tion of the original wood. The substitute must be · Porches on rear elevations need not reproduce durable, accept paint, and be approved by the His- historic details. toric Preservation Commission. 21 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 4.10 Balustrades and Handrails Balustrades (quardrails) and handrails serve as both decorative and functional elements on porches, balconies, and steps. For historic properties, the design should be consistent with the architectural style, but not at the expense of safety. Recommended: Disallowed: Historic balustrades and handrails Historic balustrades and handrails o · Repairing historic balustrades and railings, · Removing historic balustrades or railings. ~ · Replacing badly deteriorated components with ones · Covering the historic balustrades or railings with ma- ..~ that match the historic components in design and terials such as siding. ~, material. ,= New balustrades and handrails · = New balustrades and handrails · -~ · Using unpainted treated wood for elements that ~ · Constructing or replacinq missing balustrades by would have been painted in the historic application. ~ using historic photographs or by choosing a style ~ · Using wrought iron elements unless they were part _o that is consistent with the architectural style of the of the historic design. o building. · Installing turned balusters in balustrades that have an actual diameter of 2 inches or greater, or square spindles that are 2 1-1/2 inches or greater in width. · Installing top and foot rails that are at least 2 inches Applies to;Historic DistrictsNoncontributing in thickness. These can be made with 3/4-inch and Conservation Districts Allproperties 5/4-inch lumber glued together. New balustrades and handrails · On buildinqs where a spindled balustrade would be · On buildings where a spindled balustrade would be most consistent with the architectural style, spacinq most consistent with the architectural style, spacing spindles so that the balustrade is at least 40% solid, spindles so that the balustrade is at least 30% solid. Spindles must be spaced so that no gap between the spindles exceeds 4 inches as required by the · On buildinqs where turned spindles would be most building code. This is for child safety, consistent with the architectural style, installing square spindles. · Providing handrails on porch steps as required by the build/hq code. Handrails should match the his- toric balustrade height on the porch unless other- wise specified by the building code. The handrail must have a continuous member that can be easily gripped. The handrail should either match the porch balustrade or be made of round steel pipe. · Providinq balustrades on the porch as required by the build/hq code. When the porch floor is more than 30 inches above qrade, the balustrade must be 42 inches high except for sinqle-family and duplex structures where it may be as Iow as 36 inches. · _ Slop/hq the top and foot rails slightly to allow water to be shed from these surfaces and help prevent dete- rioration of these members. 22 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 4. I I Gutters and Downspouts Original built-in gutters are important design features of historic buildings. Removing these requires a building permit and must be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. A building permit and Certificate of Appropriateness is-ar~e not required for replacing external gutters. Recommended: Disallowed: Original built-in gutters Roof slope · Repairing original built-in gutters. EPDM rubber · Alteringtheroofslopenearthegutterwhencovering sheeting is an economical replacement material eke-historic built-in gutters. for the original tin flashing. · Covering original built-in gutters and applying exte- rior gutters only if the roof slope at the gutter is not altered. This can be accomplished with horizontal blocking and flashing above the old gutter. New downspouts · Installing metal downspouts placed vertically near the corners. They should be painted to match the background wal~l color. 4.1:2 Chimneys Fireplace chimneys are often a defining architectural feature of historic houses. Chimneys may have decorative brickwork and often are a distinquishinq feature of the roof profile. Therefore, historic chimneys should be preserved. Recommended: Disallowed: Historic chimneys Historic chimneys · Adding a flue liner to historic chimneys for safety · Removing prominent chimneys that are important reasons, to the historic architectural character of the build- . Keeping flue caps as inconspicuous as possible, lng. · Plastering over masonry chimneysin place of proper · Following the recommendations for masonry repair in section 4.2 Masonr7 repair. · Pointing with mortar that is too hard for historic, soft · _Repairing and capping unused historic chimneys brick. in a manner that prevents vermin from enterinq the chimney, but allows air circulation. · Using synthetic sealants, adhesives and/or wraps to New chimneys repair masonry chimneys. · Usinq masonry to construct full-height exterior fire- place chimneys in a manner that is consistent with the architectural style of the buildinq. · _Boxinq and finishinq new chimney pipes that pen- etrate the roof with thin brick veneer or stucco. 23 iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 4.13 Site and Landscaping Site features and andscaping can contribute significantly to the character of a neighborhood, streetscape or property, Accommodating parking, site access and other modern outdoor needs should be done in a discreet manner. To the extent possible, these modern site features should be located in the backyard and accessed from an alley. Recommended: Disallowed: · Repairing historic brick paving materials and retain-· Providing parking spaces betweenthe primary struc- o lng walls, ture and the street. (Moved from Neighborhood Dis- ~ trict Guidelines.) ~ · Constructinq new driveways to be similar to historic ,~ driveways in the neighborhoods. Typically these · Adding curb cuts and driveways from the street when ~ driveways are 8-10 feet in width and may have only a access is available from an alley. ~ threefootsectonforeachtrackpaved, leaving grass · Removinq historic metal fences. · '~ in the center of the drive. ~ · Removing larqe trees that are planted closer than ~ 20 feet to historic buildinqs and shrubs planted Not Recommended: _o,=, closer than 5 feet. Trees, shrubs and other substan- · Replacing historic brick pavinq with concrete. -~ tial plantings can increase the moisture and mold at the exterior walls and the roots can damaqe founda- ,, Removinq mature trees, unless tree is causinq dam- tions, aqe to a buildinq, is diseased, or is structurally Pedestrian Access sound, as determined by a professional arborist. · Providing a sidewalk that connects the entrance door Fences or porch to the public sidewalk. (Moved from Neigh- ·. Installing chain link, wire mesh or rail fences in Io- borhood District Guidelines.) cations hiqhly visible from the street. Vehicular Access · Providing vehicular access from an alley when avail- able. Driveways leading from the street to garages or parking at the rear of the property should be one lane in width, but can be widened toward the back of the lot to provide access to multi-stall garages or parking spaces. (Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) Parkin¢l · Providing parking behind the primary structure on a lot where possible. If parking must be located along the side of an existing or new primary structure, it must be set back from the front plane of the building a minimum of 10 feet and be screened by a decora- tive fence, landscaping, or a combination of a deco- rative fence and landscaping, and approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. (Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) Fences · Installinq fences between the street and the front facade that are 3 feet or less in height. · Designing fences to be similar to historic fence styles, such as wood picket fences, and wrought iron or metal fences. 24 · Paintin~ wood fences. Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 5.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Additions An addition to a historic house is often required to accommodate an expanding family, home office or modern lifestyle. These guidelines are for additions that expand the interior livinq space or building footprint, as well as for other attached structures such as new porches, decks and ramps. 5. I Expansion of Building Footprint When planning an addition that expands the buildinq footprint, consider first how a new exterior form and roof can be added to the existinq house in a manner that is compatible with the design of the historic buildinq. Often, the desired interior space dictates the location and size of the addition, and the resultinq roofline and form appear awkward and inconsistent with the historic structure. The Historic Preservation Commission stronqly recommends using a desiqn professional to help evaluate space needs and plan a compatible addition. Additions to structures in districts must also comply with the guidelines in section 8.0 Neiqhborhood District Guidelines. Recommended: Recommended (cont.): Desiqn Mass and Roofline that ..................... · Preservinq significant historic materials and features · Constructing additions """""*" *~' ..... ;~ of of the original structure such as decorative windows, ~ are consistent with the mass- brackets, porches, and trim. infl and roofline of the historic buildinq. This requires that the wall areas and vertJc~l corners, as well as · Desifininp an addition so that it does not diminish the roof pitches and spans are all consistent with the the character of the historic structure. existing str~building and have a proportion that · Distinguishing between the historic structure and is similar to that of the existinq buildinq. by offsettinq the walls of the addition from the walls · ........... ~ ................. ~ ............... of the original structure. ' ................... ~ ........... overhanq, soffits and eaves of the addition so that · Matching key horizontal "lines" on the existing build- they match the roof overhanq, soffits and eaves of lng, such as water table, eave heiqht, window head the existing buildinq. When the eaves of an addition height and band boards, in order to provide continu-intersect the eaves of the existing ......... budd~nq, ity between the addition and the historic structure,care should be taken to assure that the two eaves · Usinq a palette of materials that is similar to that align properly. The trim details of a new eave should used onthehistoricstructure, match the eave details of the existing · Placing building additions at the rear of a property, if possible. Additions at or near the front of an existinq Siding buildinq must be set back at least 18 inches from · Applying siding to a new addition that matehes4he the front plane of the historic buildinq, and must be appears similar in size, shape, texture, and material differentiated by a change in the roofiine or other to the existing siding on the ~-;~;--~,,~,,,., historic build- means, lng. Foundations Masonry · Constructing an addition foundation that m3tch thc · When usinq masonry on an addition, using new ~,,~,,,~, appears s~m~lar to the h~stonc foundation in masonry that appears similar in color, texture, unit color, texture, unit size, and joint profile, size, and ioint profile to the historic masonry. Wood · Constructing additions with materials that ........ a_2.: pear similar to the historic siding, trim, moldings, and other details of the original building. 25 (Recommendations continued on next page.) Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Recommended (cont.): Disallowed: Paint and Color · Constructinq an addition between the historic build- lng and the street. · Painting additions to match the v,,~ ...... x~stmg h~stonc budd lng. · Leaving large expanses of wall surface uninterrupted Windows by windows or doors. ' n; .....~J¢'~ll,, r~.,~ ,,,;,.,4 ....... ~;f~,~.,~,.~ ti ..... ~ .. ~.,,a ' · Constructing an addition that is not distinquishable · . /~!~,,,,,~ ......... ~ ........................................ ding from the historic building. _o t~e same width "stacked" v ............... her. · Using synthetic siding on an addition instead of the ,~ · Usinq windows that are of a similar type, proportion and v,.~ ..... historic siding type or a substitute material ~ divided-liqht pattern as those in the oriqinal structure, approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. · -=· Fotlowinq with the quidelines for new windows in section 4.7 · Adding space to a structure by enclosing a historic · , front or side porch. -~ Windows. ~' Doors ~ Not Recommended: _o · Installinq doors in additions that match the material of his- ~ toric doors, and have a similar style and appearance as the · Constructinq an addition that expands a historic historic doors in the existing buildinq, house vertically and increases its overall height. Re- . Installing French doors, or doors of a similar type, in additions modeling an attic space and addinq dormers is ac- where a large opening is desired, ceptable. _. Foltowinq the quidelines for new doors in section 4.8 Doors. Gutters and downspouts · Constructing built-in gutters in additions to historic buildings Appliesto: HistoricDistricts Setbackadditions that have built-in gutters. Conservation Districts All additions New porches New foundations · For additions to foundations, concrete or rusticated · Constructing new porches that are consistent with the his- textured concrete block may be used in place of toric building or similar to porches of the same architectural criglnal masonry units that appear similar to the origi- style, nal masonry. · Constructing new porchesthat are more than 18 inches above · For additions to foundations, it is acceptable to grade using traditional porch construction with wood joists and wood flooring, match the color of the original foundation by using paint or masonry stain rather than matching the · Adding a lattice skid or grills to fill the space between the material and appearance of the original foundation porch floor and grade if this space is 24 inches or greater, material. The skid should be constructed between the porch piers. New masonry Balustrades and handrails · Additions to masonry structures may be sided with · Following the quidelines for new balustrades and handrails wood. The siding type must be ....... ~-+'~ *"" in section 4.10 Balustrades and Handrails. sistent with the age and architectural style of the Chimneys v,,~ ..... historic building. The trim must be consis- tent with both the siding type and the architectural _. Constructinq new'exterior fireplace chimneys of masonry or style of the building. Any substitute materials must stucco if the chimney is highly visible from the street, be durable, accept paint, and be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. (Exceptions continued on next page.) 26 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Applies to: Historic Districts Setback additions Conservation Districts All additions Wood · Window trim, door trim, fascia and frieze boards, and corner and band boards on additions must be similar to those on the historic buildinq. However, other details of the .historic build- ing may be omitted, simplified, or enhanced on additions as long as they are compatible with the existing structure. Windows · Modern window types, such as casement windows, may be used in additions provided they have overall proportions com- parable to those found on the ........ similar divided-liqht pattern. The windows must be trimmed to match the ex,~,,,,~ historic windows in the building. The windows may be installed side-by-side, but they must have a mullion between them if mullions were used between win- dows on the historic building. Transom-like or half-round fixed glass units may be used if they create a traditional-look- ing window arrangement consistent with the ,.,,,~ .....h~stonc building style. Porches · Porch floors may be concrete if the floor is no more than 18 inches above grade. Porches with floors that are more than 18 inches above grade must be built using traditional porch construction with wood joists and wood flooring. · Dimensional lumber may be used for decking provided the gaps between the floorboards do not exceed 1/8 inch. · Porches on rear elevations need not reproduce historic details. Gutters and downspouts · Additions need not have built-in gutters unless the new gut- ters align with the built-in gutters of the existing building. For instance, a one-story addition need not have built-in gutters if it is attached to a two-story wall. 27 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 5.2 Decks and Ramps Decks and ramps are features that are not typical to historic structures. They are modern inventions desiqned to meet the needs of our modern lifestyle and building codes. As such, it is not necessary that they duplicate the details of the building to which they are attached, However, they should be as unobtrusive as possible, ............................................... ~,~, ................. ~,~.,~, ............................. Ramps may be approved that accommodate reasonable access and use by disabled occupants provided they do not significantly alter or detract from the historic character of the building. The Historic Preservation Commission will work with applicants to find designs that will accommodate their needs and that are compatible with the historic character of the building. Recommended: Disallowed: Decks Decks · Locatinqanewdeckonthebackofaprimarybuild- · Constructinq a deck between the street and the lng, opposite the street-facing facade and set in street-facinq facade if it detracts from the neiqhbor- from the side walls at least 8 inches, hood or is not compatible with the architectural style · Desiqning decks so that the size, scale and Ioca- of the existing buildinq. tiondonotdetractfromthecharacterofthedistdct's · Leaving balusters and railinqs unpainted if they are rear yards, if siqnificant to the district, highly visible from the street, · Attachinq decks to the buildinq in a manner that will not damage a historic exterior wall or, other Not Recommended: historic materials, or cause wood sidinq to dete- riorate, Ramps ° Followinq the quidelines in section 4.10 Balus- · Constructinq a ramp that extends more than 8 feet trades and Handrails. in front of the primary, street-facinq facade. · If creating a screened porch structure, followinrl the quidelines for porches in section 5.1 Expan- sion of Buildinq Footprint. Ramps · Designinq ramps so they do not detract from the historic character of the house. To the extent pos- sible, the yard should be graded to create a portion of the incline of the ramp. ·Locating a new ramp, or as much of the new ramp as possible, on the side of the buildinq · Incorporatinq a ramp into a porch. ·Landscapinq around a ramp to soften the visual impact of the structure from the street. · Following the quidel nes n section 4.10 Balus- trades and Handrails. 28 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 6.0 Iowa City Guidelines for New Construction (This section incorporates guidelines from tile Neighborhood D/strict Guidelines and the Iowa City Guidelines. Only substantive changes from the Neighborhood District Guidelines have been indicated.) Most new structures constructed in Iowa City's historic neiqhborhoods are garages or other outbuildinqs. Although most of the lots in these neighborhoods are developed, occasionally the opportunity to construct a new primary structure on a vacant lot may arise, or to replace a nonhistoric building or a buildinq that has been destroyed. These guidelines are intended to ensure that new buildinqs are compatible with the character of the neighborhood. Pro- posed new buildinqs must also comply with 8.0 Neiqhborhood District Guidelines, which are used to determine the appropriate size, scale, site location and architectural style of the new buildinq. These factors are dependent on the character of the surrounding neighborhood and district, and therefore are not addressed in this section. 6. I New Primary Structures Recommended: Recommended (cont.): Setbacks (Moved from Neighborhood District Guide- Masonry (Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) lines.) · Using masonry that has a similar appearance to the · For new primary buildings, locating the building a masonry on historic buildings of a similar architec- distance from the street so that the setback is con- tural style. sistent with the setbacks of existing buildings located Wood (Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) adjacent to the proposed building. · Using wood oran approved wood substitute for build- . Determining the setback of a new primary building lng trim and features such as corner boards, win- by taking the average of the setbacks of the four near- dow trim, frieze boards, columns, brackets and simi- est primary buildings located on the same block and lar features. along the same street frontage. The setbacks of existing buildings must be measured at the first floor Wood substitutes .(Moved from Neighborhood District wall of the main living area of the building, excluding Guidelines.) a covered or enclosed porch. · Substituting a material in place of wood only if the substitute material retains the appearance and func- · Locating front porches on new buildings so that they tion of-tl:re-er~:k~ wood. The substitute material extend into the required front yard, provided they are must be durable, accept paint, and be approved by no closer to the street than any of the other porches the Historic Preservation Commission. For many along the same frontage. Front porches are preva- applications, fiber cement board is an approved lent on existing buildings within the districts, wood substitute. Design (new) Dormers · Designing a new primary structure in a similar style · Followinq the quidelines for new dormers in section to the architectural styles prevalent in the district. 4.4 Mass and Rooflines. See the 8.0 Neiqhborhood District Guidelines for the architectural styles that are appropriate for each Siding (Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) district. _. Using sidinq that is consistent with the architectural · Once an architectural style for a new primary build- style of the new building. Most historic siding in - Iowa City is wood. Fiber cement siding is an accept- inq is selected, following the specifications in sec- able substitute for wood siding in most circum- tion 11.0 Residential Architectural Styles of Iowa City. stances. This section describes the massinq, roofline, sid- ing, windows, doors, porches and other architec- Paint and color (new) tural features for each historic style. · Where synthetic siding is allowed, using a color scheme that is consistent with the architectural style of the buildinq. 29 (Recommendations continued on next page.) Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Recommended (cont.): Disallowed: Windows.(Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) Windows · Specifying the window type, proportion, shape, pro- · UsinR snap-in muntin bars to create the appearance file, divided-light pattern, and placement based on of divided-lights. the architectural style of the new structure and con- Doors (Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) ~ tributing structures of a similar style. · Installing sliding glass patio doors in any location O '~ · Using windows that are made of wood. The use of that is highly visible from the street. ~ metaL-clad, solid-wood windows is acceptable. Win- ,.~ dows and trim must accept paint. Divided-lights must · Constructing balconies that protrude from the walls ~ be created with muntins that are adhered to both without vedical supports on the front or sides of the = building. ~ sides of the qlass. ,,, Masonry (Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) ._~ · Placing small decorative windows in the attic level ._-~ of front gable ends _if consistent with the architec- · Using synthetic masonry materials such as artificial ~ tural style, stone. o · Adding wood (or an acceptable wood substitute) win- Not Recommended: _~ dow trim that is three to four inches in width if the Porches.(Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) ~ exterior walls are sided with wood. · Constructing a new front porch that is entirely en- Doors.(Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) closed with walls and/or windows. Only a portion of · Adding exterior doors on front or side elevations ofa front porch may be enclosed with screens to pro- buildings that have half- or fuIHight windows and/orvide a sitting area that is to the side of the steps and raised panel construction, and are consistent with front entrance of the house, The screens should be the architectural style, set behind the columns and balustrades to create an appearance that is consistent with the architec- Porches.(Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) rural style. · Constructing front porches that are consistent with the architectural style of the building. Front porches Attached qaraqes (Moved from Neighborhood District are a character-defining element in Iowa City dis- Guidelines.) tricts, · Constructing attached garages. However, if con- . Using vertical-grained fir porch flooring for the porch structed, they should be set back at least 20 feet from the street-facing plane of the building. decking, · Using wood or an approved wood substitute that ac- Shutters cepts paint for porch posts, trim and other compo- · Adding shutters if shutters are not consistent with the nents, architectural style of the building. · Constructing new porches that are more than 18 Masonry (new) inches above grade using traditional porch construc- · Usinq thin veneer masonry. tion with wood joists and wood flooring. · Adding a skirting to fill the space between the porch floor and grade if this space is 24 inches or greater. The skirt should be constructed between the porch Applies to: Conservation Districts All properties piers. Balustrades and handrails Porches (Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) · Followinq the quidelines for new balustrades and · Porch floors may be concrete if the floor is no more handrails in section 4.10 Balustrades and Handrails.than 18 inches above grade. Porch floors that are more than 18 inches above grade must be built in a · If second-story porches are constructed, placing traditional way with wood joists and wood flooring. them above first-story porches or first-floor interior spaces. (Moved fromNeighborhood District Guide- (Exceptions continued on next page.) lines.) 30 Iowa City Hislodc Preservation Handbook Applies to: Conservation Districts All properties Porches (cont.) (Moved from Neighborhood District Windows (new) Guidelines.) · Vinyl and vinyl clad wood windows and snap-in · Pretreated porch decking or dimensional lumber muntin bars (grids) may be used on new primary may be used provided the gaps between the floor- structures and outbuildinqs. boards do not exceed 1/8 inch. · Porches on rear elevations need not reproduce historic details. Sidinq (Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) · Synthetic siding may be used on new primary struc- tures and outbuildings, provided all window and door trim, corner boards, band boards or other trim are wood or an approved wood substitute. 6.2 New Outbuildings Recommended: Not Recommended: Design (Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) Attached garages (Moved from Neighborhood District · Placing new outbuildings, including garages, to Guidelines.) the rear of the primary building. · Constructing garages attached to the primary · Constructing garages and other outbuildings that building. are clearly subordinate in size and ornamentation to the primary structure. · Constructing new outbuildings that reflectthe style of the primary structure. Appliesto: Conservation Districts AIIproperties Garage doors (Moved from Neighborhood District Design (Moved from Neighborhood District Guidelines.) Guidelines.) · New outbuildings may reflect the historic outbuild- . Installinq garaqe doors that are simple in design, lng styles in the neighborhood or the style of the pri- Smooth or simple panel-type garage doors may mary buildinq. be used. Windows · Adding trim around the garage door openings that · Vinyl or vinyl clad wood windows and snap-in mun- matches the trim of other doors and windows on tin bars may be used on new outbuildinqs. the building. Siding · Installing single-cargaragedoors. Double-car ga- rage doors are discouraged. · Synthetic sidinq may be used on new outbuildinqs. 31 Iowa City Hisloric Preservation Handbook 7.0 Iowa City Guidelines for Demolition Ll,q ............... ~, ........................................... ~ ........... A Certificate o ropnateness for the demo- lition of any primary structuro building on a contributing property within a conservation or historic district, or any landmark, will be denied unless the applicant can demonstrate that the building is structurally unsound and irretriev- able A decision to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of outbuildings on contributing and noncontributing properties, and primary buildings on noncontributing properties, will be made on a case-by-case basis For these cases, the Commission will consider the condition, integrity and architectural significance of the o outbuilding or noncontributing building. A Certificate of Appropriateness is also required for the removal of any portion of a building, such as a porch, porch balustrade, decorative brackets and trim, dormers, chimney or other architecturally significant components on any structure within a district, or on any landmark. Before a Certificate of Appropriateness for demolition will be approved for a primary building, the Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission must approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the building that will replace the one being demolished. This is true for primary buildings located on contributing and noncontributing properties. Recommended: Disallowed: · Removinq additions or alterations that are not his- · Demolishing any primary building on a contributing toric and that siqniflcantly detract from the buildinq's property within a conservation or historic district, or historic character, any Iowa City Historic Landmark. · Removinq nonhistoric buildings and structures that ° Removinq any historic architectural feature, such detract from the historic character of a district. Such as a porch, chimney, bay window, dormer, brackets buildings should be replaced with buildinqs that areor decorative trim, that is significant to the architec- more compatible with the district, rural character and style of the buildinq. _, Removing portions of a buildinq that are structurally unsound and are a safety hazard. Not Recommended: _- Saving! and storinq on site any historic architectural ° Removing significant historic site features on the features such as windows, doors and trim that are ' removed from a buildinq or structure, property such as brick driveways and iron fences. 32 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 8.0 Neighborhood District Guidelines (Guidelines that were originally iocluded in both the Longfellow and College Hill District Guidelines, and would be appropriate for any district, were incorporated into the Iowa City Guidelines. Guidelines specific to individual districts, remain under Neighborhood District Guidelines.) 8. I Longfellow Neighborhood The Longfellow Neighborhood District Guidelines apply :] L:~ L_~ t ~L I! ~,',~ to the Summit Street Historic District, Longfellow : ~' Historic District (including the Moffitt Cottage National Register Historic District), Governor-Lucas Street Con- servation District, Clark Street Conservation District, and Dearborn Street Conservation District. They apply to single-family and duplex buildings in these neighbor- hood districts. Site and Scale Guidelines Setback, Front On Summit Street only: The rear wall of the primary struc- tures must not extend deeper than 125 feet from the front street. This restriction preserves the openness of the rear yards. Building Facade The total surface area of the street elevation of a new primary building must be no more than 800 square feet. Existing primary structures must not be expanded in such a manner that the total surface area exceeds 800 square feet. For the purposes of enforcing this guideline, the total surface area of the street elevation is defined as a figure derived by calculating the surface area of all wall and roof surfaces, including window and door openings, that are visible in a measured drawing of the building's street elevation. On Governor, Bowery, and Court Streets only: The total surface area of the street elevation must be no more than 1200 square feet for a new primary building or for an existing building including a new addition. On Sum mit Street only: The total surface area of the street elevation must be no more than 1500 square feet for a new primary building or for an existing building including a new addition, and no more than 750 square feet for a new outbuilding building. In the Moffitt Cottaqe National Req ster H stor c D str ct on y The surface area of the street elevation must be no more than 450 square feet for a new primary building or an existing building includinq a new addition. Outbuildings In the Summit Street Historic District only: Attached garages are not allowed. Garages must be located at the rear of the property wherever possible. 33 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Architectural Guidelines for New Primary Structures Building Styles Architectural style is a defining characteristic for historic and conservation districts. A new primary structure must reflect the historic styles of its neighborhood. Although new construction may adapt and mix some elements of different styles, a single style must dictate the height and mass, rooflines, fenestration, and overhangs for the new building Please refer to section 1'i.0 Residential Architectural Styles of Iowa City for examples of historic building styles. The architectural styles represented in each district are given below. In the Summit Street Historic District only: A new building must reflect the Italianate, Queen Anne, Colonial Revival, American Foursquare, Prairie School, Vernacular, or Eclectic style, In the Lonqfellow Historic District only: A new building must reflect the Queen Anne, Colonial Revival, Craftsman, Craftsman Bungalow, American Foursquare, Prairie School, Period Revival Cottaqe, Vernacular, or Eclectic style. In the Governor-Lucas Street Conservation District only: A new building on Governor Street must reflect the Italianate, Queen Anne, American Foursquare, or Vernacular style. A new building on Lucas Street must reflect the Queen Anne, Craftsman, Craftsman Bungalow, American Foursquare, Prairie School, or Vernacular style, In the Clark Street Conservation District only: A new building must reflect the Queen Anne, Colonial Revival, Crafts- man, Craftsman Bungalow, American Foursquare, Vernacular, or Eclectic style, In the Dearborn Street Conservation District only: A new building must reflect the Craftsman, Craftsman Bungalow, American Foursquare, Vernacular, or Eclectic style, In the Moffitt Cottaqe National Re~!ister Historic District only: A new buildinp must reflect the Period Revival Cottage style. Building Height and Mass New single-family houses or duplexes must be one, one-and-a-half, or two stories in height except as noted below. In the Summit Street Historic District onl,(: New single-family houses must have two full stories in the principal portion of the building. In the Moffitt Cottaqe National Re~ister Historic District only: New sinqle-family houses must be one story in heiqht. Porches tn the Moffitt Cottaqe National Register Historic District only: Traditional front porches were not used in this district and must not be used on new structures. 8.2 College Hill Neighborhood The College Hill Neighborhood District Guidelines ap- ply to the College Green Historic District, East College Street Historic District, and the College Hill Conservation District. They apply to single-family and duplex buildings in these neighborhood districts. 34 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Site and Scale Guidelines Building Facade The total surface area of the street elevation of a new primary structure must be no more than 1200 square feet. Existing primary structures that were historically single-family houses must not be expanded in such a manner that the total surface area exceeds 1200 square feet. If the primary structure is accidentally destroyed or is a noncontributing structure that the owner wishes to demolish, and if the structure had/has a street elevation surface area of 1200 square feet or greater, it may be reconstructed provided its street elevation area does not exceed the area of the pre-existing primary structure. For the purposes of enforcing this guideline, the total surface area of the street elevation is defined as a figure derived by calculating the surface area of all wall and roof surfaces, including window and door openings, that are visible in a measured drawing of the building's street elevation. Architectural Guidelines for New Primary Structures Building Styles Architectural style is a defining characteristic for historic and conservation districts. A new primary structure must reflect the historic styles of its neighborhood. Although new construction may adapt and mix some elements of different styles, a single style should dictate the height and mass, rooflines, fenestration, and overhangs for the new building. Please refer to section 11.0 Residential Architectural Styles of Iowa City for examples of historic building styles. In the College Hill Neighborhood, a new building must reflect the Italianate, Queen Anne, Colonial Revival, Craftsman, American Foursquare, Prairie School, Period Revival Hous6 Vemacular or Eclectic style. Building Height and I'lass New single-family houses or duplexes must be one-and-a-half, or two stories in height, except as noted below. On Colleqe Street only: New single-family houses and duplexes must be two stories in height. 8.3 Woodlawn Historic District These quidelines apply to sinqle-family and duplex build- _ inFls in the Woodlawn Historic District. Site and Scale Guidelines Due to the unique site characteristics of this district, stan~ dard Site and Scale Guidelines are difficult to apply, i ' Therefore, the Historic Preservation Commission will use section 9.0 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for these guidelines. ~-..~.'L~E:~ ~ ...... '~ Architectural Guidelines for New Primary Structures Building Styles Althouqh it is unlikely that a new primary structure will be constructed in the Woodlawn Historic District, in the event that this should happen, section 9.0 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation will apply. Please refer to section 11.0 Residential Architectural StCes of Iowa City for examples of historic buildin~ styles. In the Woodlawn Historic District, a new buildin~ must reflect the Italianate, Queen Anne, or Eclectic style. 35 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 8.4 Northside Neighborhood "i ' The Northside Neiqhborhood District Guidelines apply - to the Brown Street Historic District, They apply to single- family and duplex buildings in this neighborhood district. Site and Scale Guidelines Building Facade / ...... - The total surface area of the street elevation of a new primary structure must be no more than 1200 square feet. Existinq primary structures that were historically single-family houses must not be expanded in such a ~,~ manner that the total surface area exceeds 1200 square feet. For the purposes of enforcinq this guideline, the total surface area of the street elevation is defined as a figure derived by calculatinq the surface area of all wall and roof surfaces, including window and door openings, that are visible in a measured drawinq of the buildinq's street elevation. Bella Vista Drive only: Due to the unique site characteristics of this district, standard Site and Scale Guidelines are difficult to apply. Therefore, the Historic Preservation Commission will use section 9.0 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for these quidelines. Architectural Guidelines for New Primary Structures Building Styles Architectural style is a defininq characteristic for historic and conservation districts. A new primary structure must reflect the historic styles of its neiqhborhood. Althouqh new construction may adapt and mix some elements of different styles, a sinqle style should dictate the height and mass, rooflines, fenestration, and overhanqs for the new buildinq. Please refer to section '11.0 Residential Architectural Styles of Iowa City for examples of historic buildinfl styles. In the Northside Neighborhood, a new buildinq must reflect the Itafianate, Queen Anne, Colonial Revival, Craftsman, American Foursquare, Prairie School, Vernacular, or Eclectic style. Buildin_~ Height and Mass New sinqle-family houses or duplexes must be one-and-a-half or two stories in heiqht. 36 iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 9.0 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (Standards) were originally written to determine the appro- priateness of proposed project work on properties that were listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Standards are accompanied by instructions concerning methods, materials, historical character, and other consid- erations that relate to the historical significance of the particular property and its surroundings. The Standards have been widely accepted by state, county, and city governments. The Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission uses the Standards to determine the appropriateness of exterior changes to historic landmarks and properties located in historic and conservation districts. The Iowa City Guidelines are based on and comply with the Standards, and were written to provide more specific quidance for owners, contractors and consultants in Iowa City as well as the Historic Preservation Commission. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (1990) are listed below. 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alter- ation of features and spaces that characterize a properly shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documen- tary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that character- ize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. 37 Iowa City Hisloric Preservation Handbook I 0.0 Design Guidelines for Multi-Family Buildings I 0. I Mandatory Compliance Items Compliance with the following design standards must be demonstrated prior to the issuance of a Certificate of ~,, Appropriateness. ~= Front Setback ,E The front yard setback must comply with the setback requirements established within the appropriate individual · _~ district guidelines. If no setback requirement is established within the district guidelines, the following standard must :~ apply. The building setback must not deviate from the average setback of existin9 structures on its street frontage by ,,, more than 5 feet, and in no case shall a new building be located closer to the street than the existing principle building ,~ on its frontage with the shallowest setback. The setbacks of existing buildings shall be measured at the first floor walt :~ of the main living area or commercial floor area of the building, excluding a covered or enclosed porch. If front ._~ porches are prevalent on existing structures, the new building may contain a covered front porch that extends into the ~' front yard, provided it is located no closer to the street than any of the other porches on its block. ~ Lighting All exterior lighting, including balcony and porch lighting, must be carefully placed, downcast and shielded so that entrances, sidewalks and stairways are well lit, but the lighting is non-obtrusive to neighboring properties. No exterior light source should be located on poles more than 15 feet high. When lights mounted on buildings are intended to provide site lighting rather than corridor or exit lighting, they must be mounted no higher than 15 feet. Lights intended to architecturally highlight a building or its features must use a limited pattern of light that does not extend beyond the wall of the building. Parking Parking lots, including detached garages and carports, must not be located between the principle building and the street. Parking must be located behind a building, below grade, or under a building. On corner lots parking may be located alongside the building, but not within a required front or side yard and no closer than 20 feet to the sidewalk. Landscaped screening consisting of densely planted evergreen shrubs, a hedge, a combination of evergreen and deciduous shrubs, or a decorative masonry wall in combination with landscaping must be used to screen the parking from the street and adjacent properties. Parking Below Buildings Where parking is located below a building, any exposed portions of the exterior walls of the parking area visible from a street and extending more than three feet above the ground must appear to be a component of the facade of the building. The use of similar building materials, window openings, and providing facade detailing similar to the upper levels are examples of how this can be achieved. In no case shall a building have the appearance from the street of being elevated above a parking level, or "on stilts." Garages When parking is provided within the primary structure, garage doors should not be located on any side of a building facing a street. When located on a side wall or on a rear wall on a corner lot, landscaping, masonry walls, or elements of the building should be used to help screen the garage doors from view from the street. 38 Iowa City Hisloric Preservation Ha~dbook Buildin§ Orientation Orientation of the "front" of the building must be to the street in a manner similar to existing buildings in the neighbor- hood, including an entrance with some architectural emphasis provided on the front of the building. Architectural treatments which emphasize the entrance include, but are not limited to, front porches, transom and sidelight win- dows, decorative trim and moldings, and/or arches. Pedestrian Access A sidewalk must be provided that connects the entrance door or porch to the public sidewalk. Balconies/Decks Balconies and decks should be designed so that they are integrated into the overall design of the building. Methods of integrating balconies into the building design may include, but are not limited to, fully or partially recessing them into the facade of the building, placing them under a roof that is integrated into the overall roof plan, utilizing supports that are compatible with the rest of the building in terms of materials and design, and utilizing supports that reach to the ground rather than append on the exterior of the building. When designed in such a manner, balconies and decks may encroach into the required front yard, provided they are located no closer to the street than any porches on the street frontage. Balconies and decks must be placed adjacent to the front or rear yard rather than the side yard. Building Height/Mass Measures should be incorporated into the design of a new building that help to reduce its "visual mass" and overall height. Examples include 1) holding the height of the eave line down by making the upper floor of a building a "half' story and utilizing dormers to accommodate the use of floor area; 2) stepping the height of a tatler building down to two stories at ends adjacent to existing buildings that are two-stories or lower in height; and 3) providing significant variations in the roofline and front building plane which help to reduce the scale of the building along the streetscape. Roof line Rooflines should reflect the predominant roof type, orientation, scale and pitch of existing buildings within the neigh- borhood. Building Modulation The street elevation setback should be varied such that no continuous wall plane or surface exceeds 35 feet in length, and such that variations between wall planes or surfaces are at least 18 inches in depth. Variations in wall planes should be accompanied by corresponding changes in the roofline and other architectural elements of the building. Windows/Fenestration The placement of windows and doors on street elevations should be consistent with the window and door patterns found on other properties in the surrounding neighborhood, and of a similar size, scale and proportion to the windows of other buildings in the neighborhood. The use of trim and moldings must be similar in width and character to surrounding buildings. Architectural Style Building Styles Besign elements from existing architectural styles found on contributing structures within the district, such as building form, rooflines, window patterns, building materials, entrance ways, and architectural detailing, must be incorporated into the design of new buildings to help them fit within the context of the district. 39 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 10.2 Design Point Items A total of 20 points from the following design options must be obtained prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness, Yehicular Access (3 points) The use of alley access to the parking area, thus minimizing paving within front yards. This may necessitate the improvement of the public alley in order to provide a suitable access to the site. Paving Materials (0-3 points) The use of textured paving, such as stamped and colored concrete, exposed aggregate, brick, or cobblestone patterns, to improve the appearance of paved areas and to designate pedestrian walkways. Side Setback (5 points) The provision of a side yard of 10 feet or more from both side lot lines, or an interior side lot line on a corner lot. Porches (0-10 points) The incorporation of a covered front porch (or porches, where appropriate) of an appropriate size and scale in areas where porches are prevalent on existing structures within the surroundirig neighborhood. A front porch helps provide a transition between the public street and the private residential use of the interior of the building, and can help a building fit within an existing neighborhood by adding detail and interest to the facade of the building. Front porches must be covered by a roof that is compatible with the roof over the rest of the structure. The evaluation of a proposed porch must take into consideration its compatibility with the design of the proposed structure, its "usability", and its compatibility with other porches in the surrounding neighborhood. Building Height (5 points) The provision of a building height along the street elevation of 27 feet or less. Architectural Details (0-10 points) The provision of architectural details to add interest to building elevations visible from the public street, including but not limited to the following: Quoins, dentils, cornice moldings, brackets, arches, corner boards, keystones, decorative lintels and sills, double-hung windows, soldier courses, belt courses, bay windows, decorative site lighting and other decorative features as appropriate for the design of the overall building and materials being used. In awarding points under this guideline, the use of these elements must be reviewed in the context of the overall building design and the character of the historic district, and not simply based on the provision of these architectural details, (0-10 points) Building Base/Exposed Foundation (0-2 points) Incorporatin9 a raised foundation or a "base" into the design of a new buildin9, The utilization of a material that differs from the primary exterior building material at the base of the building, such as stone, brick of a different color or size than that used for the overall buildin9, or other durable masonry material, can be used to give the appearance of a raised foundation. 4O Iowa Cily Historic Preservation Handbook Building Materials The use of quality exterior building materials historically used within Iowa City's older neighborhoods is preferred. 1) Building materials will be evaluated as follows. All masonry (7-10 points) The use of brick, stone, or other masonry product(s) as the exterior finish material for the entire building, with the exception of trim and decorative elements that may consist of alternative but compatible materials. The term masonry must not include concrete block or poured concrete materials, except when rusticated con- crete block or decorative concrete is used as a base or exposed foundation material. Predominantly masonry with stucco or wood (5-10 points) The use of brick, stone, or other masonry product(s) as the primary exterior building material in combination with the less substantial use of stucco, wood, or fiber cement siding. '-~ Predominantly stucco or wood with masonry (3-8 points) The use of brick, stone, or other masonry product(s) as a secondary exterior building material in combination -~, with primary materials consisting of stucco, wood, or fiber cement materials as discussed below. All stucco or wood (3-7 points) The use of stucco or other similar material(s) that conveys a stucco appearance, or wood or fiber-cement products that are wood-like in appearance, as the exterior finish material for the entire building. Acceptable wood or fiber-cement products include shakes, shingles, or painted horizontal clapboard siding composed of three (3) to eight (8) inch wide boards. Predominantly masonry with stucco or vinyl (3-5 points) Vinyl or metal siding is not permitted on new buildings within historic districts. Within conservation districts, the use of brick, stone, or other masonry product(s) as the primary exterior building material in combination with the less substantial use of vinyl or metal lap siding. Predominantly vinyl or metal with masonry (0-2 points) Vinyl or metal siding is not permitted on new buildings within historic districts. Within conservation districts, the use of brick, stone, or other masonry product(s) as a secondary exterior building material in combination with primary materials consisting of vinyl or metal lap siding in a clapboard pattern. 2) Materials or material combinations not listed above may be approved, provided that it is determined that the material will add interest to the facade of the building and that it is compatible with or similar in appearance to materials found on other buildings within the neighborhood. (0-5) 3) The following guidelines must be used to evaluate building designs that incorporate more than one exterior finish material: 41 Iowa City Historic Prese~x, alion Handbook I 1.0 Residential Architectural Styles of Iowa City The following is a guide to the most typical architectural styles found in Iowa City's historic and conservation districts. Building styles are characterized by the mass and proportions of the building, the style and placement of windows and doors (fenestration), and style of trim and other ornamentation. New construction in historic and conservation districts should reflect the size, proportions, fenestration, trim, and other ornamentation of a building style typical of that district. These guidelines will be used in evaluating new single-family houses and multi-family buildings. I I.I Italianate The Italianate building style emphasizes verticality. Of- Examples "' ten, Italianate buildings are two or three stories tall with '/ ', ,,~ each story having a ceiling height of at least ten feet. a Plans are usually rectangular, T-shaped, or L-shaped. ~ Italianate roofs are most commonly gabled with a hipped < cornice return. The roof pitch is between 6/12 and 8/12. ~ I ~ Distinctive of this style is the decorative cornice with intri- cate brackets beneath a wide overhang. Windows are narrow and tall, and first and second story windows are : , typically aligned and evenly spaced. Italianate buildings often have decorative bay windows and paired narrow -~. windows in lieu of a wider single window. Window and Simplerectangularltalianate house door openings are often arched with decorative "hoods" and sills. Italianate porches are ornate, with chamfered square columns and decorative balustrades. The balustrades may have turned or square members placed horizontally as well as vertically. A geometric pattern may also be cut from flat one-inch boards to form the balustrade. Italian- ate porches often have decorative fdezes composed of spindles just below the eaves. Porches often extend the entire width of the front facade and may wrap around to the side. Elaborate T-shaped Italianate house with rear additions Building Haterials Exterior Walls: Wood clapboard and common brick, Roof' Metal, and cedar shingles; asphalt shingles acceptable. Windo~.s.- Narrow and vertical with divided-lights: 2/2 or 4/4. Doors.' Tall panel doors with veCdcal lights. Shutters; Large Italianate building Ve~cal, board shutters acceptable; must appear operable. 42 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 11.2 QueenAnne Queen Anne buildings range from the great "painted la- Examples dies" to more modest homes of 1 1/2 stories. They have an asymmetrical building footprint with projections and intersecting masses in the roofs and walls. Roof pitches are at least 12/12 and roofs may be hipped and/or gabled in a variety of combinations. The gables are empha- sized with decorative wood shingles and ornate trim. Round turrets are common on the most elaborate Queen Anne houses. Facades frequently include a large pic- ture window, slightly taller than wide, surmounted by a fixed pane of ornamental glass. '~- Queen Anne porches are ornate, with turned or round ~~~ j ~ columns, porch rails, and turned spindles in a variety of Modest 1-1/2-story Queen Anne house patterns. Porches are large and gracious, often wrap- ping around the house. MultFfamily buildings in the Queen Anne style may ap- pear as a large elaborate house or as a series of simpler houses connected at the side walls to form a duplex or series of townhouses. Large elaborate Queen Anne house Building Materials Exterior Walls; Narrow wood clap board with decorative wood shingles, typically in the gable, Roo~' Metal, and cedar shingles; asphalt shingles acceptable. W~ndows: Large double-hung windows typical. Upper sash may have divided-lights. May also have ornamental windows and '~ansoms. Simple Queen Anne duplex Doo~s: Panel doom. Shutters: None. 43 Iowa City Historic Prese~ation Handbook I 1.3 Colonial Revival Buildings designed in the Colonial Revival style are dis-Examples tinctive for the formal, often symmetrical arrangement of the facade and plan. The plan is typically rectangular, though it may have rear or side wings. The simple side- gable roof has a pitch between 8/12 and 12/12 and fre- quently has small dormers that are symmetrically placed. Dutch Colonial Revival style houses have a gambrel roof with shed dormers at the front and rear of the house. Colonial Revival buildings have boxed eaves and they ~ have a wide frieze board beneath the eave. More elabo- · ~' rate buildings will also have dentils at the frieze. Oma- ~ mentation is limited to simple classical columns at the ~ porch and shutters. The width of the two shutters at a ~ window should equal the width of the window opening to Modest 1-1/2-story Colonial Revival house q give the appearance that they are operable. Colonial Revival porches are small porticos. The fa- cade is arranged symmetrically with the portico and en- trance door at the center. However, large multi-family buildings may have a two-story porch. The porch roof is a simple gable supported by round classical columns. The columns should taper and each column should have a capital and base Some Colonial Revival buildings have no porches, but will at least have an ornamental door surround with pilasters at the entry. Butch Colonial Revival house Single-family houses are ld/2 stories to 2-1/2 stories in height. Multi-family buildings may be up to 3-1/2 stories. Building Materials Exterior Walls: Wood clapboard; wood wall shingles and brick are less common materials. Roof' Oedar shingles; asphalt shingles acceptable. Windows: MullJ-family Colonial Revival building Divided-lights; main house windows are double-hung 6/1 or 6/6, sunporch may have divided-light casements. Door~: Panel doors with transom and/or sidelights. Enlryway classically trimmed with pediment and pilasters. Shutfers: Typical - Ioovered or re,cai board shutters. iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook I 1.4 Craftsman In Iowa City, Craftsman style houses are two stories with Examples a simple rectangular floor plan, Roof pitches are Iow, ~:,:,~ and range from 5/12 to 8/12 with 18 to 24 inch over~ ~, hangs. The soffits are open, leaving the raffer tails ex- I~,. posed. The siding material often changes between the first and second story. A wide band board or brick soldier course will delineate the change in materials. A water table and band board is located at the top of the founda- tion wall. Other ornamentation is relatively simple, with square wood brackets, upper sash divided-lights, and square porch columns. Craftsman porches may be small and only wide enough to provide a covered entry, or they may be the full width of Front~gabled Craftsman house with wall shingles the house. Porch railings are typically wood panels, solid with siding on either side or bdck, or they may have rails with square spindles. Porch ornamentation is similar to ~ that on the main house. ~- The Craftsman style has also been used for apartment buildings, though there are few examples of such build- lng in Iowa City, Craftsman apartment buildings are typi- cally 3-4 stories and have a symmetrical plan. They may be U-shaped or the entry may be centrally located and flanked by vertical bays. Apartment buildings are usually all brick, or brick and stucco. Side-gabled Cra~man house Building Platerials Exterior Walls: Wood clapboard of varying widths, wood shingles, brick and Root' Cedar shingles; asphalt shingles acceptable. Large Craftsman house W~dows : Double-hung with divided-lights; typically 3/1 or 6/1. Doors: Panel orflush doors with lights in the upper 1/3. Shutters: None. 45 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 1.5 Craftsman Bungalow Bungalows are a subset of the Craftsman style. Although Examples the two styles display similar materials and ornamenta- ~ ~, tion, Bungalows are only one or 1-1/2 stories in height. The massing may be quite simple with a rectangular plan, or more complex with wall projects, bays and dor- mers. Like the Craftsman house, they have square col umns, brackets, open eaves and a lower roof pitch. There also tend to be more variations of the Bungalow porch. The porch roof will often be integrated with the main roof and may extend the entire width of the facade. Bungalows are used for single-family residences, though they may be connected at the side walls to form a duplex Simple Craftsman bungalow or series of townhouses. Side-gable bdck Craftsman bungalow Building Materials Extedor Walls: Wood clapboard of varying widths, wood shingles, brick and Roof' Cedar shingles; asphalt shingles acceptable. Windows: Front-gable duplex Craftsman bungalow Bouble-hung with divided-lights; 3/1 or 6/1. Doors: Panel or flush door with lights in the upper third. Shutters: None. 46 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook American Foursquare The American Foursquare style is typified by its cubical Examples mass and hipped roof. Roof pitches vary from 6/12 to 10/12. Often, the roof pitch at the eave will be less than the pitch of the main roof forming a "sweep" at the roof ~ .... edge. Overhangs are often 24 inches or more with boxed-in soffits and a wide frieze board. Foursquare houses have hipped, wide attic dormers on one or more sides. Windows tend to have wider proportions than other styles, but they are still taller than they are wide. Although not always strictly symmetrical, the front facade is very regular. Ornamentation is typically simple and is usually expressed in the design of the porch. There may be two types of siding used, similar to a Craftsman house. Typical Amodcan Foursquare house Foursquare porches extend the entire width of the front <': facade and have a Iow-pitched hip roof. The porch may have two or three large, square columns on masonry piers to support the roof. Other Foursquare porches have Classic Revival style details with round tapered columns. The porch railing may be constructed of solid panels, rails with square spindles, or a solid wall covered with the siding material. The American Foursquare originated as a design for single family residences with four rooms on each of two floors. However, it may be adapted for multi-family build- ings. The square plan may be elongated or designed as Foursquare duplex two attached houses to form a duplex. ,\ Building Materials Exterior Walls: Wood clapboard of varying widths, wood shingles, brick and Asphalt shingles, cedar shingles, less commonly rretal. !4rCndows.' Large Foursquare house with Classic Revival details Double-hung with or without divided-lights (upper sash only). Doors.' Panel doors with or withoutwindow. Shutters; None. 41 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook I 1.7 Prairie School Although historic buildings of the Prairie School style are Examples not typical in Iowa City, new buildings could be con- structed based on Prairie School designs. The Prairie School developed in the Midwest with Frank Lloyd Wdght being its best known architect. In Iowa City, the Prairie School style may be combined with the American Four- square and Craftsman styles. Houses are characterized by hip roofs with pitches of 8/12 or less, and relatively simple rectangular massing. The eaves are deep to o,. provide protection from the sun. The entrances may be ~ located at the side of the house or porch, Large piers, a often at the porch, are also characteristic of this style. -.~ Windows may be double-hung or casement. Commonly, ~ Stucco Prairie School house with side en~'ance '~ multiple tall windows will be installed side-by-side with a mullion between each window. Although several patterns of divided-lights are possible, a typical divided-light pat- tern is nine lights with the muntin bars located only four to six inches from the sash. This creates a large center light with small square lights at the corners. In the case of double-hung windows, only the top sash will have di- vided-lights. Buildings influenced by the Prairie School are often stucco or brick with wood or brick banding. If sided with wood, wide board and batten siding is often used in lieu of traditional clapboard. At the upper story window sills, there is frequently wood or brick banding and a change Wood and stucco Prairie School house of materials above the banding. Although rare in Iowa City, apartment buildings influenced by the Praide School are constructed of brick, stucco or a combination of the two with ornamental banding. The roofs may be flat or hipped as described above. En- trances are often from a small courtyard, Building Materials Extefior Walls : Stucco, wood and bdck. Roof' Cedar shingles or asphalt. VFindows: Double-hung or casement; "Prairie" or veflical divided-lights. Doors; Stucco and bdck Praide School apartment building Panel or flush doors with lights in the upper 1/3 or full-light. Shutters: None. 48 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook I 1.8 Period Revival Cottages and Houses Historic European architecture, such as Cotswold cot- Examples rages, Tudor houses, French country houses, and Re- naissance manor houses, provide the precedent for Pe- riod Revival cottages and houses. The architectural char- acteristics of Period Revival buildings are based on the architectural style emulated. The modest, picturesque cottages of Howard Moffitt are most evocative of English Cotswold cottages. Other cottages, as well as fraternity houses, are commonly based on English Tudor archi- tecture. Period Revival cottages tend to have irregular plans, roof lines, and facades. Roof pitches vary from 8/12 to 16/12 or steeper. Houses with very steep gables are more evocative of Tudor cottages. The Period Revival style is Tudor Revival cottage distinctive more for the use of materials, massing and roofline than applied ornament. The cottages are usu- ally 1-1/2 stories in height and the roof may be gabled or hipped with small dormers interrupting the roofline. Most of the window openings are small, and sometimes arched and have wood shutters that appear to be operable. They often have a stone or brick chimney protruding from the exterior wall. Pedod Revival cottages typically do not have porches. They have a brick or stone front stoop and a small entry ?~ . vestibule. Some cottages may have a simple bracketed Mo~cottage canopy at the entry. Fraternity and sorority houses were typically constructed in the Period Revival style. Though significantly larger than cottages, the architectural characteristics of these houses are similar to those of the cottages described above. Buildin§ Platerlals Extedor Walls: Wood clapboard, wall shingles, bdck, stucco and stone. Roof' Cedar shingles; asphalt shingles acceptable, FC~ndows: Large Renaissance Revival house Double-hung or casement; small dividedqights. Doors: Panel or flush doors with small window. Shutters: May have shutters; must appear operable. 49 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 1.9 Vernacular Vernacular buildings tend to be relatively small in size, Examples reflecting the modest means of their early occupants. Their massing is often simple and they are one to two stories in height. Many vernacular houses have no oma- mentation. Other houses have modest ornamentation that is a simplified design of whatever "high" style may have been popular at the time the house was built, The high style may also influence the massing, roof pitch, porch design and fenestration of the vernacular house. Vernacular house with Queen Anne influence Stone and clapboard vernacular house Building Materials Exterior Walls: Wood clapboard; fieldstone for very early houses. Roof' Vernacular apartment building with Pedod Revival Wood shingles or metal; asphalt shingles acceptable, influence Double-hung with or without divided-lights. Doors: Panel doors with or without lights. Shutters: Typically none, 50 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook I 1.10 Eclectic Eclectic houses are characterized by the inclusion of Examples two or more different styles in the same building, Most frequently, these styles occurred during the same time period, or the eclectic house demonstrates the transition between two styles. Architectural characteristics of these houses may be influenced by two or more of the styles described previously in this section. However, for new construction, it is best to use only two styles in an Eclec- tic building with one style dominating. House with Queen Anne and Four Square influence Cottage with Pedod Revival and Craftsman influence Building Haterials Building materials vary; depends on what styles are being used. Duplex with Queen Anne and Four Square influence 51 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 12.0 HistoriC Landmarks Year Iowa City National Downtown Address Built Style Landmark Register Congregational Church 30 N. Clinton Street 1869 Gothic Revival Sep-96 Jun-73 College Block Building 125 E. College Street 1883 Italianate Sep-96 Jul-73 Carnegie Library 307 E. College Street 1903 Classic Revival Jul-01 ..... Trinity Episcopal Church 320 E. College Street 1871 Gothic Revival Sep-96 Dec-74 Franklin Printing House 115 S. Dubuque 1856 Commercial Brick Sep-96 Apr-86 Hohenshuh Mortuary 3 S. Linn Street 1917 Colonial Revival Jul-00 ..... Van Patten House 9 S. Linn Street 1873 Victorian Eclectic Sep-96 Jan-83 Old Post Office 28 S. Linn Street 1904 Classic Revival ..... Apr-79 Paul-Helen Building 207-215 E. Washington 1910 Commercial Brick Sep-96 Apr-86 Englert Theater 221 E. Washington 1912 Renaissance Revival ..... May-01 Boerner-Fry Company/Davis Hotel 322 E. Washington Street 1899 Classic Revival ..... Jan-83 University Landmarks Old Capitol Pentacrest 1842 Greek Revival ..... May-72 Pentacrest Capitol St. & Iowa Ave,1902-24 Classic Revival ..... Mar-78 Shambaugh House 219 N, Clinton Street 1901 Classic Revival ..... Aug-96 Bubuque/Linn Street Neighborhood Jackson-Swisher House 120 E. Fairchild Street1877 Gothic Revival Sep-96 Nov-82 & Carriage House Northside Neighborhood Arthur Hillyer Ford House 228 Brown Street 1908 Mission Revival ..... Apr-86 Charles Berryhill House 414 Brown Street 1868 Italianate ..... May-79 Bohumil Shimek House 529 Brown Street 1893 Queen Anne Vernacular ..... Dec-91 Emma J, Harvat House 332 E Davenport Street 1916 Classic Revival ..... May-00 Letovsky-Rohret House 515 E. Davenport Street1881 Greek Revival Sep-96 Apr-82 William Bostick House 115 N. Gilbert Street 1851 Greek Revival Sep-96 Mar-96 Jacob Wentz House 219 N. Gilbert Street 1847 Greek Revival Sep-96 Aug-74 Windrem House 6041owaAve, ca. 1850 Vernacular Sep-96 Sep-77 St. Mary's Church and Rectory 220 E. Jefferson Street1867 Gothic Revival Sep-96 Feb-80 Park House Hotel 130 E. Jefferson Street1852 Sep-96 Dec-78 St, Mary's Rectory 610 E. Jefferson Street1854 Greek Revival Sep-96 Jul-95 Economy Advertising Company 119-123 N, Linn 1923 Commercial Brick Sep-96 Apr-86 Union Brewery 127-131 N. Linn & 1856-57 Italianate Sep-96 Apr-86 221-227 E. Market Schindhelm-Drews House 410 N, Lucas Street 1855 Greek Revival Sep-96 Jan-94 North Presbyterian Church 26 E. Market Street 1856 Romanesque Revival Sep-96 Aug-73 Henry C. Nicking House 410 E. Market Street ca. 1854 Vernacular Sep-96 Apr-75 Vogt-Unash House 800 N. Van Buren Street1889 Queen Anne ..... Jul-78 52 Iowa City Historic P[eservation Handbook Year Iowa City National Goosetown Neighborhood Address Built Style Landmark Register F. X. Rittenmeyer (Burger) House 630 E. Fairchild Street 1857 Anglo-ltalianate Sep-96 May-79 Czecho Slovakian Association Hall 524 N. Johnson Street 1900 Colonial Revival Sep-96 Nov-76 Cavanaugh-Zetek House 704 Reno Street 1870 Gothic Revival Sep-96 Sep-77 College Hill Neighborhood Thomas C. Carson House 906 E, College Street 1875 Second Empire Sop-96 Sep-82 Linsay House 935 E. College Street 1893 Queen Anne Sep-96 Aug-77 Stevenson-Baker House 30 S. Governor Street 1882 Italianate June-03 ..... Crum-Overholt House 726 IowaAvenue ca. 1840 Greek Revival June-03 Haddock House "The Crag" 830 E. Washington Street 1891 Gothic Revival June-03 ..... Longfellow Neighborhood Cakes-Wood House 1142 E, Court Street 1858 Italianate Sep-96 Apr-78 Summit Apartment Building 228 S. Summit Street 1916 Prairie/Sullivan Sep-96 Sep-83 Manville Heights Neighborhood Ned Ashton House 820 Park Road 1947 Modern Movement ..... Sep-00 Kirkwood Neighborhood Plum Grove 1030 CarrollAve, 1844 Greek Revival ..... May-73 Bethel AME Church 411 S. Governor St. 1868 Vernacular ..... Sep-00 Clark House 829 Kirkwood Ave, 1874 Victorian/Italianate Sep-96 May-96 Samuel Kirkwood House 1101 Kirkwood 1864 Anglo-ltalianate Sep-96 Sep-74 Westside Neighborhood CyrusS.&C-eorginiaRanckHouse 747 W. Benton St. c, 1905 Late Queen Anne Aug-02 Wilbur D. & Hattie Cannon House 320 Melrose Ave. 1880 Italianate Sep-96 Oct-94 A. W. Pratt House 503 Melrose Ave. 1885 Italianate Sep-96 Feb-83 Billingsley-Hills House 629 Melrose Ave. 1870 Italianate/Greek RevivalSop-96 Jan-83 Near Southside Neighborhood Johnson County Courthouse S. Clinton Street 1901 Rid~adso~ianRoma~esque ..... Mar-75 C. D, Close House 538 S, Gilbert Street 1874 Italianate Sep-96 May-74 Chicago Rock Island & 115 Wright Street 1898 Victorian Eclectic Sep-96 Dec-82 Pacific Railroad Passenger Station Outlying Properties Rose Hill 1415 E Davenport Street 1849 Greek Revival Sep-96 Apr-92 McCollister Farmstead 2460 S. Gilbert Street 1864 Anglo-ltalianate Sep-96 Oct-76 53 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 13.0 Historic and Conservation Districts e $~reet 54 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 14.0 Longfellow Neighborhood Districts 14,1 Governor-Lucas Street Conservation District BURLINGTON ST o COURT ST ~-~ COURT ST ~ Legend Key/Contributing Noncontributing Nonhistoric 55 Iowa City Historic Preservalion Handbook 14.2 Summit Street Historic District BURLINGTON ST COURT ST LONGFELLOW SCHOOL BOWERY - SEYMOUR AVE SHERIDAN AVE Legend Key/Contributing Contributing Noncontributing Nonhistoric 56 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 14.3 Clark Street Conservation District BOWERY ST SHER]DAN AVE Legend Key/Contributing Contributin§~ Noncon~buting Nonhistoric 57 Iowa Cily Historic Preservation Handbook 14.4 Longfellow Historic District BURLINGTON ST i CENTER AVE ~ SHERIDAN AVE Key/Contributing Contribubg Noncontributing ~onhistodc 58 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 14.5 Dearborn Street Conservation District GRANT CT I '~' I i JI [ I 1 o I .? o CENTER AVE SHfiRIDA~ AVE JACKSON ST Legend Key/Contributing ~ ~ Noncontributing Nonhistoric 59 Iowa Ci y Historic Preservation Handbook 15.0 College Hill Neighborhood Districts I 5. I College Hill Conservation District JEFFERSON ST. TOWA AVE. TOWA AVE. WASHINGTON SI. COLLEGE GREEN PARK COLLEGE ST. 917 BURLINGTON ST, Legend Key/Contributing Contributing COURT ST. I 1 i, Noncontributing Nonhistoric 6O Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook IOWA AVE. WASHINGTON ST. COURT ST. 61 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 15.2 College Green Historic District WASHINGTON ST O BUR. LINGTON ST 15.3 East College Street Historic District ~ I I I _J I I I I ] E. WASHINGTON ST , , ~ Legend Key/Contributing Contributing Noncontdbutin§ BURLINGTON ST ~'~- ,-~--1 F--~~ ~11 I I I FI I I I i I Nonhistoric 62 Iowa City Hisloric Preservation Handbook 16.0 Woodlawn Historic District HOTZ ST JEFFERSON ST Legend Key/Contributin~ Contributin~ ~oncontnbutin~ ~onhistori¢ 63 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook 17.0 Northside Neighborhood Districts 1 7. I Brown Street Historic District -~ , , .? / BROWN ST I- Legend RONALDS ST m .z, Key/Contributin(. Contributing Noncontributing Nonhistoric 64 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook BROWN ST P RONALDS ST ~ ~ ~ > 65 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Appendices A. I Definitions A.2 Architectural Terms A.3 Historic Preservation Documents 67 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook A. I Definitions Addition: A structure that is attached to an existing building and that increases the size of its footprint. Rooms, new porches, decks and ramps are examples of additions. Alteration: A modification to the exterior of a building that does not increase the building footprint. Cedificate of Appropriateness: The document that is evidence of approval by the Historic Preservation Commission of a proposal to make a change in appearance. A Certificate of Appropriateness must be obtained before a Regulated Permit may be issued. Certificate of No Material Effect: The document, issued in lieu of a Certificate of Appropriateness, that signifies that the work contemplated in the application will have no effect on any significant features of a historic landmark, or property within a historic or conservation district. Change in appearance: Any alteration, addition, demolition, new construction or other change that modifies the site of or exterior of a structure on a landmark property or a property located within a district. Conservation district: An area that contains abutting pieces of property under diverse ownership, the built portions of which by majority are at least fifty (50) years old and which: 1. According to a historic resources survey, no more than sixty percent (60%) of the primary structures and/or sites are of a quality, integrity and condition that qualify as contributing to a National Register of Historic Places multiproperty listing; and 2. Represent the traditional character of Iowa City neighborhoods through architectural characteristics, building scale, building setback, and streetscape design; or 3. Exemplify a pattern of neighborhood settlement or development significant to the cultural history or tradition of Iowa City; or 4,Represent a unique or unusual physical character that creates distinctiveness. Contdbutinq property: A property within a district that is an integral par[ of the historic context and character of the district. Demolition: Any act or process that destroys a structure or building or any architecturally significant component of a structure or building, District: A historic district or conservation district. Exception: A statement in the Iowa City Guidelines that allows for a less stringent application of a historic preservation guideline for specified properties, usually buildings that are within a conservation district, noncontributing or nonhistoric. Exterior features: The architectural style, general design and arrangement of the exterior of a building, including the kind and texture of building material and the type and style of all windows, doors, light fixtures, trim and brackets, porches, chimneys, signs and other appurtenant fixtures. Highly visible from the street: A building, object or feature is "highly visible from the street" if it can be easily noticed or viewed from the street right-of-way. Such features are usually located within 20 feet of the street-facing facade of a primary building. 68 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Historic district: An area that does not exceed 160 acres in area, and contains abutting pieces of property under diverse ownership which: 1. Are significant to American and/or Iowa City history, architecture, archaeology and culture; or 2. Possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials and workership; or 3. Are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or 4. Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or 5. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, method of construction; represent the work of a master; possess high artistic values; represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or 6. Have yielded or may likely yield information important in prehistory or history. Historic landmark: Any building, structure, object, archaeological site, area of land or element of landscape architec- ture with significance, importance or value consistent with the criteria contained in subsections one through six of the definition of "Historic District," which has been designaied as a historic landmark by the Iowa City City Council. Key property: A property that is individually eligible to be listed on, or is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and/or is designated a historic landmark. A list of key properties is available from the Preservation Planner. National Reqister of Historic Places (NRHP): A list of U.S. places of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering and culture on a national, state, or local level and maintained by the U.S. Department of the Interior. Noncontributing property: Any property within a district that is not listed as a contributing property. Nonhistoric property: Any noncontributing property within a district that was less than 50 years old at the time the district was designated and/or was not constructed during the district's period of significance. Outbuilding: A building on a lot that is smaller than the primary building and typically located behind the primary building. Examples of outbuildings are garages, barns, garden sheds, greenhouses and gazebos. Primary building: The inhabited building on a lot that is normally the largest and faces the street. Most often a house is the primary building in historic and conservation districts. Property: The site features, buildings, landscaping, and other structures that are located within the property lines of a particular lot or parcel. Setback addition: An addition built behind the existing structure, opposite the street facade, that has a setback of eight or more inches from the side walls and a roof that is no higher than the existing roof. When viewed from the street, the addition must be narrower and no taller than the existing structure. No part of the setback addition is visible on the street elevation. Street elevation: All roof and wall surfaces that face the street. These would be depicted in an architectural drawing called a street "elevation." Structure: Any man-made feature that has been constructed on a site or property. 69 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook A.2 Architectural Terms ,,-., ,.._..__--~,~ Baluster: An upright member supporting a railing or ban- ister, Soffit Balustrade: A railing composed of a handrail supported by balusters. In exterior applications, balustrades typi- Fdeze board cally have a top and bottom rail. Band board: A continuous horizontal wood band on an exterior wall. Barge board: A wide ornamental fascia board hung from the eaves or in a gable, Belt course: A continuous horizontal masonr~ band on .~ an exterior wall, Pier ~. members of wood, stone or metal Brackets: Supporting ~' often used for both decorative and structural purposed -- Balustrade and generally found under projecting features such as eaves, cornices, bay windows, and canopies. Skid board Canopy: A small projecting roof structure that shelters an -- Skirting entrance. Casement window: A window that is hinged on one side and swings in or out to open, Details of Classical Revival porch Clapboards: Wood siding of overlapping horizontal boards. Column: A slender vertical element that supports part of Bracket a building or structure, Lintel Comer boards: Vertical trim boards installed at the out- side and inside comers of a wall covered with wood sid- __ Double-hung lng, window .Cornice: The projecting moldings forming the top band of a wall, eave, or other element, Cornice return: The extension of a cornice in a new Belt course direction, especially where the rake of a gable end re- ...,,,,-..,,- Quoins tums horizontally a short distance. Details of Eclectic bdck house Dentil: In the cornice of a classically detailed building, one of a sedes of small blocks that altemate with a blank space. Divided-light: A window in which the glass is divided into several small panes with muntin bars. The nomencla- ture for divided-lights is the number of lights in the upper 70 sash over the number of fights in the lower sash, e.g. 3/1. Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook Double-hung window: A window with two sashes that Rake board slide past each other vertically. Eave: The part of a roof that projects beyond the wall Bracket below the roof. shingles Facade: Anyoftheexteriorfacesofa building. Typically refers to the side that faces the street and has the main entrance. Fascia board: A finish board attached to the ends of roof rafter tails, Fenestration: The arrangement of doors and windows Band board in a building facade, Fish-scale: A pattern created by rows of shingles with curved bottoms. Frieze board: A flat board that is located on the vertical plane and directly below the soffit. Water table Front-~labled: Refers to a building with a gabled roof in -- Foundation which the main entrance is located on the facade that has the sloping eaves and gable, Details of Craftsman house Gable: The triangular upper portion of a wall beneath a . ~;:~,~,.. gabled roof, -- ~' .... Gabled roof: A roof composed of two sloping planes that '~ meet at a ridge. Gambrel roof: A roof composed of two sloping planes of different pitches on either side of a ridge; the lower plane Hip roof and dormer is the steeper one. Hip roof: A roof with sloping planes on all sides that meet at a central ridge or point. Li,qht: A pane of glass in a window or door, Lintel: A horizontal beam bddging a windowor door open- ing to carry the weight of the wall above the opening, Mullion: The vertical dividing members between grouped windows, Gambrel roof Muntin bars: The vertical and horizontal strips or gdd that separate the panes of glass in a window sash or door, Pier: The square or rectangular masonry or wood post projecting less than a story above the ground that cardes the weight of a structure down to the foundation. Iowa City Historic Preservat~n Handbook Pilaster: A shallow column that is mounted to a wall. ---- Cornice Pediment: The triangular gable end of a classical build- ing, or the same form used elsewhere. ackets Portico: A projecting, classical style porch supported by columns. return Quoin: A large, rectangular block of stone used to physi- cally and aesthetically anchor an outside corner of a building. Italianate house with gabled roof Rafter tail: The end of a roof rafter that is exposed when the eave is not enclosed. Barge board Rake: The sloped edge of a gabled roof. Fish-scale Rake board: A board installed at the gable end of a roof parallel to the roof slope. board Sash: A wood or metal frame composed of rails and Gable of Queen Anne house stiles into which glass window panes (lights) are set. Side-gabled: Refers to a building with a gable roof in which the main entrance is located on the facade that -- Casing has the straight eaves and sloping roof, Muntin bars Light Sidelight: A window located next to a door. Sil_Jl: The bottom member of a window frame. Sash Skirt board: The wide flat board installed below a porch Mullion or deck floor to conceal the floor structure. Sill Skirtin,q: The screen composed of lattice or slats within Double-hung windows with wood a rectangular frame, and installed between porch or deck storm windows piers. Soffit: The exposed and finished underside of a roof overhang. Transom: A small window located over a door or another -- Transom window. --Sidelight Tuckpointing: Refilling deteriorated mortar joints with fresh mortar. Water table: A molding or projecting sloping shelf lo- cated at the bottom of a wall that is designed to divert runoff water away from the masonry foundation below it. Entrance with portico and Prairie- style divided-lights 12 Iowa City Historic Preservation Handbook A.3 Historic Preservation Documents Preservation Plan Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan October 1992 Svendsen Tyler, Inc. Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan - Appendices October 1992 Svendsen Tyler, Inc. Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan - Neighborhood Strategies October 1992 Svendsen Tyler, Inc. Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan - Executive Summary October 1992 Svendsen Tyler, Inc. Iowa City Historic Preservation Plan - Historic Resources October 1992 Svendsen Tyler, Inc. Surveys and Evaluations of Iowa City Historic Neighborhoods Survey and Evaluation of the Central Business District April 2001 Svendsen Tyler, Inc. Survey and Evaluation of the Goosetown Neighborhood (Original Town Plat Phase III) June 2000 Svendsen Tyler, Inc. Survey and Evaluation of the Original Town Plat Phase II Area June 1999 Svendsen Tyler, Inc. Survey and Evaluation of the Longfellow Neighborhood I & II July 1998 Molly Myers Naumann Survey and Evaluation of a Portion of the Original Town Plat of Iowa City (Phase I) April 1997 Tallgrass Historians Survey and Evaluation of the Dubuque/Linn Street Corridor July 1996 Molly Myers Naumann Survey and Evaluation of College Hill Neighborhood July 1994 Tallgrass Historians, Inc. Brown Street Historic District January 1994 Svendsen Tyler, Inc. Reconnaissance Surveys Reconnaissance Survey of Iowa Avenue in the College Hill Neighborhood January 2003 Historic Preservation Commission Governor-Lucas Street Conservation District Site Information Form August 2000 Historic Preservation Commission Historic District Summaries East College Street Historic District November 1996 Arborgast & Eckhardt College Green Historic District November 1996 Arborgast & Eckhardt Moffitt Cottage Historic District November 1996 Jan Nash Brown Street Historic District January 1994 Svendsen Tyler, Inc. Feasibility Studies Montgomery-Butler House Feasibility Study Report September 2001 Svendsen Tyler, Inc. National Register of Historic Places The National Register of Historic Places Registration Forms for historic landmarks and districts in Iowa City are available from the Preservation Planner in the Department of Planning and Community Development. 73 IP7 GLORIA DEl LUTHERAN CHURCH A Congregation of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 123 EAST MARKET STREET iOWA CITY, IOWA 52245-1731 (319) 338-2893 FAX (319) 338-1899 I0 December 2003 Steve Arldm City Manager City of Iowa City 410 E Washington S~ Iowa City, IA S2240 Dear Mr. Atkins: We at Gloria Dei Lutheran Church have begun discussions regarding the possibility of serving Iowa City's homeless population by becoming an overflow site for the Shelter House. To that end, we are requesting from various city of~ces information about complying with codes and/or satisfying requirements, possibly even setting up appointments for inspections that would allow ns to move forward in our planning. I am writing in hopes that you will be able either to I) supply a written statement of requirements for compliances with or satisfactions of such city codes, 2) direct me to public resources that may already contain such information, or 3) have time for an appointment in which to discuss (I) or (2) abow I will call your oft]ce in follow-up to this letter next weel~ Sincerely yours, A~sociate Pastor cc:~a%uncil Members, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA $2240. Pastor Karl A. Divine-Koch, Gloria Del Lutheran Church Barbara Willman, President of the Council, Gloria Dei Lutheran Church ©-<. IT1 t~ GLORIA DEl LUTHERAN CHURCH A Congregation of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 123 EAST MARKET STREET IOWACITY, IOWA 52245-1731 (319)338-2893 FAX(319) 338-1899 I0 December 2003 Karen Franklin plannmg and Community Development City of Iowa City 410 E Washington Se Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Ms. Frankliru We at Gloria Dei Lutheran Church have begun discussions regarding the possibility of serving Iowa City's homeless population by becoming an overflow site for the Shelter House. To that end, we are requesting from various city offices information about complying with codes and/or satisfying requirements, possibly even setting up appointments for inspections that would allow ns to move forward in our planning. I am writing in hopes that you will be able either to I) supply a written statement of requLrements for compliances with or satisfactions of such city codes, 2) direct me to public resources that may already contain such information, or 3) have time for an appointment in which to discuss (I) or (2) above. I will call your office in follow-up to this letter next week. Sincerely yours, Associate Pastor cc: ~ouncil Members, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240. Pastor Karl A. Divine-Koch, Gloria Dei Lutheran Church Barbara Willman, President of the Council, Gloria Dei Lutheran Church GLORIA DEl LUTHERAN CHURCH A Congregation of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 123 EAST MARKET STREET IOWACITY, IOWA 52245-1731 (319) 338-2893 FAX(319) 338-1899 I0 December 2003 Andy Rocca Fire Chief City of Iowa City 410 E Washington Sr Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Chief Rocca: We at Gloria Del Lutheran Church have begun discussions regarding the possibility of serving Iowa City's homeless population by becoming an overflow site for the Shelter Housm To that end, we are requesting from various city offices imCormation about complying with codes and/or satisfying requirements, possibly even setting up appointments for inspections that would allow us to move forward in our planning. I am writing in hopes that you will be able either to I) supply a written statement of requirements for compliances with or satisfactions of such city codes, 2) direct me to public resources that may already contain such information, or 3) have time for an appointment in which to discuss (I) or (2) above. I will call your office in follow-up to this letter next week. Sincerely yours, Rebecca Clouse Associate Pastor cc: ,~ouncil Members, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240. Pastor Karl A. Divine-Koch, Gloria Dei Lutheran Church Barbara Willman, President of the Council, Gloria Dei Lutheran Church GLORIA DEl LUTHERAN CHURCH A Congregation of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 123 EAST MARKET STREET IOWA CITY, IOWA 52245-1731 (319) 338-2893 FAX (319} 338-1899 I0 December 2003 R.J. Winkelhake Chief of Police City of Iowa City 410 E Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Chief Winkelhake: We at Gloria Dei Lutheran Church have begun discussions regarding the possibility of serving Iowa City's homeless population by becoming an overflow site for the Shelter House. To that end, we are requesting from varions city offices information about complying with codes and/or satisfying requirements, possibly even setting up appointments for inspections that would allow us to move forward in our planning. I am writing in hopes that you will be able either to I) supply a written statement of requirements for compliances with or sarisfacdons of such city codes, 2) direct me to public resources that may already contain such information, or 3) have time for an appointment in which to dtSCUSs (I) or (2) above. I will call your office in follow-up to chis letter next week. Sincerely yours, Rebecca Clonse Associate Pastor cc. ~'ouncil Members, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA S2240. Pastor Karl A. Divine-Koch, Gloria Dei Lutheran Church Barbara WilLman, President of the Council, Gloria Dei Lutheran Church GLORIA DEl LUTHERAN CHURCH A Congregation of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 123 EAST MARKET STREET IOWACITY, IOWA 52245-1731 (319) 338-2893 FAX (319) 338-1899 l0 December 2003 Doug Boothroy Director, Housing and Inspection Services City of Iowa City 410 E Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mr Boothroy: We at Gloria Del Lutheran Church have begun discussions regarding the possibility of serving Iowa City's homeless population by becoming an overflow site for the Shelter House. To that end, we are requesting from various city offices information about complying with codes and/or satisfying requirements, possibly even setting up appointments for inspections that would allow us to move forward in our planning. I am writing in hopes that you will be able either to I) supply a written statement of requirements for compliances .with or satisfactions of such city codes, 2) direct me to public resources that may already contain such information, or 3) have time for an appointment m which to discuss (I) or (2) above. I will call your office in follow-op to this letter next week. Sincerely yours, Rebecca Clouse Associate Pastor cc: s~ouncil Members, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240. Pastor Karl A. Divine-Koch, Gloria Dei Lutheran Church Barbara Willman, President of the Council, Gloria Dei Lutheran Church City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM FROM: Brian Boelk ~ DATE: December 15, 2003 ~ RE: Waterworks Park Butler House/Amphitheater Trails The letting for the above referenced project has been postponed from December 16th, 2003, to February 17th, 2004, due to a late revision request by the Iowa Department of Transportation (IDOT) Office of Contracts. The IDOT Office of Contracts has requested the consultant engineer (Dunbar/Jones) make a small revision in the bid documents and resubmit to meet requirements for a February 17th letting. This postponement will not affect the funding for this project, as it will remain eligible for 80% reimbursement per Federal STP Enhancement funds. Due to the winter timeframe of this letting, this postponement should not affect the construction schedule for this project, as no work would have occurred in the next couple of months. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Cc: Ron Knoche Los Angeles Times: Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors ~ Page 1 of 10 I IP9 I Marian Karr From: Irvin Pfab [ipfab@avalon.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 'I7, 2003 9:59 PM To: Iowa City City Council Subject: '121703fw..Senator's way to wealth was paved with favors: los Angeles Times, by Chuck Neubauer and Richard T Cooper - Times staff writers http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-stevens 17dec 17,1,5444268.story THE NATION Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors By Chuck Neubauer and Richard T. Cooper Times Staff Writers December 17, 2003 ANCHORAGE -- He wielded extraordinary power in Washington for more than three decades, eventually holding sway over nearly $800 billion a year in federal spending. But outside the halls of the U.S. Senate, which is a world of personal wealth so rarified some call it "the Millionaires' Club," Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) had struggled financially. Then, in 1997, he got serious about making money. And in almost no time, he too was a millionaire -- thanks to investments with businessmen who received government contracts or other benefits with his help. Added together, Stevens' new partnerships and investments provide a step-by-step guide to building a personal fortune -- if you happen to be one of the country's most influential senators. They also illustrate how lax ethics rules allow members of Congress and their families to profit from personal business dealings with special interests. Among the ways that Stevens became wealthy: · Armed with the power his committee posts give him over the Pentagon, Stevens helped save a $450-million military housing contract for an Anchorage businessman. The same businessman made Stevens a partner in a series of real estate investments that turned the senator's $50,000 stake into at least $750,000 in six years. · An Alaska Native company that Stevens helped create got millions of dollars in defense contracts through preferences he wrote into law. Now the company pays $6 million a year to lease an office building owned by the senator and his business partners. Stevens continues to push legislation that benefits the company. · An Alaskan communications company benefited from the senator's activities on the Commerce Committee. His wife, Catherine, earned tens of thousands of dollars from an inside deal involving the company's stock. Stevens, in a written response to questions submitted by The Times, said that in all these cases his official actions were motivated by a desire to help Alaska, and that he played no role in the day-to-day management of the ventures into which he put money. "I am a passive investor," Stevens said of his real estate dealings. "I am not now nor have I been involved in buying or selling properties, negotiating leases or making other management decisions." 12/18/03 Los Angeles Times: Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors Page 2 of 10 All in the Family In these deals and others, Stevens' brother-in-law, William H. Bittner, played a pivotal role. An Anchorage lawyer and lobbyist, Bittner represents major business interests for whom the senator has repeatedly gone to In one instance, Stevens engineered a $9.6-million federal appropriation that chiefly benefited a Bitmer client, part of South Korea's Hyundai conglomerate. Stevens tucked a single line into a must-pass appropriations bill that used federal tax dollars to buy the company out of a coal-loading facility in Seward. Stevens said he did it to lower the company's costs and keep it from canceling an agreement to buy Alaskan coal. Bittner did not respond to questions from The Times. Stevens' relationship with Bittner fits an increasingly widespread pattern in Washington: Senior senators do favors for special interests that pay hundreds of thousand of dollars in lobbying and consulting fees to the senators' children, spouses and other relatives. As The Times documented in a series of articles in the summer, Sens. John B. Breaux (D-La.), Trent Lott (R- Miss.) and Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) did favors for companies and groups that paid their sons as lobbyists and consultants. Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has pushed through federal land trades and other provisions benefiting Nevada interests that employ his sons and son-in-law. The Times also reported that Stevens had continually supported interests that paid his youngest son, Ben, hundreds of thousands of dollars as a consultant. The senators all said their decisions on policy issues and legislation had not been influenced by their relatives. But Stevens' dealings have carried him a step further. His official actions have helped individuals and companies from which he himself draws financial benefits, a six-month Times examination found. His required financial statements have fallen short of complete disclosure -- especially on the activities of a small investment corporation owned by his wife and her family, a company that is covered by the reporting rules. The Senate has few ethics rules governing such arrangements. Although accepting expensive gifts and speaking fees is barmed, the conflict-of-interest rules are much less explicit. For example, nothing clearly bars a senator from sponsoring legislation that benefits the clients of family members who lobby. Nor are lawmakers prohibited from going into business with people receiving legislative favors. Mainly, the Senate relies on an ill-defined injunction not to bring shame upon the body. Senate Ethics Committee Chairman George Voinovich (R-Ohio) declined to discuss the issues raised by The Times articles. House Ethics Committee Chairman Joel Hefley (R-Colo.) said he hoped to convene an advisory panel of current and former House Ethics Committee members next year to examine a range of ethics questions, including how to address the issue of lobbying by relatives. "I do think we ought to revisit this," he said. He declined to comment on the issue of lawmakers' financial partners. Lawmakers should be careful about their business relationships, John D. Saxon, a former Senate Ethics 12/18/03 Los Angeles Times: Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors Page 3 of 10 Committee counsel, said, speaking generally and not about Stevens in particular. "It's a very slippery slope for a member of Congress to be entangled with someone in a business dealing and then use their official position to help them, even if it's on something completely different," he said. 'Stevens Money' Today, Stevens is the longest-serving Republican in the Senate, and as president pro tempore stands just behind the vice president and the speaker of the House in the constitutional line of succession to the Oval Office. For more than 20 years, he has been chairman or ranking member of the Senate's Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. Since 1997, he has been chairman or ranking member of the full Appropriations Committee, which must approve every dollar of federal discretionary spending each year. Stevens' position as a senior member of the Commerce Committee adds to his clout -- especially in telecommunications policy, which is under the committee's jurisdiction. In Alaska, Stevens exerts unparalleled influence. No state is so dependent on federal dollars and decisions. The federal government still owns 60% of all its land, generates one-third of all jobs, and holds the keys to economic growth through regulation of its major industries oil and gas, fishing, timber and tourism. Federal spending in Alaska, known locally as "Stevens money," runs as much as 70% above the national average on a per capita basis. Since his first day in the Senate in 1968, Stevens has delivered for Alaska. He has won tax breaks for Native businesses, bailouts for fishermen, a pipeline for an oil consortium and restoration of an abandoned Army post as a tourist attraction for a Yukon village. He got $28 million for a rail terminal open only during the summer and $40 million for a commercial space satellite facility. Almost every institution, region and segment of the population in the state has benefited from Stevens' efforts, from its schools and social programs to its transportation system, its urban areas and the far-flung villages of Alaska's Native peoples. But during the period Stevens has grown wealthy, some longtime supporters say, the senator has become less willing to hear their views. "i've been here a long time, and always had a great deal of respect for Sen. Stevens' enormous power and the good he's done for Alaska," Terry Haines, a veteran commercial fisherman from Kodiak Island, said recently. "But lately he's become extremely rigid and doesn't seem to be listening to his constituents much." Hard Times Theodore Fulton Stevens was born Nov. 18, 1923, in Indianapolis. At the outset of the Great Depression, when Stevens was 6 years old, his parents divorced, according to his campaign biography. Stevens went to live with his grandparents after the divorce, helping out by selling newspapers and working evenings and weekends in a drugstore. He later moved in with an aunt and uncle in Manhattan Beach, Calif., where he graduated from high school. Both his father and grandfather died of cancer, Stevens has said. Stevens joined the Army Air Corps during World War II, flying cargo planes "over the Hump" in the Himalayas 12/18/03 Los Angeles Times: Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors Page 4 of 10 some of the most dangerous missions of the war. He won two Distinguished Flying Crosses and two Air Medals, his biography says. The biography describes how he graduated from UCLA and Harvard Law School. After working in the 1952 Eisenhower campaign, he was hired by a Washington lawyer, but soon took a new job as a lawyer in Alaska, which was still a territory. He played a leading role in the successful campaign for statehood, but Alaska's voters rejected Stevens the first two times he ran for the Senate. Winning a seat in the state Legislature, he became House majority leader and go-to man for Gov. Walter J. Hickel. In 1968, when Sen. E.L. "Bob" Bartlett died unexpectedly, Hickel picked his ally to fill the vacancy. In the Senate at last, Stevens worked hard to master legislative details and committee politics. But increasing political success was accompanied by personal tragedy. In 1978, his first wife, Ann, died along with four others when the executive j et carrying them home crashed at the Anchorage airport. Stevens was one of two survivors. At that point, the Stevens' five children were adults. Two years later, he remarried, and soon had a daughter, Lily, who recently graduated from college. In the 1980s, Stevens and his ne~v wife, the former Catherine Bittner, suffered a serious financial reversal. Along with her younger brother, William Bittner, and other partners, Stevens invested in the construction of a $2-million crab boat, records show. Before it was finished, costs soared and the crab market crashed, plunging Stevens into debt. The unexpected inheritance of a 54-foot yacht helped Stevens to regain his financial footing. Records show the boat was a bequest from the late Charles Willis "Bill" Snedden, publisher of the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, a longtime friend of Stevens'. Stevens sold the boat for about $400,000, according to a source involved in the transaction who did not want to be named. Stevens' financial problems underscored the disparity between his personal situation and that of his wealthy Senate colleagues. In a news interview in the late 1980s, he lashed out at Alaska voters for failing to appreciate the personal and financial sacrifices he had made for them. A $50,000 Investment In 1997, Stevens began making up for lost time. "Money was never what Ted Stevens was about," one close associate said of Stevens' sudden focus on accumulating wealth. The associate attributed it to Stevens' age -- he turned 80 last month -- and to concern about his family. Whatever the reasons for the change, sometime in 1997 acting at the senator's request -- brother-in-law Bittner contacted a friend, Anchorage real estate developer Jonathan B. Rubini, about investment opportunities for the senator, Rubini said. At the time, Stevens was making about $130,000 a year as a senator, and his wife reported annual earnings of 12/18/03 Los Angeles Times: Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors Page 5 of 10 about $100,000. Rubini said he would be honored to help, the developer recalled recently during extensive interviews in his Anchorage office. A lawyer and a Democrat known for representing liberal clients, Rubini had a gift for engineering complex deals. Rubini and his partner, Leonard B. Hyde, made it a practice to form a separate syndicate of investors for each project. Bittner had often been among those participants. Rubini arranged for Stevens to put up $50,000, giving him a 7.7% interest in a new syndicate called JLS Properties. Rubini, Hyde and another partner who came in on the deal were required to personally guarantee, if necessary, debts the partnership took on. They also agreed to contribute more capital if needed. Stevens was not asked to guarantee notes or promise more money because he was brought in as a passive investor, Rubini said. The senator said he asked for that status because it shielded him from the kind of open- ended financial obligation that had caused his "bad experience" in the crab boat venture. The deal began in characteristic Rubini fashion, with the purchase of an $11-million collection of what he called "ragtag" properties, whose out-of-state owners wanted to unload. Rubini quickly resold several of the properties to pay down debt. Among the properties retained were a small office park near the Anchorage airport and a modest two-story office building downtown. Within three years, Rubini said, Stevens' equity climbed to about $250,000. Stevens also invested $50,000 in a separate Rubini syndicate to acquire an apartment complex in Fairbanks in 1999, records show. Stevens' equity in that property has grown too, Rubini said. A Federal Contract Stevens was soon in a position to do a favor for Rubini. When Elmendorf Air Force Base, immediately north of Anchorage, was selected to participate in a new Pentagon program to privatize base housing, Rubini and another set of partners bid on the $450-million contract in 2000. The chosen developer would take title to the existing housing, upgrade and expand it, then rent the houses back to service families. At 828 units, the Elmendorf contract was far larger than anything Rubini had built before -- "a big reach for us," as he put it. Yet with low-interest government construction loans and the Air Force pledging to pay tenants' housing allowances directly to the contractor for the next 50 years, it looked like a moneymaker. Bittner became an investor in the Elmendorf group that Rubini put together, records show. Stevens did not, and he said Monday that he had been unaware of Bittner's involvement. The senator said he "strongly supported" privatization because it improved housing for military families and "it would greatly enhance the likelihood that Elmendorf would not be closed in the next round of base closures." When Rubini sought more time to prepare his bid, Air Force officials noted in their records, he sent the senator a copy of the request. 12/18/03 Los Angeles Times: Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors Page 6 of 10 "I purposely CC'd Sen. Stevens to send a signal to the Air Force that we would raise the issue with the Alaska delegation if the Air Force acted unreasonably," Rubini said. Although it was less than he wanted, Rubini was given a two-week extension. With only the final paperwork to wrap up, Rubini was told he'd won. Then, in September 2000, days before the deal was to become final, the Air Force reneged. One government memo said the Air Force thought Rubini's group "lacked capacity and adequate financing" -- claims Rubini strenuously rejects. Rubini, whose group had already spent $1 million on preparation work, fought back. He filed a formal protest and also wrote to Stevens, explaining the problem and requesting help. Then he flew to Washington. First, he tried to talk to Air Force officials, who refused to see him. Next, he visited Stevens on Capitol Hill. The meeting went so well that Stevens invited Rubini home, where they watched one of the presidential candidate debates between A1 Gore and George W. Bush, Rubini said. Military Offensive Stevens said he decided to get involved with the Elmendorf project. "My involvement with the Elmendorf project was motivated to ensure that the Air Force moved forward," he said in his written response. In addition, he said, he was "looking out for an Alaskan company that was getting short shrift from the Department of Defense." Stevens did not answer questions about the specific actions he took. He was quoted in an August Anchorage Daily News article as saying he called Air Force generals. The article reported on his relationship with Rubini. Whatever he did, the Air Force began to feel some heat. As chairman of Appropriations, Stevens is an ex officio member of its Military Construction Subcommittee. The chairman of that subcommittee, Conrad R. Burns (R-Mont.), is one of Stevens' fishing buddies. In October 2000, Bums wrote to the secretary of the Air Force, F. Whitten Peters, threatening to take away the Elmendorf privatization money because of the glitch in awarding the contract. Burns arranged for a similar letter to go to the Air Force from the chairman of the corresponding House committee, and House aides said they knew Stevens was interested in the matter. Burns did not respond to calls or written questions about his actions. Meanwhile, Rubini tried one more move: joining forces with the only other Elmendorf bidder -- Hunt Building Corp. of E1 Paso. Hunt was an established builder of military housing, though the government had forced the company to pay $8 million in compensation for construction problems on an earlier project. In early December 2000, the Air Force put aside its reservations and decided Rubini and his new partner were acceptable. Rubini said he did not know specifically what Stevens did on the Elmendorf project. Whatever it was, "Sen. Stevens would have stepped up to assist any Alaska business," he said. 12/18/03 Los Angeles Times: Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors Page 7 of 10 Air Force officials say they are happy with the work Rubini's firm has done at Elmendorf, and recently announced the Rubini group would get to do a second round of housing upgrades without further competition -- this phase 50% larger than the first. Inside Track Stevens' efforts to help Rubini with Elmendorf came just as Rubini was making a decision that transformed Stevens from a modestly successful investor into a millionaire. In October 2000, while Rubini was enlisting the senator's help with the Air Force, the developer acquired 30 acres in midtown Anchorage that he planned to cover with gleaming office towers. Like Elmendorf, this deal was a big step up for Rubini -- larger both in size and potential profits than his earlier ventures. And Rubini chose to make Stevens and JLS Properties part of it. He said JLS had accrued equity in the properties it already owned and thus could help with the new financing. Rubini could have financed the new development in many ways. He could have used the financial resources of almost any of his numerous successful holdings. Or, as he frequently did in such cases, he could have attracted an entirely new set of investors. Why did he choose to use JLS to help with financing instead of one of the other options? It was just a decision he made, Rubini said. Once again, the senator did not have to agree to guarantee the new venture's debts, as the other JLS partners were required to do. The first new building to be constructed, called Centerpoint I, is a striking $35-million edifice with commanding views of snow-capped mountains. The remainder of the 30-acre parcel is being developed as Centerpoint II. Stevens is part of that project too. Stevens has reported that his investments in JLS, Centerpoint I and Centerpoint II, all stemming from his initial $50,000 investment, are now worth between $750,000 and $1.5 million. Rubini said there was no connection between Stevens' intervention on Elmendorf and Rubini's decision to move the senator into the Centerpoint deals. "Clearly, a phone call from Sen. Stevens does not hurt," Rubini said, referring to the senator's contacts with the Air Force on his behalf. "But there was no quid pro quo, plain and simple," he said. Lifetime Annuity Today, Centerpoint I is fully occupied as the new headquarters of the Arctic Slope Regional Corp., which is paying $6 million a year on a 20-year lease. Arctic Slope is no ordinary tenant. A $1-billion-a-year business, it is the largest Alaskan-owned company in the state. More important, the company along with 12 other regional Native corporations -- was created through legislation the senator took the lead in drafting. And it has prospered through his continuing efforts in the Senate. 12/18/03 Los Angeles Times: Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors Page 8 of 10 Arctic Slope and the other Native regional corporations were bom in 1971 as part of a landmark bill called the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, hailed as a humanitarian alternative to the failures of traditional reservations. Under the act, about 40 million acres and almost $1 billion in working capital went to Native corporations and to some 200 much smaller village bodies to settle their claims to land. They were to help their shareholders, the Native people living in their regions, by making investments, starting businesses and in other ways generating economic activity. Many of the Native corporations have found it hard to fulfill their mission, but Arctic Slope, which represents Inupiat Eskimos on the oil-rich North Slope, gradually built a strong base providing support services to the giant oil companies at Prudhoe Bay. And Stevens is now fighting to authorize oil extraction from the nearby Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, where Arctic Slope owns petroleum rights to 92,000 acres. Thanks to Stevens, Arctic Slope and the other Native corporations also enjoy preferences when seeking federal contracts that go well beyond anything available to blacks or Latinos, even though Arctic Slope ranks among the nation's 500 largest privately owned companies. One set of preferences that Stevens inserted into his annual defense appropriations bills recently enabled Arctic Slope and another Native corporation to land a $2-billion Pentagon deal without competitive bidding. Now money is flowing the other way -- to Stevens. A company executive, Conrad Bagne, said Arctic Slope did not find out about Stevens' ownership in Centerpoint until the company had finalized the deal. He said Stevens' involvement had no effect on the company's decision to sign the lease and that there was no impropriety. "No one is more committed to public service than Sen. Stevens," Bagne said. Stevens now has a personal stake in his tenant's future. At the same time, he continues to aid the company's bottom line through his position as chairman of the Appropriations Committee. This year, for example, he pushed through legislation renewing the federal defense contract preferences. In addition, Stevens has inserted a provision in this year's pending appropriations bill that directs federal agencies to consult with Arctic Slope and the other Native corporations on equal footing with tribal governments. This gives Arctic Slope, for one, new legal standing when pushing to open the Arctic wildlife refuge to oil and gas drilling -- a position opposed by at least some tribal leaders. "I have and will continue to work with all Alaska Native corporations -- both individually and collectively -- in my official capacity," said Stevens, noting that he does not deal directly with Arctic Slope on its lease. An Arctic Slope subsidiary has paid B ittner $120,000 since 2002 to lobby on appropriations and government contracts. Hidden Interest Business interests that look to her husband for support have also enriched Catherine Stevens in a series of transactions that went through Chamer Co., the private family investment firm run by Bittner. Sen. Stevens did not report some of these deals on his financial disclosure reports; others were reported only 12/18/03 Los Angeles Times: Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors Page 9 of 10 sketchily without the details required by law. One of the transactions was a quick stock deal involving the Alaska Communications Systems Group that earned Catherine Stevens at least $47,000, records show. The company has benefited from the senator's influence over communications policy as a senior member of the Commerce Committee. For example, Stevens pushed through legislation in 1996 that created a subsidy for remote telephone service, and he has fought efforts to dilute Alaska's sizable share of the subsidy. Alaska Communications considers the subsidy, called the universal service fund, an important revenue source. Alaska Communications Chairman Charles Robinson said, "The universal service fund is important to every telephone company in Alaska." He said Stevens had "done a great j ob in preserving it." The senator said his actions had "benefited ail Alaskans and all Alaska communications companies." Stevens stands to be an even more valuable ally in 2005, when he's scheduled to take over as Commerce Committee chairman. Robinson combined the Fairbanks and Anchorage phone companies to create Alaska Con'ununications in 1999, and took it public in the fall of that year. As is common before companies go public, a select group of insiders was allowed to buy stock at a bargain price, in this instance $6.15 a share, the documents show. In this group were several financiers and others involved in creating the company, including Bittner, who was and is the company's Washington lobbyist. Though she was not on record as an officer or financier for the company, Catherine Stevens ended up with some of the bargain shares. Robinson said he knew she had shares but did not remember how she obtained them. Alaska Communications issued 42,248 shares to Chamer Co., which Catherine Stevens owns with Bittner, their sister and their mother. She purchased 16,250 of those shares and sold them a year later, according to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Ted Stevens did not report the shares on his ethics report for 1999, the year Chamer acquired them. Ethics rules require disclosure of activity by a family-owned business, in detail and in the same year a transaction occurs. The deal was not reported until 2000, after Catherine Stevens had sold her shares, most of them at $9.25, for a profit of at least $47,000. Rubini, the developer of Centerpoint I, said Chamer also had an interest in that project. He said Chamer put up $250,000 for a 3% short-term stake in Centerpoint I that earned a 15% return on investment. Records show Chamer also invested $125,000 in an earlier Rubini syndicate. Stevens did not disclose either of these investments on his Senate financial forms. Although Senate ethics rules encompass his wife's financial activities as ~vell as his own, Stevens sought to distance himself from Chamer. "I have no interest in that company, do not participate in its meetings, nor do I participate in any decisions 12/18/03 Los Angeles Times: Senator's Way to Wealth Was Paved With Favors Page 10 of ! 0 related to its business activities," he said Monday. His wife did not respond to telephone messages on Tuesday. Back in Washington Stevens continues to push for money and other benefits for Alaskan interests -- including nearly $400 million in pending legislation to help tourism, education, the environment, scientific research, roads, fisheries and the war against fetal alcohol syndrome. There's also $2.5 million to survey the seabed for a fiber-optic cable connecting Kodiak Island, Anchorage and the Kenai Peninsula; Alaska Communications Systems serves both Anchorage and Kodiak. Researcher Mark Madden in Washington assisted in this report. Staff writer Judy Pasternak in Washington also contributed. Copyright2003LosAngelesTimes eSafe scanned this email for malicious content *** IMPORTANT: Do not open attachments from unrecognized senders 12/18/03 Iowa City Police Department Monthly Liquor License (OFF PREMISE SALES) Report IP10 November 2003 2002 Monthly Total Year to Date Totals Arrest/Visit Business Name A B YTD A&J MINI MART-2153 ACT CIR. 0.00 AAJAXXX LIQUOR STORE 0.00 BIG KMART-HOLLYVVOOD 0.00 CUB FOODS J 2 0.00 DAN'S SHORT STOP CORP I 0.00 19 0.00 DELIMART - E. BENTON , , DELI-MART- MORMON TREK 0 0.00 DELIMART-HWY 1 0.00 DELIMART-LWR MUSCATINE 0.00 DOc's sTANDARD 1 0.00 DRUGTOWN 0.00 EAGLE FOOD CENTER- N.DOD. 0.00 FAREWAY STORES INC .:i: 2 0.00 GASBY'S - S. GILBERT 0.00 GASBY'S EAST- 2303 MUSCAT. 0.00 HANDIMART - DUBUQUE ST 0.00 HANDIMART - N.DODGE i 2 0.00 HANDIMART - WlLLOWCREEK : 5 0.00 HARTIG DRUG - MORMON TREK 4 0.00 HAWKEYE CON ST - Commerce 8 0 0.00 HAWKEYE CON ST-KIRKWOOD , 3 0.00 HY-VEE- N. DODGE ST I 0.00 HY-VEE- S. 1STAVE ; h1 0.00 HY-VEE- WATERFRONT 0.00 JOHN'S GROCERY INC I 3 0 0.00 KUM & GO - GILBERT/BURL 0.00 KUM & GO - MORMON TREK 0.00 KUM & GO- S. RIVERSIDE 0 0.00 KUM & GO- W. BURLINGTON ST 22 0 0.00 L&M MIGHTY SHOP INC 2 20 0 0.00 LIQOUR HOUSE 8 0.00 LINN STREET CAFe 0 0.00 MINI MART 0.00 NEW PIONEER COOP 0.00 NORTH DODGE EXPRESS 0.00 ON THE GO CONV. STORE INC. 1 0 0.00 Column A is the number of times a license holder is visited specifically checking for underage sales, Column B is the number of people charged with possession under the legal age. Note this is not the total number of charges. Iowa City Police Department Monthly Liquor License (OFF PREMISE SALES) Report November 2003 YEAR 2002 Year to Date Totals Arrest/Visit Business Name YTD OSCO DRUG 0 0.00 PANCHEROS I 0.00 PETRO-N-PROVISIONS t 7 0.00 PIZZA PALACE 0.00 RUSS' AMOCO SERVICE 0.00 SUBURBAN AMOCO 12 0.00 SUBURBAN AMOCO-KEOKUK 1 17 0.00 T&M MINI MART 0.00 TOBACCO OUTLET PLUS- S. RIV 1 0 0.00 WALGREENS ;" 0 0.00 TOTAL 19 314 0.00 Column A is the number of times a license holder is visited specifically checking for underage sales. Column B is the number of people charged with possession under the legal age. Note this is not the total number of charges. December 17, 2003 ~ Resident ~ C~[.~ O~i~./~ Petsel Place ~ Re: Neighborhood on-street parking during snow events Dear Resident: Recently snowplow operators who have Petsel Place as part of their route have alerted us to a potentially dangerous situation that we need to resolve. The issue is the narrow width of the cul- de-sac circle on Petsel Place when there are cars parked there. Snowplow operators have indicated to us that because of on-street parking, they have had difficulty getting a snowplow through Petsel Place. The City has been asked to take action to ensure that snowplows and emergency vehicles can get down your street for the remainder of the winter. I have observed that there is a relatively large amount of on-street parking on Petsel Place. During most of the year this is not a problem. However, during the snowplowing season, especially after there have been one or two snows, vehicles tend to be parked further out into the street than is normal. This causes a problem for snowplow operators. Because there is not a problem during most of the year, we would like to see if this matter can be resolved with voluntary compliance by those of you in the neighborhood. We are asking that when there is snow on the ground and the road is narrowed, please do not park your vehicles on the cul-de-sac circle so that snowplows can get through on Petsel Place. This will leave the south side of Petsel Place available for on-street parking. As stated previously, we would like to see if we can get voluntary compliance from your neighborhood. Those who choose to ignore these suggestions will not be ticketed for illegal parking. However, if we continue to receive reports that snowplow operators are having trouble getting through Petsel Place, we will be forced to take action to formally eliminate parking on the cul-de-sac circle for the winter months. We realize that taking such an action will be an inconvenience for your neighborhood, but this is a public safety matter, and the safety of your neighborhood is our first concern. We appreciate your voluntary assistance to the above request during snow events. Feel free to contact me at 356-5254 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Anissa Williams JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner cc: City Manager Director of Public Works City Engineer Fire Chief Police Chief jccogt p/~tdpetsel pi doc 410 EAST WASHINGTON STREET · IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240- 1826 · (319) 356-5000 · FAX (319) 356 5009 December 18, 2003 CITY OF IOW^ CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 Resident (~) as6-~ooo Tulane Court (3 ~ ~) 356-soo9 tax Re: Neighborhood on-street parking during snow events www.icgov.org Dear Resident: Recently snowplow operators who have Tulane Court as part of their route have alerted us to a potentially dangerous situation that we need to resolve. The issue is the narrow width on Tulane Court when there are cars parked on both sides of the street. Snowplow operators have indicated to us that because of on-street parking, they have had difficulty getting a snowplow down Tulane Court. The City has been asked to take action to ensure that snowplows and emergency vehicles can get down your street for the remainder of the winter. I have observed that in your neighborhood many of you prefer to park your cars in the street. During most of the year this is not a problem. However, during the snowplowing season, especially after there have been one or two snows, vehicles tend to be parked further out into the street than is normal. This causes a problem for snowplow operators. Because there is not a problem during most of the year, we would like to see if this matter can be resolved with voluntary compliance by those of you in the neighborhood. We are asking that when there is snow on the ground and the road is narrowed, please park your vehicles in your driveways to enable the free flow of snowplows up and down Tulane Court. If you must park on street, we would appreciate voluntary adherence to an informal odd-even policy. You would park only on the side of the street with odd house numbers on odd numbered days, and on the even numbered side of the street on even numbered days. Once again, this will help alleviate the difficulty for snowplows, while leaving both sides of Tulane Court available for on street parking the remainder of the year. As stated previously, we would like to see if we can get voluntary compliance from your neighborhood. Those who choose to ignore these suggestions will not be ticketed for illegal parking. However, if we continue to receive reports that snowplow operators are having trouble getting down Tulane Court, we will be forced to take action to formally eliminate parking on one side of the street for the winter months. We realize that taking such an action will be an inconvenience for your neighborhood, but this is a public safety matter, and the safety of your neighborhood is our first concern. We appreciate your voluntary assistance to the above request during snow events. Feel free to contact me at 356-5254 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Anissa Williams JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner cc: City Council City Manager Director of Public Works City Engineer Fire Chief Police Chief jccog[p/Itr/AlpineDr,doc December 18, 2003 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Str¢ct Iowa City, Iowa 52240 1826 Resident (3 ~ 9) 3 ~ 6 ~ooo Shamrock Drive (] ~ 9) }s6 5009 FAX Re: Neighborhood on-street parking during snow events www i¢~°v'°rs Dear Resident: Recently snowplow operators who have Shamrock Drive as part of their route have alerted us to a potentially dangerous situation that we need to resolve. The issue is the narrow width on Shamrock Drive when there are cars parked on both sides of the street. Snowplow operators have indicated to us that because of on-street parking, they have had difficulty getting a snowplow down Shamrock Drive. The City has been asked to take action to ensure that snowplows and emergency vehicles can get down your street for the remainder of the winter. I have observed that in your neighborhood many of you prefer to park your cars in the street. During most of the year this is not a problem. However, during the snowplowing season, especially after there have been one or two snows, vehicles tend to be parked further out into the street than is normal. This causes a problem for snowplow operators. Because there is not a problem during most of the year, we would like to see if this matter can be resolved with voluntary compliance by those of you in the neighborhood. We are asking that when there is snow on the ground and the road is narrowed, please park your vehicles in your driveways to enable the free flow of snowplows up and down Shamrock Drive. If you must park on street, we would appreciate voluntary adherence to an informal odd-even policy. You would park only on the side of the street with odd house numbers on odd numbered days, and on the even numbered side of the street on even numbered days. Once again, this will help alleviate the difficulty for snowplows, while leaving both sides of Shamrock Drive available for on street parking the remainder of the year. As stated previously, we would like to see if we can get voluntary compliance from your neighborhood. Those who choose to ignore these suggestions will not be ticketed for illegal parking. However, if we continue to receive reports that snowplow operators are having trouble getting down Shamrock Drive, we will be forced to take action to formally eliminate parking on one side of the street for the winter months. We realize that taking such an action will be an inconvenience for your neighborhood, but this is a public safety matter, and the safety of your neighborhood is our first concern. We appreciate your voluntary assistance to the above request during snow events. Feel free to contact me at 356-5254 if you have any questions. Sincere.ly, , - Anissa Williams JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner cc: City Council City Manager Director of Public Works City Engineer Fire Chief Police Chief Jccogtp/Itr/AIpineDr doc December 18, 2003 CIIY OF IOWA CIIY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 522o:0 1826 Resident (3 ] 9) 356-~000 Kirkwood Circle (319) 3s6-so09 ~^x Re: Neighborhood on-street parking during snow events ,vww ~£sov ors Dear Resident: Recently snowplow operators who have Kirkwood Circle as part of their route have alerted us to a potentially dangerous situation that we need to resolve. The issue is the narrow width on Kirkwood Circle when there are cars parked on both sides of the street. Snowplow operators have indicated to us that because of on-street parking, they have had difficulty getting a snowplow down Kirkwood Circle. The City has been asked to take action to ensure that snowplows and emergency vehicles can get down your street for the remainder of the winter. I have observed that in your neighborhood many of you prefer to park your cars in the street. During most of the year this is not a problem. However, during the snowplowing season, especially after there have been one or two snows, vehicles tend to be parked further out into the street than is normal. This causes a problem for snowplow operators. Because there is not a problem during most of the year, we would like to see if this matter can be resolved with voluntary compliance by those of you in the neighborhood. We are asking that when there is snow on the ground and the road is narrowed, please park your vehicles in your driveways to enable the free flow of snowplows up and down Kirkwood Circle. If you must park on street, we would appreciate voluntary adherence to an informal odd-even policy. You would park only on the side of the street with odd house numbers on odd numbered days, and on the even numbered side of the street on even numbered days. Once again, this will help alleviate the difficulty for snowplows, while leaving both sides of Kirkwood Circle available for on street parking the remainder of the year. As stated previously, we would like to see if we can get voluntary compliance from your neighborhood. Those who choose to ignore these suggestions will not be ticketed for illegal parking. However, if we continue to receive reports that snowplow operators are having trouble getting down Kirkwood Circle, we will be forced to take action to formally eliminate parking on one side of the street for the winter months. We realize that taking such an action will be an inconvenience for your neighborhood, but this is a public safety matter, and the safety of your neighborhood is our first concern. We appreciate your voluntary assistance to the above request during snow events. Feel free to contact me at 356-5254 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Anissa Williams JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner cc: City Council City Manager Director of Public Works City Engineer Fire Chief Police Chief jccogt p/Itt/A~pin e Dr doc December 18, 2003 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Strect Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 Resident (3~9) 3s6-sooo Alpine Drive (~9) ~s6 soo~ r^x Re: Neighborhood on-street parking during snow events wwt,.icgov.org Dear Resident: Recently snowplow operators who have Alpine Drive as part of their route have alerted us to a potentially dangerous situation that we need to resolve. The issue is the narrow width on Alpine Drive when there are cars parked on both sides of the street. Snowplow operators have indicated to us that because of on-street parking, they have had difficulty getting a snowplow down Alpine Drive. The City has been asked to take action to ensure that snowplows and emergency vehicles can get down your street for the remainder of the winter. I have observed that in your neighborhood many of you prefer to park your cars in the street. During most of the year this is not a problem. However, during the snowplowing season, especially after there have been one or two snows, vehicles tend to be parked further out into the street than is normal. This causes a problem for snowplow operators. Because there is not a problem during most of the year, we would like to see if this matter can be resolved with voluntary compliance by those of you in the neighborhood. We are asking that when there is snow on the ground and the road is narrowed, please park your vehicles in your driveways to enable the free flow of snowplows up and down Alpine Drive. If you must park on street, we would appreciate voluntary adherence to an informal odd-even policy. You would park only on the side of the street with odd house numbers on odd numbered days, and on the even numbered side of the street on even numbered days. Once again, this will help alleviate the difficulty for snowplows, while leaving both sides of Alpine Drive available for on street parking the remainder of the year. As stated previously, we would like to see if we can get voluntary compliance from your neighborhood. Those who choose to ignore these suggestions will not be ticketed for illegal parking. However, if we continue to receive reports that snowplow operators are having trouble getting down Alpine Drive, we will be forced to take action to formally eliminate parking on one side of the street for the winter months. We realize that taking such an action will be an inconvenience for your neighborhood, but this is a public safety matter, and the safety of your neighborhood is our first concern. We appreciate your voluntary assistance to the above request during snow events. Feel free to contact me at 356-5254 if you have any questions. Sincerely, . ., Anissa Williams JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner cc: City Council City Manager Director of Public Works City Engineer Fire Chief Police Chief jccogtp/Itr/AlpineDr doc December 18, 2003 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 1826 Resident (~) 3s6-sooo Gleason Avenue (3 I 9) 356-5009 FAX Re: Neighborhood on-street parking during snow events ~r~l~r'~c~ov ~r~ Dear Resident: Recently snowplow operators who have Gleason Avenue as part of their route have alerted us to a potentially dangerous situation that we need to resolve. The issue is the narrow width on Gleason Avenue when there are cars parked on both sides of the street. Snowplow operators have indicated to us that because of on-street parking, they have had difficulty getting a snowplow down Gleason Avenue. The City has been asked to take action to ensure that snowplows and emergency vehicles can get down your street for the remainder of the winter. I have observed that in your neighborhood many of you prefer to park your cars in the street. During most of the year this is not a problem. However, during the snowplowing season, especially after there have been one or two snows, vehicles tend to be parked further out into the street than is normal. This causes a problem for snowplow operators. Because there is not a problem during most of the year, we would like to see if this matter can be resolved with .voluntary compliance by those of you in the neighborhood. We are asking that when there is snow on the ground and the road is narrowed, please park your vehicles in your driveways to enable the free flow of snowplows up and down Gleason Avenue. If you must park on street, we would appreciate voluntary adherence to an informal odd-even policy. You would park only on the side of the street with odd house numbers on odd numbered days, and on the even numbered side of the street on even numbered days. Once again, this will help alleviate the difficulty for snowplows, while leaving both sides of Gleason Avenue available for on street parking the remainder of the year. As stated previously, we would like to see if we can get voluntary compliance from your neighborhood. Those who choose to ignore these suggestions will not be ticketed for illegal parking. However, if we continue to receive reports that snowplow operators are having trouble getting down Gleason Avenue, we will be forced to take action to formally eliminate parking on one side of the street for the winter months. We realize that taking such an action will be an inconvenience for your neighborhood, but this is a public safety matter, and the safety of your neighborhood is our first concern. We appreciate your voluntary assistance to the above request during snow events. Feel free to contact me at 356-5254 if you have any questions. Sincerely~ Anissa Williams JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner cc: City Council City Manager Director of Public Works City Engineer Fire Chief Police Chief jccogtp/ItdAIpineDr doc December 18, 2003 CITY OF IOWA CiTY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 1826 Resident (3 ~ ~) 3s6-sooo Hickory Court (~ ] 9) 356-$009 FAX www.icgov.org Re: Neighborhood on-street parking during snow events Dear Resident: Recently snowplow operators who have Hickory Court as part of their route have alerted us to a potentially dangerous situation that we need to resolve. The issue is the narrow width on Hickory Court when there are cars parked on both sides of the street. Snowplow operators have indicated to us that because of on-street parking, they have had difficulty getting a snowplow down Hickory Court. The City has been asked to take action to ensure that snowplows and emergency vehicles can get down your street for the remainder of the winter. I have observed that in your neighborhood many of you prefer to park your cars in the street. During most of the year this is not a problem. However, during the snowplowing season, especially after there have been one or two snows, vehicles tend to be parked further out into the street than is normal. This causes a problem for snowplow operators. Because there is not a problem during most of the year, we would like to see if this matter can be resolved with voluntary compliance by those of you in the neighborhood. We are asking that when there is snow on the ground and the road is narrowed, please park your vehicles in your driveways to enable the free flow of snowplows up and down Hickory Court. If you must park on street, we would appreciate voluntary adherence to an informal odd-even policy. You would park only on the side of the street with odd house numbers on odd numbered days, and on the even numbered side of the street on even numbered days. Once again, this will help alleviate the difficulty for snowplows, while leaving both sides of Hickory Court available for on street parking the remainder of the year. As stated previously, we would like to see if we can get voluntary compliance from your neighborhood. Those who choose to ignore these suggestions will not be ticketed for illegal parking. However, if we continue to receive reports that snowplow operators are having trouble getting down Hickory Court, we will be forced to take action to formally eliminate parking on one side of the street for the winter months. We realize that taking such an action will be an inconvenience for your neighborhood, but this is a public safety matter, and the safety of your neighborhood is our first concern. We appreciate your voluntary assistance to the above request during snow events. Feel free to contact me at 356-5254 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Anissa Williams JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner cc: City Council City Manager Director of Public Works City Engineer Fire Chief Police Chief jccogtp/lldAIpineD r doc City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: December 23, 2003 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk RE: Absence I will be out of the office starting Tuesday, December 30, and will return on Monday, January 5. Deputy City Clerk Julie Voparil will be available to answer any questions you may have. Happy Holidays. AGENDA City of Iowa City City Council Economic Development Committee Wednesday, December 17, 2003 1:30 p.m. Lobby Conference Room City Hall 410 East Washington Street 1. Call to Order 2. Approve Minutes from December 4, 2003 3. Set Date for Next Meeting 4. Discussion and Recommendation on TIF Request for the Old Capitol Mall 5. Adjournment MINUTES CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE THURSDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2003 - 9:00 AM CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM Members Present: Ernie Lehman, Dee Vanderhoef, Ross Wilburn Members Absent: None Council Members Present: Irvin Pfab Staff Present: Steve Nasby, Steve Atkins, Mitch Behr, Rick Fosse, Brian Boelk Call To Order Chairperson Lehman called the meeting to order at 9:03 AM. Approval of November 4, 2003 minutes MOTION: Wilburn moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Vanderhoef seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 3-0. Set Date for Next Meetinf:l The committee members agreed to schedule another committee meeting in December if it were to become necessary. Discussion and Recommendation on Storm Water Management Utility Fee Lehman stated there has been some concern on the part of the City Council about the rates as proposed for the Storm Water Management Utility Fee and if it is burdensome on the commercial/industrial properties of the community. Lehman referred to the memo provided from Brian Boelk listing two different utility rate options. Atkins stated the recommended fee is satisfying an unfunded federally mandated regulation. He stated they reviewed the budget and determined the level of need. The original proposal was going to raise $960,000 per year. They are now proposing to cut the fees in half for both commercial\industrial and residential properties. This proposal will reduce the income to approximately $450,000 per year, which will allow for administration program management as well as having some money for capital improvement projects. Atkins stressed to the committee that they please keep in mind the fact that storm sewer management will become an increasing burden and will continue to have projects that need to be completed. Boelk reviewed the proposed rate adjustment. He said the proposed Rate Option B, which is a 50/50-fee structure, reduces both residential and non-residential rates equally by adjusting the unit cost per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). Therefore, the total collected by the utility is reduced by greater increments and the distribution of the fee is proportionate among all properties. This plan would benefit industrial, commercial as well as large schools and keep the fee comparable to other Cities within the State. Atkins said Option B also maintains the legal principal of tying the fee to a formula; it also reduces the fee but provides some money for Capital Projects and allows the City to implement the federally mandated regulations. Fosse said in response to a question from Lehman that the City would not necessarily have to treat storm water in the future. He said the goal is to manage the watersheds to prevent the input of pollutants into the storm water rather than trying to remove the pollutants after they are already in the water. Atkins said the County Government would need to find its way into this issue at some time because the agricultural and unincorporated area run-off is not regulated and contributes a great deal to storm water pollutants entering the watershed. Lehman questioned what this fee structure does long term in creating the cash flow needed to manage the storm sewer utility. Atkins said he expects a need for a rate adjustment within 3 to 5 years. Economic Development Committee Minutes December 4, 2003 Page 2 Atkins said in response to a question from Vanderhoef, that in his contact with other City Managers, this fee increase has not been an economic issue in other cities because most businesses have an understanding of the Federal mandate. Atkins said that unfortunately, the State and Local Governments end up being the bad guy by having to carry out the Federal Government's agenda. Lehman said he does not perceive this fee adjustment to be negative for economic development. From a legal standpoint, Lehman said the proposals are very logical. He questioned how the fee would be collected. Atkins said the fee would be applied to the sewer bill. Lehman said he has no complaint with the proposed residential $2.00 fee, it is a small amount, reasonable and a painless way to raise a significant amount of money. Lehman questioned if this really would create enough cash flow. Atkins assured it would create what is needed. Lehman said in terms of fairness, the reduction of 50% for business/commercial is justified because of the disproportionate amount they pay for other services through property taxes. Wilburn said that there might an issue brought up later as to why they did not use a flat rate fee like some other cities have used. He said the question of fairness could be looked at in different ways. Wilburn pointed out that some might want the council to ignore the legal advice they are receiving and institute a flat rate fee regardless of consequences. Vanderhoef said in looking at the dollars that they need, the flat rate fee would really skew everything. She said in areas where the flat fee has been used, the fee amount has been so Iow that no one has complained. However, if they were to apply a fiat fee it might trigger a lawsuit. Behr said the more that is charged the chances are greater for a lawsuit. Fosse noted the industrial/commercial users already apply and pay for a permit from the State DNR for storm water run-off. Aisc, in the 1980'sand 1990's the threshold for when storm water management was required was at 1 acre rather than the 2-acre threshold for residential. So, in a sense they were held to a higher standard as to when storm water management was required. Atkins said they would have a campaign to inform everyone what the fee is all about and what for what it would be used. He also said staff would write a summary memo to council explaining how they arrived at the decisions that have been made. Wilburn said this position is okay with him. He felt that the fiat rate fee issue would need to be justified as to why they would oppose legal counsel's advice. Lehman asked the committee if they have a consensus as to a recommendation. He stated that the $2.00 residential and 50% reduction in the commercial fee structure for the reasons previously discussed is reasonable, and would agree with legal counsel that a fiat fee is indefensible. MOTION: Vanderhoef moved to recommend to council a $2.00 residential fee and a 50% reduction in the commercial fee structure for storm water management. Wilburn seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 3-0. Old Business · CDBG application- Oasis Falafel Nasby noted that this item is to be deferred until the applicant finds a rocation. Adiournment MOTION: Wilburn moved to adjourn the meeting. Vanderhoef seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 3-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 AM. data on citynt/pcd/n~ nute$/ecodev/edcl 2-04-03 doc City of Iowa City Application TIF Tax Rebate or Tax Abatement Exemption Business Requesting Financial Assistance: Business Name: OC Group. ECL Name of Authorized Person te Obligate the Business: I~k:flael Hodge, Dean Oakes, and Robert Bal~£r Busin~ Address: 201 S. Clinton St, Iowa Oty, IA 522,q0 Business Contact Person: Kevin Digmann 'F~Ue: Mall Manager Telephone: 338-7858 Fax: 338-8753 E-mail Address: kdigmann@yahoo.com Business Federal ZD#: 20 025 9317 Date of Application Submittal: 11/25/03 Release of Information and Certification NOTE: Please read carefully before signing ! hereby give permission to the Oty of Iowa Oty (the Ob/) to research the company's history, make credit checks, contact the company's finandal in~tution, and perform other related activities necessary for reasonable evaluation of this proposal. ! undef~,~nd that all information submitted to the City relating to this application is subject to the Open Records Law (1994 Iowa Code, Chapter 22) and that confidentiality may not be guaranteed. I hereby certify that all repre- sentations; warranties or statements made or fumished to the City in connection with this application are true and correct in all material respects. ! understand that it is a criminal violation under Iowa law to engage in deception and knowingly make, or cause to be made, directly or indirectly, a false statement in writing for the purpose of procuring economic development assistance from a state agency or political subdivision. SIGNATURE OF COMPANY OFFICER AUTHOR.tZED TO OBlIGATE BUS[NESS: NOTE: The Ob/will not provide assistance in situations where it is determined that any repre- sentation, warranty or statement made in connection with this application is incorrect, false, misleading or erroneous in any material respect. If assistance has already been provided by the db/prior to discovery of the incoffect, ~alse or misleading representation, the db/may initiate legal aclJon to recover city funds. 1. What is the location of the proposed project? 201 S. Clinton Street, Iowa City, IA 2. Please provide a bdef timeline for the proposed project. January 2004 - June 2004 planning, design, lease negotiations June 2004 - completion Intedor and extedor renovations Tt is antidpated bhat the above work would be completed within 36 months. 3. Descdbo in detail the proposed "project" (e.g., company relocation, plant expansion, remodel- ing, new product line and/or new fadlity). The Old Capitol Town Center project would consist of re-tenanting the first floor with retail businesses and other comparable uses. The second floor will be converted to office and special use purposes. 4. Specifically, what type of capital improvements will be completed? (e.g. new building, remodeling, far, ade improvement, accessibility) As leases are signed for new retail tenants, each space will be improved to meet specific needs. These improvements may indude bom intedor and extedor renovatJons. However, exterior improvements will bo compatible to an overall extedor design. The second floor offices will require more extensive renovations to convert the existing retail to offices. This renovation will include the addition of many extedor windows and other compatible design elements. 5. Will the project increase the value of the property by at least 15%? Please indude the amount of the proposed investment. Yes, the project value increase will exceed 15%. It is antidpated that the total investments for improving the proposed project will exceed five million dollars. 6. Type of assistance requested: (check one) Tax Increment finandng __ X__ Tax Exemption Tax Abatement 7. If an existing Iowa City business, how many total individuals have been employed by the company at the Iowa City fadlity dudng the past year? N/A 8. What is the number of jobs within the existing or proposed Iowa City facility and what is the ~;--rtin(j average hourly wage rate (not induding fringe benefits): For the new employees? The number of new jobs and the pay rate will depend on how much or, ce verses retail space we are able to lease. If most of the second floor wore converted to office space, we would expect 200 to 300 new employees to be working in downtown Iowa City. We will assume the average pay rate would be at lease $12.00 per hour. By keeping the first floor retail, we expect at least 50 to 100 new jobs that would pay In the $8.00 per hour range. The retail jobs would be great in providing additional full and part-time jobs for the student population. For existing employees? We were unable to get pay information from our existing tenants, but there is currently over 300 full and part-time employees working in the Old Capitol Town Center. For existing and new employees? When the project is completed, we could see 600 to 700 people working in the Old Capitol Town Center. 9. Does the business provide standard medical and dental insurance for full-time employees? If so, what percentage of the standard medical and dental insurance package expense does the company provide? Each tenant has different benefits; we were unable to get any spedfic information. 10. Beyond the present project, what future growth potential is there for the Iowa C~y operation? We are considering the addition of several stodes to the existing building for residential housing. This could be a mix of beth condominiums for sale, and apartments for rent. 11. Please descdbe the energy and resource efficiency programs, waste reduction, waste exchange, and/or recycling programs at your Iowa City operation. We are still assessing what programs are in effect and what programs we can add. 12. Do you use recyded materials in the production of any products or through the provision of any services at your facility? If so, please describe. N/A 13. Has the business been dted or convicted for violations of any federal or state laws or regulations within the last five years (induding environmental regulations, Occupational Safety And Health laws, Fair Labor Standards, the National Labor Relations Act, the Americans W'~J~ Disabilities Act)? ]~f yes, please explain the drcumstances of the violation(s). No RECEIVED: 12-15- 3; 5:07PM; 3~93549602 :> CITY OF IA CITY PCD; Dec 15 03 0~:17p Hod~e Con$1~ruc~ion CO. ADDENDUM TO TIF APPLK~ATION OC GROUP, D/B/A OLD CAPITOL TOWN CF, NTER W~ a~ requesting TIF assistance to help fund thc cost of the improYements to bc made to thc Old Capitol Towa Center. We request th~ TIF asskstance to bo s~ in a similar manner to tha~ which was done for the Sycamore M~II. Under the Sycamore TIF program, the assistance is 100% ofthe morea.seal tax value paid out over seven years. We are requesting the same program for the Old Capitol Town Center. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: December 18, 2003 TO: Economic Development Committee FROIfl: Steven Nasby, Community and Economic Development Coordinator ~-~ RE: TIF Application - Old Capitol Mall Redevelopment For your consideration is a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) application from OC Group, L.C., the owners of Old Capitol Town Center. They are planning a redevelopment of the facility that anticipates that the first floor will remain as retail and the second floor will be converted into office space. The owners are estimating an initial investment of $5.0 million. Site improvements will include closing in the second floor (which will add leaseable square footage), adding windows on the second floor, streetscape and other improvements to the building. Architectural drawings of the proposed improvements and a listing of the costs are enclosed for your information. The TIF request from the owners is in the form of a 7-year, 100 percent property tax rebate, which will be applicable only to the improvements to the property. This request is based on the Development Agreements the City has approved for Sycamore Mall and Pepperwood Plaza. To receive the TIF tax rebates, OC Group, L.C. will have to meet occupancy requirements (leased space) and the minimum improvements must increase the assessed value of the property by at least 15 percent over the January 1, 2002 assessment, as this is the "base" or "frozen" value of the City-University TIF Area. If you have any questions please contact me at 356-5248. Cc: City Manager Karin Franklin, Director of Planning and Community Development ©C Group, L.C. OLD CAPITOL TOWN CENTER ESTIMATED IMPROVEMENT COSTS INTERIOR RENOVATIONS $ 4,000,000 WINDOWS & DOORS $ 350,000 FA(~ADE $ 250,000 AWNINGS & SIGNS $ 100,000 STREET SCAPE $ 50,000 ROOF REPAIRS & REPLACEMENT $ 250,000 $ 5,000,000 MINUTES Approved CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE THURSDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2003 - 9:00 AM CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM Members Present: Ernie Lehman, Dee Vanderhoef, Ross Wilburn Members Absent: None Council Members Present: Irvin Pfab Staff Present: Steve Nasby, Steve Atkins, Mitch Behr, Rick Fosse, Brian Boelk Call To Order Chairperson Lehman called the meeting to order at 9:03 AM. Approval of November 4, 2003 minutes MOTION: Wilburn moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Vanderhoef seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 3-0. Set Date for Next Meetinf~ The committee members agreed to schedule another committee meeting in December if it were to become necessary. Discussion and Recommendation on Storm Water Manaqement Utility Fee Lehman stated there has been some concern on the part of the City Council about the rates as proposed for the Storm Water Management Utility Fee and if it is burdensome on the commercial/industrial properties of the community. Lehman referred to the memo provided from Brian Boelk listing two different utility rate options. Atkins stated the recommended fee is satisfying an unfunded federally mandated regulation. He stated they reviewed the budget and determined the level of need. The original proposal was going to raise $960,000 per year. They am now proposing to cut the fees in harf for both commercial\industrial and residential properties. This proposal will reduce the income to approximately $450,000 per year, which will allow for administration program management as well as having some money for capital improvement projects. Atkins stressed to the committee that they please keep in mind the fact that storm sewer management will become an increasing burden and will continue to have projects that need to be completed. Boelk reviewed the proposed rate adjustment. He said the proposed Rate Option B, which is a 50/50-fee structure, reduces both residential and non-residential rates equally by adjusting the unit cost per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU). Therefore, the total collected by the utility is reduced by greater increments and the distribution of the fee is proportionate among all properties. This plan would benefit industrial, commercial as well as large schools and keep the fee comparable to other Cities within the State. Atkins said Option B also maintains the legal principal of tying the fee to a formula; it also reduces the fee but provides some money for Capital Projects and allows the City to implement the federally mandated regulations. Fosse said in response to a question from Lehman that the City would not necessarily have to treat storm water in the future. He said the goal is to manage the watersheds to prevent the input of pollutants into the storm water rather than trying to remove the pollutants after they are already in the water. Atkins said the County Government would need to find its way into this issue at some time because the agricultural and unincorporated area run-off is not regulated and contributes a great deal to storm water pollutants entering the watershed. Lehman questioned what this fee structure does long term in creating the cash flow needed to manage the storm sewer utility. Atkins said he expects a need for a rate adjustment within 3 to 5 years. Economic Development Committee Minutes December 4, 2003 Page 2 Atkins said in response to a question from Vanderhoef, that in his contact with other City Managers, this fee increase has not been an economic issue in other cities because most businesses have an understanding of the Federal mandate. Atkins said that unfortunately, the State and Local Governments end up being the bad guy by having to carry out the Federal Government's agenda. Lehman said he does not perceive this fee adjustment to be negative for economic development. From a legal standpoint, Lehman said the proposals are very logical. He questioned how the fee would be collected. Atkins said the fee would be applied to the sewer bill. Lehman said he has no complaint with the proposed residential $2.00 fee, it is a small amount, reasonable and a painless way to raise a significant amount of money. Lehman questioned if this really would create enough cash flow. Atkins assured it would create what is needed. Lehman said in terms of fairness, the reduction of 50% for business/commercial is justified because of the disproportionate amount they pay for other services through property taxes. Wilburn said that there might an issue brought up later as to why they did not use a flat rate fee like some other cities have used. He said the question of fairness could be looked at in different ways. Wilburn pointed out that some might want the council to ignore the legal advice they are receiving and institute a fiat rate fee regardless of consequences. Vanderhoef said in looking at the dollars that they need, the fiat rate fee would really skew everything. She said in areas where the flat fee has been used, the fee amount has been so Iow that no one has complained. However, if they were to apply a fiat fee it might trigger a lawsuit. Behr said the more that is charged the chances are greater for a lawsuit. Fosse noted the industrial/commercial users already apply and pay for a permit from the State DNR for storm water run-off. Also, in the 1980'sand 1990's the threshold for when storm water management was required was at 1 acre rather than the 2-acre threshold for residential. So, in a sense they were held to a higher standard as to when storm water management was required. Atkins said they would have a campaign to inform everyone what the fee is all about and for what it would be used. He also said staff would write a summary memo to council explaining how they arrived at the decisions that have been made. Wilburn said this position is okay with him. He felt that the flat rate fee issue would need to be justified as to why they would oppose legal counsel's advice. Lehman asked the committee if they have a consensus as to a recommendation. He stated that the $2.00 residential and 50% reduction in the commercial fee structure for the reasons previously discussed is reasonable, and would agree with legal counsel that a fiat fee is indefensible. MOTION: Vanderhoef moved to recommend to council a $2,00 residential fee and a 50% reduction in the commercial fee structure for storm water management. Wilburn seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 3-0. Old Business · CDBG application- Oasis Falafal Nasby noted that this item is to be deferred until the applicant finds a location. Adiournment MOTION: Wilburn moved to adjourn the meeting. Vanderhoef seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 3-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 AM. data on ci[yntJpcd/min ut es/e code¥/ed c 12 ~4-03.d ~, City of Iowa City FY05-FY07 Financial Plan FY04-FY08 Capital Improvement Plan PROPOSED FINANCIAL PLAN Fiscal Year 2005 through 2007 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CITY COUNCIL Ernie Lehman, Mayor Connie Champion Mike O'Donnell Steven Kanner Irvin Pfab Ross Wilburn Dee Vanderhoef CITY COUNCIL ELECT Regenia Bailey Bob Elliott CITY MANAGER FINANCE DIRECTOR Stephen J, Atkins Kevin O'Malley BUDGET ANALYST Deb Mansfield CITY OF IOWA CITY FINANCIAL PLAN FISCAL YEARS 2005, 2006 & 2007 F NTE PAGE CITY MANAGER'S LETTER ............................................................................................................ 1 FINANCIAL PLAN OVERVIEW ......................... 3 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART ................................................................ 4 FINANCIAL AND FISCAL POLICIES ................................................................................................ 5 SUMMARIES AND CHARTS: Budget H gh ghts ......................................................................................................................... 13 Future Issues ............................................................................................................................... 17 Financial Plan Analysis Property Tax .......................................................................................................................... 19 General Fund ......................................................................................................................... 23 All Funds Financial Summaries ................................................................................................... 39 Transfers-In .................................................................................................................................. 44 Transfers-Out ............................................................................................................................... 46 FY2005 Additional Position Requests .......................................................................................... 49 PUBLIC SAFETY: Police Department: Summary ............................................................................................................................... 51 Administration ........................................................................................................................ 52 Patrol ..................................................................................................................................... 53 Criminal Investigat on ............................................................................................................ 54 Records ................................................................................................................................. 54 Community Services .............................................................................................................. 55 Emergency Communications ................................................................................................ 55 Fire Department: Summary ............................................................................................................................... 56 Equipment Replacement Reserve ......................................................................................... 57 Housing & Inspection Services: Administration ........................................................................................................................ 58 Building nspect on ................................................................................................................. 59 Housing Inspect on ................................................................................................................ 59 Animal Shelter Operations ........................................................................................................... 60 Deer Control ................................................................................................................................. 60 PUBLIC WORKS: Street System Maintenance ......................................................................................................... 61 Traffic Engineering ....................................................................................................................... 62 Engineering .................................................................................................................................. 63 Public Works Adm n strat on ........................................................................................................ 64 Public Transit ............................................................................................................................... 65 Public Transit Replacement Reserve ........................................................................................... 66 Energy Conservat on .................................................................................................................... 67 Energy Revolving Fund ................................................................................................................ 67 Road Use Tax (RUT) ................................................................................................................... 68 CULTURE AND RECREATION: Library 71 Library Special Revenues ............................................................................................................ 72 Parks & Recreation Administration .............................................................................................. 75 Parkland Reserves ....................................................................................................................... 76 Parks 77 Recreation .................................................................................................................................... 78 Cemetery ...................................................................................................................................... 79 Senior Center ............................................................................................................................... 80 COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: CBD Maintenance ........................................................................................................................ 81 Forestry ........................................................................................................................................ 81 Planning and Community Development: Public Art ............................................................................................................................... 82 Economic Development ......................................................................................................... 82 Tax Increment Financing Districts (TIF ................................................................................. 83 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) - Metro Entitlement ..................................... 86 H.O.M.E. Program ................................................................................................................. 87 Emergency Shelter Grant ...................................................................................................... 87 PCD Administration ............................................................................................................... 88 Urban Planning ...................................................................................................................... 88 Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG): JCCOG Summary ...........................................................................................................89 Administration ................................................................................................................. 90 Transportation Planning .................................................................................................. 90 Human Services Planning ............................................................................................... 91 Solid Waste Management ............................................................................................... 91 Neighborhood Services ......................................................................................................... 92 Community Development Non-Grant Activity ........................................................................ 92 GENERAL GOVERNMENT: Administrative Summaries ........................................................................................................... 93 City Council .................................................................................................................................. 94 City Manager ................................................................................................................................ 94 Human Relations .......................................................................................................................... 95 City Clerk ...................................................................................................................................... 95 Finance Administration ................................................................................................................. 96 Accounting & Reporting ......................................................................................................... 96 Central Services .................................................................................................................... 97 Treasury ................................................................................................................................ 97 Document Services ............................................................................................................... 98 City Attorney ................................................................................................................................. 98 Human Rights .............................................................................................................................. 99 Government Buildings .................................................................................................................. 99 Risk Management ........................................................................................................................ 100 Non-Operational Administration ................................................................................................... 100 Aid to Agencies ...................................................................................................................... 101 Community Event Funding .................................................................................................... 102 Emergency Levy ........................................................................................................................... 103 DEBT SERVICE: Debt Service ................................................................................................................................. 105 Special Assessments ................................................................................................................... 105 General Obligation Debt ............................................................................................................... 106 BUSINESS TYPE ACTIVITIES (ENTERPRISE FUNDS): Water: Water Operations .................................................................................................................. 107 Water Reserves ..................................................................................................................... 108 Wastewater Treatment: Wastewater Treatment Operations ....................................................................................... 110 Wastewater Treatment Reserves .......................................................................................... 111 Airport Operations ........................................................................................................................ 115 Landfill: Landfill Operations ................................................................................................................. 116 Landfill Reserves ................................................................................................................... 117 Solid Waste Collection Operations .............................................................................................. 119 Broadband Telecommunications: Broadband Telecommunications Operations ........................................................................ 120 Local Access Pass Through .................................................................................................. 121 Public Access ........................................................................................................................ 121 Broadband Telecommunications Equipment (BTC) Replacement Reserve ......................... 122 Housing Authority ......................................................................................................................... 123 Storm Water Management ........................................................................................................... 127 Parking: Parking Operations ................................................................................................................ 128 Parking Reserves .................................................................................................................. 129 NON-PROGRAM FUNDS: Equipment: General Fleet Maintenance ................................................................................................... 131 Equipment Replacement Reserve ......................................................................................... 132 Information Technology Services (ITS): Administration & Operations .................................................................................................. 133 ITS Equipment Replacement Fund ....................................................................................... 134 Police Computer Replacement Fund .................................................................................... 134 Central Services ........................................................................................................................... 135 Risk Management Reserves ........................................................................................................ 136 Parking Impact Restricted Fund ................................................................................................... 136 Public Safety Reserve .................................................................................................................. 137 Health Insurance Reserve ............................................................................................................ 137 Employee Benefits Fund .............................................................................................................. 138 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (CIP): FY2004-2008 Program Summary ............................................................................................. C-1 Unfunded Projects FY2008 and Beyond ...................................................................................... C-11 CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 131~) 356-$000 December 2003 (319) 356-5009 FAX www icgov.org City Council City of Iowa City Mayor and Council: Our community's property tax base has continued to experience healthy growth as represented by our building permit activity. For the 5th consecutive year, over $100 million in new construction/building permit activity has occurred in our community. However, with the offsetting decline in the rollback of residential property values by the state government as well as the elimination of state aid to support our general fund, even with this growth there is virtually no margin with respect to inability to respond to any new programs or other related initiatives. The FYO5 budget plan continues to maintain a satisfactory general fund reserve within Council policy. This is particularly critical at these difficult times in the state's economy as we work to assure our city's continued financial health. The FY05 budget is balanced in accordance with state law with modifications to several City services, notably a reduction of 16 positions within the general fund employment. We continue to pursue a planned attrition of employees to satisfy these reductions. Also, as we have indicated in the past, we must continue to exercise caution and avoid any new major expenditure as we try to deal with the state's economic condition and the possibility of even further reductions of available resources by the state. This is particularly notable from our FY04 experience of having projected general fund revenues reduced after the budget adoption. The City tax rate decreases from an FY04 rate of 17.6 to 17.3 for F'Y05 as proposed. The actual tax impact for a $100,000 home will be $841 for FY05, which is 7.5% less than the actual tax of $904 for FY04. The FY05 budget proposes a 5% reduction in water rates in accordance with our annual assessment of water rates, our water operating and capital needs and assuring an adequate cash reserve for system operations. Sincerely, City Manager -1- -2- FINANCIAL PLAN OVERVIEW This Three-Year Financial Plan is for fiscal years FY2005 through FY2007, which begin on July 1 and end on June 30. This includes our one-year annual budget, required by Iowa Code for city government, and provides two years of projections as a planning tool. The purpose of the overview is to discuss the basis on which the financial plan has been built. The role of a government's operating budget differs from that of a private business. Budgets are an important internal planning tool for business, but they also play an external role for governmental entities. A multi-year financial plan informs parties inside and outside government of future objectives and provision of services to its constituents. The three-year plan also permits a more comprehensive review of the City's financial condition, allowing analysis of current and future needs and requirements. During preparation of the plan, careful review is made of property tax levy rates, utility and user fee requirements, ending cash balance by fund, debt service obligations, bond financing needs, capital outlay for equipment purchases and major capital improvement projects. This document contains operating budgets for the governmental funds: general, special revenue, debt service, capital project and permanent funds. It also includes business type funds (proprietary) and Internal Service Funds. Budgets are summarized by major revenue and expenditure categories within each division. A separate multi-year Capital Improvements Program (ClP) show budgeted revenue and expenditures for FY2004 through FY2008. The modified cash basis of accounting has been used for preparation of this document. Revenues are recorded when received, not necessarily when they are earned, and expenditures are recorded when paid instead of when they are incurred. The Finance Administration Division monitors actual receipts and expenditures carefully on a line-item basis. Department directors are ultimately responsible for ensuring that the divisions under their control stay within budget. -3- Citizens of Iowa City Key · Appointed Elected By Mayor & officials Council City Council & Mayor · _ .T, ~ ~Directol~ ~ I * * * I I Manager Appointed Employed by By City I Airport Boards & City City City I Library Board or ' Manager Board of [ i Commission Commissions Attorney Clerk Manager i Trustees ~Commission Airport I Library Manager i Director = F' Mous ng ~ Parking Parks & i Senior Center Assistant Finance re Planning & -- - Inspection Community Police Public Works City I Director : ~nle! & Recreation i i ~ Services ~ Transit Director Director i ~ Director p ~ ~ Manager ~ Development Chief Director Coordinator ~ ~ Director ~ ~ ~ Broadband Administration ~Admin/ ~ Admin. ~Administration ;- Administration -Administration Administration ~ Parking I Energy Senior Center Telecomm. Accounting ,~ Training ~ Building ~ Transit Opera~ions ' CBD Mmntenance' Community _Animal Care Conservation ~Fim , Inspection ? Development & Adoption Human Rights Central ! Prevention - Cemetery * Engineering Services ' Housing [ Economic %Community ~ Equipment i Fire ! Authority Forestry Development Services ~ Maintenance Human Document ~Suppression : Resources Services Housing Government ~ JCCOG Programs Criminal ~ Landfill Information Inspection Buildings Investigations ' ~ Neighborhood i Solid Waste Collection Technology Parks i Services Emergency ~ Stormwater Services Comm. , Management Risk Recreation Urban Planning Patrol I Streets Management ~ Traffic Engineering Records & Treasury Investigation ~ Wastewater I Management FINANCIAL AND FISCAL POLICIES The City of Iowa City's financial policies set forth the basic framework for the overall fiscal management of the City. These policies assist the decision-making process of the City Council. These policies provide guidelines for evaluating both current activities and proposals for future programs, Most of the policies represent long-standing principles, traditions and practices, and follow generally accepted accounting principles which have guided the City in the past and have helped maintain financial stability. (3PI=RATING BUDGET D The City will prepare an annual balanced budget for all operating funds. [] The City will maintain a budgetary control system to ensure adherence to the budget and will prepare regular reports comparing actual revenues and expenditures to budgeted amounts. [] Operating budgets are established on a fund/department/program basis. [] A contingency account will be maintained in the annual General Fund operating budget to provide for unanticipated expenditures or to meet unexpected small increases in service delivery costs. The City Council will be informed semi-annually on staff initiated amendments from the contingency account to the operating programs within the General Fund. [] Budget amendments may be made throughout the year with approval of the Department Director, Director of Finance and the City Manager. The City Council formally reviews and approves all amendments processed by staff twice a year in August/September and May. [] Increases or amendments to operating budgets are made only in the following situations: - emergency situations - transfer from contingency - expenditures with offsetting revenues or fund balance - carry-over of prior year budget authority for expenses that had not been paid as of the end of the fiscal year. OPERATIN~ RUI3~I=T PREPARATION CRITERIA Maintain the fiscal integrity of the City's operating and capital improvement budgets in order to provide services and to construct and maintain the City's infrastructure. Maintain the City's responsible fiscal position and Aaa bond rating. Present budget data to the City Council in a format that will facilitate annual budget decisions based on a three-year planning perspective, Provide the City Council with a summary of the three-year forecasts. Encourage citizen involvement in the annual budget decision-making process through public hearings, informal meetings, budget briefs and related informational efforts. Deliver service levels which are consistent with the citizens' willingness to pay and the City's available resources. Base decisions to reduce service levels or eliminate programs on City-wide priorities. Recognize that City employees are one of the City government's most valuable resources and are essential to the delivery of high quality, efficient services. Property tax levy rates will not exceed the limits as established by the State of Iowa. Revise user fee rate structures to charge the costs of service provided to the benefiting customers, while maintaining sensitivity to the needs of Iow income citizens. Support federal and state legislation which provides property tax relief. Oppose legislation which imposes local service mandates without fiscal support. Support responsible management efforts to increase productivity by providing resources for office automation, preventive maintenance, risk management/employee safety, and employee training. REVENUE [] The City will try to maintain a diversified and stable revenue system to minimize short-mn fluctuations in any one revenue source. [~ The City will attempt to maximize benefits from major revenue soumes as a way of maintaining a stable property tax rate. [] The City will follow an aggressive policy of collecting revenues. [] The City will establish all user charges and fees at a level related to the full cost (operating, direct~ and indirect) of providing the service, whenever practical. [] The City will review licenses, fees, and charges annually to determine if the revenues support the cost of providing the service. -6- [] Parking, Refuse, Wastewater Treatment, Landfill, Broadband Telecommunications and Water funds will be self-supporting through user fees. Rate adjustments will be submitted to the City Council by ordinance if state or locally legislated, or by resolution (if not state or locally legislated). CAPITAL IMPRE)VI=MFNT PRi~RAM I~LII~I=T PCILICII-_'R [] The City will develop a multi-year Capital Improvement Program (ClP), which will be reviewed and updated annually, comply with City Council goals and be compatible with the Comprehensive Plan whenever possible. [] The complete multi-year CIP funding plan must be balanced each year by matching projected expenditures with proposed revenue sources by fund. [] Funding for projects should be obtained through borrowing from: - bond market, general obligation or revenue bonds - enterprise fund operations and reserves - internal loans [3 The City may utilize General Fund cash balances to fund capital projects whenever available and feasible. [] The City shall utilize available funding sources for capital improvements whenever practical and feasible such as but not limited to: - federal and state grant funds - special assessments - developer contributions [] The City will maintain its physical assets at a level adequate to protect the City's capital investment and to minimize future maintenance and replacement costs. The budget will provide for the adequate maintenance and the orderly replacement of the capital plant and equipment from current revenues when possible. RF~FRVF PC)LICII-'_R U The City will establish a contingency line-item in the annual General Fund operating budget to provide for unanticipated expenditures or to meet unexpected small increases in service delivery costs. [] Operating cash balances at fiscal year-end will be maintained at a level to ensure sufficient cash flow throughout the fiscal year. General Fund cash balances will not go below 15%. [] Reserves will be maintained in the Water, Wastewater and Parking Funds in accordance with existing bond ordinance provisions. -7- Reserves will be maintained for equipment replacement and for unexpected major repairs in the following areas: Parking, Wastewater, Water, Landfill, Transit, Broadband Telecommunication, Equipment Replacement, Information Technology Services, and Central Services as well as Library Computer Equipment and Parkland Acquisition and Replacement. E~ Reserves, based on third party actuaries, will be maintained for the Risk Management Loss Reserve, Medical and Dental Insurance Funds. [] All City trucks, cars and necessary accessories will be maintained on a replacement cost basis each year. A separate reserve fund has been set up to fund these replacements. Additions to the fleet are made through allocations in the annual budget. Fire Department vehicles and Transit buses will be purchased through the issuance of debt. [] All general obligation debt will be paid from the Debt Service Fund. General Obligation debt applicable to Enterprise Fund projects will be paid out of the Debt Service Fund, but will be abated from revenues from the respective Enterprise Fund(s). INVFRTMI=NT P(~LIClFR D Disbursement, collection, and deposit of all funds will be managed to insure maximum investment opportunity for City funds. D The City will strive to maximize the return on its investment portfolio, with the primary objective of preserving capital in accordance with the City's investment policy and prudent investment practices. [] All City funds not restricted by bond issue covenants will be pooled for investments, with interest allocations made monthly. i3 The City will confine long-term borrowing to capital improvements. Short term borrowing will be applicable for large dollar rolling stock (buses, fire apparatus) purchases and computer systems. [] Total general obligation debt will not exceed 5% of total taxable assessed value of real property. [] The debt service property tax levy shall not exceed 25% of the total property tax levy. [] The City will follow a policy of full disclosure on every financial report and bond prospectus. U The City will use "pay as you go" financing to fund general capital improvement projects, whenever feasible and practical. -8- CE)MPENRATED ABSENCES Administrative employees hired prior to June 15, 1983 and all other employees hired prior to June 29, 1985, upon death, retirement or termination (except firefighters) are entitled to be paid for one- half of the total accumulated sick leave hours at the current effective hourly rate for that employee up to the sick leave payout amount calculated as of June 28, 1985, whichever is less. After June 28, 1985, employees accumulate vacation, sick leave, and other benefits at various rates depending on bargaining group and length of service. Employees are paid for their total unused vacation time upon death, termination (except firefighters) or retirement. However, sick leave can only be used during employment. The cost of compensated absences are recognized when payments are made to employees and the City amends the budget at that time. ACCOUNTIN¢~: AUDITIN(~ AND FINANCIAL REPORTIN~ P¢')LICIFS [] Quarterly financial reports will be prepared. [~ A three-year financial plan for all operating funds will be prepared by the City Manager and presented to the City Council for their review. [] A Multi-Year Capital Improvement Program budget will be prepared, reviewed and revised annually. [] An independent audit will be performed annually for all City funds. [] The City will produce a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles as outlined by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. PURCHASlN~ PC)LICII--_R 13 Purchases for all City departments for the City of Iowa City shall be in accordance with the City Procurement Policy. [] Methods of source selection are as follows: •Public Improvements Competitive sealed bidding shall be used for Public Improvement Contracts of $25,000 or greater (Code of Iowa). This process shall consist of: Invitation for bids Public notice Bid opening Bid acceptance and bid evaluation Bid award - City Council/Commission authorization -9- -Professional Services The consultant selection procedures guide all City departments involved in procuring engineering, architectural, and other professional services. Within approved budgets, the City Manager may approve contracts up to $50,000 and the City Council approves contracts over $50,000. -Major Purchases The Central Services Division operates a "voluntary purchasing" system rather than a complete "centralized purchasing" system. Under the voluntary system, departments obtain standard operating items, within approved budgets, utilizing Purchasing procedures. The Purchasing Division reviews various categories of merchandise and services and makes recommendations for consolidation and standardization of purchases to reduce duplication and overall costs. -Emergency Procurement In the event of an emergency, supplies, services or construction may be purchased without regard to normal purchase selection procedures to protect the health and welfare of the public. The City Manager shall keep the City Council informed of the extent of the emergency. -Gifts/Conflict of Interest/Interest in Public Contracts Conduct shall be in accordance with the Code of Iowa - Chapters 68B.22 Gifts, 68B.2A Conflict of Interest and 362.5 Interest in Public Contract. A City officer or employee shall not have an interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or job of work or material or the profits thereof or services to be furnished or performed for the officers or employees of the city. RIRK MANAGEMENT POLICIER [] It shall be the policy of the City of Iowa City to assume the risk of property damage, liability and dishonesty in all cases in which the exposure is so small or dispersed that the loss would not significantly or adversely affect the operations or financial position of the City. U Insurance will not be purchased to cover loss exposures below prevailing deductible/retention amounts of current insurance held by the City of Iowa City, unless such insurance is required by statute or by contact, or in those instances in which it is desirable to obtain special services, such as inspection or claim adjustment services in connection with insurance. The deductible/retention amounts will be reviewed once annually by the Director of Finance and the Risk Manager to ensure appropriateness of the amounts. -10- [] Insurance will be purchased where possible against all major exposures which might result in loss in excess of the City's insurance reserve through the purchase of the following types of insurance. - All risk insurance on real and personal property. - General liability insurance. - Automobile liability insurance. - Fidelity and crime insurance. - Catastrophic workmen's compensation insurance. The City will self-insure in those instances where the cost of insurance is so high that it would be more cost effective to assume the risk. [] Property will be insured on replacement cost basis, as determined by a competent appraisal service, against as wide a range of perils as possible. The value will be reviewed once annually by the Risk Manager and the City's insurance advisor. [] Loss prevention recommendations made by insurance companies, the state fire marshal or local fire authorities will, whenever possible, be implemented. In those cases in which such recommendations are not followed, a written report in which an explanation or justification is made will be filed with the Director of Finance and the City Manager within 30 days of receipt of the report. [] Insurance will be purchased only through licensed agents or agencies who have the staff and technical competence to adequately service the insurance provided. [] Insurance will be placed only in insurance companies rated A+ or A in B.e,s,ts. Insurance placed in other companies will require a written report of the particulars, such report to be filed with the Risk Manager. [] The administration of the risk management policy will be a responsibility of the Risk Manager. Such responsibility includes placement of insurance coverage, maintenance of property appraisals and inventories, processing of claims and maintenance of loss records, and supervision of loss prevention activities. [] Settlement of claims are handled through the Risk Management Division and/or City Attorney Office. The Risk Manager is authorized to settle claims up to $3,000, the City Manager authorizes claim settlements between $3,000 and $20,000 and City Council approval is needed for settlements above $20,000. -11 - -12- Budget Highlights 1. Police- $250,000 The current complement of police officers has been reduced from 75 to 72 in accordance with earlier budget reductions which were made necessary by the state's elimination of financial aid to cities. The FY05 budget proposal maintains the number of officers at 7?. Originally there was to be 5 positions reduced from the Police Department; however, the department was able to reduce a number of other accounts such as training, education, uniform, and other related suppor~ expenses to meet an annualized expense reduction of $25O,OOO. 2. Police - Portable Alarm System - $4,200 The Police Department, through the use of a portable alarm system, can provide a service to our businesses and citizens who may have experienced problems with recurring burglaries, thefts, vandalization, and stalking. This system can be set up in various locations and provide for immediate notification to the police dispatch center when a crime situation may be occurring. 3. Permit Plan Pouches - $2,500 The Building Inspection Division of the Department of Housing and Inspection Services issues approximately 750 building permits per year. At the time of a building permit application issuance, a plan pouch is provided to the permittee. This pouch allows the contractor to post all required information in one location, allowing our inspectors easy access to the information. The pouch is designed in order that the information may be placed outside and protected from the weather. Typically for new construction the pouch is fastened to a temporary electrical service. Pouches are not issued for interior projects. 4. Senior Center Fees In response to reductions by the County as it relates to the contribution to the operations of the Senior Center, a fee for service program was initiated. Early estimates were the Center was to generate $57,000 a year in fees in order to help offset the reductions by the County government. Our revised estimates are now that the fees generated will be approximately $35,000 annually thereby leaving a $22,000 annual shortfall in the Center's operating budget. This shortfall has been considered in their operating budget but it will be necessary to revisit the fees and charges. The General Fund can provide the offsetting revenue of $22,000 for FY05. However, it is assumed the Senior Commission will be directed by the City Council to revisit the fee system. 5. Senior Center/Johnson County Agreement The County has indicated they would be providing financing for the Senior Center in FY05, and we have assumed a $75,000 annual contribution. There appears to be a willingness to enter a joint services agreement between the City and the County; however, the County's position is that such an agreement would be on an annual basis. We believe a longer-term agreement is necessary. In September of this year the Board of Supervisors conducted a survey of County services. It was interesting to note that the services for the elderly and paratransit were rated 3 and 4 by respondents to the recent County survey of the 15 core County services identified. -13- 6. Recycling Coordinator- $50,000 The budget proposes the addition of the position of Recycling Coordinator at the Landfill/Recycling Center. Our landfill has truly become a recycling center by locating the Furniture Project, as well as our latest investment in new facilities for recycling. The Furniture Project had traditionally been run by a human service agency, with the Landfill contributing substantially from Landfill revenues to the cost of operations. We have now reached the point where recycling activities require full-time attention. The new staff person would be available at the recycling center in order to coordinate collection and distribution of furniture, set up with other referring agencies, develop guidelines and other new diversion opportunities for furniture, a computer registration program in order to provide for information to match referring agencies and the needs of their clients and, in general, provide oversight for the recycling efforts. This position would be financed by Landfitl revenues. 7. Compost Equipment - $80,000 The Landfill has proposed the purchase of an additional front end loader to assist in the processing of compost. Currently Landfill staff process about 4,000 tons of yard waste per year. The finished product is available to homeowners, landscapers, and we have used this product as part of our own topsoil addition/capital project needs. This past year was the first time the demands of the product has outpaced its production. We believe this to be an indication of the product quality and the desire of the public. The additional loader would allow for reduction at overtime requirements to employees to process the yard waste. Also, we currently rent five such loaders for snow removal during the winter season at a cost of $2,000 per month (usually 4 months out of the year). We would be able to reduce the rentals from 5 to 4. The purchase of the additional loader would be from Landfill funds supported by the annual snow removal budget which is financed from Road Use Tax Funds. 8. Parks and Recreation Master Plan The Parks and Recreation Commission continues to believe in the importance of a Parks and Recreation Master Plan. The matter was funded in the past, but was eliminated due to budget reductions. The Commission feels strongly enough that they are recommending the remaining monies in the parkland acquisition fund finance a community-wide Parks and Recreation Master Plan. It is estimated that this plan would cost approximately $75,000. This request has not been incorporated into the FY05 budget proposal. While a worthwhile goal, the timing remains such that if the Council were to commit the monies necessary to finance the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, the parkland acquisition fund, would be lost to you as a potential source of monies if the State were to provide further budget reductions. The possibility of further State reductions remains imminent. -14- 9. Municipal Electric Study The proposed budget for FY05 does not include any monies for further municipal electric studies. The Council will ultimately need to declare its policy on this matter. Estimating the cost for further studies, legal challenges, etc., is difficult without policy direction. If you choose to proceed with this matter and wish to finance these studies, it would of necessity need to come from our operating reserves and/or reduce other services. We cannot recommend the use of the reserves at this time for such a purpose, with further State budget cuts being imminent. 10. Human Rights - Language Line - $3,000 The use of the City's lan~uaqe line has grown in use, notably in our Human Rights office. A $3,000 line item has been included in the FY05 Budget. Our experience has shown the need for translators for Spanish, Bosnian, Mandarin and Chinese languages. 11. Cable TV Franchise Negotiations - $30,000 An appropriation of $30,000 annually for three years from Cable revenues has been included in the Telecommunications Budget. This is for the purpose of legal and related professional assistance for negotiation of a new franchise agreement. 12. Homeland Security- Water Plant - $100,000 We have included a line item of $100,000 within the water budget for the purposes of homeland security responsibilities, notably at our water treatment plant. We do not now know the extent of these federal regulations, but we feel confident federal government will likely NOT reimburse the City for any such security measures. The monies appropriated will be used to comply with any federal mandate and if not used for this purpose would be returned to the water cash reserves. 13. Loss of General Fund Staff Positions The 3-year budget plan represents a total ~oss of 16 positions from the General Fund, or approximately 5% of City employment financed by the General Fund. These positions were identified in May/June of 2003 in response to the loss of State aid to the General Fund as well as continued decline in the rollback of residential property values. To the fullest extent possible, the positions are being vacated by a process of managed attrition. The following is a summary of those positions. To be vacated Status Police 3* 2 Fire 4 0 Planning 1 1 Library 1 1 Parks/Rec 2 1 Finance/Admin 2 ¼ 1 ½ Public Works 2 ½ 1 16'* 7 ½ * originally was 5 ** originally was 18 -15- 14. Loss of State Financial Assistance it is anticipated that State aid eliminated in FY04 will not be appropriated now or at any time in the near future. While it is difficult to predict State action, we do expect these lost revenues will not be available for financing of the General Fund. These losses are as follows: 0;3 0--4 05 Proposed State Population Allocation 596,000 -0- -0- Personal Properly Replacement 290,000 -0- -0- Bank Franchise Tax 97,000 95,000 -0_.c 913,000 95,000 -0- The two remaining programs of financial aid are the Road Use Tax (restricted in its use for road purposes only) and residential property tax exemptions funded by the State. The Road Use Tax transfer to the General Fund is $3,400,000 and the property tax exemptions are $800,000. We can only wait to see what actions the Legislature might choose with respect to any future reductions and/or whether these two other sources of General Fund income are jeopardized. 15. Health Insurance Health insurance continues its precipitous rise in cost. All national indicators advise of continued increases. The budget for FY05 as proposed represents a 13% increase in the cost of health insurance over FY04. You will recall in last year's budget for health insurance was increased by 13%. We expect those increases to continue for the next 2 to 3 planning years. We have projected accordingly. 16. Employee Pensions Although not as dramatic an increase as the cost of health insurance, employee pensions - that is police, fire, and general employees - are also rising. Police and fire secured additional benefits from the State legislature and simultaneously is a decline in pension system income. The budget reflects the cost of the benefits gained as enacted by the legislature as well as a general increase in the cost of pension expense. The City's cost for pension for police and fire employees was 20.5% per annual wage in FY04, up from 17% in FY03. It has now risen to 24.9% for FY05. Additionally social security and Medicare as the base wage grows have also been increased. 17. Water Rate Reduction The FY05 budget proposes a 5% reduction in the current water rates. -16- Future Issues During the development of a budget there are often ideas, suggestions, and other issues identified which may be worthy of future discussion and possible consideration in the budget process. New initiatives will be difficult given the fiscal condition of the state and its regulation of local government finances. However, we would hope at some time in the future, Iowa's financial problems will be resolved. The following represents a number of issues which were identified by staff as we reviewed operating and capital budgets for the upcoming fiscal year. These are intended to be proposals (ideas for the future) and although they have not had a detailed budget developed, we would like to secure your interest in determining whether you wish to pursue these matters further. 1. Consider construction of a speculative warehouse industrial building at the Aviation Commerce Park using reserves from our water, sewer, and landfill enterprise funds. This would involve development of a building of 15,000 - 20,000 square feet, with lease or purchase options in order to repay the loans from enterprise reserves. Land purchase and construction would be approximately $1,000,000. Shared financing with a private institution may be worthy of consideration. 2. Initiating discussions with property owners and developing a recreational plan for the large body of water (sand pit operation) located off of Gilbert Street/Sand Road south of our public works maintenance building. This area is being actively mined and at some time in the future could serve to be a community recreational asset, once the mining operation ceases. The site is approximately 90 acres. The value of the land appears to be in the product produced (sand and gravel). When complete, that is mined out, would the body of water and surrounding property serve as a possible recreational site? This could be a complex and long-term undertaking as we consider such a future recreational use of this area and the related capital investment and operational commitment. You may wish to refer this matter to the Parks and Recreation Commission for their review and comment. Additionally, a joint project with the County may be considered. 3. Probably no other complaint/concern about downtown creates greater consternation among Council and the community than the state of the alleys in our downtown. Try as we may with respect to steam cleaning, sweeping, enforcement action and assorted other City maintenance activities the alleys often are in disarray as a result of irresponsible actions such as dumping of trash, overflowing dumpsters, and lack of concern for appearance, health and safety. City ordinances currently provide for a permit issuance process for dumpsters. After detailed discussions a formal application of this part of the code is difficult if not impractical, that is without the commitment of the downtown business community. We would like to entertain discussions as to how the Council would like to proceed with a more serious "alley cleanup (and keep them clean) policy in downtown". This may involve a change in waste collection operations, such as the pickup of waste containers by City forces; regulating pickups by contracting for and thereby assuring more timely pickup by private haulers, issuing of some type of permit that clearly identifies the location of a dumpster, etc. Such a cleanup effort will require cooperation on the part of the property owners with a long-term goal of the alleys serving as throughways for pedestrian traffic. This could require an investment on the part of the city in order to dress up the alleys, which would include paving, better lighting, etc. We can only have such a policy if the downtown property owners are willing to provide a more serious approach and support enforcement of alley cleanup. -17- 4. In the review of various city-financed economic development initiatives, ICAD is provided $45,000 (reduced from $50,000 in '04) by the City's general fund and the Convention and Visitors Bureau is provided $120,000 (reduced from $140,000 in '04) from the hotel tax. A pre-eminent theme in our economic development policy has been the growth of the tax base, recognizing we as a city are primarily supported by property taxes, in that sales taxes, gambling revenues, and other state option taxes are not available. A secondary goal of our economic development policy and likely as important as the first is the creation of jobs for our citizens and future citizens. While the CVB performs a function of providing for a variety of economic activities, the mission of ICAD is policy more closely tied to City goals of tax base growth and job creation. I would suggest the Council may wish to consider an increase to ICAD and its economic development policies (as determined by the Council) and a reduction in the amount of monies directed to the CVB. This does come at a time when we should see growth in hotel taxes by way of the Plaza Towers project. This can mitigate some of the reduction to CVB. 5. As the City's emergency communication system ages there are new technologies available which need to be considered in the future. The replacement of hand-held public safety radios is now becoming a necessity ($14,000 per year). The emergency communication system was last upgraded in 1991 and is now in need of technological upgrade and selected equipment replacement. The radio/communication system has grown and expanded to accommodate other users such as our recent addition of the City of University Heights. While it has functioned well over the years, it is time to develop a plan to upgrade and replace the emergency communication system. As we plan to proceed with selected replacement equipment and consider a comprehensive system overhaul, we would suggest initiating a discussion as to the future of the emergency communication center, given the potential upgrade/overhaul cost approaching $1 million +/-. Considering a joint dispatch center (multiple jurisdiction) could have a profound effect over the long term on the provision of public safety services in both cost savings and better service. -18- FINANCIAL PLAN ANALYSIS GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES Governmental Activities consist of the General Fund, Debt Service Fund, the Trust and Agency Funds, Special Revenue Funds and Internal Service Funds. A. PROPERTY TAX Property tax is the single largest revenue source for the City General Fund, accounting for over 65% of FY2005 General Fund revenues. Taxable property in Iowa is categorized into distinct classes such as residential, commercial, industrial, utilities, or agricultural with each class having different procedures for assessing value for taxing purposes. To reduce the opportunity for dramatic tax shifts between the classes from year to year, a statutory limit of 4% a year has been imposed commonly called the growth limitation. For example, i~ statewide growth in any one class of property in any year exceeds 4%, the taxable value is reduced by a percentage so that growth of taxable valuation is at the 4% ceiling. This percentage is called the "rollback". Furthermore, residential property is subject to an additional restriction in which the statewide growth in residential property cannot exceed the growth in agricultural property. In other words, the taxable growth of residential property is either 4% or equal to the growth in agricultural property, whichever is lower. The following graph demonstrates the effect of the rollback on taxable valuation. In FY96 the residential rollback exempted $383 million or 20% of Iowa City's assessed valuation. In FY2005 the residential rollback will exempt ~1,150 million or 36% of the assessed valuation. Iowa City Taxable vs. Assessed Valuation 3.50 ~ 3.00 ~ ~ ~ ~ 100% ~ 2.50 Assessed '~ 2.00 Valuation '-~ 1.50 c · Taxable o 1.00 Assessed ' ~ 0.50 Valuation Fiscal Year (FY) -19- Iowa City - Property Valuations Commercial, Less: Exemptions Taxable Industrial & Military & Assessed Description Residential Utilities TIF Values Valuation Fiscal Year 2005 (Est) 100% Assessment $2,155,029,747 $1,039,634,649 $3,194,664,396 State rollback 0.484558 * - (1,117,443,510 Less: Exemptions (3,637,513) (3,637,513 Less Gas & Electric (46,187,625/ (46,187,625 Taxable Assessed Value- for Debt Levy $1,044,236,905 $1,032,983,981 $ (49,825,138) $2,027,395,748 Less TIF Increment - available for debt only (32,579,876) (32,579,876 Taxable Assessed Value - Regular Levies $1,994,815,872 · *State rolled back Commercial and Railroads to 99.257% for this year, Other Utilities and Industrial are at 100%. Fiscal Year 2004 100% Assessment $1,985,685,748 $974,592,309 $2,960,278,057 State rollback 0.513874 * - (965,293,449 Less: Exemptions (3,701,778) (3,701,778 Less Gas & Electric 145,505,0491 (45,505,049 Taxable Assessed Value- for Debt Levy $1,020,392,299 $974,592,309 $ (49,206,827) $1,945,777,781 Less TIF Increment - available for debt only (13,156,396) (13,156,396 Taxable Assessed Value - Regular Levies $1,932,621,385 · *Commercial, Industrial and Utilites are at 100% for this year. Fiscal Year 2003 100% Assessment $1,932,822,466 $974,518,848 $2,907,341,314 State rollback 0.516676 * - (953,312,414 Less: Exemptions (3,750,300) (3,750,300 Less Gas & Electric /45,012,616/ 145,012,616 Taxable Assessed Value- for Debt Levy $998,643,120 $955,385,780 $ (48,762,916) $1,905,265,984 Less TIF Increment - available for debt only (5,087,715) (5,087,715 Taxable Assessed Value - Regular Levies $1,900,178,269 · *State rolled back Commercial and Railroads to .977701. Other Utilities and Industrial are at 100%. Fiscal Year 2002 100% Assessment $1,719,115,220 $971,071,124 $2,690,186,344 State rorlback 0.562651 * - (751,853,372 Less: Exemptions (3,807,712) (3,807,712 Less Gas & Electric (45,363,928/ /45,363,928 Taxable Assessed Value- for Debt Levy $967,261,848 $971,071,124 $ (49,171,640) $1,889,161,332 Less TIF Increment - available for debt oniy (11,774,108) (11,774,108 Taxable Assessed Value - Regular Levies $1,877,387,224 Fiscal Year 2001 100% Assessment $1,668,069,820 $920,524,896 $2,588,594,716 State rollback 0.548525 * - (762,723,826 Less: Exemptions (3,866,050) (3,866,050 Less Gas & Electric (45,404,500/ (45,404,500 Taxable Assessed Value - for Debt Levy $914,978,054 $910,892,836 $ (49,270,550) $1,776,600,340 Less TIF Increment - available for debt only (11,604,365) (11,604,365 Taxable Assessed Value - Regular Levies $1,764,995,975 · State rolled back Railroads and Commercial to .987732; other Utilities and Industrial are at 100%. -20 - The City's property tax requests for FY2005 through FY2007, including the FY2004 certified tax requests, are shown as follows: FY2004 FY2005 LEVIES Tax Rate Tax Rate Dollars per $1,000 Dollars per $1,000 General Fund Tax Levies: General $15,654,233 8.100 $16,158,009 8.100 Transit 1,835,990 0.950 1,895,075 0.950 Tort Liability 470,748 0.244 695,971 0.349 Library 521,808 0.270 538,600 0.270 Subtotal: 18,482,779 9.564 19,287,655 9.669 Special Revenue Levies: Emergency 521,808 0.270 ' 538,600 0.270 Employee Benefits 6,169,064 3.192 6,856,401 3.437 Subtotal: 6,690,872 3.462 7,395,001 3.707 Debt Service 8,892,633 4.570 8,061,878 3.976 Total City Levy Property Taxes: 34,066,284 17.596 34,744,534 17.352 % Change from 6.56% 4.65% 1.99% -1.39% prior )'ear: Agland Levy 6,690 3.004 5,813 3.004 Total Property Taxes 34,072,974 --- 34,750,347 --- FY2006 FY2007 LEVIES Tax Rate Tax Rate Dollars per $1,000 Dollars per $1,000 General Fund Tax Levies: General $16,406,743 8.100 $16,868,223 8.100 Transit 1,924,248 0.950 1,978,372 0.950 Tort Liability 725,624 0.358 756,863 0.363 Library 546,891 0.270 562,274 0.270 Subtotal: 19,603,506 9.678 20,165,732 9.683 Special Revenue Levies: Emergency 546,891 0.270 562,274 0.270 Employee Benefits 7,850,990 3.876 8,706,231 4.181 Subtotal: 8,397,881 4.146 9,268,505 4.451 Debt Service 9,066,596 4.395 9,529,097 4.483 Total City Levy Property Taxes: 37,067,983 18.219 38,963,334 18.617 % Change from 6.69% 4.99% 5.11% 2.18% prior year: Agland Levy 6,690 3.004 6,690 3.004 Total Property Taxes 37,074,673 .... 38,970,024 .... -21 - The FY2005 property tax levy rate is $17.352 per $1,000 of taxable assessed valuation, compared to $17.596 in FY2004. The decrease in the levy rate is primarily due to the expected donation of $500,000 from the Library Foundation to assist in the payment of the $18,400,000 bond issue. There were increases in the tort liability levy due to increased property and liability insurance costs. Also, the employee benefits levy was higher due to rising health insurance costs and an increase in police and fire pension contribution rates from 20.5% to 24.92%. Estimated Property Tax Levy on $100,000 Residential Valuation (Iowa City portion) City Levy: $ '17.596 City Levy: $ 17.352 State Rollback: 51.3874% State Rollback: 48,4558% The General property tax levy of $8.10 is used in the General Fund to pay for the support of many services, such as police, fire, library, park and recreation services. The levy cannot exceed $8.10 per $1000 of taxable assessed valuation per State law. The Library tax levy of $.27 was voted in by a majority of the residents in 1991. The initial levy was used to expand Library services and continues to maintain that level of service. The Transit levy of $.95 is a "general" levy for transit purposes. State code requires that it be receipted into the general fund. Therefore, through FY2002, the transit levy was receipted into the general fund and then transferred to the Transit Enterprise Fund. Beginning in FY2003 Transit Operations moved into the general fund. The Tort Liability levy has no maximum levy and is based on estimated insurance premiums and claim losses within the self-insurance retention. The retention rate increased in FY2003 from $50,000 per occurrence to $200,000. The Emergency levy of $.27 has been utilized since FY2001. The General levy must be at $8.10 before this levy can be used, but is otherwise an unrestricted levy. The Employee Benefits property tax levy is used for General Fund employer costs of social security (FICA - 7.65%), Iowa Public Employees Retirement System costs (IPERS - 5.75%), Municipal Fire and Police Retirement System of Iowa (MFPRSI-24.92%, up from 20.5%), health insurance, life insurance, disability insurance, worker's compensation insurance premiums and unemployment compensation. The Employee Benefits Fund reflects the use of local Employee Benefits Retirement Fund Reserve monies to fund part of the employer share of the Police/Fire pension contribution. The Debt Service levy provides funds for the payment of the principal and interest on general obligation bonds. The levy can also be utilized to fund the payment of any judgments against the City. The Debt Service levy decreases from $8,892,633 in FY2004 to $8,061,878 in FY2005 and is projected to increase to $9,066,596 in FY2006 and to $9,529,097 in FY2007. Future debt issues include $4.4 million in general purpose bonds and $7.4 million in tax increment financing for 64-1a in FY2004. FY2005 and 2006 bond issues are estimated at $6.3 and $4.8 million, respectively. - 22 - Bm GENERAL FUND REVENUES FY2005 revenues total $41.8 million and represent a 4.2 % increase over the FY2004 budget of $40.2 million. Revenue is projected to increase 3.2% in FY2006 ($41,7 million) and 2.1% in FY2007 ($42.2 million). Property tax receipts (general levies, employee benefits transfer and emergency levy transfer) represent 65% of General Fund revenue and are proposed to increase by 6.6% in FY2005 to $27,289,283. Property taxes for FY2006 are proposed at $28.4 million, an increase of 4%. FY2007 property taxes are projected at $29.5 million, a 4% increase. Other Financing Sources 13% Use Of Money& Property FY2005 2% General Fund Total Revenue Misc. Charges For 4% Services 6% Other City Taxes 2% Intergovt. 5% Licenses ~ Permits 3% FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 Actual Amended Budget Estimated Estimated Property Taxes 24,417,216 25,599,085 27,289,283 28,373,577 29,500,243 Licenses 8, Permits 1,133,476 1,271,775 1,266,200 1,272,000 1,274,300 Intergovernmental Revenues 3,167,524 2,303,678 2,132,833 2,180,836 2,209,703 Other City Taxes 951,257 972,896 984,112 991,062 997,926 Charges For Sen,ices 2,525,452 2,501,216 2,526,455 2,533,459 2,557,438 Miscellaneous 1,271,708 1,386,952 1,411,710 1,326,510 1,336,510 Use Of Money & Property 490,804 675,000 810,000 785,000 760,000 Other Financing Soumes 6,290,715 5,454,948 5,362,279 5,646,173 5,393,552 Total GenFundRevenue: $ 40,248,152 $40,165,550 $41,782,872 $43,108,617 $44,029,672 - 23 - General Fund revenues are summarized into eight major categories. An analysis of each category follows: 1. Procertv Taxes - Direct Receipted Levies - This includes the general, transit, library, tort liability and agriculture land levies. The property tax revenue as proposed will be at the maximum allowable levy rates per State of Iowa Code, except for the tort liability levy. FY2005 properly tax revenues are projected to be $19.3 million or 4.4% greater than FY2004. FY2006 is projected to increase by 1.61% to $19.6 million and FY2007 by 2.87% to $20.2 million. Transferred Levies - The employee benefits ~evy property tax revenue is receipted into the Employee Benefits Fund and then transferred to the General Fund. In FY2005 the Employee Benefit Fund will transfer $7.4 million to the General Fund. The emergency levy is receipted first into the Emergency Levy Fund and then transferred to the General Fund. For FY2005, the General Fund will receive $551,071 from the Emergency Levy Fund. 2. Licenses & Permits - This category consists of revenue received for building and rental housing permits/inspections, plumbing and electrical license fees; taxi licenses; beer, liquor and cigarette permit/license fees (state regulated), sign permits, burial permits, animal licensing and some miscellaneous fees. Total FY2005 budget is $1,266,200. 3. Interqovernmental Fundinq - This revenue includes money that was received from the State of Iowa consisting of state aid, personal property replacement tax and bank franchise tax. Those revenues were eliminated by the state after the FY04 budget was adopted. Reimbursement from the University of Iowa for Fire projection was $1 million in FY2002 and is projected for FY2003 at $1.13 million. A portion of the University Fire contract is also receipted into the Fire Vehicle replacement fund and the Fire Employee Benefit fund. FY2001 general fund. Aisc this category includes monies that Johnson County provides Iowa City Public Library and the Senior Center. The funding level for the Library is based on a three-year average of rural patronage to total transactions at the library. The percentage is 8% for FY2003, or $285,512. The county has supported the Senior Center in prior years based on 20% of costs. In FY2003 the support would have amounted to $141,410. However, for FY2003 Johnson County Board of Supervisor's voted to limit this amount to $100,000. In FY04 the Board of Supervisors cut the Senior Center funding to $75,000. This plan continues with the funding level of $75,000 for FY05 and thereafter. 4. Other City Taxes - This includes hotel/motel tax of 7%. Actual receipts are allocated as follows: Police Patrol (50%), Convention and Visitors Bureau (22.5%), Parks and recreational facilities (27.5%). FY05 budgeted revenues are $550,000. This category also includes a gas and electric excise tax, which the state legislature has reclassified from a property tax to a usage tax. Cities were in a revenue neutral period from FY2001 through FY2003 where they were guaranteed to receive at least the equivalent of their property tax levy from gas and electric. The valuation is still within the assessed valuation for debt capacity; however beginning in FY2004 the revenues will no longer be guaranteed to match or exceed the property tax rate. 5. Charges for Services - This revenue source consist of Transit fees, recreation fees, miscellaneous police and fire fees, plan checking fees, animal boarding fees, and Senior Center membership fees. Transit fees for FY2005 are projected at $730,300. Recreation Division fees and charges revenue will be reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission to comply with the goal of receiving 40% of the Division revenue through fees. 6. Miscellaneous - This category includes a variety of different revenue sources. The largest are parking fines other than expired meters ($700,000), Magistrate Court fines and surcharges ($310,000), and reimbursement of expenses ($301,71'0) and loan repayment from the Englert Theatre ($100,000.) 7. Use of Money & Property- This revenue source consists of interest income, sale of animals from the - 24 - Animal Care and Adoption Center, Park shelter rental fees, locker rentals, and installment Sale proceeds for sale of the Peninsula property. Interest income earned on the landfill closure reserve has been deposited in the general fund since FY2003. New revenue of $260,000 is expected from parking and rental fees generated from Court Street Transpodation Center. 8. OtherFinancingSources-RoadUseTax(RUT)transfersinare64%ofthiscategory, or $3,429,867 for FY2005. The portion of RUT transferred to the general fund is used to pay the net operating costs of the Traffic Engineering and Streets Divisions. Also a position in the Forestry Division that is directly related to the maintenance of City street right-of-way is funded from RUT. Administrative chargebacks is the other major source of revenue in this classification, a revenue budget of $1,479,000 is expected for FY05. The administrative chargeback is a mechanism for funding operations that business type funds, i.e. Wastewater, Water, & Solid Waste, would incur in their respective fund, but for the centralization of customer service, finance, and other administrative functions that are expenses of the General Fund. -25- C. GENERAL FUND - EXPENDITURES The proposed General Fund expenditure budget in FY2005 is $41,763,352 compared to the current FY2004 budget of $40,561,954 and represents a 3% increase in expenditure levels. A comparison of dollars by major expenditure classification is provided below: FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 Actual Amended Budget Estimated Estimated Personnel 26,828,512 28,575,706 29,769,162 31,447,210 33,000,319 Commodities 1,540,499 1,726,242 1,774,929 1,808,188 1,844,370 Services And Charges 6,962,999 7,823,498 7,761,903 8,038,060 8,032,379 Capital Outlay 1,383,759 1,515,138 1,214,766 ~1,038,134 1,109,100 Transfers 842,765 834,146 828,592 857,936 865,989 Contingency 87,224 414,000 428,000 441,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 37,558,534 40,561,954 41,763,352 43,617,528 45,293,157 % Change 8.0% 3.0% 4.4% 3.8% General Fund Expenditures by Category 50,000 ~ 45,000 = 40,000 O c3 35,000 "~ 30,000 ~n ~' 25,000 rqContingency = 20,000 ~ E~ Transfers ~ 15,000 = o 10,000 · Capital Outlay .c 5,000 ~ [] Services And Charges .,,~ ~ ..e"' .,.e"' ...e'~' · Commodities ,,~0'~ .~ ~.b'-'> ~,~ ~x,' E~Personnel Fiscal Year (FY) Personnel expenditures account for approximately 71% of General Fund expenditures and include salaries and benefits (health, life, disability insurance, and employer share of FICA, IPERS, and Police/Fire retirement contributions). The FY2005 budget includes scheduled step increases and an estimated bargained adjustment. Personnel expenditures are primarily controlled by collective bargaining agreements. Most employees of the City are represented by one of three unions: AFSCME (Local #183), the Police Labor Relations Organization (PLR)) of Iowa City, and the Iowa City Association of Professional Fire Fighters, IAFF, AFL-CIO (Local #610). All supervisory, confidential, temporary and other employees who are excluded by law in Chapter 20 of the Code of Iowa are excluded from the units and from the terms, conditions or application of the Agreement. - 26 - The AFSCME union represents the majority of City employees. This Union is comprised of two bargaining units, one composed exclusively of Library employees and the other composed of employees in all other departments. AFSCME ratified a one-year contract that spans July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2004. This agreement included a 3% adjustment to wages in July 2003 plus any step increases. Sworn police officers are represented by the Police Labor Relations Organizations (PLRO) of Iowa City. The bargaining unit is composed of all Iowa City police officers. Exempt from the unit are the police chief, captains, lieutenants, sergeants, and other confidential, administrative, supervisory and less than half-time employees. The PLRO ratified a one-year contract that spans July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2004. This agreement included a 3% adjustment to wages in July 2003 plus any step increases. The firefighters are represented by the Iowa City Association of Professional Fire Fighters (IAFF), AFL-CIO (Local #610). The bargaining unit is composed of firefighters, lieutenants, and captains. Exempt from the unit are the fire chief, fire marshal and battalion chiefs. The IAFF and City ratified a one-year contract that spans July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2004. This agreement included a 2.75% adjustment to wages in July 2003 plus any step increases. The Personnel Rules and Regulations cover employees who are administrative, supervisory or otherwise ineligible for collective bargaining. Some employees are eligible for Civil Service. Salaries and benefit appropriations are determined by the City Council upon the recommendation of the City Manager. FY2005 through FY2007 adjustments to pay plans for approximately 100 administrative and confidential employees will be the same percentages as the AFSCME unit, per resolution adopted by the City Council. Commodities consist primarily of materials that are consumed or depleted such as, office and cleaning supplies, fuels, and materials for repair and maintenance of buildings, streets, and equipment. Services and Charges include funding of Human Services (Aid to Agencies) payments, printing, insurance, training and education, postage, various service contracts, repairs and maintenance to vehicles, equipment and buildings, utility costs and chargebacks for internal services. The City Council appropriates money annually from the General Fund in support of Human Services agencies. The FY2005 appropriation is proposed at $421,315, which is five percent (-5%) less than FY2004 appropriations. FY2004 was also reduced five percent (-5%) from FY2003 levels in accordance with Council direction as a direct result of state legislative cuts. FY2005 Human Services support is proposed at $281,315 from the General Fund; $105,000 from the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG); and an abatement of $35,000 from the Water and Wastewater Funds estimated for Agency utility usage for the fiscal year. General Fund support of community events is recommended at $34,574 for FY2005. Similar to Human Services, this represents a second year of funding cuts, with a ten-percent decrease (-10%) in both FY2004 and FY2005. For a detailed listing of the funding of Human Service and Community Event agencies from FY03 to FY05 see the Non-Operational Administration budget table on page 101. -27 - Transfers are primarily forintedund toan repayments, transfers ~ library equipment reserves and capital improvement proje~ funding. Following is an itemized listing of actualtransfers from the General Fund for FY2002 and FY2003, the FY2004 budget, FY2005 proposed budget, and pr~ections for FY2006 and FY2007. GENERAL FUND FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 TRANSFER TO Actual Amended Budget Estimated Estimated Airport Operations 110,538 183,000 167,000 188,000 188,000 JCCOG 154,351 129,701 154,912 163,256 171,309 Landfill Loan Repay - Englert Theatre 160,783 160,783 160,783 160,783 160,783 Landfill Loan Repay - Non Op. Admin. 30,400 30,400 30,400 30,400 30,400 CIP-Civic Center, Airport, All Other 69,056 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Landfill Loan Repay - Fire 52,089 52,089 52,089 52,089 52,089 Landfill - H.I.S. Loan Repay 25,524 25,524 Landfill - Mercer/Scanlon Loan Repay 88,097 88,097 88,097 88,097 88,097 Library-Open Access Fees 20,000 Library-Computer RepL Reserve 31,250 31,250 39,062 39,062 39,062 Library-Cable Channel Repl. 14,738 - 14,738 17,685 17,685 17,685 Parking-Senior Center 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Landfill-Loan Repayment--Sr. Center 65,940 73,564 73,554 73,564 73,564 Total Transfer from General Fund 842,766 834,146 828,592 857,936 865,989 The FY2003 original contingency budget was $300,000. Contingency in the past has been based on approximately 1% of total expenditures. FY2005, FY2006 and FY2007 are at $414,000, $428,000, and 9441,000 respectively, which ranges between 0.97% and 0.99% of total General Fund expenditures. -28- D. GENERAL FUND YEAR-END CASH BALANCE The City Council established guidelines starting in FY99 to maintain cash balances at a five-year average of 20% of expenditures, but not less than 15%. That policy ensures that operating cash balances will be maintained at a level to ensure sufficient cash flow throughout the fiscal year. The following table depicts the General Fund Operating cash p~sition for fiscal years 2003 through 2007. FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 Actual Amended Proposed Estimated Estimated Beginning Balance $ 10,471,292 $ 13,160,910 $ 12,764,506 $ 12,784,026 $ 12,275,115 Receipts 40,248,152 40,165,550 41,782,872 43,108,617 44,029,672 Expenditures -37,558,534 -40,561,954 -41,763,352 -43,617,528 -45,293,157 Ending Balance $ 13,160,910 $ 12,764,506 $ 12,784,026 $ 12,275,115 $ 11,011,630 Balance as a % of 35.0% 31.5% 30.6% 28.1% 24.3 °/~ Expenditures: The Operating Cash Fund Balance is used to provide for cash flow in the first quarter of the next fiscal year because the majority of property taxes are not received until October/November and cash balances are drawn down. The following chart shows cash flow needs or how expenditures have exceeded receipts in the first three months for the past five years. 3 Months @ Receipts Expenditures Shortfall in Sept. 30 Receipts FY04 4,593,134 11,065,912 (6,472,778) FY03 4,806,797 9,410,440 (4,603,643) FY02 4,387,107 8,818,510 (4,431,403) FY01 4,449,250 9,233,286 (4,784,036) FYO0 4,321,697 8,730,848 (4,409,151) -29 - GENERAL FUND PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 10,471,292 13,160,910 12,764,506 12,784,026 12,270,015 Property Taxes 15~359,636 15,660,923 16,163,822 16,412,556 16,874,036 Transit Levy ' 1,800,627 1,835,990 1,895,075 1,924,248 1,978,372 Library Levy 523,073 521,808 538,600 546,891 562,274 Tort Levy 409,135 470,748 698,971 725,624 756,863 Monies & Credits Tax 31,407 8,000 · 8,000 8,000 8,000 Military Credits 12,212 12,125 12,125 12,125 12,125 Personal Property Replacement 2~1,10~ 0 0 0 0 Licenses & Permits 105,154 100,~05 101,700 101,200 100 700 Building Permits & Inspections 821,056 873,470 909,200 915,500 923 300 Housing Permits & Inspections 207,266 297,600 255,300 255,300 250 300 Cemetery Fees & Charges 67,874 65,000 65,000 65,000 65 000 Magistrates Court Fines & Fees 339,845 289,500 310,000 325,000 335 000 Parking Fines 461~155 700,000 700,000 700,000 700 000 Charges For Services 11,329 5,275 5,275 5,275 5 275 Recreation Fees 682,303 896,834 762,709 762,484 762 484 Senior Center Fees 9,255 57,000 44,000 44,000 44 000 Police Services 116,568 73,018 116,050 106,050 116 050 University Fire Contract 1,101,624 1,162,835 1,225,199 1,272,185 1,300,000 Animal Control Services 217,727 157,841 202,723 208,304 213,590 Bldg & Development Fees 61,910 34,500 48,500 48,500 48,500 Sdwlk/Str Rep/maint 40,597 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Library Services 547,765 539,448 526,898 538,546 547,239 Fees - Contracted Services 604 0 0 0 0 Admin Expense Chargeback 1,344,470 1,344,247 1,404,589 1,446,426 1,475,155 County - Senior Center Support 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Transit Fees 27,263 0 260,000 260,000 260,000 Bus Fares 770,124 647,300 730,300 730,300 730,300 Local Governments 0 0 5,000 0 0 Univ. Heights Transit 28E 27,309 28,069 29,051 30,068 31,120 Univ. Heights Dispatch 0 42,275 42,275 42,275 42,275 Gas / Elec. Use Tax 387,773 422,896 434,112 441,062 447,926 State Population Allocation 571,581 0 0 0 0 Bank Franchise Tax 184,348 95,000 0 0 0 Other State Grants 144,293 101,500 55,000 55,000 55,000 Hotel/Motel Tax 563,484 550,000 550,000 550,000 550,000 Library Open Access 49,920 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 Federal Grants 4,400 0 0 0 0 Federal Transit Assist. 405,540 449,061 402,180 402,180 402,180 State Transit Assist. 287,405 315,938 270,128 270,128 270,128 Interest Income 376,286 375,000 250,000 225,000 200,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 370,708 297,452 301,710 301,510 301,510 Sale of Land 86,651 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 Loan Repayments 100,000 100,000 100,000 0 0 City Attorney Chargeback 103,793 73,125 75,000 75,000 75,000 Transfer from Road Use Tax 2,852,809 3,055,057 3,429,867 3,39~,747 3,489,397 Transfer: Employee Benefits 5,758,052 6,555,397 7,424,619 8,184,584 8,733,451 Transfer:Emergency Levy 523,074 534,094 551,071 559,549 575,122 Transfer from Parking Fund 200,000 227,200 200,000 200,000 200,000 Transfer from Broadband Fund 82,074 153,784 152,823 153,000 154,000 Miscellaneous Transfer 589,731 1,535 0 0 0 Transfer frm Parkland Acq 0 100,000 100,000 100,000 0 G.O. Bonds for Capital Outlay 1,117,838 500,000 0 281,000 0 Total Receipts 40,248,152 40,165,550 41,787,872 43,108,617 44,029,672 Personnel 26,828,512 28,575,706 29,769,162 31,447,210 33,000,319 Commodities 1,540,499 1,726,242 1,774,929 1,808,188 1,844,370 Services And Charges 6,962,999 7,823,498 7,766,903 8,043,160 8,037,581 Capital Outlay 1,383,759 1,515,138 1,214,766 1,038,134 1,109,100 Transfers 842,765 834,146 828,592 857,936 865,989 Contingency 0 87,224 414,000 428,000 441,000 Total Expenditures ' 37,558,534 40,561,954 41,768,352 43,622,628 45,298,359 Ending Balance 13,160,910 12,764,506 12,784,026 12,270,015 11,001,328 -30- CITY OF IOWA CITY GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES SUMMARY BY DIVISION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 ACTIVITY ACTUAL BUDGET PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION City Council 114 709 143251 112 638 115 887 119263 City Clerk 338 168 395828 367 469 434 073 398878 City Attorney 528 832 554657 576 381 604 750 632057 City Manager 464 762 461811 482 066 501 952 521 593 Human Relations 359 318 432491 434 400 451 366 467 933 Finance Dept. Administration 330 347 338513 293 493 305 602 318020 Accounting & Reporting 497 915 558.622 573 890 598 926 622 363 Central Procurement 230 272 247019 248 567 260 534 272357 Treasury 850 270 929.828 943 576 979 838 1,015,067 Document Services 250 102 249.050 224 513 232 204 256,874 Risk Management 352 709 581 823 712 080 742 410 774,156 Government Buildings 392 747 430.448 443 552 471 501 482,744 Human Rights Activities 197 440 219.415 210 340 219 414 228,539 Non-operational Admin. 1,144,665 1,356,156 1,392,420 1,444 570 1,474,606 Pcd Dept. Administration 214 533 226,082 222,723 232 553 243,011 Urban Planning 351 325 327,539 332,997 348 297 362,840 Neigborhood Services 105 979 113,196 113,734 118 253 122,460 Public Art 3 097 4,346 3,281 3 336 3,392 Comm. Dev.-non Grant Activity 17 830 57,059 58,617 61,841 64,747 Economic Development 118 268 120,807 114,511 117,391 120,147 Engineering 725 536 797,455 761,827 799,837 834,331 Public Works 197 055 203,591 201,749 212,129 221,976 Cbd Maintenance 358 567 392,258 433,548 448,902 463,682 Energy Conservation 12 054 32,576 34,772 36,700 38,460 Police Protection 7,412,945 8,040,791 8,253,329 8,669,182 9,151,609 Fire Protection 4,363,876 4,857,280 4,995,475 5,270,997 5,543,754 Shelter Operations & Admin 456,681 448,482 477,384 497,481 514,502 Deer Control 1,295 100,000 88 105,089 90 His Department Administration 318,890 317,587 294,746 308,494 321,397 Building Inspection 489,876 522,087 550,241 577,293 602,339 Housing Inspections 276,578 293,193 309,337 324,060 337,728 Traffic Engineering 996,755 1,039,631 1,142,495 1,177,651 1,211,691 Streets Maintenance 2,267,609 2,409,657 2,710,249 2,778,284 2,872,631 Forestry Operations 328,587 315,593 348,389 362,809 374,486 Cemetery 265,418 331,089 312,168 319,398 331,679 Recreation 2,602,344 2,638,272 2,569,946 2,596,112 2,660,751 Parks 1,276,049 1,325,024 1,340,925 1,386,659 1,435,280 Library 3,745,025 3,896,161 4,035,933 4,179,617 4,351,490 Library Special Revenues 182,929 80,061 110,047 98,792 101,600 Parks & Rec Dept. Admin. 196,476 205,576 210,326 220,864 230,877 Senior Center 650,915 674,969 685,656 710,321 734,257 Transit 3,569,786 3,892,680 4,128,474 4,297,259 4,462,702 GRAND TOTAL 37,558,534 40,561,954 41,768,352 43,622,628 45,298,359 -31 - This fund provides for payment of the principal and interest due on general obligation debt of the City. The Debt Service Property Tax levy and transfers from Parking, Wastewater, and Water Enterprise funds, and the 64-1a Tax Increment fund. Debt Service issuance in FY2005 includes $6.3 million in general purpose bonds and $7.4 million in TIF financing for 64-1a. FY2006 and 2007 issues are estimated at $4.8 and $4.5 million, respectively. Allowable Debt Margin Outstanding Debt as % of Fiscal Total Property (5% of Total Property Debt Allowable Year Valuation Val.) at July I Debt Margin FY98 2,185,166,884 109,258,344 31,390,000 29% FY99 2,371,395,259 118,569,763 41,675,000 35% FY00 2,416,782,699 120,839,135 46,165,000 38% FY01 2,591,030,038 129,551,502 41,190,000 32% FY02 2,692,448,464 134,622,423 61,565,000 46% FY03 2,909,644,383 145,482,219 85,260,000 59% FY04 2,962,505,107 148,125,255 91,355,000 62% *FY05 3,051,380,260 152,569,013 89,495,000 59% *FY06 3,104,779,415 155,238,971 89,435,000 58% *FY07 3,159,113,055 157,955,653 87,550,000 55% * Estimate As stated in the City's Fiscal Policy, "Debt incurred as a general obligation of the City of Iowa City shall not exceed statutory limits: presently 5% of the total assessed value of property within the corporate limits as established by the City Assessor." The following schedule and graph show current and estimated future debt margins for the City. Total property valuation amounts are actual property valuations for FY98 -FY2004, but are estimates for FY2005 through FY2007. - 32 - Below is a graphical depiction of the past, present, and proposed debt issuance compared to allowable legal debt margin. 180 , 160 G.O. Debt Outstanding 14o - by Fiscal Year - ~ 120 '~ 100 80 .o_ ~ 60 BAJlowable Debt Margin ~ (5% of Total Property Val.) 20 [] Outstanding Debt at July 1 0 Fiscal Year (FY) * Estimate - 33 - The Fiscal Policy also includes the guideline that "the debt service levy shall not exceed 25% of the city levy in any one fiscal year." The debt service levy did reach this percentage in FY2003 and FY2004. The proposed Capital Improvement Program (FY2004-2008) presented in this document will bring the levy below the 25% margin in FY2005, FY2006, and FY200?. The following chart shows the debt service levy as a percentage of the city levy for FY97 through FY2007. The levies for FY97-FY04 are certified; the levies for FY2005-FY2007 are projected. Debt Service Levy As a Percentage of Total Property Tax Levy 30% (25% Recommended Maximum) 24% / 250/0 20% 200/0/'' ~,., ;o 20% 10% w10% 5% * Estimated - 34 - F. INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Internal Service funds include the Equipment Maintenance Fund, Equipment Replacement Fund, the Central Services Fund, the Risk Management Loss Reserve Fund, the Health Insurance Reserve Fund and Information Technology Services Fund. The Equipment Maintenance Fund provides maintenance for all City vehicles and equipment and rents vehicles to other City departments from a central vehicle pool. Funding is provided from a chargebacks to all departments for the maintenance services and the rentals of vehicles. The Equipment Replacement Fund is used to replace most rolling stock. Funding is provided from an annual chargebacks to all departments based on the estimated replacement value at the time of replacement. The information Technology Services Fund accounts for the operating support and replacement of all computer equipment for most of the City. All divisions are charged for computer operating support and equipment replacement except for Library, Cable TV and HUD financed departments such as C.D.B.G. and the Housing Authority. The Central Services Fund covers the operation of copiers, mail services and radio maintenance. All of these functions are available to all City departments who are charged based upon the services utilized. The Risk Management Loss Reserve Fund accounts for the liability for all funds. All funds are charged based on their loss experience and pro rata share of the insurance premium. Market conditions within the insurance industry have resulted in an increase in the City's self-insured retention amount from $50,000 per occurrence to $200,000. The Health Insurance Reserve accounts for the actual payment of all health and dental claims. Premiums are based on actuarially sound estimates and charged to each department. Health insurance premiums increased by 24.5% in FY02, 16.1% in FY03 and are projected to increase 15% in FY04, 13% in FY05, 10% in FY06 and 5% in FY07. - 35 - G. SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS The Special Revenue Funds include the Employee Benefits Fund, Community Development Block Grant Fund (CDBG), Road Use Tax Fund, Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG), Special Assessments, Economic Development Fund, and Tax Increment Financing funds. The Employee Benefits Fund accounts for the receipt of property taxes levied to pay the employer share of benefits of employees in the General Fund. Transfers to the General Fund are made from this fund. Local public safety reserve funds of $585,000 annually are included as funding for current police/fire pension costs as in past years. The local public safety reserve is a restricted fund available only for police and fire pension costs. It has been used to reduce the police / fire employee benefit property taxes since the state acquired the police / fire pension system. The fund balance at the end of FY2004 is estimated at $883,701 and $309,572 at the end of FY2005. The purpose for this fund will have been completed in FY2006 and the employee benefits levy will begin levying for the full cost of the police / fire pension costs after that time. The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Fund accounts for revenue f~om the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development programs and is restricted in u~e for eligible projects as defined by Federal regulations The Road Use Tax Fund accounts for State distributed revenues based on gasoline taxes, license fees and weight taxes. These funds are distributed back to cities based on a per capita formula and are used to pay for street and traffic engineering maintenance, planning and construction-related costs: Per capita estimates for FY2005 - 2007 are $82.50, $83.50 and $84.50 respeotively. Based on an Iowa City population of 62,380; Road Use Tax funding is estimated at $5.2 million, $5.3 million and $5.33 million annually during the next three years. Johnson County Council of Governments (JCCOG) provides countywide planning assistance for transportation, human services and solid waste planning. The City of Iowa City acts as custodian for the fund and provides accounting and payroll services. The City is utilizing Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts for economic development in various locations throughout Iowa City. Sycamore Mall has been improved and is receiving property tax rebates on the incremental valuation. Also property tax rebates are being utilized in Sycamore and First Avenue Urban Renewal District, Scott Six Industrial Park Urban Renewal District, and the Northgate Corporate Park Urban Renewal District. In the City-University Project I Urban Renewal District, Plaza Towers L.L.C plans to construct two 14-story buildings on parcel 64-1A adjacent to the Iowa City Public Library this fiscal year. The city will issue approximately $7.415 million in general obligation bonds for this project. Property taxes from the increase in valuation at this site and in the remainder of the district will be used to pay principal and interest on the debt. Several General Fund reserves have been segregated out of the General Fund in order to more easily see the unrestricted General Fund balance. These include reserves for Library Equipment Replacement, Library Computer Replacement, Parkland Acquisition and Parkland Development. A number of reserve funds appear in the Enterprise Fund section of the Financial Plan. Revenue bond covenants require that Parking, Water and the Wastewater Treatment Funds set aside a number of special reserve accounts. Landfill and Broadband Telecommunications also have separate reserves for future capital expenditures. Landfill's reserve is to be used for the purchase of additional land, cell construction, and cell closure costs. Broadband Telecommunications' reserve is for future equipment replacement. - 36 - The Business-type Funds include Parking, Wastewater Treatment, Water, Refuse, Landfill, Airport, Broadband Telecommunications, Housing Authority, and Stormwater Management. These are primarily self-supported from user fees for services provided with the exception of Airport and Housing Authority. Note that the Stormwater Management fee has not been enacted as of December 18, 2003. 1. pARKING Numerous changes occurred in FY2002 which impacted Parking Fund's revenue, including an increase to hourly ramp rates, metered parking rates, and a change in time limits for some meters adjacent to the Central Business District. In FY04 parking fine dollar limits by the Iowa legislature. City Council increased the $5 tickets to $10 for the General Fund and increased the $3 parking meter tickets to $5 for the Parking Fund. Ticket revenue is receipted into the Parking Fund to satisfy revenue require- ments for Parking Revenue bond covenants. FY2005 transfers totaling $1,687,654 are just over 40% of the operating budget and include funding for debt payment ($1,308,111) and an annual transfer to the Parking Improvement Reserve. 2. WASTEWATER TREATMENT Transfers out of Wastewater are the largest portions (62%) of the operating budget. Transfers fund principal and interest payments on Sewer Revenue sinking funds and annual sewer projects as scheduled in the Capital Improvements Program. The new water treatment plant began operations in the spring of 2003. Funding for the project was provided by this fund's cash balance, accumulated for this purpose, and through the issuance of water revenue bonds. City Council approved a five-percent (-5%) decrease to water user fees based on completion of the water treatment plant and existing fund balance, The rate decrease will be effective in July 2603. This budget proposes an additional five-percent (-5%) decrease for FY05. Transfers out represent forty nine percent (55%) of FY04 total expenditures, providing funding for annual water improvement projects and scheduled repayment of outstanding debt. 4. REFUSE There are no significant changes planned for Refuse operations in the FY2005 - 2007 Financial Plan. A pilot program began in FY2002 to install rollout trash containers that can be emptied by an automated arm-mechanism attached to the back of the vehicle. The changeover has continued in FY2003 and is planned for the fall of FY2004. 5. LANDFILL Completion and opening of the Hazardn,~s Waste Recycling Facility in FY2003 provides daily operations of a drep-off facility for paints, batteries and other toxic chemicals which require recycling. In addition to hazard waste recycling, other recycling initiatives such as - 37 - furniture salvage and distribution have grown in popularity. That initiative was supported by a human service agency. The FY05 budget proposes an additional employee be hired to provide coordination of all recycling services at the Landfill. Construction of another landfill cell is proposed for FY07. The project cost is $2,300,000. 6. AIRPORT A separate review of airport finances was completed during FY2002 by the City Council, City Manager and Finance Administration due to projected shortfalls in lease revenue in FY2002. The property tax subsidy has increased from $99,600 in FY2001 to $183,000 in FY2004 and represents 52% of the Airport operating budget. Rental income has decreased significantly from $205,785 in FY2001 to $160,275 in FY2004, primarily due to a new FBO (fixed based operator) contract. The Airport Commission has hired a consulting firm to provide a business plan to address Airport finances and operations. Transfers out include interfund loan repayments, which financed construction of four airport hangar buildings. The proposed Airport budget reflects the restructuring of these loans to match loan repayments to actual lease revenue on the individual hangars. 7. BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS This fund accounts for the Cable TV operations of the City. The funding source is a 5% cable franchise fee agreement with Mediacom. The agreement also includes a fifty cents per month per customer local programming fee. Transfers out of Broadband includes a subsidy to the Library Channel 10 ($52,823) for operation costs, a transfer of $100,000 to the General Fund, and a transfer of $11,000 replacement reserve. 8. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT The stormwater utility fund is a new fund created to account for operations in managing stormwater runoff within the City limits. Federal mandates require municipal entities to begin a collection and treatment of stormwater. Expected funding will come from a stormwater fee. The Public Works division has contracted for mapping necessary to develop the stormwater fee schedule and policy. Use of these monies will go to improvement projects that address stormwater issues. 9. HOUSING AUTHORITY The Housing Authority Fund accounts for revenue from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development programs to assist individuals and families in obtaining affordable housing. -38- ALL FUNDS SUMMARY FY2003 I TOTAL .'1 BALANCE TOTAL DISBURSE- BALANCE FUND 06130102 i RECEIPTS MENTS I 06130103 1. GENERAL FUND i 10,471,292 40,248,i52 37,558,534 13,160,910 2~ !DEBT SERVICE FUND 402,i04 10,684,173 !0,690,528 i 395,749 3. ~cAPITAL PROJECTS 3~060,142 23,078,529 26,942,270 (803,599) 4. CiP BOND PROCEEDS 26,i39,731 i 8,730,061 17,817,506 17,052,286 5. PARKING SYSTEM OPERATIONS i 522,i44I 4,436,047 4,507,987 [ 450,204 6. PARKING BOND RETIREMENT & RESERVEI 2,509,762 i 2,229,488 1,365,724 3,373,526 7. WASTEWATER TRMT OPERI 4,363,026~. i3,396,862 13,8~6,404 ! 3,901,484~ 81 WASTEWATER BONE) RET & RES FUNDS I 4'1~1~3~397 6,900,095 i 33,242,348 ! 14,811,144 9. r~ATEROPERi ~ M~,iNT. ' I 4,9251978 I i(},126,153. 8,673'~99 6,378,5~ 10 iWATER BOND RE~& RES FUNDS [ 5'5191025 , 3,484,432 i ~58~'§43 7,41_-_5,_5~!~_4 i:1: REFUSE bC)LLEC~ION OPERATi~N~ 879,18~ 2,162,138 ! 2,158,635 882,690 12. ~NDFiLL OPERATIONS 8,0131135 I 3,889,101 ~ 2,701,933 9,200~3~- 13. LANDFILL RESERVE i 8,608,582 [ 1,944,489 ~,~,-540 9,477,531 _ 14. AIRPORT O~-R~q~' _. ~ I --316,2~2~ 310,977 5,323 15. MASS TRANSIT OPERATIONS 583,213 I 583,213 16. TRANSIT RESERVES ~60~66 ~0_7966- 17. BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS 577,110 1,047,782 I 751,439 873,453 18. BTC RESERVES 76,389 13,033 ! 18,237 7_1~,18__5_ 19. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 75 ! 75 20. ESCROW ACCOUNT~ 2,!2~,78~9 $~1,767 618,195 2,182,361 21. LIBRARY DEV. OFFICE SALARY 73 81,479 81,238 314 "2-~ LIBRARY EQUIPMENT RESERVES . i2(~f1~ 51,495 67,020 105,185 23. PARK LAND RESERVES 361,!_47 35,889 225 396,811 24. TRANSIT REPLACEMENT RESERVE 260,995 76,026 184,969 25. FIRE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT RES 158,371 158,371 26. JCCOG 9,48~. 550,495 552,937 7,047 27. GO BOND TRUST 10,959,690 6,831,775 4,127,915 28. EMPLOYEE COMPUTER PURCHASE (109,196) 59,286 (49,910} - 2~. IOWA CI~HOUSING AUTHORITY 2~,049,834 ~' 7,087,258 6_,5~9~,_4~_ 5 2,567,647 30. EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (15,456). 114,062 105,565 (6,959} 31. GEN FUND LOAN REPAYMENTS _ . 105,834 3,026 _ 108,860 32. FHLB - HOUSING REHAB (7,335) 1,200 (6,135} 33. HOUSING PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 109,780 43,356 39,759 !13,377 34. ENERGY CONSERVATION 145,428 _ 6,779 !52,207 , 35. IFA RENTAL REHAB REPAYMENTS ~27,~161 8,360 35,521 36. SPEC ASSESSMENT FUND 9,880 ~ 9,871 9 37. ROAD USE TAX i 2,185,207 5,15_4,21~7 4:125,821 3,213,603- 38. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 574,745 6,274,407 6,246,738 602,414 39. PUBLIC SAFETY RESERVE 1,988,008 62,392 585,140 1,465,260 40. EMERGENCY LEVY I _523,074 . 523,074 41. CDBG METRO ENTITLEMEN¥ ~ (19,254)I 2,115,910 2,086,228 t0,428 42. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SVCS 352,736 1,525,288 1,411,122 466,902 43. REPLACEMENT FUND _ 546,196 295,184; ~22,252 619,128 44. POLICE CMPTR REPLACEMENT 18~0~_524 104,979 38,059 247,~?.~' 45. GENERAL FLEET MAINTENANCE 74,72_~ 1,752,231 1,635,766 191,189 46. EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ~ 2,522,324 1,182,713 870,485 2,834,552 47. FIRE EQUIPMENT REPL. RESERVE : 125,931 125,931 48. CENTRAL SUPPLY 440,808 235,828 471,241 205,395 49.~ R~ MANAGEMENT 1,313,~5~0 ~ 332,305 782,614 863,441 50. [HEALTH INSURANCE RESERVE 3,~99,26? 4,302,509 4,211,540 3,490,236 ~1. iT F FUNDS - 6,254 101,700 (95,446) GRAND TOTAL 136,676,557 176,657,439 202,495,550 110,838,446 - 39 - ALL FUNDS SUMMARY FY2004 AMENDED : ; I TOTAL ESTIMATED BALANCE i TOTAL i DISBURSE- BALANCE i FUND I 06/30/03 ~ RECEIPTSi MENTS 06/30/04 I 1. GENERAL FUND ~ 13,160,910 40,165,550 I 40,561,954 12,764,506 2. iDEBT SERVicE FUND 395,749 i2,59i1822 10145~1865 ! 2,534,706 3. CAPITAL PROJECTS i (803,599) 8_,74!,200 8,741,200i (803,599~) 4. CIP BOND PROCEEDS 17,052,286 6,600,000 4,610,000 , 19,042,286 5. PARKING sYSTEM OPERATIONS 4501204 ~ a,~:3~18~0 41~3~,_7_0_5 548,329 6. PARKING BOND RETIREMENT & RESERVE 3,~3,~I 1,107,423 1,338,598 3,142,351 7. iWA~TEWATER TRM~OPER ~ 3,901,484 13,701,699 I 14,354,483 3,2481700 8. ~WASTEWATER BOND RET & RES FUNDS . 14,811,144 7,237,738 j 8,013,255 14,03~,6~ 9. WATER OPER. & MAINT. 6;3781532 9,6411800 ' 9,179,542 I 6,840,790 10. WATER BOND RET & RES FUNDS 7,415,514 [ 2,7021~85 2,351,770 i 7,766,~2~9- i~: REFUSE COLLECTION oPERA~iONS 882,690 i 2;~26,000 ~;33~,8~8 672,812 ~: LANDFILL ~)-P-E~TI~NS 9,~0,30~ , ~ 3,177,766 9,1~;;53-~- 1§. ILA~DFILL RE~ 9,477,531 ~ ~89~Y 124,372 1i,~42,996 14. AIRPORT OPERATIONS 5,323 349,626 367,929 (12,981) 15. BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS 873,453 807,009 888,717 791,745 16. BTC RESERVES 71,185 12,628 _ 8_,049 75,764 17. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT 75 ' 420,000 130,0~0~ 290,075 18. ESCROW ACCOUN_T_S 2,182,361 i 500 500 2,182,361 19. LIBRARY DEV. OFFICE SALARY 314 92,301 83,796 8,819 20. LIBRARY EQUIPMENT RESERVES 105,185 46,988 152,173 21. PARK LAND RESERVES ~ ~__396,811 39,060 . !50,000 285,871 22. TRANSIT REPLACEMENT RESERVE 184,969 i 184,969 23. FIRE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT RES 158,371 29,173 187,544 24. JCCOG 7,047 566,285 5~_64,390 8,942 25. GO BOND TRUST 4;127,915 - 4,127,915 26. EMPLOYEE COMPUTER PURCHASE (49,910) 33,00~0 (t6,910) -~. i IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY 2_,567,647 6,483,901 ~ 6,328,194 2,723,354 28. ~EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (6,959) t05,230 100,253 _ (1,982) 29. GEN FUND LOAN REPAYMENTS 108,860 108,860 30. FHLB- HOUSING REHAB (6,135~)~_ I (6,135)' 31. HOUSING PROPERTY MANAGEMENT !~3,377 44,000 ~27,484 129,8~9~3_ 32. ENERGY CONSERVATION 152,207 1~2,207 33. IFA RENTAL REHAB REPAYMENTS 35,521 35,521 3-~.SPEC ASSESSMENT FUND ..... 9 9 35. ROAD USE TAX 3,213,603 5,021,590 4,2~76,695 3,958,498 36. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 602,414 7,033,513 . 7,038,495 ~7,432 37. PUBLIC SAFETY RESERVE 1,465,260 22,000 585,129 902,131 38. ~EMERGENCY LEVY 53~,,094 534,094 39. CDBG METRO ENTITLEMENT 10,4281,910,600 1,617,43_~_ 302,994 40. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SVCS 466,902 1,321,785 1,106,717 681,970 41. REPLACEMENT FUND 619,128 273,998 313,467 579,659 42. POLICE CMPTR REPLACEMENT 247,~.~.~. [ 108,184 80,1_00 ' 275,528 43. iGENERAL FLEET MAINTENANCE ...... 191189 1651878 1641198 201869 44.~QUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 2834552 1077606 1498576 2413582 45.~CEN~'I~L'SU~L.Y ..... '; 205,--~9~ ~ _269,883 259,0i~ .._216,266 46. RiSK MANAGEMENT I 863,441 1,302,200 !,013,969 1,151,672 47. HEALTH INSURANCE RESERVE 3,490,236 4,493,300 ~ 4,404,055 3,579,48'~~' 48. TIF FUNDS 195,446) 7,576,9351 3,576,935 3,904,554 GRAND TOTAL 110,838,446 155,603,950 145,970,576 120,471,820 - 40 - ALL FUNDS SUMMARY FY2005 PROPOSED BUDGET ESTIMATED TOTAL ESTIMATED BALANCE TOTAL DISBURSE- BALANCE FUND 06~30~04 RECEIPTS MENTS 06130/05 , , 1. !GENERAL FUND 12,764,506 41,787,872 J 12,784,026 2. IiDEBTSERVlCE FUND 2,534,706 10,483,741 1,934,705 3. 'CAPITAL PROJECTS I (803,599)' 22,281,300 22,281,300 . (803,599) 4. CIP BOND PROCEEDS ~ 19,042,286: 8,930,000 6,447,711 r 21,524,575 5. PARKING SYSTEM OPERATIONS [ 548,329 ', 4,074,250 4,195,048 r, 427,531 6 .PARK NG BOND RETIREMENT &RESERVE 3,142,351 1,174,504 1,305,550 r 3,0;1113~0~- 7. IWASTEWATER TRMT OPER ~ 3,248,700 i 12,885,000 13,100,114 3,033,58~ 8. WAS~EWATER BOND RET & RES FUNDS ~ 14,035,627 ~ 7,281,875 7,~67~3~ I 14,-'~,~0~19~ 9. WATER OPER. & MAINT. ~ 6,840,790 . 9,761,835 11,074,480 r 5,528,145 lO. WATER BOND RET & RES FUNDS 7766129 2,703,122 2,185,253 8,283,998 11. REFUSE COLLECTION opERATIONS 672,812 2,143,600 2'290'657 i 525'-7~-5 12. LANDFILL OPERATIONS . 9,162,537 4,115,000 2,973,812 I 10,303,725 13. LANDFILL RES~:~I~ ' j 11,342,996 1,813,313 57~2,277~ 12,584,032 ;i~. AI~S ~ ~) ~4~,27-5 ~56~ 338 15. BROADBAND TELECOMMUNI(.~ATIONS I ~7-9~,~- 853931 ~ 724,339 16. BTC RESERVES ~ 75,764 I 12,200 3,300 I 84,664 17. STORM WA~ER MANAGEME~NT ] ~2 _9_0~75 420,000 161,989 ~ ~,~ ~0~-6 - 18. ESCROW ACCOUNTS ~ 2,182,361 110,000 48,599 ~ 2,243,762 19. [i-B~'~ BEV.OFFICE SALARY 8,819 53,670 5~,610 [ 8,819 20. LIBRARY EQUIPMEN~ ~'~S~-R~Es 152,173 5_7,747~ ] 209,920 21. PARK LAND RESERVES ....... 285,87! 33,060 100,000 I 218,931 22. TRANSIT REPLACEMENT RESERVE 184,969 ...... 173,580 I 11,389 23. FIRE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT RES 187,544 32,000 I 2_19,544 24. JCCOG 8,942 588,623 589,077 8,488 25. GO BOND TRUST _ 4,127,91_5 . _ 16,206 4,111,709 26. EMPLOYEE ......... COMPUTER PURCHASE (16,910) 29,5~5~4~ ..... 12,644 27. IOWA CITY .... HOUSING AUTHORITY 2,723,354 7,510,498 . 7.,~38__.3_~590 2,850,262 28. PUBLIC HOUSING-ClAP 168,361 168,361 29. EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (1,982)! 106,717 104,735 30. DEN FUND LOAN REPAYMENTS 108,860 ' 108,860 31. FHLB- HOUSING REHAB (6,135) (6,135) 32..HOUSING PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 129,893 46,298 20,584_ 155,607 33. !ENERGY CONSERVATION ........ 152,207 152,207 34. IFA RENTAL REHAB REPAYMENT~ 35,5~2_1 35,521 35. ~SPEC ASSESSMENT FUND I 9 9 36. ROAD USE TAX 3,958,498 5,208,730 5,792,934 3,374,294 37. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 597,432 7,776,370 7,776,375 597,427 38. PUBLIC SAFETY RESERVE 902,131 11,000 585,140 327,991 39. EMERGENCY LEVY 551,071 551,071 49. CDBG METRO ENTITLEMENT 302994 1667000 1,661,525 308,469 41. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SVCS 681970 1306809 1,356,394 632,385 42. REPLACEMENT FUND 579659 242689 124676~ 697672 43. POLICE CMPTR REPLACEMENT 275,528 109,042 47,702 336,868 44. GENERAL FLEET MAINTENANCE 201,869 1,703,200 1,722,054 183,015 45. EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 2,413,582 ~ 1,067,606 1,132,315 2,348,873 46. CENTRAL SUPPLY 216266 278027 262061 232232 47. RISK MANAGEMENT 1151672' 798700 805112 1145260 4148882 4379791 4~99: HEALTH INSURANCE RESERVE 35794811 4949192 T F FUNDS 3,904,554 608,690 4,539,348 (26,104) GRAND TOTAL 120,471,820 166,078,412 167,087,663 119,462,569 -41 - ALL FUNDS SUMMARY FY2006 PROJECTED I EST MATEDi TOTAL ! ESTIMATED BALANCE TOTAL DISBURSE- BALANCE i FUND 06/30/05 RECEIPTS MENTS 06/30/06 1. GENERAL FUND i 12,784,026 i 43,108,617 i 43,622,628 12,270,015 2. DEBT SERVICE FUND 1'934'705 i 10,982,433 i 11,694,817 1,222132i 3. CAPITAL PROJECTS (803,599) 6,325,000i 6'325~000 [ (803,599) 4. CiP BOND PROCEEDs 21,524,575 3,100,000 4,901,000 19,723,575 51 !PARKING SYSTEM OPERATIONS I 427,531 ! 3~9~9,250 4,197,496 159,285 6. iPARK!NG BO~D RETiREMEN~ & RESERVE! 3,011,305 I t,070,704, 972,333 3,109,676 7. WASTEWATER TRMT OPER 3,033,586 ' 13,135,000 12,690,283 3,478,303 14,1501i96 7~i7,~0~~ 7,204,790 ~ 8. WASTEW~I=R BOND RET & RES FUNDS i , ' 14,~63,11~ 9. WATER OPER. & MAiNTi I ~,528,t45 10,035,130 9,126,596 ' 6,436,679 ~0~ IwATER BOND RET & RES FUND~ [ 8,28~,9~ 2~102,5i0 2,185,316 8,80~9~ ~. iRI-'FUSE COLLI=CTiON 0PE~Ti0NS [ 525,755[ i,202;8~0I 2,3681595 36{~;010 12. LANDFILL OPERATIONS . 10,303,725', 4,115,000 i 2,997,873 , 11,4_20,852 13. LANDFILL RESERVE . 12,584,032 ' 1,8t3,313 178,918 ~ 14,218,427 1,4.AIRPORT OPERATIONS ] ii ~338 370,?75' 370,26~ 850 15~ BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATION,<~' 724,339 882,531 9~ 667,705 16. BTC RESERVES [ e4,~6~ 12,200 i 96,864 171 STORM WATER MANAGEMEN1 , 548,086 '~ 420,_00_0 [ 162,6~9_ 805,457 i8. ESCROW-A{~CbUNTS i 2'243'7621 110,000 34,410[ 2,3t9,352 19. LiB~RY DEV. OFFICE SALAR~ 8'8!~ i 56,294 56,294 ~ 8,819 20. LIBRarY EQUIPMENT RESERVES I 209,920 56,747 266,667 21. PARK LAND RESERVES I 218,931 [ ~3,060 i 100,000 ~51,991 22. TRANSIT REPLACEMENT RESERVE ~ 11,389 11,389 -2~3T FIRE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT RES 219,544 32,000 i ~ 251,544 24. JCCOG 8,488 615,418 615,296: 8,610 25. i GO BOND TRUST 4,1tl,709 16,527 4,095,182 26. EMPLOYEE COMPUTER PURCHASE i 12,644 13,642 ' 26,286 27. IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY 2,850,262 7,_5t0,498 7,559,609 2,801,151 28. PUBLIC HOUSING-ClAP 168,361 t68,361 336,722 29. EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT 107,0_0_0_ 106,0_97 103 30. GEN FUND LOAN REPAYMENTS I t~)8,860 ~ 108,860 31. :HLB- HOUSING REHAB 32. HOUSING PROPERTY MANA- ~-~=M EN1 155,607 46,298 21,046 180,859 -~33. ENERGY CONSERVATION ~t52,207 152,207~ 34. IFA RENTAL REHAB REPAYMENT~< 35,521 35,521 35. SPEC ASSESSMENT FUND 9 9 ~36. ROAD USE TAX 3,374,294 5,271,! ~1_0 4,260,~614 4,384,790 37. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 597~4~27 8 548 650 8,548,65~4 597,423 -~8. PUBLIC SAFETY RESERVE 327,991 327,991 39.- EMERGENCY LEVY ~ ~ 5~9,549 , 5~$§,549 40:- CDBG METRO ENTITLEMENT ~ 308,469 ! 1,665,000 1,667,049 3~'6,420 '4.1. INFORMATION-¥ECHNOLOGY SVC$ 632,3~5 1,317~,30~5 1,330,2_9_1 ~ 619,399 42. REPLACEMENT FUND 697,672 242,689 242,051 ' 698,310 43. POLICE CMPTR REPLACEMENT 336868 109042 48261 397649 44. G~:N~I~A.L FLEET MAIN~I'ENANCE i t83,015 ' 1,7~:3,890 ~,777,954 128,951 45. EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 2,348,873 1,067,606 . 750,667 2,665,8t2 46. CENTRAL SUPPLY 232,232 283,043 267,036 , . _ 248,239 4,7. RISK MANAGEMENT 1145260 805300 821416 1129144 48. HEALTH INSURANCE RESERVE 414888_2~ 54251;16 4716255 4.857743 49. TIF FUNDS (26,104~ 1,114,313 i 550,119 538,0-9~ GRAND TOTAL 119,462,569 148,304,950 144,315,688 123,451,831 - 42 - ALL FUNDS SUMMARY FY2007 PROJECTED ESTIMATED TOTAL ESTIMATED BALANCE TOTAL DISBURSE- BALANCE FUND 06/30/06 RECEIPTS MENTS 06/30/97 1. GENERAL FUND , t2,270,015 44,029,672 45,298,359 11,001,328 2. 'DEBT SERVICE FUND ~ 1,222,321 12,106,479 ' t2,156,217 1,172,583 3. 'CAPITAL PROJECTS (803,599) 7,910,000 8,610,000 ! (1,503,599 4. IClP BOND PROCEEDS 19,723,575 ' 3,700,000 i 16,023,575 5. PARKING SYSTEM OPERATIONS I 159,285 * 4,334,300 r 4,308,882 184,703 6. PARKING BOND RETIREMENT & RESERV 3,109,676 1,07t,023 1,298,237 I 2,882,462 7. WASTEWATER TRMT OPER 3,478,303r 13,38~,000 : 12,~81,197 ! 3,98'~,~)~ 8. WASTEWATER BOND RET & RES FUNDS -- 14,163,1t2 ' 7,259,669 ' 7,138,687 ' 14,284,094 9. !WATER OPER. & MAINT. 6,436,679 i 10,316,624 i 9,264,141 ! 7,489,162 10. 'WATER BOND RET & RES FUNDS ~ 8,801,192 2,704,522 2,183,515 9,322,199 ! 11. REFUSE COLLECTION OPERATIONS 360,010 I 2,248,400 2,439,655 168,755 12. LANDFILL OPERATIONS tt,420,852 4,115,000 3,041,608 12,494,244 13. LANDFILL RESERVE 14,218,427 ' 1,8!3,313 ~ 2,485,014 13,546,-726 t4. AIRPORT OPERATIONS I 850 ' 370,775 365,294 [ 6,331 ~. J BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATION'~ ! 667,705 i 904,130 966,678- I 605,157 16- BT~ R~ES ; 96,864 12,200 109~)64 ~7'~. STORM WATER MANAGEMEN1 ] 805,457 4~2~,_~__~) 163,282r 1,0~,_!7_5__ 18. ESCROW ACCOUNTS~ 2,319,352 110,000 35,248 2,394,104' 19. LIBRARY DEV. OFFICE SALAR*~ / 8,8t9 r ~8,§~)6 58,956 20. LIBRARY EQUIPMENT RESERVES L 26~,667 i 56,747 I 323,4t4 21. PARK LAND.R_ESE_R~E~- ' ,., 1~5~ i 33,060 ' 185,051 22. TRANSIT REPLACEMENT RESERVE 11,389 ~ 11,389 2_3_._ FIRE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT RES 2~,~ . 32,000 l 283,544 24. JCCOG_ .... 8,610 640,424 640,2t2 8,822 25. GO BOND TRUST 4,095,182 16,854 4,078,328 26. EMPLOYEE COMPUTER PURCHASE 26,286 [ 26,286 2-~. i IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTH(~RI'r¥ I 2,801,151 I 7,510,498 7,734,811 2~576,838 28. ' PUBLIC HOUSING-ClAP I 336,72_2 168,361 _- 505,083 29. EMERGENCY SHELTER GRAN'r 103 109,100 109,106 97 30. GEN FUND LOAN REPAYMENTS 108,860 108,860 31. FHLB - HOUSING REHAB (6135) (6,135) 32. HOUSING PROPERTY MANAGEMENT t_8_0_,859~ ' 46,298 21,520 205,637 33. ENERGY CONSERVATION !52,207 i 1_52,207 34. IFA RENTAL REH_ABREp_AYMENT~ 35,521 35,521 35. SPEC ASSESSMENT FUND 9 9 36. ROAD USE TAX 4,384,790 5,333,490 4,465,264 5,253,016 37. EM PLOYE E_~B__EN_EFI'[S 59_7,4_23 9,105,156 9_,_110,164 592_,415 38. EMERGENCY LEVY 575,122 575,122 39. CDBG METRO ENTITLEMENT 306,420 1,665,000 1,687_,043 284,377 40. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SVCS 619,399 1,328,0t0_ I 1,358,247 589,162 41. REPLACEMENT FUND . 698,310 242,689 242,091 698,908 42. POLICE CMPTR REPLACEMENT 397,649 109,042 .4.8_,326 458,365 43. GENERAL FLEET MAINTENANCE 128951 1728890 1832045 25796 ~4~- EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 2,665,8t2 . 1,057,600 t,88.__ 1,154 t,842,258 45. CENTRAL SUPPLY 248,239 i 288,747 272,151 264,835 46. RISK MANAGEMENT 1,129,144 824,2§t ~ 837,833 1,115,592 r~7. HEALTH INSURANCE RESERVE 4,857,743_ 5,692,629 4,944,968 5,605,404 48. TIF FUNDS 538,090 1,125,289 1,211,367 452,0t2 GRAND TOTAL 123,451,831 150,842,496 153,383,248 120,91%079 - 43 - SUMMARY OF TRANSFERS BETWEEN FUNDS RECEIPTS - TRANSFERS IN ,TRANSFER TO: TRANSFER FROM: FY05 FY06 FY07 GENERAL FUND: NON-OPERATIONAL ADMINISTRATION Emergency Levy 551,071 559,549 575,122 Other Employee Benefits 5,763,050 6,245,458 6,600,411 Parking Fund 200,000 200,000 200,000 Broadband Fund 100,000 100,000 100,000 G.O. Bonds 281,000 NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Road Use Tax 7,500 7,500 7,500 POLICE DEPARTMENT Employee Benefits Fund 957,082 1,052,791 1,158,071 FiRE DEPARTMENT Employee Benefits Fund 704,487 886,335 974,969 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING Road Use Tax 1,049,839 1,077,010 1,105,030 STREETS Road Use Tax 2,314,998 2,245,837 2,314,867 FORESTRY Road Use Tax 57,530 60,400 62,000 PARKS Parkland Acquisition Fund 100,000 100,000 LIBRARY OPERATIONS Broadband Telecommunications 52,823 53,000 54,000 SUBTOTAL GENERAL FUND 11,858,380 12,868,880 13,151,970 DEBT SERVICE FUND Plaza Tower TIF 650,262 Water Operations 1,243,653 1,234,094 1,222,281 Wastewater Operations 181,401 177,193 172,984 Parking Operations 313,150 310,900 318,525 SUBTOTAL DEBT SERVICE 1,738,204 1,722,187 2,364,052 ENTERPRISE FUNDS: PARKING OPERATIONS Senior Center Operations 20,000 20,000 20,000 PARKING RESERVE Renewal & Impr Reserve 200,000 100,000 100,000 1999 Issue - Sinking Fund 974,504 970,704 971,023 WASTEWATER TREATMENT RESERVE Wastewater Operations 7,281,875 7,217,706 7,259,669 WATER RESERVE Depr, Ext, & Improv Reserve 500,000 500,000 500,000 Water Operations 2,203,122 2,202,510 2,204,522 LANDFILL RESERVE lnterfund Loans 463,313 463,313 463,313 Landfill Operations 500,000 500,000 500,000 AIRPORT OPERATIONS Non-Operational Admin. 167,000 188,000 188,000 BROADBAND RESERVE Broadband Operations 11,000 11,000 11,000 SUBTOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS 12,320,814 12,173,233 12,217,527 - 44 - SUMMARY OF TRANSFERS BETWEEN FUNDS RECEIPTS - TRANSFERS IN TRANSFER TO: TRANSFER FROM: FY05 FY06 FY07 OTHER FUNDS JCCOG: Non-Operational Admin. 154,912 163,256 171,309 Landfill Surcharge Reserve 56,328 58,850 61,192 Road Use Tax 137,000 143,800 149,800 CABLE CHANNEL REPLACEMENT Library Operations 17,685 17,685 17,685 LIBR COMPUTER RESERVE Library Operations 39,062 39,062 39,062 PARKLAND ACQUISITION RESERVE Scanlon Gym Loan Repayment 27,060 27,060 27,060 RISK MANAGEMENT ADMIN Department Loss Reserves 127,500 127,500 127,500 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS OPERATIONS Employee Benefits Reserve 585,000 327,851 CAPITAL PROJECTS Road Use Tax 2,225,000 725,000 825,000 General Fund - Non-Op. Admin. 25,000 25,000 25,000 Parking Renewal & Impr. Reserve 330,000 330,000 Wastewater CIP Projects 620,000 300,000 300,000 Water ClP Projects 2,130,000 300,000 300,000 Landfill CIP Projects 2,300,000 Stormwater CIP Projects 130,000 130,000 130,000 Transit CIP Projects 573,580 G.O. Bond Transfers 6,275,000 4,845,000 3,700,000 Capital Projects Subtotal 12,308,580 6,325,000 7,910,000 SUBTOTAL OTHER FUNDS 13,453,127 7,230,064 8,503,608 GRAND TOTAL - TRANSFERS BET~VEEN FUNDS: $ 39,370,625 $ 33,994,364 $ 36,237,157 -45 - SUMMARY OF TRANSFERS BETWEEN FUNDS DISBURSEMENTS - TRANSFERS OUT TRANSFER FROM TRANSFER TO DESCRIPTION FY05 FY06 FY07 GENERAL FUND: NON-OPERATIONAL ADMINISTRATION Airport Operations Airport Subsidy 167,000 188,000 188,000 Landfill Reserve Loan Repayment 30,400 30,400 30,400 Landfill Reserve Englert Loan Repay 160,783 160,783 160,783 JCCOG Iowa City's Portion 154,912 163,256 171,309 Capital Projects City Hall-Other Imp. 25,000 25,000 25,000 FIRE ADMINISTRATION Landfill Reserve Loan Repayment 52,089 52,089 52,089 RECREATION Landfill Mercer - Loan Repay 61,037 61,037 61,037 Parkland Acq. Scanlon Gym Repay 27,060 27,060 27,060 LIBRARY Equipment Repl. Reserve Computer Replace ADMINISTRATION Reserve 39,062 39,062 39,062 Cable Channel Equipment Repl. Reserve Replacement 17,685 17,685 17,685 SENIOR CENTER Loan Repay-Senior OPERATIONS Parking Operations Center Sprinkler 20,000 20,000 20,000 Loan Repayment- Landfill Reserve Bldg Improvements 73,564 73,564 73,564 SUBTOTAL GENERAL FUND 828,592 857,936 865,989 ENTERPRISE FUNDS PARKING SUPERVISION Genera~ Fund Admin. Return Parking Fines 200,000 200,000 200,000 Renewal & Improv. PARKING OPERATIONS Reserve Parking Reserve 200,000 . 100,000 100,000 Bond &Int Sinking Revenue Bonds 1,287,654 1,281,604 1,289,548 PARKING RESERVE Capital Projects Ramp Repairs 330,000 330,000 WASTEWATER OPERATIONS Wastewater Bonds 2002 Refund 93 Issue 3,210,943 3,167,293 3,177,243 Wastewater Bonds 1996 Revenue Issue 1,394,113 1,391,063 1,411,738 Wastewater Bonds 1997 Revenue Issue 781,550 766,100 775,650 Wastewater Bonds 1999 Revenue Issue 542,930 541,030 543,705 Wastewater Bonds 2000 Revenue Issue 873,524 873,405 872,518 Wastewater Bonds 2001 Revenue Issue 478,815 478,815 478,815 Debt Service Abated G.O. Bonds 181,401 177,193 172,984 Capital Projects Wastewater Projects 620,000 300,000 300,000 WATER SUPERVISION Water Bonds 1999 Revenue Issue 653,125 656,013 653,188 Water Bonds 2000 Revenue Issue 940,049 939,299 942,799 Water Bonds 2002 Revenue Issue 609,948 607,198 608,535 Debt Service Abated G.O. Bonds 1,243,653 1,234,094 1,222,281 Depr., Ext., & Improvmt Reserve For Future Improvements 500,000 500,000 500,000 Capital Projects Dodge St Main 830,000 Capital Projects Water CIP '~rojects 300,000 300,000 300,000 Capital Projects Distribution Building 1,000,000 - 46 - SUMMARY OF TRANSFERS BETWEEN FUNDS DISBURSEMENTS - TRANSFERS OUT TRANSFER FROM TRANSFER TO DESCRIPTION FY05 FY06 FY07 Excavation, LANDFILL OPERATIONS Landfill Reserve Closures, Repl. 500,000 500,000 500,000 LANDFILL RESERVE Capital Projects Landfill Cell 2,300,000 Capital Projects Transit Facility Daycare 400,000 JCCOG Solid Waste Planner 56,328 58,850 61,192 Loan Repayment - AIRPORT OPERATIONS Landfill Reserve Hangers 85,440 85,440 85,440 BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS General Fund, Library A.V. Lab Support 52,823 53,000 54,000 Cable Franchise Non-Operational Admin. Subsidy 100,000 100,000 100,000 Replacement Reserve Equipment Replacement 11,000 11,000 11,000 STORMWATER MGMT Capital Projects Stormwater Permitting 130,000 130,000 130,000 SUBTOTAL ENTERPRISE FUNDS 17,513,296 14,451,397 17,120,636 OTHER FUNDS PARKLAND ACQ RESERVE General Fund - Parks Div. General Fund Subsidy 100,000 100,000 TRANSIT REPLACEMENT RESERVE Capital Projects 17% Match - Buses 145,860 Transit Bus Cameras 27,720 RISK MANAGEMENT LOSS RESERVES Risk Management Admin. Administration Funding 127,500 127,500 127,500 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS OPERATIONS Police Dept Pension & Retirement 957,082 1,052,791 1,158,071 Fire Dept Pension & Retirement 704,467 886,335 974,969 Non-Op. Admin, Gen Fund Employee Benefits 5,763,050 6,245,456 6,600,411 PUBLIC SAFETY RESERVE Employee Benefits Police & Fire Benefits 585,000 327,851 EMERGENCY LEVY Non-Op. Admin. ' Emergency Levy 551,071 559,549 575,122 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING Debt Service Plaza Towers - 64-1a 650,262 - 47 - SUMMARY OF TRANSFERS BETWEEN FUNDS DISBURSEMENTS - TRANSFERS OUT TRANSFER FROM TRANSFER TO DESCRIPTION FY05 FY06 FY07 General Fund, ROAD USE TAX Traffic En9. Operations '1,049,839 1,077,010 1,105,030 General Fund, Streets Operations 2,314,998 2,245,837 2,314,867 General Fund, Forestry Operations 57,530 60,400 62,000 JCCOG-Trans. Planning Operations 137,000 143,800 149,800 Neighborhood Program for Improving Services Neighborhoods 7,500 7,500 7,500 Capital Projects Asphalt & Chip Seal 250,000 250,000 250,000 Bridge Maintenance 60,000 60,000 60,000 Brick Recontruction 20,000 20,000 20,000 Camp Cardinal Road 1,000,000 Creek/Drainage Maint. 25,000 25,000 25,000 Curb Ramps- A.D.A. 100,000 100,000 Dubuque/Foster Rd Int. 400,000 Inter City Trails 30,000 30,000 30,000 Overwidth Paving 30,000 30,000 30,000 Pavement Markings 60,000 60,000 60,000 P.C.C. Maintenance 100,000 100,000 100,000 RR Crossing Improvements 25,000 25,000 25,000 Sump Pump Discharge Tiles 25,000 25,000 25,000 Traffic Calming 30,000 30,000 30,000 Traffic Signals 70,000 70,000 70,000 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Non-Operational Admin Capital Outlay 281,000 CAPITAL PROJECTS BOND TRANSFERS Capital Projects G.O. Bonds 6,275,000 4,845,000 3,700,000 SUBTOTAL OTHER FUNDS 21,028,637 18,685,031 18,250,532 GRAND TOTAL 39,370,525 33,994,364 36,237,157 -48- CITY OF IOWA CITY ADDITIONAL POSITIONS REQUESTED: FY2005 RECOMMENDED IN FY2005 FINANCIAL PLAN SALARY I DEPARTMENT POSITION FTE* WAGES BENEFITS TOTAL Landfill Operations / Solid Waste Surcharge Res.** Recycling Coordinator 1.00 39,437.67 26,963.10 66,400.77 Transit Intermodal Facility 1.00 28,423.25 14,732.50 43,155.75 Transit Intermodal Facility 1.00 30,376.16 2,630.27 33,006.43 GRAND TOTAL - POSITIONS RECOMMENDED FY05: 3.00 98,237.08 44,325.87 142,562.95 NOT RECOMMENDED IN FY2005 FINANCIAL PLAN Emergency Comm. Center Emergency Comm. Operator 1.00 34,564.02 15,733.16 56,297.18 Emergency Comm. Center Emergency Comm. Operator 1.00 34,564.02 15,733.t6 50,297.18 Fire Prevention Fire Code Enforcement Spec. 1.00 51,014.01 25,267.41 76,281.42 TOTAL: GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES 3.00 120,142.05 56,733.73 176,875.78 Water Customer Service MW III - Water Cust. Serv. 1.00 35,556.20 15,762.70 51,318.90 TOTAL: BUSINESS TYPE ACTIVITIES 1.00 35,556.20 15,762.70 51,318.90 Desktop Support PC Desktop Analyst 1.00 42,677.02 16,809.61 59,486.63 Phone Administration Telephone Technician 1.00 37,523:93 16,065.19 53,589.12 TOTAL: NON PROGRAM 2.00 80,200.95 32,874.80 113,075.75 GRAND TOTAL: NOT RECOMMENDED IN FY2005: 6~00 235i899.20 105,371.23 341,270.43 * FTE: Full Time Equivalent ** Funded from Landfill Operations (25%) and Solid Waste Surcharge Reserve (75%) - 49 - - 50 - POLICE PROTECTION SUMMARY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 F¥05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 6,272,769 6,766,804 6,807,922 7,138,066 7,505,213 Police Services 116,568 73,018 116,050 106,050 116,050 Univ. Heights Dispatch 0 42,275 42,275 42,275 42,275 State Grants 138,887 100,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 Hotel/Motel Tax 281,742 275,000 275,000 275,000 275,000 Transfer: Empl Benefits 602,979 783,694 957,082 1,052,791 1,158,071 Total 7,~ 8,040,791 ~ ~ 9,151,609 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 6,409,705 6,941,736 7,254,017 7,675,312 8,081,169 Commodities 171,124 199,807 184,896 187,831 191,587 Services And Charges 612,360 622,057 579,372 581,679 588,747 Capital Outlay 219,756 277,191 235,044 224,360 290,106 Total 7,412,945 8,040,791 ~ 8,669,182 9,151,609 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 POLICE RECORDS CLERK 2.00 2.00 1 BUILDING IMPROVEMENT-PAINT 915 SR POLICE RECORDS CLERK 2.00 2.00 8 7 MARKED & 1 I/NMARKED SQUAD 177,500 COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER 5.00 5.00 7 REAR SEATS FOR SQUAD CARS 3,450 EMERGENCY COMM DISPATCHER 9.00 9.00 12 R3%DIO REPLACEMENT 31,620 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 1.00 1.00 31 PORTABLE ALARM SYSTEM 16,959 RECORDS SUPERVISOR 1.00 1.00 10 TASK CHAIRS 4,600 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS SUPER 1.00 1.00 COMPUTER SYST ANALYST - POLICE 1.00 1.00 POLICE SERGEANT 9.00 9.00 POLICE LIEUTENANT 4.00 4.00 POLICE CAPTAIN 2.00 2.00 POLICE CHIEF 1.00 1.00 POLICE OFFICER 58.00 55.00 EMERGENCY COMM DISPATCHER 1.25 1.25 97.25 94.25 235,044 POLICE DEPARTMENT ADMIN. PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 459,284 498,068 509,879 532,844 555,199 Transfer: Empl Benefits 31,714 30,683 39,027 42,930 47,223 Total 490,998 528,751 ~ 575,774 602,422 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 429,795 467,202 491,371 518,391 544,251 Commodities 8,220 15,335 14,948 15,248 15,553 Services And Charges 52,045 40,364 42,587 42,135 42,618 Capital Outlay 938 5,850 0 0 0 Total 490,998 528,751 ~ 575,774 602,422 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 1.00 1.00 COMPUTER SYST ANALYST - POLICE 1.00 1.00 POLICE SERGEANT 1.00 1~00 POLICE CAPTAIN 1.00 1.00 POLICE CHIEF 1.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 0 - 52 - POLICE PATROL PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 3,926,013 4,353,475 4,384,863 4,601,387 4,867,802 Police Services 103,816 54,718 95,800 85,800 95,800 State Grants 89,857 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 Hotel/Motel Tax 281,742 275,000 275,000 275,000 275,000 Transfer: Empl Benefits 474,220 626,313 772,857 850,143 935,158 Total 4,875,648 5,364,506 ~ 5,867,330 6,228,760 F¥05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 4,269,636 4,651,973 4,926,181 5,217,421 5,499,483 Commodities 140,040 161,617 154,828 157,517 160,666 Services And Charges 266,285 289,605 274,782 276,957 280,705 Capital Outlay 199,687 261,311 227,729 215,435 287,906 Total 4,875,648 5,364,506 5,583,520 5,867,330 6,228,760 PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER 5.00 5.00 8 7 MARKED & 1 UNMARKED SQUAD 177,500 POLICE SERGEANT 6.00 6.00 7 REAR SEATS FOR SQUAD CARS 3,450 POLICE LIEUTENANT 3.00 3.00 12 RADIO REPLACEMENT 31,620 POLICE CAPTAIN 1.00 1.00 30 BICYCLES 12,759 POLICE OFFICER 50.00 48.00 6 TASK CHAIRS 2,400 65.00 63.00 227,729 - 53 - CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 588,857 631,432 688,285 717,578 748,205 State Grants 49,030 45,000 0 0 0 Transfer: Empl Benefits 78,123 102,134 127,932 140,725 154,798 Total 715,810 778,566 ~ 858,303 903,003 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 670,161 716,312 773,166 819,065 863,372 Commodities 2,217 10,486 3,072 3,132 3,193 Services And Charges 40,251 50,268 35,779 36,106 36,438 Capital Outlay 3,181 1,500 4,200 0 0 Total 715,810 778,566 816,217 858,303 903,003 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 POLICE SERGEANT 1.00 1.00 1 PORTABLE ALARM SYSTEM 4,200 POLICE LIEUTENANT 1.00 1.00 POLICE OFFICER 7.00 7.00 9.00 9.00 4,200 RECORDS ~ IDENTIFICATION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 419,771 450,063 423,264 447,719 458,613 Police Services 12,341 18,300 20,250 20,250 20,250 Transfer: Empl Benefits 10,835 14,404 17,266 18,993 20,892 Total 442,947 482,767 460,780 486,962 499,755 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 307,707 339,062 352,030 371,636 390,117 Commodities 4,912 5,090 5,384 5,237 5,342 Services And Charges 120,273 131,185 101,351 102,264 103,196 Capital Outlay 10,055 7,430 2,015 7,825 1,100 Total 442,947 482,767 ~ 486,962 499,755 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 POLICE RECORDS CLERK 2.00 2.00 1 BUILDING IMPROVEMENT-PAINT 915 SR POLICE RECORDS CLERK 2.00 2.00 2 TASK CHAIR 1,100 RECORDS SUPERVISOR 1.00 1.00 POLICE SERGEANT 1.00 1.00 6.00 6.00 2,015 COMMUNITY SERVICES BUREAU PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 140,809 120,789 55,549 57,456 59,446 Police Services 388 0 0 0 0 Transfer~ Empl Benefits 8,087 10,160 0 0 0 Total 149,284 130,949 ~ 57,456 59,446 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 128,432 126,238 55,044 56,940 58,919 Commodities 11,307 1,735 505 516 527 Services And Charges 4,516 2,976 0 0 0 Capital Outlay 5,029 0 0 0 0 Total 149,284 130,949 55,549 57,456 59,446 _w_ FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 POLICE OFFICER 1.00 1.00 .00 0 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS CTR. PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 738,235 712, 977 746,082 781,082 815, 948 Police Services 23 0 0 0 0 Univ. Heights Dispatch 0 42,275 42,275 42,275 42,275 Total 738,258 755,252 788,357 823,357 858,223 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 603,974 640,949 656,225 691,859 725,027 Commodities 4,428 5,544 6,159 6~181 6,306 Services And Charges 128,990 107,659 124,873 124,217 125,790 Capital Outlay 866 1,100 1,100 1,100 1,100 Total 738,258 755,252 788,357 823,357 858,223 PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 EMERGENCY COMM DISPATCHER 9.00 9.00 2 TASK CHAIRS 1,100 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS SUPER 1.00 1.00 EMERGENCY COMM DISPATCHER 1.25 1.25 11.25 11.25 1,100 FIRE PROTECTION SUI~MARY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 2,800,283 3,119,241 3,052,114 3,105,402 3,261,710 Charges For Services 3,505 3,800 3,800 3,800 3,800 University Fire Contract 1,101,624 1,162,835 1,225,199 1,272,185 1,300,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 4,860 3,100 3,275 3,275 3,275 Transfer: Empl Benefits 453,604 568,304 704,487 886,335 974,969 Total 4,363,876 4,857,280 ~ 5,270,997 5,543,754 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 3,876,075 4,154,354 4,392,297 4,707,847 4,967,479 Commodities 94,796 136,985 133,206 135,873 138,587 Services And Charges 299,865 392,152 310,383 315,488 320,699 Capital Outlay 41,051 121,700 100,900 59,700 64,900 Transfers Out 52,089 52,089 52,089 52,089 52,089 Total 4,363,876 2,857,280 4,988,875 5,270,997 5,543,754 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 AIDMINISTRATIVE CLERK/TYPIST 1.00 1.00 1 TRAINING FACILITY IMPROVMTS 2,500 BATTALION CHIEF 4.00 4.00 1 VkN - 1 TON/PASSENGER 29,200 FIRE CHIEF 1.00 1.00 22 FIRE TP~AINING EQUIPMENT 67,450 FIREFIGHTER 39.00 37.00 5 DESK 1,750 FIRE LIEUTENANT 10.00 10.00 FIRE CAPTAIN 3.00 3.00 58.00 56.00 100,900 TR~SFER TO: Weather Alert Sirens 35,157 Fire Air Sys 38815 Repay 16,932 52,089 - 56 - FIRE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT RES PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 158,371 187,544 219,544 251,544 University Fire Contract 29,173 29,173 29,000 29,000 29,000 Interest Income 3,267 0 3,000 3,000 3,000 Miscellaneous Transfer 125,931 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 158,371 29,173 32,000 32,000 32,000 Ending Balance 158,371 187,544 219,544 251,544 283,544 - 57 - HIS DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 313,742 311,987 289,446 303,194 321,097 Housing Permits & Inspect 5,148 5,600 5,300 5,300 300 Total 318,890 317,587 ~ 308,494 321,397 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 243,517 231,265 236,479 249,355 261,367 Commodities 717 1,292 1,212 1,236 1,260 Services And Charges 45,157 59,506 57,055 57,903 58,770 Capital Outlay 3,975 0 0 0 0 Transfers Out 25,524 25,524 0 0 0 Total 318,890 317,587 294,746 308,494 321,397 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 HOUSING ASSISTkNT .50 .25 CODE ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANT 1.00 1.00 HIS DIRECTOR 1.00 1.00 HOUSING ASSISTANT .63 .63 3.13 2.88 0 - 58 - BUILDING INSPECTION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Bldg Permits & Inspect 800,886 863,470 899,200 905,500 913,300 Total 800,886 863,470 ~ 905,500 913,300 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 437,066 451,415 472,215 498,201 522,157 Commodities 9,016 7,540 10,319 10,526 10,738 Services And Charges 41,794 63,132 66,107 66,966 67,844 Capital Outlay 2,000 0 1,600 1,600 1,600 Total 489,876 522,087 550,241 577,293 602,339 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 BUILDING INSPECTOR 5.00 5.00 2 PORTABLE RADIO 1,600 DEVELOPMENT REG SPECIALIST 1.00 1.00 SR BUILDING INSPECTOR 1.00 1.00 7.00 7.00 1,600 HOUSING INSPECTIONS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 74,460 1,193 0 0 0 Housing Permits & Inspect 202,118 292,000 309,337 324,060 337,728 Total 276,578 293,193 309,337 324,060 337,728 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 231,302 243,137 255,800 269,891 282,914 Commodities 719 1,822 1,673 1,707 1,742 Services And Charges 44,557 43,664 51,864 52,462 53,072 Capital Outlay 0 4,570 0 0 0 Total 276,578 293,193 309,337 324,060 337,728 PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 HOUSING INSPECTOR 2.00 2.00 BUILDING INSPECTOR 1.00 1.00 SR HOUSING INSPECTOR 1.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 0 - 59 - SHELTER OPERATIONS & ADMIN PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 238,954 290,641 274,661 289,177 300,912 Animal Control Services 217,727 157,841 202,723 208,304 213,590 Total 456,681 448,482 ~ 497,481 514,502 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 300,481 318,584 334,403 352,527 369,390 Commodities 40,335 45,996 44,851 45,647 46,559 Services And Charges 91,961 71,382 95,060 96,787 98,553 Capital Outlay 23,904 12,520 3,070 2,520 0 Total 456,681 448,482 ~ 497,481 514,502 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 KENNEL ASSISTANT 2.00 2.00 1 PVC FLOOR-SUPERVISORS OFFICE 550 ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER 3.00 3.00 2 TASK CHAIRS 1,320 ANIMAL CONTROL SUPERVISOR 1.00 1.00 1 KENNEL CAGE GATES 1,200 6.00 6.00 3,070 DEER CONTROL PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 1,295 100,000 0 105,089 0 Total 1,295 100,000 0 105,089 0 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Services And Charges 1,295 100,000 0 105,089 0 Total 1,295 100,000 0 105,089 0 - 60 - STREETS MAINTENANCE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS~ ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 0 336,238 370,251 507,447 532,764 Sidewalk Reimbursements 40,597 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 721 0 0 0 0 Road Use Tax 1,892,841 2,048,419 2,314,998 2,245,837 2,314,867 Transfer: Empl Benefits 333,455 0 0 0 0 Total 2,267,614 2,409,657 ~ 2,778,284 2,872,631 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 1,315,079 1,485,851 1,619,635 1,705,397 1,784,507 Commodities 219,180 204,478 252,251 257,294 262,438 Services And Charges 650,710 637,902 702,713 712,593 722,686 Capital Outlay 82,640 81,426 135,650 103,000 103,000 Total 2,267,609 2,409,657 2,710,249 2,778,284 2,872,631 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 M.W. I - STREETS 7.00 7.00 2 SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT 100,000 SR CLERK/TYPIST STREETS .50 .50 1 SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT 3,000 M.W. II STREETS 4.50 4.50 2 LEAF BOXES 9,000 M.W. III - STREETS 7.00 7.00 1 HOT PATCHER-RECLAIMER 23,650 SR M.W~ - STREETS 2.00 2.00 ASST SUPT STREETS/SOLID WASTE .50 .50 SUPT STREETS/SOLID WASTE .50 .50 22.00 22.00 135,650 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 0 90,783 78,756 86~741 92,761 Charges For Services 400 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 26,400 4,500 13,900 13,900 13,900 Road Use Tax 907,218 944,348 1,049,839 1,077,010 1,105,030 Transfer: Empl Benefits 62,738 0 0 0 0 Total 996,756 1,039,631 ~ 1,177,65t 1,211,691 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 349,684 385,265 397,854 418,842 438,433 Commodities 146,794 170,451 193,120 196,983 200,922 Services Md Charges 473,854 483,915 551,521 561,826 572,336 Capital Outlay 26,423 0 0 0 0 Total 996,755 1,039,631 1,142,495 1,177,651 1,211,691 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 SR CLERK/TYPIST - STREETS .50 .50 M.W. II - STREETS 1.50 1.50 ELECTRICI~N 2.00 2.00 ELECTRONICS TECH/TP~AFFIC ENG 1.00 1.00 ASST SUPT STREETS/SOLID WASTE .50 .50 SUPT STREETS/SOLID WASTE .15 .15 5.65 5.65 0 - 62 - ENGINEERING PROPOSED B~/DGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 688,261 777,480 742,152 780,162 814,656 Bldg Permits & Inspect 20,170 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Charges For Services 260 275 275 275 275 Building & Develop. Fees 15,889 8,500 8,500 8,500 8,500 Miscellaneous Revenue 956 1,200 900 900 900 Total 725,536 797,455 ~ 799,837 834,331 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 608,307 671,744 641,612 678,107 711,055 Commodities 8,187 13,154 9,790 9,985 10,183 Services And Charges 105,676 111,307 110,425 111,745 113,093 Capital Outlay 3,366 1,250 0 0 0 Total 725,536 797,455 761,827 799,837 834,331 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 CLERK/TYPIST - ENGINEERING 1.00 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN .10 .10 SR ENGINEERING TECH 1.00 1.00 CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR II 2.00 2.00 UTILITIES TECHNICIAN 1.00 1.00 SURVEY PARTY CHIEF 1.00 1.00 SR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR 1.00 1.00 CIVIL ENGINEER 2.00 1.00 ARCHITECTURAL SERV/ENERGY COOR .50 .50 SR ENGINEER 3.00 3.00 CITY ENGINEER 1.00 1.00 13.60 11.60 0 -63- PUBLIC WORKS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 50,293 52,203 50,361 53,199 62,927 Admin Expense Chargeback 146,762 151,388 151,388 158,930 159,049 Total 197,055 203,591 ~ 212,129 221,976 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 188,654 194,004 191,293 201,532 211,238 Commodities 1,661 700 402 410 418 Services And Charges 6,740 8,887 10,054 10,187 10,320 Total 197,055 203,591 ~ 212,129 221,976 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 1.00 1.00 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 0 - 64 - MASS TRANSIT OPERATIONS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 195,339 566,322 491,740 630,335 740,602 Transit Levy 1,800,627 1,835,990 1,895,075 1,924,248 1,978,372 Charges For Services 27,263 0 260,000 260,000 260,000 Bus Fares 770,124 647,300 730,300 730,300 730,300 Univ. Heights Transit 28E 27,309 28,069 29,051 30,068 31,120 State Grants 8,006 0 0 0 0 Federal Transit Assist. 405,540 449,061 402,180 402,180 402,180 State Transit Assist. 287,405 315,938 270,128 270,128 270,128 Interest Income 3,844 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 47,329 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Total ~ ~2,680 ~ 4,297,259 4,4~,702 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 2,380,218 2,538,363 2,718,114 2,865,309 3,002,510 Commodities 375,571 423,253 463,881 472,060 481,500 Services ~/ld Charges 802,258 921,064 941,479 959,890 978,692 Capital Outlay 11,739 10,000 5,000 0 0 Total ~ ,8~680 ~ 4,297,259 4,462,702 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 MW I - TRANSIT BLDG M1T1 1.00 1.00 1 STEAM CLEANER 5,000 PARKING ENFORCEMENT ATTENDANT 1.00' ACCOLrNT CLERK - TRA/~SIT 1.00 M.W. II - RAMP/METER REPAIR 1.00' M.W. II - TRANSIT 1.00 1.00 MASS TRANSIT OPERATOR 19.00 18.00 PARTS/DATA ENTRY CLERK 1.00 1.00 CUSTOMER SERV REP - TRANSIT 1.00 BODY REPAIR MECHANIC 1.00 1.00 MECHANIC II - TRANSIT 2.00 2.00 SR MW - PARKING & TRANSIT .50 .50 MECHANIC III - EQUIPMENT (DAY} 1.00 MECHANIC III - TRANSIT 1.00 2.00 TRANSIT OPERATIONS SUPV 3.00 3.00 TP3kNSIT MANAGER 1.00 1.00 PARKING AND TRANSIT DIRECTOR .50 .50 M.W. I - TRANSIT FACILITY .50 .50 M.W. I - TR3kNSIT 2.25 2.25 MASS TRANSIT OPEPJtTOR 12.75 13.75 48.50 50.50 5,000 * Staffing for Court Street Transportation Center. -85- TRANSIT REPLACEMENT RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 F¥05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 184,969 184,969 39,109 39,109 Interest Income 29 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Transfer 260,966 0 0 0 Total Receipts 260,995 0 0 0 0 Transfers 76,026 0 145,860 0 0 Total Expenditures 76,026 0 145,860 0 0 Ending Balance 184,969 184,969 39,109 39,109 39,109 TRANSFER TO: 17% Local Match - Buses 145,860 145,860 - 66 - ENERGY CONSERVATION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 12,054 32,576 34,772 36,700 38,460 Total 12,054 32,576 ~ 36,700 38,460 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 11,622 31,824 34,077 35,991 37,737 Commodities 0 150 150 153 156 Services And Charges 432 602 545 556 567 Total 12,054 32,576 ~ 36,700 38,460 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ARCHITECTURAL SERV/ENERGY COOR .50 .50 .50 .50 0 ENERGY REVOLVING FUND PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 145,428 152,207 152,207 152,207 152,207 Loan Repayments 6,779 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 6,779 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 152,207 152,207 152,207 152,207 152,207 - 67 - ROAD USE TAX PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY0? FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 2,185,207 3,213,603 3,958,498 3,374,294 4,384,790 Road Use Tax 5,144,346 5,021,590 5,208,730 5,271,110 5,333,490 Miscellaneous Transfer 9,871 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 5,154,217 5,021,590 5,208,730 5,271,110 5,333,490 Services And Charges 1,067 1,218 1,067 1,067 1,067 Transfers 4,124,754 4,275,477 5,791,867 4,259,547 4,464,197 Total Expenditures 4,125,821 4,276,695 5,792,934 4,260,614 4,465,264 Ending Balance 3,213,603 3,958,498 3,374,294 4,384,790 5,253,016 TRANSFER TO: Traffic Engineering 1,049,839 Streets Maintenance 2,314,998 FY99 Pavement Marking 60,000 Inter City Trails 30,000 Curb Ramps - A.D.A. 100,000 Creek Drainage/Maint 25,000 Camp Cardinal Road 1,000,000 Brick Reconstruction 20,000 Dub/Foster Rd Intersect. 400,000 Asphalt resurf/Chip Seal 250,000 Annual Bridge Maintenance 60,000 Overwidth Paving 30,000 P.C.C. Maintenance 100,000 Railroad Crossing Improvemnt 25,000 Sump Pump Discharge Tiles 25,000 Traffic Calming 30,000 Traffic Signals 70,000 Forestry-Parkway Mtce. 57,530 PIN Prog. RUT Projects 7,500 Transfer-JCCOG Trans 137,000 5,791,867 - 68 - ROAD USE TAX FUND TRANSFERS OUT AND EXPENDITURE DETAIL FY 2003 FY 2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 ACTUAL BUDGET PROPOSED PROJECTED PROJECTED Miscellaneous Expenditures 1,067 1,218 1,067 1,067 1,067 Transfer - GF Streets 1,892,841 2,048,419 2,314,998 2,245,837 2,314,867 Transfer - GF Traffic Engineering 907,218 944,348 1,049,839 1,077,010 1,105,030 Transfer- GF Forestry 50,000 54,790 57,530 60,400 62,000 Transfer - GF Pin Grant 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 Transfer - JCCOG - Trans Planning 100,000 135,420 137,000 143,800 149,800 Sub Total - Operating Transfers & Miscellaneous Expenditures 2,951,126 3,191,695 3,567,934 3,535,614 3,640,264 Annual Bridge Maintenance 64,202 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 Asphalt & Chip Seal 18,812 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 Brick Street Repair 533 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Burlington St. Bridge/Ralston 19,321 Camp Cardinal Road 236 1,000,000 Concrete St. Maintenance 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Creek/Drainage Maint. 5,376 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Culvert Railing Improvements 47,375 298,000 Curb Ramps- A. D.A. 79,264 100,000 100,000 Dodge Street Paving Entrances to City-Beautification Project 10,562 First Avenue Sidewalk 877 Foster Rd/Dubuque Intersection 7,431 400,000 Foster Rd/Dub to Prairie du Chien 7 Fourth Ave Bridge 533 Gilbert St Improvements 2,735 Hwy 1/Sunset ~ Right Turn 44,830 Hwy 6 Drainage (163,619) Hwy 6/la Ave Ped Bridge Repair 19,764 Hwy 6/Lakeside to 420th St. 3,060 Inter City Trails 321 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Iowa Avenue Streetscape I 47 Longfellow/Pine St ped/Bicycle Trail 7,585 - Meadow Street Bridge 2,628 62,000 Melrose/Grand Ave Study 17,242 Mormon Trek-Abbey Ln Storm 437 Mormon Trek-CIr Crk to RR 121,462 Mormon Trek-Melrose/IAIS (19,400) Mormon Trek-R/R Overpass 399,000 Oakdale Blvd. 39,597 Overwidth Paving Projects 17,110 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Pavement Marking 19,412 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 RR Crossings-City Wide 35,959 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Riverside Drive Redevelopment 3,000 Scott Boulevard-ACT/Roch. 100,000 Sidewalk/Trail Maint - Parks ROW 2,750 Sump Pump Discharge Tiles 7,471 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Telephone System Upgrade 150,600 Traffic Calming 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Traffic Signals 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 Van Buren Storm Sewer 38,772 Sub Total - Transfer to ClP 1,174,692 1,085,000 2,225,000 725,000 825,000 Sub Total - Total Transfers from Road Use Tax 4,'124,751 4,275,477 5,791,867 4,259,547 4,464,197 Grand Total Road Use Tax Fund 4,125,818 4,276,695 5,792,934 4,260,614 4,465,264 - 69 - - 70 - LIBRARY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 F¥05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 2,700,071 2,842,896 2,962,037 3,085,805 3,227,877 Library Levy $0.27 523,073 521,808 538,600 546,891 562,274 Library Services 472,307 480,173 482,473 493,921 507,339 Trans from Broadband Tel. 49,574 51,284 52,823 53,000 54,000 Total 3,745,025 3,896,161 4,035,933 4~ 4,351,490 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 2,729,401 2,883,713 3,014,125 3,167,684 3,314,866 Commodities 88,906 103,720 82,871 84,528 86,215 Services And Charges 363,499 379,720 404,160 391,595 399,038 Capital Outlay 517,231 483,020 478,030 479,063 494,624 Transfers Out 45,988 45,988 56,747 56,747 56,747 Total 3,745,025 3,896,161 ~ 4,179,617 4,351,490 --~ FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 MWI - LIBRARY 1.00 1.00 1 CATALOG SOFTWARE 14,000 MW II - LIBR3%RY 1.00 1.00 2 ADULT LIBP~ARY MATERIALS 429,530 LIBP~ARY CLERK 2.00 2.00 1 RFID TAGS 34,500 PUBLIC SERVICES CLERK ~.00 2.00 SR LIBRARY CLERK 1.00 1.00 LIBP~ARY ASSISTkNT I 1.00 1.00 LIBR3%RY ASSISTANT II 1.00 1.00 LIBRARY ASSISTANT III 2.00 2.00 SR LIBRARy ASSISTANT 2.00 2.00 MICROCOMPUTER SPECIALIST 1.00 1.00 PAGE SUPERVISOR 1.00 1.00 LIBR3~RIAN I 1.00 LIBP~ARIAN II 4.00 5.00 NETWORK DATABASE SPECIALIST 1.00 1.00 SR LIBRARIAN 1.00 1.00 OFFICE MANAGER - LIBRARY 1.00 1.00 LIBRARY BUILDING MGR 1.00 1.00 LIBP~ARY SYSTEMS MGR 1.00 1.00 LIBRARY COORDINATOR 5.00 5.00 ASST LIBRARY DIRECTOR 1.00 LIBRARY DIRECTOR 1.00 1.00 MWI - LIBRARy 1.25 1.25 LIBRARY CLERK 1.25 1.25 PUBLIC SERVICES CLERK 1.00 1.00 LIBP~ARY ASSISTANT I 1.25 1.25 LIBRARy ASSISTANT II .75 .75 LIBR3LRy ASSISTANT III 2.75 2.80 LIBRARY WEB SPECIALIST .50 .75 LIBRARIAN I .50 LIBP~ARIAN II 1.75 1.33 42.50 41.88 478,030 TRANSFER TO: Library Computer Repl~ Resrv 39,062 Library Equip Repl Resrv 17,685 56,747 LIBRARY SPECIAL REVENUES PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 57,551 0 31,622 20,167 27,700 Library Services 75,458 59,275 44,425 44,625 39,900 Library Open Access 49,920 34,000 34,000 34,000 34,000 Total 182,929 93,275 ~ 98,792 101,600 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 42,764 35,022 36,755 38,544 40,376 Commodities 38,245 21,845 13,639 13,912 14,191 Services And Charges 15,002 23,194 45,653 46,336 47,033 Capital Outlay 66,918 0 14,000 0 0 Transfers Out 20,000 0 0 0 0 Total 182,929 80,061 110,047 98,792 101,600 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 SR LIBRARY ASSISTANT .50 .50 2 LAPTOP 4,000 PUBLIC SERVICES CLERK .25 .25 1 FICTION ON TAPE 10,000 .75 .75 14,000 - 72 - LIBRARY EQUIP REPLACEMENT RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 14,774 26,467 42,205 60,890 78,575 Interest Income 432 1,000 1,000 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 16 0 0 0 0 Library Dept Transfer 14,738 14,738 17,685 17,685 17,685 Total Receipts 15,186 15,738 18,685 17,685 17,685 Capital Outlay 3,493 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 3,493 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 26,467 42,205 60,890 78,575 96,260 LIBRARY COMPUTER REPL RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 105,936 78,718 109,968 149,030 188,092 Interest Income 2,211 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 2,848 0 0 0 0 Library Dept Transfer 31,250 31,250 39,062 39,062 39,062 Total Receipts 36,309 31,250 39,062 39,062 39,062 Capital Outlay 63,527 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 63,527 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 78,718 109,968 149,030 188,092 227,154 Ending Balance 0 0 0 0 -73- LIBRARY DEV. OFFICE SALARY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 PY04 CITY MGR PY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 73 314 8,819 8,819 8,819 Miscellaneous Revenue 61,479 92,301 53,610 56,294 58,956 Miscellaneous Transfer 20,000 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 81,479 92,301 53,610 56,294 58,956 Personnel 81,238 83,796 53,610 56,294 58,956 Total Expenditures 81,238 83,796 53,610 56,294 58,956 Ending Balance 314 8,819 8,819 8,819 8,819 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 SR LIBRARY ASSISTANT .50 LIBRARY COORD - DEVELOPMENT 1.00 .80 1.50 .80 0 ~ 74 - PARKS & REC DEPT. ADMIN. PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 186,476 205,576 210,326 220,864 230,877 Total 196,476 205,576 ~ 220,864 230,877 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY M~R FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 178,304 185,746 193,398 203,728 213,530 Commodities 726 1,471 991 1,011 1,031 Services And Charges 17,446 18,359 15,937 16,125 16,316 Total 196,476 205,576 ~ 220,864 230,877 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 1.00 1.00 PARKS & RECREATION DIRECTOR 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 0 - 75 - PARK LAND ACQUISITION RESERVE PROPOSED BIYDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 338,256 373,374 262,434 120,494 53,554 Interest Income 8,283 12,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 Interfund Loans 27,060 27,060 27,060 27,060 27,060 Total Receipts 35,343 39,060 33,060 33,060 33,060 Services And Charges 0 0 75,000 0 0 Transfers 225 150,000 100,000 100,000 0 Total Expenditures 225 150,000 175,000 100,000 0 Ending Balance 373,374 262,434 120,494 53,554 86,614 TRANSFER TO: Parkland Acq to Gen Fund 100,000 100,000 PARK LAND DEVELOPMENT RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY 05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 22,891 23,437 23,437 23,437 23,437 Interest Income 546 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 546 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 23,437 23,437 23,437 23,437 23,437 PARKS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 1,225,335 1,189,324 1,190,225 1,236,159 1,384,780 Recreation Fees 33,076 24,000 37,000 37,000 37,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 14,888 11,700 13,700 13,500 13,500 Road Use Tax 2,750 0 0 0 0 Transfer frm Parkland Acq 0 100,000 100,000 100,000 0 Total 1,276,049 1,325,024 ~ 1,386,659 1,435,280 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 803,196 853,273 833,826 877,279 917,551 Commodities 74,992 80,477 83,896 85~424 87,131 Services And Charges 357,285 360,739 386,218 390,981 395,848 Capital Outlay 40,576 30,535 36,985 32,975 34,750 Total 1,276,049 1,325,024 ~ 1,386,659 1,4~,280 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 CLERK TYPIST PARKS/FORESTRY 1.00 1.00 12 NON-CONTRACTED IMPROVEMENTS 4,500 M.W. II - PARKS 6.00 5.00 2 PARKS & RECREATION EQUIPMENT 9,000 M.W. III - PARKS 3.00 3.00 7 OTHER OPEP~ATING EQUIPMENT 23,485 SR MW - TURFGRASS SPECIALIST 1.00 1.00 SR MW - PARKS 1.00 1.00 SUPERINTENDENT PARKS/FORESTRY 1.00 1.00 13.00 12.00 36,985 - 77 - RECREATION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 1,812,246 1,614,188 1,692,987 1,719,378 1,784,017 Recreation Fees 649,227 872,834 725,709 725,484 725,484 Hotel/Motel Tax 140,871 151,250 151,250 151,250 151,250 Total 2,602,344 ~,638,272 2,569,946 2,596,112 ~660,751 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 1,800,772 1,755,919 1,769,181 1,846,386 1,922,288 Commodities 148,622 164,125 154,752 157,739 160,894 Services And Charges 426,844 505,801 429,216 438,690 448,472 Capital Outlay 138,009 124,330 128,700 65,200 41,000 Transfers Out 88,097 88,097 88,097 88,097 88,097 Total ~--,-,~,344 2,638,272 2,569,946 2,596,112 2,660,751 --- FTE - - PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 M.W. I - RECREATION 2.00 2.00 4 CEILING TILE 33,500 CLERK TYPIST RECREATION 1.00 5 TURF IRRIGATION 46,000 SR CLERK/TYPIST - REC 1.00 1.00 13 GAME ROOM EQUIPMENT 35,200 M.W. II - RECREATION 1.00 1.00 1 EXERCISE EQUIPMENT 4,000 M.W. II - POOLS 1.00 1.00 2 CASH MONITORING SYSTEM 10,000 OFFICE COORD - RECREATION 1.00 1.00 REC PROGP~AM SUPERVISOR 5.00 5.00 REC. MAINT. SUPR .67 .67 RECREATION SUPT 1.00 1.00 M.W. I - POOLS 1.50 1.50 15.17 14.17 128,700 TRANSFER TO: Mercer Gym Loan Repay 61,037 Scanlon Repaymt to Park Acq. 27,060 88,097 - 78 - CEMETERY PROPOSED BI/DGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 197,544 266,089 247,168 254,398 266,679 Cemetery Fees & Charges 67,874 65,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 Total 265,418 331,089 ~ 319,398 331,679 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 196,285 222,596 240,978 253,392 264,839 Commodities 10,067 13,380 10,802 11,016 11,234 Services And Charges 51,182 61,683 52,729 53,248 53,777 Capital Outlay 7,884 33,430 7,659 1,742 1,829 Total 265,418 331,089 312,168 319,398 331,679 v_ FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 M.W. II CEMETERY 1.00 1.00 CONCRETE FLOOR 5,000 M.W. III - CEMETERY 1.00 1.00 ROADWAY GATE 2,659 CEMETERY SUPR 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 7,659 -79- SENIOR CENTER PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 538,721 542,969 566,281 590,946 614,882 Senior Center Fees 9,255 57,000 44,000 44,000 44,000 County - Sr Ctr Support 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 389 0 375 375 375 Miscellaneous Transfer 2,550 0 0 0 0 Total 650,915 674,969 ~ 710,321 734,257 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 363,725 385,982 401,626 423,259 443,518 Commodities 18,933 18,528 18,058 18,367 18,731 Services And Charges 150,249 172,680 171,908 175,131 178,444 Capital Outlay 32,068 4,215 500 0 0 Transfers Out 85,940 93,564 93,564 93,564 93,564 Total 650,915 674,969 685,656 710,321 734,257 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 M.W. I - SENIOR CENTER .81 .81 1 DIGITAL CAMERA 500 SR CLERK/TYPIST - SR CENTER 1.00 1.00 MWIII - SENIOR CENTER 1.00 1.00 PROGRAM SPECIALIST - SR CENTER 1.00 1.00 VOLUNTEER SPECIALIST-SR CNTR 1.00 1.00 SENIOR CENTER COORDINATOR 1~00 1.00 CLERICAL ASST - SR CTR .50* .50 6.31 6.31 500 TRANSFER TO: SR CTR/Tower P1 Pkg 20,000 Sr Ctr Ceiling Sprinkler '99 43,296 Sr Ctr HVAC Improv FY99 22,644 Sr Ctr Repay 38525 FY02 7,624 93,564 * This clerical position was added in FY04 via Council Resolution #03-299. - 80 - CBD MAINTENANCE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED F¥06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 355,817 388,258 430,548 445,902 460,682 Licenses & Permits 2,750 4,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Total 358,567 392,258 ~ 448,902 463,682 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 241,188 257,673 289,558 302,809 315,441 Commodities 19,393 23,164 23,762 24,237 24,721 Services ~_nd Charges 90,347 86,576 96,860 98,132 99,429 Capital Outlay 7,639 24,845 23,368 23,724 24,091 Total 358,567 392,258 433,548 448,902 463,682 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 REFUSE COLLECTION EQUIPMENT 11,868 M.W.II CBD 2.00 2.00 ANNUAL SURFACE REPAIRS 8,000 SR M.W. - CBD 1.00 1.00 ANNUAL TREE/SHRUB REPLACEMNT 3,500 3.00 3.00 23,368 FORESTRY OPEP~ATIONS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY 06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 268,587 260,803 290,859 302,409 312,486 Miscellaneous Revenue 10,000 0 0 0 0 Road Use Tax 50,000 54,790 57,530 60,400 62,000 Total 328,587 315,593 348,389 362,809 374,486 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTIO~ PROJECTION Personnel 202,448 215,582 239,678 251,749 262,826 Commodities 4,259 4,176 4,508 4,599 4,690 Services And Charges 94,055 86,335 94,428 95,711 97,020 Capital Outlay 27,825 9,500 9,775 10,750 9,950 Total 328,587 315,593 348,389 362,809 374,486 -- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 M.W. I FORESTRY 1.00 1.00 CONTRACTED IMPROVEMENTS 6,000 M.W. II - FORESTRY 1.00 1.00 NON CONTRACTED IMPROVEMENTS 2,500 SR MW - FORESTRY 1.00 1.00 OTHER OPERATING EQUIPMENT 1,275 3.00 3.00 9,775 PUBLIC ART PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 2,908 4,346 3,281 3,336 3,392 Charges For Services 189 0 0 0 0 Total 3,097 4,346 --3~,2~ 3,336 3,392 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Commodities 487 50 39 40 41 Services And Charges 2,610 4,296 3,242 3,296 3,351 Total 3,097 4,346 --~Y~ 3,336 3,392 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 118,197 120,557 114,411 117,291 120,047 Miscellaneous Revenue 71 250 100 100 100 Total 118,268 120,807 114,511 117,391 120,147 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 52,905 50,259 50,563 53,129 55,563 Commodities 1,189 1,206 1,468 1,497 1,528 Services And Charges 64,174 69,342 62,480 62,765 63,056 Total 118,268 120,807 114,511 117,391 120,147 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ASSOCIATE PLANNER .25 .25 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COORD .25 .25 .50 .50 0 - 82 - HWY 6 COM~iERCIAL URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 -98 -98 -98 -98 Personnel 98 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 98 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance -98 -98 -98 -98 -98 HWY 6 COM~iERCIAL URBAN RENEWAL PEPPERWOOD PLAZA TIF PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 -496 -496 -496 w496 Personnel 435 0 0 0 0 Services And Charges 61 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 496 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance -496 -496 -496 -496 -496 CITY-UNIVERSITY PROJECT 1 URBAN RENEWAL 64-iA PROJECT PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 -59,423 3,940,577 8,659 574,159 TIF Property Taxes 0 0 68,082 565,500 565,500 Sale Of Bonds 0 7,415,000 0 0 0 Total Receipts 0 7,415,000 68,082 565,500 565,500 Services And Charges 59,423 2,065,262 4,000,000 0 0 Transfers 0 1,349,738 0 0 650,262 Total Expenditures 59,423 3,415,000 4,000,000 0 650,262 Ending Balance -59,423 3,940,577 8,659 574,159 489,397 -83- SYCAMORE AND 1ST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL SYCAMORE MALL PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 706 706 1,207 1,207 TIF Property Taxes 6,254 160,400 222,313 226,248 230,773 Total Receipts 6,254 160,400 222,313 226,248 230,773 Personnel 1,313 0 0 0 Services And Charges 267 160,400 221,812 226,248 230,773 Transfers 3,968 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 5,548 160,400 221,812 226,248 230,773 Ending Balance 706 706 1,207 1,207 1,207 SYCAMORE AND 1ST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL PLAMOR PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 -171 -171 -171 -171 Services And Charges 171 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 171 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance -171 -171 -171 171 -171 NORTHGATE CORPORATE PARK URBAN RENEWAL SEABURY AND SMITH PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 331 -331 1,224 714 TIF Property Taxes 0 0 150,987 151,911 154,949 Total Receipts 0' 0 150,987 151,911 154,949 Personnel 165 0 0 0 0 Services And Charges 166 0 149,432 152,421 155,469 Total Expenditures 331 0 149,432 152,421 155,469 Ending Balance -331 -331 1,224 714 194 84- SCOTT 6 INDUSTRIAL PARK URBAN RENEWAL OWENS-BROCKWAY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 -361 -361 -361 -361 TIF Property Taxes 0 1,535 167,308 170,654 174,067 Total Receipts 0 1,535 167,308 170,654 174,067 Personnel 189 0 0 0 0 Services And Charges 172 0 167,308 170,654 174,067 Transfers 0 1,535 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 361 1,535 167,308 170,654 174,067 Ending Balance -361 -361 -361 -361 -361 HEINZ ROAD URBAN RENEWAL ALPLA PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 -35,206 -35,206 35,206 35,206 Personnel 35 0 0 0 0 Services And Charges 35,171 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 35,206 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance -35,206 -35,206 -35,206 -35,206 35,206 -85- CDBG METRO ENTITLEMENT PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance -3,355 12,211 296,720 308,016 305,967 Charges For Services 10 0 0 0 0 Comm Der Block Grant 798,822 825,000 825,000 825,000 825,000 Building Rentals 570 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 2,880 0 0 0 0 Sale of Land 0 250,000 0 0 0 Loan Repayments 159,546 125,000 125,000 125,000 125,000 Total Receipts 861,828 1,200,000 950,000 950,000 950,000 Personnel 235,800 268,744 230,691 243,325 254,997 Commodities 7,601 1,357 9,320 9,506 9,695 Services And Charges 216,345 195,890 315,193 320,218 325,351 Capital Outlay 486,516 449,500 383,500 379,000 382,000 Total Expenditures 946,262 915,491 938,704 952,049 972,043 Ending Balance 12,211 296,720 308,016 305,967 283,924 --- FTE - - PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 HOUSING REHAB SPECIALIST 1.20 1.20 5 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS 175,000 ASSOCIATE PLANNER 1.00 1.00 7 OFFICE FURNITURE 4,000 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARy .25 .25 5 MICRO-COMPUTER 4,500 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COORD .50 .50 3 LAND ACQUISITION 200,000 PROGRAM ASSISTANT .40 .40 3.35 3.35 383,500 - 86 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - HOME PROPOSED BI/DGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance -15,899 -1,783 6,274 453 453 Comm Der Block Grant 1,081,087 0 0 0 0 HOME Federal Grant 0 685,000 685,000 685,000 685,000 Loan Repayments 72,995 25,000 32,000 30,000 30,000 Total Receipts 1,154,082 710,000 717,000 715,000 715,000 Personnel 48,778 71,835 72,534 76,380 80,064 Commodities 0 503 450 459 468 Services And Charges 78,135 143,005 146,780 148,672 150,600 Capital Outlay 1,013,053 486,600 503,057 489,489 483,868 Total Expenditures 1,139,966 701,943 722,821 715,000 715,000 Ending Balance -1,783 6,274 453 453 453 --- FTE - PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ASSOCIATE PLANNER .75 .75 3 LAND ACQUISITION 225,000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COORD .25 .25 7 BUILDING IMPROVEMENT 278,057 1.00 1.00 503,057 . EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY03 FY04 FY05 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 15,456 -6,959 -1,982 0 103 Other State Grants 114, 062 105,230 106,717 107,000 109,100 Total Receipts 114,062 105,230 106,717 107,000 109,100 Personnel 5, 137 0 4,536 4,695 4,861 Services And Charges 100,428 100,253 100,199 102,202 104,245 Total Expenditures 105, 565 100,253 104,735 106, 897 109, 106 Ending Balance -6,959 1,982 0 103 97 -87- PLANNING & COM14UNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 214,533 226,082 222,723 232,553 243,011 Total 214,533 226,082 ~ 232,553 243,011 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 186,956 200,011 205,164 215,702 226,030 Commodities 1,565 1,669 1,613 1,644 1,676 Services And Charges 15,893 17,138 15,111 15,207 15,305 Capital Outlay 10,119 7,264 835 0 0 Total 214,533 226,082 ~ 232,553 243,011 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN .50 .50 1 FLJkT FILE 835 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARy .55 .55 PCD DIRECTOR 1~00 1.00 CLERICAL ASSIST PCD .50 .50 2.55 2.55 835 URBAN PLANNING PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY 04 PROPOSED FY 06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 299,642 300,839 291,997 307,297 321,840 Building & Develop. Fees 46,021 26,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Federal Grants 4,400 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 1,262 700 1,000 1,000 1,000 Total 351,325 327,539 332,997 348,297 362,840 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 287,869 266,428 277,237 291,970 305,934 Commodities 2,135 3,166 2,009 2,048 2,088 Services And Charges 61,321 57,945 53,751 54,279 54,818 Total 351,325 327,539 332,997 348,297 362,840 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ASSOCIATE PLANNER 3.50 2.50 SENIOR PLANNER 1.00 1.00 4.50 3.5~ 0 -88- JCCOG SI/~94ARY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 9,489 7,047 8,942 8,488 8,610 Charges For Services 576 0 0 0 0 Local Governments 114,231 133,623 124,914 129,889 134,608 Other State Grants 114,038 112,248 115,469 119,623 123~515 Miscellaneous Revenue 29 0 0 0 0 Transfer from Road Use Tax 100,000 135,420 137,000 143,800 149,800 Gen Fund-non Op Adm. 154,351 129,701 154,912 163,256 171,309 Transfer from Landfill Fund 67,270 55,293 56,328 58,850 61,192 Total Receipts 550,495 566,285 588,623 615,418 640,424 Personnel 414,843 427,508 447,808 471,810 494,470 Commodities 2,683 4;395 5,435 5,545 5,655 Services ~d Charges 133,301 130,087 133,334 135,441 137,587 Capital Outlay 2,110 2,400 2,500 2,500 2,500 Total Expenditures 552,937 564,390 589,077 615,296 640,212 Bnding Balance 7,047 8,942 8,488 8,610 8,822 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN .40 .40 1 ON-STREET TRAFFIC COUNTERS 2,500 ASSOCIATE PLJ~NNER 2.50 2.50 HLrMAN SERVICES COORDINATOR 1.00 1.00 SOLID WASTE PLANNER 1.00 1.00 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY .20 .20 ASST PCD DIRECTOR/JCCOG EX DIR 1.00 1.00 6.10 6.10 2,500 89- JCCOG ADMINISTRATION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Local Governmntl Agencies 30,617 37,916 23,840 24~216 24,601 State Grants 0 27,127 26,000 26,000 26,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 26 0 0 0 0 Non Oper Admin Transfer 99,160 73,077 93,541 99,118 104,424 Total 129,803 138,120 ~ 149,334 155,025 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 75,237 82,917 85,873 90,413 94,768 Commodities 1,216 2,226 2,069 2,111 2,153 Services And Charges 49,994 52,623 55,735 56,834 57,956 Total 126,447 137,766 ~ 149,358 154,877 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN .40 .40 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY .20 .20 ASST PCD DIRECTOR/JCCOG EX DIR .50 .50 1.10 1.10 0 JCCOG-GENERAL TRANS. PLAN PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Local Governmntl Agencies 36,664 37,402 40,668 42,556 44,325 State Grants 114,038 85,121 89,469 93,623 97,515 Miscellaneous Revenue 3 0 0 0 0 Road Use Tax 100,000 135,420 137,000 143,800 149,800 Total 250,705 257,943 ~ 279,979 291,640 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 209,446 213,574 225,136 237,335 248,736 Commodities 1,223 1,441 2,760 2,816 2,872 Services And Charges 41,292 39,232 37,013 37,297 37,584 Capital Outlay 2,110 2,400 2,500 2,500 2,500 Total 254,071 256,647 267,409 279,948 291,692 -- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAy: FY05 ASSOCIATE PLANNER 2.50 2.50 1 ON-STREET TRAFFIC COI/NTERS 2,500 ASST PCD DIRECTOR/JCCOG EX DIR .50 .50 3.00 3.00 2,500 JCCOG HUMkN SERVICES PROPOSED BIIDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Charges For Services 576 0 0 0 Local Governmntl Agencies 16,128 15,509 16,809 17,567 18,319 Non Oper Admin Transfer 55,191 56,624 61,371 64,138 66,885 Total 71,895 72,133 78,180 81,705 85,204 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 62,772 63,028 66,134 69,471 72,779 Commodities 66 350 320 326 332 Services And Charges 10,180 8,554 11,668 11,849 12,033 Total 73,018 71,932 ~ 81,646 85,144 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ~ SERVICES COORDINATOR 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 SOLID WASTE M/%NAGEMENT PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Local Governmntl Agencies 30,822 42,796 43,597 45,550 47,363 Transfer from Landfill 67,270 55,293 56,328 58,850 61,192 Total 98,092 98,089 ~ 104,400 108,555 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES; ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 67,388 67,989 70,665 74,591 78,187 Commodities 178 378 286 292 298 Services And Charges 31,835 29,678 28,918 29,461 30,014 Total 99,401 98,045 ~ 104,344 108,499 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 SOLID WASTE PLAA~NER 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 -91 - NEIGBORHOOD SERVICES PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 105,979 105,696 101,234 105,653 109,758 Road Use Tax 0 7,500 7,500 7,500 7,500 Total 105,979 113,196 ~ 113,153 117,258 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 70,855 74,264 77,005 81,148 84,972 Commodities 1,172 569 545 555 565 Services And Charges 21,862 23,071 16,184 16,450 16,721 Capital Outlay 12,090 15,292 15,000 15,000 15,000 Total 105,979 113,196 ~ 113,153 117,258 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ASSOCIATE PLANNER 1.00 1.00 1 MISC CONTRACTED IMPROVEMENTS 15,000 1.00 1.00 15,000 GENEP~AL FUND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (NON-GRANT ACTIVITY} PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS: ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Property Tax 17,830 57,059 58,617 61,841 64,747 Total 17,830 57,059 ~ 61,841 64,747 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 19,300 52,959 55,919 59,092 61,947 Commodities 150 276 400 408 416 Services And Charges -1,620 3,824 2,298 2,341 2,384 Total 17,830 57,059 58,617 61,841 64,747 - FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 HOUSING REF-~B SPECIALIST .80 .80 PROGRAM ASSISTANT .10 .10 .90 .90 0 - 92 - CITY OF IOWA CITY ADMINISTRATIVE RECEIPTS SUMMARY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 PROPOSED FY06 FY07 RECEIPTS ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION Tort Levy 409,135 470,748 695,971 725,624 756,863 Monies & Credits 31,407 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 Military Credit 12,212 12,125 12,125 12,125 12,125 Personal Property Replacement 291,104 0 0 0 0 Licenses & Permits 102,404 96,705 98,700 98,200 97,700 Magistrates Court 339,845 289,500 310,000 325,000 335,000 Parking Fines 461,155 ~00,000 700,000 700,000 700,000 Charges For Services 6,975 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 Johnson County Contract 604 0 0 0 0 Admin Expense Chargeback 1,197,708 1,19~,859 1,253,201 1,287,496 1,316,106 Gas /Elec. Use Tax 387,773 422,896 434,112 441,062 447,926 State Population Alloc. ,571,581 0 0 0 0 Bank Franchise Tax 184,348 95,000 0 0 0 State Grants 400 1,500 0 0 0 Hotel/Motel Tax 140,871 123,75Q 123,750 123,750 123,750 Interest Income 372,442 375,000 250,000 225,000 200,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 263,832 226,002 218,460 218,460 218,460 Sale Of Real Estate 86,651 300,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 Loan Repayments 100,000 100,000 100,000 0 0 City Attorney Chargeback 103,793 73,125 75,000 75,000 75,000 Transfer-Parking Fund 200,000 227,200 200,000 200,000 200,000 Trans from Broadband Tel. 32,500 102,500 100,000 100,000 100,000 Miscellaneous Transfer 587,181 1,535 0 0 0 G.O. Bonds-Cap Outlay 1,117,838 560,000 0 281,000 0 TOTAL 7,001,759 5,319,645 4,880,519 5,121,917 4,892,130 CITY OF IOWA CITY GENERAL FUND ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISIONS EXPENDITURES SUMMARY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 ACTIVITY ACTUAL BUDGET PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION City Council 114,709 143 251 112 638 115,887 119 263 City Clerk 338 168 395 828 367 469 434,073 398 878 City Attorney 528 832 554 657 576 381 604,750 632 057 City Manager 464 762 461 811 482 066 501,952 521 593 Human Relations 359 318 432 491 434 400 451,366 467 933 Finance Dept. Administration 330 347 338 513 293 493 305,602 318 020 Accounting & Reporting 497 915 558 622 573 890 598,926 622 363 Central Procurement 230 272 247 019 248 567 260,534 272 357 Treasury 850 270 929 828 943 576 979,838 1,015 067 Document Services 250 102 249 050 224 513 232,204 256 874 Risk Management 352 709 581 823 712 080 742,410 774 156 Government Buildings 392 747 430 448 443 552 471,501 482 744 Human Rights Activities 197 440 219 415 210 340 219,414 228 539 Non operational A~nin. 1,144,665 1,356,156 1,392,420 1,444,570 1,474 606 GRAND TOTAL 6,052,256 6,898,912 7,015,385 7,363,027 7,584,450 - 93 - CITY COUlqCIL PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY08 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 47,278 46,604 48,326 50,571 52,925 Commodities 2,477 3,911 2,560 2,611 2,662 Services And Charges 61,954 92,736 61,752 62,705 63,676 Capital Outlay 3,000 0 0 0 0 Total 114,709 143,251 ~ 115,887 119,263 _v FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 CITY COUNCIL 6.00 6.00 MAYOR 1.00 1.00 7.00 7.00 0 CITY MANAGER PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 363,350 380,742 394,198 413,412 432,365 Commodities 5,892 4,429 5,178 5,282 5,389 Services And Charges 95,520 76,640 82,690 83,258 83,839 Total 464,762 461,811 482,066 501,952 521,593 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ADM ASSISTANT TO CITY MANAGER 1.00 1.00 ASST CITY MANAGER 1.00 1.00 CITY MANAGER 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 0 - 94 - HUMAN RELATIONS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 251,559 270,107 282,768 298,169 312,573 Commodities 11,719 22,995 26,036 26,596 27,172 Services And Charges 88,770 137,639 125,046 126,601 128,188 Capital Outlay 7,270 1,750 550 0 0 Total 359,318 432,491 ~ 451,366 467,933 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 PERSONNEL ASSISTANT 2.00 2.00 1 CHAIR 550 PERSONNEL GENERALIST 1.00 1.00 PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATOR 1.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 550 CITY CLERK PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 249,716 262,674 276,457 291,322 305, 161 Commodities 1,352 1,728 1,427 1,455 1,485 Services And Charges 86,339 131,426 89,585 141,296 92,232 Capital Outlay 761 0 0 0 0 Total 338,168 395,828 367,469 434,073 398,878 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK/TYPIST 1.00 1.00 LICENSE SPECIALIST 1.00 1.00 DEPUTY CITY CLERK 1.00 1.00 CITY CLERK 1.00 1.00 4.00 4.00 0 - 95 - FINkNCE DEPT. ADMINISTRATION PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 258,620 270,698 224,314 236,058 247,392 Commodities 1,525 2,109 1,998 2,038 2,078 Services And Charges 70,202 65,706 66,481 67,506 68,550 Capital Outlay 0 0 700 0 0 Total 330,347 338,513 293,493 305,602 318,020 FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT 1.00 1.00 1 DESK CHAIR 700 BUDGET MANAGEMENT ANALYST 1.00 1.00 ASST FINANCE DIRECTOR .10 .10 FINANCE DIRECTOR 1.00 .50 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY .32 .32 3.42 2.92 700 ACCOLrNTING & REPORTING PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 345,947 395,966 416,920 439,607 460,647 Commodities 2,567 2,759 3,970 4,049 4,129 Services And Charges 149,549 158,997 153,000 155,270 157,587 Capital Outlay -148 900 0 0 0 Total 497,915 558,622 ~ 598,926 622,363 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ACCOUNT CLERK ACCTNG 1.00 1.00 SR ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CLERK 1.00 1.00 SR ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE CLERK 1.00 1.00 ACCOUNTANT - PAYROLL 1.00 1,00 SR ACCOUNTANT ACCOUNTING 1,00 1.00 ASSISTANT CONTROLLER 1.00 1.00 ASST FINANCE DIRECTOR .55 .55 6.55 6.55 0 CENTRAL PROCUREMENT PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 211,965 220,146 230,312 242,098 253,735 Commodities 381 1,633 395 403 411 Services And Charges 17,840 24,040 17,860 18,033 18,211 Capital Outlay 86 1,200 0 0 0 Total 230,272 247,019 248,567 260,534 272,357 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 BUYER II 2.00 2.00 CENTRAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR 1.00 1.00 CENTRAL SERVICES INFO CLERK 1.26 1.26 4.26 4.26 0 TREASURY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 509,508 527,730 555,442 585,463 613,502 Commodities 4,028 6,944 4,170 4,253 4,338 Services And Charges 335,830 393,954 383,164 390,122 397,227 Capital Outlay 904 1,200 800 0 0 Total 850,270 929,828 943,576 979,838 1,015,067 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ACCOUNT CLERK TREASURY 3.00 3.00 1 DESK CHAIR 800 SR ACCOUNT CLERK - TREASURY 1.00 1.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE REP 3.00 3.00 SR ACCOUNTANT - TREASURY 1.00 1.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE MANAGER 1.00 FINANCE DIRECTOR .50 CASHIER - TREASURY 1.38 1.38 10.38 9.88 800 - 97 ~ DOCUMENT SERVICES PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 216,256 214,064 180,839 190,500 199,630 Commodities 6,707 7,383 8,104 8,266 8,430 Services And Charges 25,797 24,803 31,570 31,438 31,814 Capital Outlay 1',342 ' 2,800 4,000 2,000 t7,000 Total ~ 249,05Q 224,513 232,204 256,874 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 DOCUMENT SPECIALIST 2.00 2.00 1 MICROCOMPUTER HARDWARE 2,000 SR. DOCUMENT SPECIALIST 1.00 1.00 1 MICROCOMPUTER SOFTWARE 2,000 DOCUMENT SERVICES SUPV 1.00 .50 4.00 3.50 4,000 CITY ATTORNEY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 472,788 499,050 522,750 550,418 577,010 Commodities 4,253 6,105 4,445 4,534 4,625 Services And Charges 50,705 48,802 49,186 49,798 50,422 Capital Outlay 1,086 700 0 0 0 Total 528,832 554,657 576,381 604,750 632,057 - FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY 1.00 1.00 LEGAL ASSISTANT 1.00 1.00 ASST CITY ATTORNEY 3.00 3.00 FIRST ASST CITY ATTORNEY 1.00 1.00 CITY ATTORNEY .60 .60 6.60 6.60 0 - 98 - HUM3~N RIGHTS ACTIVITIES PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 168,751 182,678 175,868 184,524 193,222 Commodities 2,945 2,460 3,197 3,261 3,327 Services And Charges 25,744 34,277 31,275 31,629 31,990 Total 197,440 219,415 210,340 219,414 228,539 --- FTE - PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 HUM3LN RIGHTS INVESTIGATOR 1.00 HUMAN RIGHTS COORDINATOR 1.00 1.00 HUMAN RIGHTS INVESTIGATOR 1.50 .50 2.50 2.50 0 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 204,794 218,278 228,159 240,886 252,520 Commodities 17,582 20,336 18,345 18,710 19,082 Services And Charges 167,412 185,834 191,048 195,405 199,892 Capital Outlay 3,245 6,000 6,000 16,500 11,250 Transfers Out 286 0 0 0 0 Total 392,747 430,448 443,552 471,501 482,744 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 CUSTODIAN 2.00 2.00 2 CARPET/FLOORING REPLACEMENT 6,000 M.W. I - GOVMT BLDGS 1.00 1.00 M.W. II - GOVERNMENT BLDNGS 1.00 1.00 REC. MAINT. SUPR .33 .33 CUSTODI~lq .63 .63 4.96 4.96 6,000 ~ 99 - RISK MANAGEMENT PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 F¥07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Services And Charges 352,709 581,823 712,080 742,410 774,156 Total 352,709 581,823 712,080 742,410 774,156 NON- OPEP~ATIONAL ADMIN. PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 F¥05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 EXPENDITURES: ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Personnel 302 0 0 0 0 Commodities 130 0 0 0 0 Services And Charges 527,820 480,548 440,325 449,131 458,114 Capital Outlay 91,000 259,500 0 0 0 Transfers Out 525,413 528,884 538,095 567,439 575,492 Contingency 0 87,224 414,000 428,000 441,000 Total 1,144,665 1,~156 1,392,420 1~-4~, 570 1,~ --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 1 CONTINGENCY 414,000 .00 .00 414,000 TRANSFER TO: City Hall - Other 25,000 Multi Co Assessmt 24,341 JCCOG-Human Services 61,371 JCCOG-Administration 69,200 Airport Subsidy 167,000 Englert Purch 38971 Repay 160,783 GF Repay Cable TV/N. Court 30,400 538,095 - 100 - NON-OPERATIONAL ADMIN. FY2005 FUNDING REQUESTS During FY2003 budget discussions, Council directed staff to budget $35,000 in Aid to Agencies funding based on a calculation of the agencies' average annual utilities. This provides relief to the General Fund by shifting a portion of funding to the affected Enterprise funds of Water, Wastewater and Refuse Operations. In response to state legislative cuts Council directed a five percent (5%) reduction in Agency funding and a ten percent (10%) reduction in community event funding in FY2004 and FY2006. Revised REQUESTS FOR AID TO AGENCIES Actual Request Proposed FY2003 Budget FY2005 FY2005 FY2004 Human Services Agencies: 4 C's*** 2,000 Arc of Johnson County** 2,000 Big Brothers/Big Sisters $ 41,011 $ 35,160 $ 42,242 $ 33,402 Crisis Center 40,600 39,805 39,805 37,815 Domestic Violence Program 58,756 52,303 54,920 49,688 Elderly Services Agency* 62,063 59,530 62,506 56,554 Emergency Housing Project 24,500 17,100 16,245 Free Medical Clinic 26,584 6,350 7,000 6,033 HACAP -Hawkeye Area Community Action 8,635 8,203 8,635 7,793 ICARE - Iowa Center for Aids Resource 9,350 8,883 12,000 8,439 Jo Co Juvenile Crime Prev/ Youth Dev 2,500 Jo Co Office of the Red Cross 5,500 5,510 6,200 5,235 Mayor's Youth Employment 43,483 22,309 32,309 21,194 MECCA* 29,962 28,654 33,000 27,221 Neighborhood Centers 64,941 60,521 63,547 57,495 Rape Victim Advocacy 12,200 11,590 12,810 11,011 Shelter House 9,529 20,000 STAR Program 7,500 United Action for Youth* 65,000 62,558 82,000 59,430 Youth Homes** 1,000 Youth Pre-employment/Job Training ** (Collaborative Grant) 15,000 15,000 14,250 Contingency use: 10,010 9,510 Community Foundation of Johnson County 1,000 Subtotal: Human Services Agencies $ 513,114 443,486 496,974 421,316 Less Direct funding from: - CDBG (Comm. Dev. Block Grant) (147,529) (105,000 (105,00~] (105,00{] - Enterprise Funds for Agency Water and Wastewater Utilities (33,301) (35,000 (35,00{] (35,00{~ General Fund Total for Aid to Human Services Agencies: $ 332,284 $ 303,486 $ 356,974 $ 281,315 Human Services Reduction - Legislative Cuts (5%) N/A (22,024) N/A (22,171 -101 - NON-OPERATIONAL ADMIN. FY2005 FUNDING REQUESTS FUNDING REQUESTS FOR Actual Revised Proposed Proposed COMMUNITY EVENTS FY2003 Budget FY2095 FY2005 FY2004 Community Events: ADA Celebration $ 1,130 $ 1,080 $ 972 Arts Festival (June 5-8) 6,695 6,030 5,427 Downtown Association: Friday Night Concert Series 6,438 5,760 5,184 Saturday Night "Just Jazz" Series*** 8,600 8,600 Holiday Lights 2,250 2,025 Abilities Awareness Days 250 Humanities Iowa Johnson Co Historical Society 4,635 4,167 3,750 Jazz Festival (July 4-6) 7,500 6,750 6,075 Jaycees' 4th of July Celeb. 5,000 4,950 4,455 Univemity of Iowa's Week of Welcome 2,000 Extend the Dream Foundation: Uptown Bill's Labor Day Fair & Flea Mrkt 873 786 Contingency: 1,000 900 Subtotal: Community Events 42,248 41,460 N/A 29,574 Community Events Reduction - Legislative Cuts (19%) NIA (3,840] NIA (11,886) Actual Budget Proposed Proposed CITY-SPONSORED COMMUNITY EVENTS FY2003 FY2004 FY200$ FY2005 City-Sponsored Community Events: Ali-IA New Horizons Band Concert 250 258 Community Spirit Banners Irving B. Weber Day 7,119 5,150 3,000 3,000 Contingency 5,000 2,000 2,000 Subtotal: City-Sponsored Community Events 7,369 10,408 5,000 5,000 City-Sponsored Events Reduction - Legislative Cuts N/A N/A N/A (5,408) General Fund Total for Community Event Funding: 49,617 51,868 5,000 34,574 and CommunityEvents $ 381,901 $ 355,354 $ 361,974 $ 315,889 * Recipient of CDBG funds ** FY2004 represents the first funding request. *** Funding was not reducted to the following: Youth Pre-employment / Job Training (Collaborative Grant) Saturday Night "Just Jazz" Series - 102 - EMERGENCY LEVY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 PY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 0 0 0 0 Emergency Levy 511,491 521,808 538,600 546,891 562,274 Delq Emergency Levy 282 0 0 0 0 Gas / Elec. Use Tax 11,301 12,286 12,471 12,658 12,848 Total Receipts 523,074 534,094 551,071 559,549 575,122 Transfers 523,074 534,094 551,071 559,549 575,122 Total Expenditures 523,074 534,094 551,071 559,549 575,122 Ending Balance 0 0 0 0 0 TRANSFER TO: TO General Fund 11900 551,071 551,071 - 103- - 104 - DEBT SERVICE FUND PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 402,104 395,749 2,534,706 1,262,355 562,355 Debt Service Levy 7,893,090 8,892,633 7,559,658 9,260,246 9,742,427 Gas / Elec. Use Tax 174,122 207,970 13,529 12,384 0 Interest Income 17,965 0 0 0 Gain/loss 6,659 0 0 0 0 Library Expansion Contribution 0 0 500,000 0 0 Accr Iht On Bonds 3,385 0 0 0 0 Loan Proceeds 4,548 0 0 0 0 Abatements Funding 2,085,134 3,491,219 1,738,204 1,722,187 2,364,052 Miscellaneous Transfer 499,270 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 10,684,173 12,591,822 9,811,391 10,994,817 12,106,479 Services And Charges -26,975 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlay 10,145,681 10,452,865 11,083,742 11,694,817 12,156,217 Transfers 571,822 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 10,690,528 10,452,865 11,083,742 11,694,817 12,156,217 Ending Balance 395,749 2,534,706 1,262,355 562,355 512,617 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTI~Y: FY05 1 G.O. Bond Interest Exp 3,997,492 Principal 7,086,250 .00 .00 11,083,742 SPEC ASSESSMENT FUND PROPOSED BI/DGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 9 9 9 9 Interest Income 9 0 0 0 0 Special Assessments 9, 871 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 9,880 0 0 0 0 Transfers 9, 871 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 9,871 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 9 9 9 9 9 - 105 - Debt Service Fund General Obligation Debt Principal and Interest Payments FY2004 - 2006 Total Principal Principal & Interest Payments Outstanding Issue Use of Funds Issued 6/30/04 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 96 General Obligation Water construction 6,100,000 300,000 314,550 97 General Obligation Multi-purpose 5,200,000 1,525,000 596,675 547,000 523,500 97 General Obligation Water construction 5,540,000 3,875,000 467,125 478,650 463,950 98 General Obligation Multi-purpose 8,500,000 5,050,000 808,038 782,163 756,288 99 General Obligation Multi-purpose 9,000,000 6,650,000 776,388 755,963 735,538 00 General Obligation Multi-purpose 14,310,000 12,215,000 1,245,098 1,244,598 1,247,598 01 General Obligation Multi-purpose 11,500,000 9,615,000 1,146,705 1,142,905 1,038,105 02 General Obligation Library Expansion 29,100,000 25,930,000 2,826,205 2,822,055 2,810,980 02 General Obligation Multi-purpose; 10,600,000 7,050,000 1,305,863 1,568,613 1,549,113 Refunding '92 Capital Loan Notes, '94 GO, '95 GO, and '96 GO 03 General Obligation Multi-purpose 5,570,000 5,570,000 725,845 721,970 712,845 Projected: 2004 GO Multi-purpose 4,400,000, 6,924,000 271,250 542,500 542,500 Projected: 2004 GO Plaza Tower T.I.F. 7,415,000 I 7,400,000 600,000 700,000 700,000 Projected: 2005 GO Multi-purpose 6,300,000 388,400 776,800 Projected: 2006 GO Multi-purpose 4,850,000 299,000 Projected: 2007 GO Multi-purpose 4,500,000 Total Debt Service: $ 92,104,000 ~ $ 11,083,740 $ 11,694,815 $ 12,156,215 Less: Abatement from Library (500,000) Less: T,I.F. Financing (600,000) (700,000) (700,000) Less: Abatement from Parking, Water and Sewer Revenues (1,738,204) (1,722,187) (1,713,790) Less: Gas & Electric Tax Funding (13,529) (12,384) Obligation for Debt Service portion of Property Tax Levy: ! $ 8,232,007 $ 9,260,244 $ 9,742,425 - 106- WATER OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 4,925,978 6,378,532 6,840,790 5,528,145 6,436,679 Charges For Services 9 0 0 0 0 Water Sales 9,558,855 9,391,800 9,214,835 9,488,130 9,769,624 Hydrant Rental 114 0 0 0 0 Conn. & Recon. Fee 139,375 110,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 Water Service & Taps 247 0 0 0 0 Interest Income 218,635 100,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 A/R Interest 113,345 0 100,000 100,000 100,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 95,573 40,000 67,000 67,000 67,000 Total Receipts 10,126,153 9,641,800 9,761,835 10,035,130 10,316,624 Personnel 1,812,865 1,900,519 1,999,393 2,106,958 2,206,618 Commodities 677,524 617,774 764,191 779,468 795,053 Services And Charges 1,328,782 1,582,914 1,592,221 1,628,566 1,660,667 Capital Outlay 480,857 641,225 641,900 375,000 375,000 Transfers 4,373,571 4,437,110 6,076,775 4,236,604 4,226,803 Total Expenditures 8,673,599 9,179,542 11,074,480 9,126,596 9,264,141 Ending Balance 6,378,532 6,840,790 5,528,145 6,436,679 7,489,162 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 M.W. I - METER READER 1.20 1.20 1 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS 2,000 WATER SERVICES CLERK 1.00 1.00 3 METER EXCHANGE PROGP~AM 350,000 M.W. I-WATER CUSTOMER SERVICE 2.00 2.00 2 NON-CONTRACTED IMPROV 85,000 MW I - WATER PL/LNT 1.00 1.00 1 TRUCK 15,000 M.W. II - WATER SERVICE 3.00 3.00 1 WATER METERS 175,000 MWII - WATER DISTRIBUTION 4.00 4.00 1 RADIO EQUIPMENT 700 M.W. III - WATER DIST 2.00 2.00 4 GENERATOR 12,200 TPO - WATER 4.00 4.00 1 SPRAY TECH PAINT BOOTH 2,000 PUBLIC INFO/ED COORD - WATER 1.00 1.00 MAINTENANCE OPERATOR - WATER 3.00 3.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE COORD 1.00 1.00 ELECTRONICS TECH - WATER 1.00 1.00 UTILITIES TECHNICIAN 1.00 1.00 BUILDING INSPECTOR 1.00 1.00 SR MW WATER PLANT 1.00 1.00 SR M.W. - WATER DISTRIBUTION 1.00 1.00 SR TPO - WATER 1.00 1.00 ASST SUPT - WATER 1.00 1.00 WATER SUPERINTEhIDENT 1.00 1.00 WATER SERVICES CLERK .50 .50 31.70 31.70 641,-~ TRANSFER TO: Dodge I80/Govr Water 830,000 Water Distribution Bldg 1,000,000 Water Main Proj-Annual 300 000 1999 Revenue Bonds 653 125 2000 Revenue Bonds 940 049 2002 Revenue Bonds 609 948 Nov 97 G.O. Water 467 125 2002 GO Refunding 541 276 1996 G.O. Bonds 235 252 Improvement Reserve 500 000 -6,076,775 -107- DEPR., EXT., & IMPROV. RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MaR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 2,844,536 3,480,536 3,980,536 4,480,536 4,980,536 Transfer from Water Fund 636,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Total Receipts 636,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Ending Balance 3,480,536 3,980,536 4,480,536 4,980,536 5,480,536 ONE YEAR DEBT SERVICE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MaR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 1,624,409 2,261,902 2,261,902 2,261,902 2,261,902 01 Water Rev Bond Tr 637,493 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 637,493 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 2,261,902 2,261,902 2,261,902 2,261,902 2,261,902 BOND & INTEREST SINKING - 5/99 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MaR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 440,806 445,462 449,881 454,062 463,006 Bond Ordinance Transfers 655,925 654,763 653,125 656,013 653,188 Total Receipts 655,925 654,763 653,125 656,013 653,188 Capital Outlay 651,269 650,344 648,944 647,069 649,600 Total Expenditures 651,269 650,344 648,944 647,069 649,600 Ending Balance 445,462 449,881 454,062 463,006 466,594 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 Principal 245,000 Rev Bond Interest Exp 403,944 .00 .00 648,944 - 108 - BOND & INTEREST SINKING-12/00 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 609,274 617,399 625,149 627,524 634,649 Bond Ordinance Transfers 944,799 945,299 940,049 939,299 942,799 Tot&l Receipts 944,799 945,299 940,049 939,299 942,799 Capital Outlay 936,674 937,549 937,674 932,174 931,049 Total Expenditures 936,674 937,549 --~/~ 932,174 931,049 Ending Balance 617,399 625,149 627,524 634,649 646,399 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 Rev Bond Interest Exp 632,674 Principal 305,000 .00 .00 937,674 BOND a INTEREST SINKING - 2002 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MaR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 610,215 448,661 459,974 461,099 Accr Iht On Bonds 3,504 0 0 0 0 Bond Ordinance Transfers 606,711 602,323 609,948 607,198 608,535 Total Receipts 610,215 602,323 609,948 607,198 608,535 Capital Outlay 0 763,877 598,635 606,073 602,866 Total Expenditures 0 763,877 598,635 606,073 602,866 Ending Balance 610,215 448,661 459,974 461,099 466,768 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 Principal 295,000 Rev Bond Interest Exp 303,635 .00 .00 598,635 - 109 - WASTEWATER TRMT OPER PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 4,363,026 3,901,484 3,248,700 3,033,586 3,478,303 Charges For Services 12,187,997 12,175,300 12,500,000 12,750,000 13,000,000 Local Governments 200 0 0 0 0 Interest Income 1,110,972 400,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 Rentals 1,944 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 95,749 65,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 Miscellaneous Transfer 0 1,061,399 0 0 0 Total Receipts 13,396,862 13,701,699 12,885,000 13,135,000 13,385,000 Personnel 1,570,877 1,654,711 1,747,882 1,844,770 1,932,792 Commodities 408,640 345,459 477,832 487,388 497,131 Services D_nd Charges 1,910,936 2,088,007 2,296,624 2,355,226 2,410,621 Capital Outlay 160,852 492,500 494,500 308,000 308,000 Transfers 9,807,099 9,773,806 8,083,276 7,694,899 7,732,653 Total Expenditures 13,858,404 14,354,483 13,100,114 12,690,283 12,881,197 Ending Balance 3,901,484 3,248,700 3,033,586 3,478,303 3,982,106 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 M.W. I - METER READER .80 .80 2 BUILDING IMPROVEMENT 50,000 M.W. I - WASTEWATER TRTMITT 1.00 1.00 12 TRANSFORMER CONTAINMENT 110,000 SR CLERK/TYPIST - WASTEWATER .75 .75 1 LANDSCAPING 5,000 MW II - WASTEWATER TRTMNT PLNT 4.00 4.00 10 FACILITY REPAIRS 329,500 LABORATORY TECHNICIAN 2.00 2.00 M.W. III - WASTEWATER COLLECT 1.00 1.00 MAINT OPERATOR - WASTEWATER 4.00 4.00 TPO - WASTEWATER TREATMENT 6.00 6.00 M.W. III - WASTEWATER 1.00 1.00 ~LECTRONICS TECH - WASTEWATER 1.00 1.00 CHEMIST 1.00 1.00 SR M.W. - WASTEWATER COLLECT 1.00 1.00 SR M.W. - WASTEWATER pLANT 1.00 1.00 SR TPO - WASTEWATER 1.00 1.00 ASST SUPT - WASTEWATER TRMT 1.00 1.00 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SUPT .75 .75 27.30 27.30 494,500 TRANSFER TO: Dodge St San Sewer-Scott/ACT 320,000 Sewer Main Proj-Annual 300,000 6/97 Revenue Bond Issue 781,550 2001 Sewer B & I 478,815 2000 Revenue Bond Issue 873,524 1999 Revenue Bond Issue 542,930 1996 Revenue Bond Issue 1,394,113 2002 Refund 93 Refund 86 3,210,943 2002 GO Refunding 181,401 8,083,276 - 1t0 - 1993 REV BOND COVENANT RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 Ending Balance 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 BOND & INTEREST RESERVES PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 7,639,259 7,639,259 6,577,860 6,577,860 6,577,860 Transfers 0 1,061,399 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 0 1,061,399 0 0 0 Ending Balance 7,639,259 6,577,860 6,577,860 6,577,860 6,577,860 ARBITRAGE REBATE FUND PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MaR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 44,289 23,899 23,899 23,899 23,899 Services And Charges 20,390 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 20,390 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 23,899 23,899 23,899 23,899 23,899 BOND & INTEREST SINKING - 1/93 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY M~R FY06 PY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 28,313,422 0 0 0 0 Bond Ordinance Transfers 112,307 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 112,307 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlay 28,313,422 0 0 0 0 Transfers 112,307 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 28,425,729 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 0 0 0 0 0 -111- BOND & INTEREST SINKING 2/02 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 467~994 2,484,615 2,727,522 2,800,472 2,798,647 Bond Ordinance Transfers 2,568,680 3,175,043 3,210,943 3,167,293 3,177,243 02 Sewer Rev Bond Tr 137,364 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 2,706,044 3,175,043 3,210,943 3,167,293 3,177,243 Capital Outlay 719,423 2,902,136 3,137,993 3,169,118 3,124,768 Total Expenditures 719,423 2,902,136 3,137,993 3,169,118 3,124,768 Ending Balance 2,454,615 2,727,522 2,800,472 2,798,647 2,851,122 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 Principal 2,280,000 Rev Bond Interest Exp 857,993 .oo .oo BOND & INTEREST SINKING - 3/96 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 934,819 947,944 960,444 972,057 983,032 Bond Ordinance Transfers 1,395,888 1,395,888 1,394,113 1,391,063 1,411,738 Total Receipts 1,395,888 1,395,888 1,394,113 1,391,063 1,411,738 Capital Outlay 1,382,763 1,383,388 1,382,500 1,380,088 1,376,400 Total Expenditures 1,382,763 1,383,388 1,382,500 1,380,088 1,376,400 Ending Balance 947,944 960,444 972,057 983,032 1,018,370 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 Principal 525,000 Rev Bond Interest Exp 857,500 .00 .00 1,382,500 -112- BOND & INTEREST SINKING - 5/97 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 511,375 529,937 522,856 540,775 533,050 Bond Ordinance Transfers 784,875 770,713 781,550 766,100 775,650 Total Receipts 784,875 770,713 781,550 766,100 775,650 Capital Outlay 766,313 777,794 763,631 773,825 758,375 Total Expenditures 766,313 777,794 763,631 773,825 758,375 Ending Balance 529,937 522,856 540,775 533,050 550,325 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 Principal 275,000 Rev Bond Interest Exp 488,631 .oo .oo ~ BOND & INTEREST SINKING - 2/99 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR F¥05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 398,040 402,727 407,202 411,464 415,514 Bond Ordinance Transfers 545,455 544,405 542,930 541,030 543,705 Total Receipts 545,455 544,405 542,930 541,030 543,705 Capital Outlay 540,768 539,930 538,668 536,980 534,868 Total Expenditures 540,768 539,930 538,668 536,980 534,868 Ending Balance 402,727 407,202 411,464 415,514 424,351 --- FTE PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 Principal 270,000 Rev Bond Interest Exp 268,668 .00 .00 538,--'~ -113- BOND & INTEREST SINKING-10/00 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 564,890 573,355 576,436 584,261 591,702 Bond Ordinance Transfers 876,711 872,874 873,524 873,405 872,518 Total Receipts 876,711 872,874 873,524 873,405 872,518 Capital Outlay 868,246 869,793 865,699 865,964 865,461 Total Expenditures 868,246 869,793 865,699 865,964 865,461 Ending Balance 573,355 576,436 584,261 591,702 598,759 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 Principal 280,000 Rev Bond Interest Exp 585,699 .oo .oo ~ BOND & INTEREST SINKING - 2001 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 279,309 239,408 239,408 239,408 239,408 Bond Ordinance Transfers 478,815 478,815 478,815 478,815 478,815 Total Receipts 478,815 478,815 478,815 478,815 478,815 Capital Outlay 518,716 478,815 478,815 478,815 478,815 Total Expenditures 518,716 478,815 478,815 478,815 478,815 Ending Balance 239,408 239,408 239,408 239,408 239,408 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 -1 Rev Bond Interest Exp 478,815 .00 .00 478,815 -114- AIRPORT OPERATIONS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 75 5,323 -12,981 338 850 Rentals 179,894 160,275 167,775 175,275 175,275 Miscellaneous Revenue 25,793 6,350 7,500 7,500 7,500 Transfer: General Levy 110,538 183,000 167,000 188,000 188,000 Total Receipts 316,225 349,625 342,275 370,775 370,778 Personnel 117,731 123,594 128,493 135,315 141,760 Commodities 4,723 18,535 6,779 6,916 7,055 Services A~d Charges 103,533 140,360 101,244 98,892 101,039 Capital Outlay 0 0 ' 7,000 43,700 30,000 Transfers 84,990 85,440 85,440 85,440 85,440 Total Expenditures 310,977 367,929 328,956 370,263 365,294 Ending Balance 5,323 -12,981 338 850 6,331 w FTE w PERSONAL SERVICES FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 MWI - AIRPORT 1.00 1.00 1 ASPHALT OVERLAY 7,000 AIRPORT MANAGER 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 7,000 TR3kNSFER TO: S.E. T-HANGER #37310 15,960 S.T-Hanger Loan Repay 037430 16,320 SW T Hanger 037350 Repay 17,160 Corp. Hanger #37330 36,000 85,440 ~115- LANDFILL OPERATIONS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 8,013,135 9,200,303 9,162,537 10,303,725 11,420,852 Landfill Fees 3,257,637 2,750,000 3,500,000 3,500,000 3,500,000 Recycled Solid Waste 251,701 250,000 260,000 260,000 260,000 City special Waste 105,445 0 105,000 105,000 105,000 Non-city Closure 7,851 0 0 0 0 Non-city Spec. Waste 50,036 0 50,000 50,000 50,000 Interest Income 204,571 140,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 11,860 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 3,889,101 3,140,000 4,115,000 4,115,000 4,115,000 Personnel 625,263 757,591 791,060 834,111 873,792 Commodities 62,996 83,963 118,278 120,641 123,051 Services Dnud Charges 1,430,742 1,546,212 1,466,474 1,491,121 1,514,765 Capital Outlay 47,932 90,000 98,000 52,000 30,000 Transfers 535,000 700,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Total Expenditures 2,701,933 3,177,766 2,973,812 2,997,873 3,041,608 Ending Balance 9,200,303 9,162,537 10,303,725 11,420,852 12,494,244 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 SCALEHOUSE OPERATOR 1.00 1.00 3 CONTRACTED IMPROVEMENTS 39,000 RECYCLE CLERK - LANDFILL 1.00 1.00 2 NON-CONTRACTED IMPROVEMENTS 15,000 M.W. II - LANDFILL 3.00 3.00 6 HHW H3kNDLING EQUIPMENT 44,000 SR CLERK/TYPIST - WASTEWATER .25 .25 MW II - LANDFILL/RECYCLE 1.00 1.00 M.W. III - LAArDFILL 3.00 3.00 RECYCLING COORDINATOR .25 ASSIST SUPT - LANDFILL 1.00 1.00 5R ENGINEER 1.00 1.00 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SUPT .25 .25 LANDFILL CLERK .50 .50 12.00 12.25 98,000 TRANSFER TO: Transfer-Capital Reserve 500,000 500,000 -116- LANDFILL REPLACEMENT RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 1,817,842 1,958,912 3,147,749 4,111,062 2,774,375 Interest Income 133 0 0 0 0 Interfund Loan Repayments 774,036 488,837 463,313 463,313 463,313 Transfer from Landfill Fund 300,000 700,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Total Receipts 1,074,169 1,188,837 963,313 963,313 963,313 Transfers 933,099 0 0 2,300,000 0 Total Expenditures 933,099 0 0 2,300,000 0 Ending Balance 1,958,912 3,147,749 4,111,062 2,774,375 3,737,688 SOLID WASTE SURC}{ARGE RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - F¥07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 238,215 254,871 231,499 219,222 200,304 State Surcharge 151,961 98,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Interest Income 5,645 3,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 1,491 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 159,097 101,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 Personnel 0 0 44,481 47,171 49,467 Commodities 1,987 0 2,500 2,550 2,601 Services And Charges 73,184 69,079 68,968 70,347 71,754 Transfers 67,270 55,293 56,328 58,850 61,192 Total Expenditures 142,441 124,372 172,277 178,918 185,014 Ending Balance 254,871 231,499 219,222 200,304 175,290 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 RECYCLING COORDINATOR .75 .00 .75 0 TRANSFER TO: JCCOG, Solid Waste Dept. 56,328 56,328 -117- LANDFILL ASSURANCE CLOSURE RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 6,552,525 7,263,748 7,963,748 8,653,748 9,343,748 Landfill Fees 711,223 700,000 690,000 690,000 690,000 Total Receipts 711,223 700,000 690,000 690,000 690,000 Ending Balance 7,263,748 7,963,748 8,653,748 9,343,748 10,033,748 - 118 - SOLID WASTE COLLECTION OPERATIONS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 879,187 882,690 672,812 525,755 360,010 Refuse Collection Fees 1,482,847 1,460,000 1,475,000 1,534,250 1,579,800 Recycling Curbside Collection 534,712 510,000 530,000 530,000 530,000 Refuse Stickers $1 per bag 27,645 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Yardwaste Bags 74,989 84,000 68,600 68,600 68,600 Yardwaste Stickers 20,725 22,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Interest Income 21,088 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 132 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 2,162,138 2,126,000 2,143,600 2,202,850 2,248,400 Personnel 980,511 1,063,001 1,103,886 1,165,027 1,220,695 Commodities 31,011 29,076 32,406 33,054 33,715 Services And Charges 1,064,870 1,243,801 1,154,365 1,170,514 1,185,245 Capital Outlay 82,243 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 2,158,635 2,335,878 2,290,657 2,368,595 2,439,655 Ending Balance 882,690 672,812 525,755 360,010 168,755 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 M.W. I - REFUSE 7.00 7.00 M.W. II - REFUSE 11.00 11.00 ASST SUPT STREETS/SOLID WASTE 1.00 1.00 SUPT STREETS/SOLID WASTE .35 .35 CLERK/TYPIST - SOLID WASTE 1.00 1.00 20.35 20.35 0 -119- BROADBAND TELECObRqlYNICATIONS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 312,369 541,940 430,491 359,338 299,723 Charges For Services 1,969 0 1,800 1,800 1,800 Interest Income 10,562 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 A/R Interest 1,589 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 145 0 0 0 0 Cable TV Franchise 713,707 500,000 540,000 560,000 575,000 Miscellaneous Transfer 1,883 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 729,855 509,000 550,800 570,800 585,800 Personnel 306,561 345,117 319,094 335,481 351,093 Commodities 6,087 11,731 10,656 10,869 11,085 Services D~nd Charges 76,884 87,889 118,055 120,065 121,710 Capital Outlay 10,027 10,500 10,325 0 0 Transfers 100,725 165,212 163,823 164,000 165,000 Total Expenditures 500,284 620,449 621,953 630,415 648,888 Ending Balance 541,940 430,491 359,338 299,723 236,635 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 M.W. I - SENIOR CENTER .19 .19 1 17" STUDIO MONITOR 1,325 PRODUCTION ASSISTANT 1.00 1.00 3 GS POWER PCS 9,000 INTERACTIVE SPECIALIST 1.00 COMMUNICATIONS TECH. - CABLE 1.00 PRODUCTION COORDINATOR - BTC 1.00 1.00 CLERICAL ASSISTANT - CABLE TV .50 .50 SPECIAL PROJECTS ASST - CABLE .75 CABLE TV ADMINISTRATOR .75 .75 5.19 4.44 10,325 TRANSFER TO: Library Ch 10 Support 52,823 Cable Franchise Subsidy 100,000 Equip. Replacement Reserve 11,000 163,823 - 120 - LOCAL ACCESS PASS THROUGH PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 175,348 241,022 269,507 269,623 269,073 Interest Income 4,862 5,000 4,500 4,500 4,500 Cable TV Franchise 133,468 110,000 110,000 115,000 118,000 Total Receipts 138,330 115,000 114,500 119,500 122,500 Personnel 53,654 60,405 96,884 102,200 107,109 Commodities 410 2,250 0 0 0 Services And Charges 13,214 19,860 17,500 17,850 18,207 Capital Outlay 945 4,000 0 0 0 Transfers 4,433 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 72,656 86,515 114,384 120,050 125,316 Ending Balance 241,022 269,507 269,623 269,073 266,257 --- FTE --~ PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 COMMUNITY PROGRAMMER 1.00 1.00 SPECIAL PROJECTS ASST - CABLE .75 1.00 1.75 0 PUBLIC ACCESS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 89,393 90,491 91,747 95,378 98,909 Interest Income -1,528 0 0 0 0 Cable TV Franchise 181,125 183,009 188,631 192,231 195,830 Total Receipts 179,597 183,009 188,631 192,231 195,830 Services And Charges 178,499 181,753 185,000 188,700 192,474 Total Expenditures 178,499 181,753 185,000 188,700 192,474 Ending Balance 90,491 91,747 95,378 98,909 102,265 - 121 - BTC EQUIP REPLACEMENT RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY0? FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 76,389 71,185 75,764 84,664 96,864 Interest Income 1,605 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 Transfer from Broadband Fund 11,428 11,428 11,000 11,000 11,000 Total Receipts 13,033 12,628 12,200 12,200 12,200 Capital Outlay 18,237 8,049 3,300 0 0 Total Expenditures 18,237 8,049 3,300 0 0 Ending Balance 71,185 75,764 84,664 96,864 109,064 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY08 3 TRIPODS 3,300 .00 .00 3,300 - 122 - IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 1,012,879 962,756 1,037,063 1,208,635 1,205,745 Federal Grants 4,916,967 5,306,501 6,357,844 6,357,844 6,357,844 Housing Admin. Grant 690,406 650,000 740,660 740,660 740,660 Interest Income 25,045 23,000 23,000 23,000 23,000 Rent Of Property 219,364 260,000 242,816 242,816 242,816 Miscellaneous Revenue 147,554 113,000 113,000 113,000 113,000 Sales Tax Collected 2 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 5,999,338 6,352,501 7,477,320 7,477,320 7,477,320 Personnel 660,787 758,251 797,753 841,657 882,045 Commodities 7,005 11,169 7,391 7,540 7,693 Services And Charges 5,381,293 5,508,774 6,500,604 6,631,013 6,764,085 Capital Outlay 376 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 6,049,461 6,278,194 7,305,748 7,480,210 7,653,823 Ending Balance 962,756 1,037,063 1,208,635 1,205,745 1,029,242 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 HOUSING ASSISTANT .50 .75 HOUSING PROGRAM ASSISTANT 6.00 6.00 HOUSING INSPECTOR 1.00 1.00 HOUSING OFFICE MANAGER 1.00 1.00 FSS PROGRAM COORDINATOR 1.00 1.00 SECTION 8 COORD 1.00 1.00 pUBLIC HSG. COORD 1.00 1.00 HOUSING ADMINISTR3~TOR 1.00 1.00 12.50 12.75 0 123 - PUBLIC HOUSING FY00 - CIAP PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 12,650 12,650 12,650 12,650 Federal Grants 38,813 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 38,813 0 0 0 0 Services And Charges 25,763 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlay 400 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 26,163 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 12,650 12,650 12,650 12,650 12,650 PUBLIC HSG ESCROW DEPOSITS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CiTY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 55,903 67,779 67,779 67,779 67,779 Interest Income 621 0 0 0 0 Rent Of Property 41,458 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 42,079 0 0 0 0 Services A~nd Charges 30,203 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 30,203 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 67,779 67,779 67,779 67,779 67,779 PUBLIC }{SG. ACQUISITION 1-10 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 0 0 0 0 Federal Grants 48,744 50,000 0 0 Total Receipts 48,744 50,000 0 0 Services And Charges 48,744 50,000 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 48,744 50,000 0 0 0 Ending Balance 0 0 0 0 0 - 124 - PUBLIC HOUSING REPLACEMENT RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 599,784 675,639 757,039 790,217 823,395 Interest Income 14,755 25,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 61,100 56,400 29,178 29,178 29,178 Total Receipts 75,855 81,400 33,178 33,178 33,178 Ending Balance 675,639 757,039 790,217 823,395 856,573 PUBLIC HSG-NEW CONSTR./008 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 67,519 67,519 -10,323 -89,722 Federal Grants 168,074 0 0 0 Total Receipts 168,074 0 0 0 Services And Charges 77,622 0 77,842 79,399 80,988 Capital Outlay 22,933 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 100,555 0 77,842 79,399 80,988 Ending Balance 67,519 67,519 -10,323 -89,722 -170,710 PUBLIC HSG SECURITY DEPOSITS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 40,183 41,545 41,545 41,545 41,545 Federal Grants 842 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 520 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 1,362 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 41,545 41,545 41,545 41,545 41,545 - 125- PHO TENANT TO OWNER PROGRAM PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 342,265 739,759 739,759 739,759 739,759 Interest Income 14,186 0 0 0 0 Rent Of Property 1,400 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 30,931 0 0 0 0 Sale of Land 566,827 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 613,344 0 0 0 0 Commodities 148 0 0 0 0 Services And Charges 35,815 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlay 179,887 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 215,850 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 739,759 739,759 739,759 739,759 739,759 PUBLIC HOUSING FY01 - CIAP PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance -1,180 0 0 0 0 Federal Grants 99,649 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 99,649 0 0 0 0 Commodities 250 0 0 0 0 Services And Charges 56,082 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlay 42,137 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 98,469 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 0 0 0 0 0 - 126- STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 75 75 290,075 548,086 805,457 Storm Water Mgmt Fee 0 420,000 420,000 420,000 420,000 Total Receipts 0 420,000 420,000 420,000 420,000 Services And Charges 0 0 31,989 32,629 33,282 Transfers 0 130,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 Total Expenditures 0 130,000 161,989 162,629 163,282 Ending Balance 75 290,075 548,086 805,457 1,062,175 TR3kNSFER TO: Stormwater Permitting 130,000 130,000 127 - PARKING SYSTEM OPERATIONS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 522,144 450,204 548,329 427,531 159,285 Parking Fines 528,933 615,000 615,000 615,000 615,000 Interest Income 127,388 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Building Rentals 34,355 34,800 36,000 36,000 36,000 Permit Lots 283 0 0 0 Ramp Revenues 1,761,764 1,797,000 1,785,000 1,785,000 1,788,000 Ramp Permits 488,596 505,000 500,000 505,000 510,050 Other Parking Revenue 884,254 820,080 903,300 903,300 903,300 Miscellaneous Revenue -100 0 0 0 0 Sale of Land 0 0 0 0 400,000 Sale Of Condos 575,625 125,000 150,000 0 0 Loan Repayments 14,949 14,950 14,950 14,950 14,950 Transfer from Senior Center 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Miscellaneous Transfer 0 250,000 0 0 0 Total Receipts 4,436,047 4,231,830 4,074,250 3,929,250 4,334,300 Personnel 1,399,636 1,541,842 1,637,389 1,725,280 1,807,243 Commodities 32,465 66,958 66,613 67,945 69,300 Services And Charges 510,311 714,794 773,592 791,667 810,291 Capital Outlay ~01,406 144,800 29,800 31,000 32,500 Transfers 2,464,169 1,665,311 1,687,654 1,581,604 1,589,548 Total Expenditures 4,507,987 4,133,705 4,195,048 4,197,496 4,308,882 Ending Balance 450,204 548,329 427,531 159,285 184,703 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 CASHIER - PA=RKING 3.00 2.00 1 P~qKING METERS 25,000 M.W. I - PARKING SYSTEMS 3.00 3.00 3 PRINTERS 4,800 PARKING ENFORCEMENT ATTENDANT 4.00 5.00 M.W. II - PARKING SYSTEMS 2.00 2.00 M.W. II - RAMP/METER REPAIR 2.00 2.00 CUSTOMER SERV REP - PARKING 1.00 1.00 SR MW - PARKING & TRANSIT .50 .50 PARKING OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR 2.00 2.00 PARKING MANAGER 1.00 1.00 PARKING AND TRANSIT DIRECTOR .50 .50 CASHIER - PA~RKING 10.00 11.00 M.W. I - PARKING SYSTEMS .50 .50 M.W. I - TOWING .50 .50 PARKING ENFORCEMENT ATTENDANT 1.50 .50 31.50 31.50 29,800 TRANSFER TO: 99 Parking Rev Bonds 974,504 2002 GO Refunding 313,150 Improve/Replace Reserve 200,000 Fines To General Fund 200,000 1,687,654 - 128 - REVENLrE BOND RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 1,227,419 1,227,419 977,419 977,419 977,419 Transfers 0 250,000 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 0 250,000 0 0 0 Ending Balance 1,227,419 977,419 977,419 977,419 977,419 RENEWAL & IMPROVEMENT RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 100,830 785,405 915,405 785,405 885,405 Transfer from Parking Fund 814,000 130,000 200,000 100,000 100,000 Total Receipts 814,000 130,000 200,000 100,000 100,000 Transfers 129,425 0 330,000 0 330,000 Total Expenditures 129,425 0 330,000 0 330,000 Ending Balance 785,405 915,405 785,405 885,405 655,405 TRANSFER TO: Parking Ramp Repair/Maint 330,000 330,000 PARKING LOAN NOTE - 10/92 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 0 0 0 0 0 Bond Ordinance Transfers 139,036 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 139,036 0 0 0 0 Transfers 139, 036 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 139,036 0 0 0 0 Ending Balance 0 0 0 0 0 - 129 - PARKING SINKING FUND - 4/95 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMg%TE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 403,442 409,614 0 0 0 Bond Ordinance Transfers 424,230 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 424,230 0 0 0 0 Capital Outlay 418,058 409,614 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 418,058 409,614 0 0 0 Ending Balance 409,614 0 0 0 0 PARKING SINKING FUND - 1999 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY M~R FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 508,120 574,665 879,665 885,706 891,306 Bond Ordinance Transfers 738,968 977,423 974,504 970,704 971,023 Total Receipts 738,968 977,423 974,504 970,704 971,023 Capital Outlay 672,423 672,423 968,463 965,104 960,863 Total Expenditures 672,423 672,423 968,463 965,104 960,863 Ending Balance 574,665 879,665 885,706 891,306 901,466 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 Rev Bond Interest Exp 663,463 Principal 305,000 .00 .00 968,463 - 130- GENERAL FLEET MAINTENANCE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 74,724 191,189 201,869 183,015 128,951 Charges For Services 1,747,177 1,648,678 1,700,000 1,720,690 1,725,690 Interest Income 4,479 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 575 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 Total Receipts 1,752,231 1,651,878 1,703,200 1,723,890 1,728~890 Personnel 577,930 596,896 616,702 650,582 681,741 Commodities 827,318 774,077 862,932 879,782 897,376 Services And Charges 216,027 266,225 242,420 247,590 252,928 Capital Outlay 14,491 4,000 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 1,635,766 1,641,198 1,722,054 1,777,954 1,832,045 Ending Balance 191,189 201,869 183,015 128,951 25,796 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 PARTS/DATA ENTRY CLERK 1.00 1.00 MECHANIC I - EQUIPMENT 4.00 2.00 MECHANIC II EQUIPMENT 1.00 3.00 MECHANIC III - EQUIPMENT (DAY) 1.00 1.00 MECHANIC III - EQUIPMENT (EVE) 1.00 1.00 EQUIPMENT SHOP SUPERVISOR 1.00 1.00 EQUIPMENT SUPERINTENDENT .50 .50 EQUIPMENT CLERK .38 .38 9.88 9.88 0 - 131 - EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PROPOSED BUDGET FOR F¥05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 2,522,324 2,834,552 2,413,582 2,348,873 2,665,812 Charges For Services 1,066,917 992,606 992,606 992,606 992,600 Interest Income 63,914 70,000 60,000 60,000 50,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 3,575 0 0 0 0 Sale Of Autos 48,307 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 Total Receipts 1,182,713 1,077,606 1,067,606 1,067,606 1,057,600 Personnel 45,554 82,096 87,011 91,793 96,225 Commodities 183 1,062 692 706 720 Services And Charges 37,509 5,218 4,812 4,868 4,924 Capital Outlay 787,239 1,410,200 1,039,800 653,300 1,779,285 Total Expenditures 870,485 1,498,576 1,132,315 750,667 1,881,154 Ending Balance 2,834,552 2,413,582 2,348,873 2,665,812 1,842,258 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 4 OTHER VEHICULAR EQUIPMENT 122,600 EQUIPMENT SUPERINTENDENT .50 .50 1 AUTOMOBILES 17,200 EQUIPMENT CLERK .38 .37 14 TRUCKS 816,800 BUYER I - EQUIPMENT .50 .50 4 TRACTORS 83,200 1.38 1.37 1,039,800 - 132 - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SVCS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 352,736 ' 466,902 681,970 632,385 619,399 Interest Income 15,528 3,500 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 1,218 0 0 0 0 Telephone Chargebks 261,222 237,500 230,568 230,568 230,568 ITS Server Support Fees 740 483,975 0 0 0 ITS Desktop Support Fees 1,084,378 596,810 1,076,241 1,086,737 1,097,442 Miscellaneous Transfer 162,202 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 1,525,288 1,321,785 1,306,809 1,317,305 1,328,010 Personnel 496,044 526,881 591,349 623,073 653,034 Commodities 23,854 45,816 29,377 29,200 29,783 Services And Charges 593,346 455,520 641,168 628,018 625,430 Capital Outlay 197,878 78,500 94,500 50,000 50,000 Transfers 100,000 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 1,411,122 1,106,717 1,356,394 1,330,291 1,358,247 Ending Balance 466,902 681,970 632,385 619,399 589,162 - FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 SOFTWARE UPGRADES 25,000 OPERATIONS SPECIALIST 1.00 1.00 1 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS 17,500 PROGP,3~MER/kNALYST 1.00 1.00 1 CONTRACTED IMPROVEMENTS 3,500 SR PROGR3~MMER/ANALYST 2.00 2.00 2 NON-CONTRACTED IMPROVEMENTS 4,000 DOCUMENT SERVICES SUPV .50 2 OFFICE FURNITURE 2,000 WEB DEVELOPER 1.00 1.00 SERVER UPGRADES 25,000 PC DESKTOP ANALYST 1.00 1.00 t PC 1,800 ITS COORDINATOR .70 1.00 1 DATA COMM EQUIPMENT 15,000 OPERATIONS CLERK - ITS .50 .50 1 LARGE DISPLAY 700 7.20 8.00 94,500 - 133 - ITS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT F~ PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 546,196 619,128 579,659 697,672 698,310 Interest Income 13,418 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 7,747 0 0 0 0 ITS Equip. Repl. Fees 274,019 268,998 237,689 237,689 237,689 Total Receipts 295,184 273,998 242,689 242,689 242,689 Commodities 1,802 967 1,500 1,530 1,560 Services And Charges 2,798 0 1,011 521 531 Capital Outlay 217,652 312,500 122,165 240,000 240,000 Total Expenditures 222,252 313,467 124,676 242,051 242,091 Ending Balance 619,128 579,659 697,672 698,310 698,908 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 5 OTHER EDP HARDW~RE 20,500 35 PRINTERS 82,240 16 EDP MONITOR/DISPLAY 3,950 15 DATA COMM EQUIPMENT 7,025 1 MICROCOMPL~ER 6,100 1 UPS 2,350 .00 .00 122,165 POLICE COMPUTER REPLACE~4EI~T PROPOSED BD-DGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 180,524 247,444 275,528 336,868 397,649 ITS Equip. Repl. Fees 100,523 108,184 109,042 109,042 109,042 Miscellaneous Transfer 4,456 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 104, 979 108, 184 109,042 109, 042 109, 042 Commodities 559 0 584 596 608 Services And Charges 2,500 0 2,613 2,665 2,718 Capital Outlay 35,000 80,100 44,505 45,000 45,000 Total Expenditures 38,059 80,100 47,702 48,261 48,326 Ending Balance 247,444 275,528 336,868 397,649 458,365 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 15 MICRO COMPUTER 28,700 4 DATA COMM EQUIPMENT 625 i1 PRINTERS 8,580 5 EDP MONITORS 5,600 2 MISC EDP F=ARDWARE 1,000 -134- 44,505 CENTRAL SERVICES PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 440,808 205,395 216,266 232,232 248,239 Charges For Services 185,830 249,736 237,880 242,043 246,747 Fees - Contracted Services 19,188 20,147 20,147 21,000 22,000 Interest Income 8,836 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 940 0 0 0 0 Printing Supplies 19,974 0 20,000 20,000 20,000 Loan Repayments 1 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Transfer 1,059 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 235,828 269,883 278,027 283,043 288,747 Personnel 22,037 23,472 25,983 27~231 28,545 Commodities 11,692 14,596 12,217 12,462 12,712 Services And Charges 327,104 185,444 178,861 182,343 185,894 Capital Outlay 47,147 35,500 45,000 45,000 45,000 Transfers 63,261 0 0 0 0 Total Expenditures 471,241 259,012 262,061 267,036 272,151 Ending Balance 205,395 216,266 232,232 248,239 264,835 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ITS COORDINATOR .30 PHOTOCOPIERS 45,000 MAIL CLERK .75 .75 1.05 .75 45,000 - 135- RISK MANAGEMENT PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 1,313,750 863,441 1,151,672 1,395,260 1,634,144 Risk Management Fees 1,000 1,145,500 632,000 663,600 696,781 Interest Income 24,398 39,200 39,200 14,200 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 16,730 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Transfer 290,177 117,500 127,500 127,500 127,500 Total Receipts 332,305 1,~02,200 798,700 805,300 824,281 Personnel 93,957 91,474 96,287 101,271 106,142 Commodities 481 ~,095 948 968 988 Services A~d Charges 397,999 802,900 330,377 336,677 343,103 Transfers 290,177 117,500 127,500 127,500 127,500 Total Expenditures 782,614 1,013,969 555,112 566,416 577,733 Ending Balance 863,441 1,151,672 1,395,260 1,634,144 1,880,692 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 OCC. HEALTH & SAFETY SPECIALST 1.00 1.00 ASST FINANCE DIRECTOR .20 .20 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY .13 .12 1.33 1.32 0 TRANSFER TO: Risk Mgt Admin - Water 25,000 Risk Mgt Admin - Sewer 35,000 Risk Mgt Admin - Refuse 20,000 Risk M~t Admin - Parking 25,000 Risk Mgt Admin - Landfill 15,000 Risk Mgt Admin - Equip. Div. 5,000 Risk Mgt Admin - Cable TV 500 Risk Mgt Admin - Airport 2,000 127,500 PARKING IMPACT RESTRICTED FLrND PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 269,951 376,423 369,862 362,775 355,546 Parking Impact Fee 113,254 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 113,254 0 0 0 0 Services And Charges 6,782 6,561 7,087 7,229 7,374 Total Expenditures 6,782 6,561 7,087 7,229 7,374 Ending Balance 376,423 369,862 362,775 355,546 348,172 - 136 - PUBLIC SAFETY RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 1,988,008 1,465,260 902,131 327,991 0 Interest Income 58,768 22,000 11,000 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 3,624 0 0 0 0 Total Receipts 62,392 -22,000 11,000 0 0 Services And Charges 140 129 140 140 0 Transfers 585,000 585,000 585,000 327,851 0 Total Expenditures .585,140 585,129 585,140 327,991 0 Ending Balance 1,465,260 902,131 327,991 0 0 TRANSFER TO: To Police Employee Benefit 385,000 To Fire Employee Benefit 200,000 585,000 HEALTH INSURANCE RESERVE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 3,399,267 3,490,236 3,579,481 4,148,882 4, 857,743 Health Ins. Fees 4,218,748 4,415,800 4,874,192 5,350,116 5,617,629 Interest Income 83,761 77,500 75,000 75,000 75,000 Total Receipts 4,302,509 4,493,300 4,949,192 5,425,116 5, 692,629 Personnel 114 0 0 0 0 Services And Charges 4,211,426 4,404,055 4,379,791 4,716,255 4,944,968 Total Expenditures 4,211,540 4,404,055 4,379,791 4,716,255 4,944,968 Ending Balance 3,490,236 3,579,481 4,148,882 4,857,743 5,605,404 - 137 - CITY OF iOWA CITY EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND FY2001 FY2002 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL RE-EST BUDGET ..... $ .......... $ .......... $ .......... $ .......... $ ..... Costs Budgeted in Employee Benefits Fund Police & Fire Pension and Retirement 893,713 1,022,400 1,050,866 1,351,998 1,661,569 Police & Fire Other Employee Benefits 29,460 228,356 129,251 185,247 157,972 General Fund Employee Benefits 3,092,651 3,772,960 4,701,469 5,203,399 5,763,050 Workers Compensation 41,752 23,969 26,410 27,564 45,000 Unemployment Expense 48,835 75,400 91,985 55,000 0 Loss Reserve Transfer 90,914 0 0 190,000 100,000 Miscellaneous Transfers & Expenses 29,968 88,739 207,248 739 10,950 Staff Support 25,350 25,758 24,923 24,548 27,834 Police & Fire Retirement-Chapter 410 7,582 9,686 14,586 0 10,000 Transfer to General Fund 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL TRUST & AGENCY FUND BENEFITS 4,260,225 5,2;47,268 6,246,738 7,038,495 7,776,375 Costs Budgeted in General Fund FICA 883,545 942,638 1,122,394 1,169,824 1,236,293 IPERS 584,423 618,941 ,764,874 739,410 871,401 Health, Life & Disability Insurance, Unemployment Exp 1,822,563 2,211,379 2,821,777 3,294,165 3,655,356 TOTAL GENERAL FUND BENEFITS 3,290,531 3,772,958 4,709,045 5,203,399 5,763,050 Paid from General Tax Levy 197,880 -2 7,576 0 0 PAID FROM EMPLOYEE BENEFITS TAX LEVY 3,092,651 3,772,960 4,701,469 5,203,399 5,763,050 Employer's Contribution Rate Police / Fire Retirement - City pays per State Code 17.00% 17.00% 17.00% 20.48% 24.92% Police / Fire Retirement - State actuarial rate 16.74% FICA 7.65% 7.65% 7.65% 7.65% 7.65% IPERS 5.75% 5~75% 5.75% 5.75% 5.75% Police & Fire Retirement - The State of Iowa adminsters the Police & Fire Retirement Fund. The State Code requires a minimum contribution from cities of 17%. The rate was raised in FY04 to be 20.48% and will be 24.92% in FY05. FICA - Rate is expected to remain at 7.65%. Maximum salary covered on the social security portion is $87,000 in Calendar Year 2003. IPERS - The rate remains at 5.75% for FY05, but is projected to increase to 6.35% in FY06. The maximum salary cap was eliminated-effective January 1, 1997. - 138 - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY05 - FY07 FY05 FY03 FY04 CITY MGR FY06 FY07 ACTUAL ESTIMATE PROPOSED PROJECTION PROJECTION Beginning Balance 574,745 602,414 597,432 597,427 597,423 Empl. Benefits Levy 5,387,209 6,169,064 6,856,401 7,850,990 8,706,210 University Fire Contract 150,466 119,203 171,212 188,093 200,000 Gas / Elec. Use Tax 119,139 145,246 158,757 181,716 198,946 Interest Income 45 15,000 5,000 0 0 Miscellaneous Revenue 4,248 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Transfer 613,300 585,000 585,000 327,851 0 Total Receipts 6,274,407 7,033,513 7,776,370 8,548,650 9,105,156 Personnel 39,509 24,548 37,834 39,545 41,156 Services And Charges 248,594 458,550 313,922 324,525 335,557 Transfers 5,958,635 6,555,397 7,424,619 8,184,584 8,733,451 Total Expenditures 6,246,738 7,038,495 7,776,375 8,548,654 9,110,164 Ending Balance 602,414 597,432 597,427 597,423 592,415 --- FTE --- PERSONAL SERVICES: FY04 FY05 CAPITAL OUTLAY: FY05 ASST FINANCE DIRECTOR ~15 .15 ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY .19 .19 .34 .34 0 TRANSFER TO: Police Records Transfer 17,266 Stop Violence/Wmn Grant 12,771 Police Administration Trans. 39,027 General Fund Benefits 5,763,050 Fire Training Transfer 14,049 Police Patrol Transfers 760,086 Police Criminal Invest Trans 115,124 Jo. Co. Task Force Grant 12,808 Hazardous Materials Oper. 19,551 Fire Administration Transfer 45,774 Fire Suppression Transfer 625,113 7,424,619 - 139 - - 140- City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program FY 2004 - 2008 Project Name Proposed FundinR 64-1A Plaza Towers $ 7,415,000 Proiect Descrintion $ 7,415,000 Financial support for a $22million + redevelopment of the last urban renewal parcel downtown. Bonds will be repaid by the taxes paid on a minimum assessed value agreed to by the developer of the proiect. Project Fundin,q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GO Bonds (TIF) $ 7,415,000 Project Name Proposed Fundin.q Burlington Street Bridge at Ralston Creek $ 529,000 $ 529,000 Project Description This project will provide for the replacement of the Burlington Street Bridge over Ralston Creek located between Gilbert Street and Van Buren Street. This project includes widening the bridge to allow for a left turn lane and 8- foot sidewalks. The bridge is being designed to minimize any disruption of the coal tar contaminates in the underlying soil. Project Fundin,q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GO Debt $ 220,000 State DOT $ 309,000 Project Name Proposed Fundinj7 Camp Cardinal Road $ 4,200,000 $ 4,200,000 Project Description This project provides for a the paving of Camp Cardinal Road between U.S. Highway 6 in Coraiville and Melrose Avenue in Iowa City. It includes reconstruction of a portion of Deer Creek Road in order to provide the connection to Melrose Avenue. The portion to be constructed by Iowa City includes property that will eventually be within corporate limits of Iowa City according to an agreement between Iowa City, Coralville, and Johnson County. This project is also funded by private developer and the City of Coralville and final shared costs will be determined. Project Fundinq FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GO Debt $ 1,000,000 2,200,000 RUT $ 1,000,000 C-1 12/21/2003 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program FY 2004 - 2008 Project Name Proposed Fundin~l Capital Outlay - General Fund $ 1,098,400 $ 1,098,400 Proiect Description An annual appropriation from debt financing to pumhase selected equipment. Project Fundin,cI FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 General Fund - Cash $ 317,400 $ 250,000 GO Debt $ 500,000 $ 281,000 $ 250,000 Project Name Proposed Fundin~l Court Street Transportation Center $ 7,943,400 Day Care Center $ 400,000 Bus Depot $ 200,000 $ 8,543,400 Pro[ect Description The Court Street Transportation Center is a multi-modal transportation facility built on Block 102 in the Near Southside neighborhood. It includes a daycare center, a new bus station, covered bicycle parking, one or two smal commercial spaces for lease, and a 500-space parking garage. Includes FY02 funding, expenditures are scheduled for FY2004. Project Fundinq FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FedFTA $ 7,000,000 GO Debt $ 700,000 Parking Impact Fees $ 243,400 Internal Loan - Day Care $ 400,000 State Grant- Bus Depot $ 200,000 (FY02 Fed FTA Funding $2.6 million) (FY02 GO Debt Funding $1.4 million) City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program FY 2004 - 2008 Proiect Name Proposed FundlnR Dodge Street Reconstruction - 180 to Governor $ 5,929,000 Dodge Street Water Main - 1-80 to Governor $ 830,000 Dodge Street Sewer - Scott to ACT $ 320,000 Project Description $ 7,079,000 This is a capacity related improvement identified by the Arterial Street Plan. Right-of-way constraints exist throughout much of this project. This project will reconstruct Dodge Street between the Governor/Dodge intersection and Interstate 80. Included with this project will be the replacement of the existing 6 inch and 12 inch water mains, elimination of redundant water mains and relocation of the water mains from under the pavement. Also included with this project will be reconstruction of a sanitary sewer along Dodge Street between Scott Boulevard and ACT Circle. This sanitary sewer will serve the Highlander Lift Station and will increase the capacity for future growth north on Interstate 80. Proiect Fundina FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 State DOT $ 5,729,000 Federal STP $ 200,000 Water Cash $ 830,000 Waste Water Cash $ 320,000 Project Name Proposed Fundinq Dubuque Street & Foster Road Intersection $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 Pro[ect Description This project will improve both the capacity and safety of the Dubuque Street / Foster Road intersection through the add t on of signa ights and extended turning lanes. Project Fundin,cI FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Federal STP $ 1,600,000 RUT 400,000 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program FY 2004 - 2008 Project Name Proposed Funding Economic Development $ 750,000 $ 750,000 Project Description Allocation for Economic Development initiatives for community growth. Project Funding FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GO Debt $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 (no accumulative policy) Project Name Proposed Funding Emergency Communication Radio System $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Project Description Gradual replacement of Emergency Communication Radio System, originally purchased in 1991. Project Funding FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GO Debt $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Project Name Proposed Fundin,q Fire Apparatus $ 1,950,000 $ 1,950,000 Project Description Fire Vehicles scheduled within this plan are: FY03 Pumper, FY06 Ladder Truck and FY07 E-1 Pumper. Project Funding FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GODebt $ 1,500,000 $ 450,000 C-4 12/21/2003 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program FY 2004 - 2008 Project Name Proposed FundinR Fire Station ~.4 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 Project Description This project involves the land acquisition, design, and site improvement for an additional fire station in the northeast area of Iowa City. Recent land annexations and in-fill development have increased service demands in this area. Project Fundin,q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GO Debt $ 200,000 Project Name Proposed FundinR Gilbert St / Highway 6: Dual Left Turn Lanes $ 3,000,000 $ 3,000,000 Project Description Reconstruct the Gilbert Street / US Highway 6 intersection to include dual left turn lanes on Gilbert Street and accommodate the future expansion of US Highway 6. Project Fundinq FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GO Debt $ 3,000,000 Project Name Proposed Fundin~l Landfill Cell $ 2,300,000 $ 2,300,000 Proiect Description This project which is included in the Landfill Master Plan will be the fifth cell in the West half of the randfill and is expected to last approximately 8 years. This cell will include the approved clay liner system and shredded tire dra nage system to reduce construction costs and promote recycling. Pro[ect Fundin,q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Landfill Revenues $ 2,300,000 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program FY 2004 - 2008 Project Name Proposed FundinR Lower West Branch Road $ 3,800,000 $ 3,800,000 Project Description This project will reconstruct Lower West Branch Road to City standards from its intersection with Scott Boulevard to Taft Avenue. Development along this segment is obligated to pay a prorata share of the cost of reconstruction based on current dollars at the time of development approval. Project Funding FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GO Debt $ 3,800,000 Project Name Proposed FundinR Meadow Street Bridge and Trail Connection $ 310,000 $ 310,000 Pro[ect Description This project will replace the Meadow Street Bridge and provide a means for the Court Hill Trail to connect to and cross Meadow Street at this location. Pro~ect Fundin.q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 RUT $ 62,000 State Grant $ 248,000 Project Name Proposed Fundin,q Melrose & Grand Avenue Intersection $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Proiect Description This project will expand South Grand Avenue to five lanes between Grand and Melrose Avenues. It will alleviate exist ng traffic constra nts and accomodate expansion of UI parking facilitfes in the area. Project Fundin,q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Federal STP $ 320,000 University of Iowa $ 80,000 C-6 12/21/2003 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program FY 2004 - 2008 Pro[ect Name Proposed Fundin.q Miller - Orchard Park $ 200,000 $ 200,000 Pro~ect Description Development of a neighborhood park on 3.5 acres of ~and located on Benton Street and Miller Avenue. Two acres of this land was purchased by the City in 1999 utilizing a combination of Parkland Acquisition and Community Development Block Grant Funds. The other 1.5 acres is a pending Neighborhood Open Space parkland ded cat on. The P & R Commission is looking into acquiring another .5 acre, bringing the total to 4 acres. Project Fundinq FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 General Fund - Cash $ 200,000 Project Name Proposed FundinR Missing Link Trail $ 700,000 $ 700,000 Project Description IThis north-south trail is the final in thirteen-mile trail from Park to the pedestrian segment a system Napoleon Coralville Reservoir. The "Missing Link" trail will connect Foster Road to trails on the Water Works property and the Iowa River Corridor Trail System. Project Fundin,q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Federal Grants $ 350,000 GO Debt $ 350,000 Pro~ect Name Proposed Fundin~l Mormon Trek - Hwy 1 to Hwy 921 $ 4,740,000 Dane Road Area Sewer $ 1,790,000 $ 6,530,000 Project Description This project consists of the extension of Mormon Trek Boulevard from US Highway 1 to US Highway 921 (Old Hwy 218) and includes paving, sidewalk, storm sewer, grading, sanitary sewer and box culvert construction. The sanitary sewer will serve the area south of Hwy 1 and will eliminate an existing lift station on the Westside of H ghway 218. The construction of this project will be phased. Project Fundin.q FY04 FY05 FY0~ FY07 FY08 GO Debt $ 2,000,000 $ 2,740,000 Wastewater Cash $ 1,790,000 C-7 12/21/2003 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program FY 2004 - 2008 Project Name Proposed Funding Old Bus Depot Land Acquisition $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Project Description Acquisition by the General Fund of the the old bus depot located at the intersection of Gilbert and College Streets. Project Fundin.cI FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GO Debt $ 400,000 Project Name Proposed FundinR Parking Garage Maintenance $ 330,000 Project Description $ 660,000 This project includes routine concrete restoration and application of sealant; and associated repair of stairwells. Project Fundin~l FY04 FY05 F, Y06 FY07 FY08 Parking Revenues $ 330,000 $ 330,000 Project Name Proposed Funding Riparian Restoration - Corp of Engineers - Peninsula and Waterworks Parks $ 70,000 $ 70,000 Proiect Description This project provides riparian and wetland habitat restoration to improve water quality in the Iowa River and enhance biodiversity. Woodlands and wetland along the Iowa River in the Waterworks and Peninsula parks will undergo restoration and complete a portion of our park plan. Construction of a trail in the Waterworks Park portion is included. The project also includes streambank stabilitzatior~ on the south side of the Park Road bridge on the east bank of the river. This is a joint project with the Corps, Coralville and University of Iowa. Project Fundin.q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Water Cash $ 70,000 C-8 12/21/2003 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program FY 2004 - 2008 Project Name Proposed FundinR Runway Extension $ 745,700 Project Description $ 745,700 Included in this project is the relocation of Dane Road, site preparation for runway extension. Project Fundin,q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Fed FAA $ 670,700 GO Debt $ 75,000 Project Name Proposed Fundin.q Sand Road $ 1,300,000 $ 1,300,000 Project Description This project will be done in conjunction with Johnson County to provide proper road capacity for anticipated growth south of Napo ean Park. Project FundinR FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GO Debt $ 1,300,000 Proiect Name Proposed Fundin.q Stormwater Permits, Plans $ 650,000 Project Descriotion $ 650,000 The Phase II Stormwater Regulations require Iowa City to apply for a Stormwater Permit by March 10, 2003, and to implement the six programs included in those regulations. Each of the six programs has measurable goals as part of the permit and requires the submittal of periodic reports to the State. Included in these goals is the stormwater system mapping, which entails collecting data about existing storm structures in the field, along with creating a database to contain the non-graphic data and linking the database to the drawing that contains the }raphical data. Project FundinR FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 StormwaterFees $ 130,000 $ 130,000 $ 130,000 $ 130,000 $ 130,000 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program FY 2004 - 2008 Project Name Proposed FundinR Targeted Area Housing Rahab Projects (T.A.R.P.) $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Project Description Ihis enables the rehabilitation of stock in of the the project housing targeted neighborhoods City, as approved by ity Council. Assistance will be provided to households with incomes equivalent to 80% to 110% of median. The rehabilitation loans will be repaid, with property liens securing the City's interests. Project Fundin.q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 GO Debt $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 Project Name Proposed Fundin,q Transit Capital Outlay - 3 Buses & 21 Cameras $ 996,600 $ 996,600 Project Description IdReebPlac~ 73o/bo~ses in FY05 and install safety cameras in 21 buses. Federal grant funding is 83%, General Obligation Project Fundin.q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Fed FTA $ 827,178 GO Debt $ 169,422 Project Name Proposed Fundin~l Water Distribution Building $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Project Description Construction of a new water distribution building, partially funded by sale of old building on Gilbert Court. Project Fundin.q FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Water Cash $ 1,000,000 C-1 0 12/21/2003 Capital Improvement Projects Unfunded Projects # Project Name Unfunded Amt Bridges 1 BURLINGTON ST BRIDGE- The south bridge is having a problem with $800,000 SOUTH delaminating concrete on the bottom side of the arches. 2 F STREET BRIDGE This project involves the removal and replacement $250,000 of the existing corrugated metal arch bridge with a larger bridge. 3 FOURTH AVENUE BRIDGE This project will replace the bridge over the South $255,941 Branch of Ralston Creek at Fourth Avenue and will include sidewalks. Possibility of approximately $75,000 state funding. 4 IOWA RIVER BRIDGE @ This project provides an Iowa River Bridge along $2,165,000 MORMON TREK the route of Mormon Trek south of the new Public Works Facility. 5 PARK RD BRIDGE APPROACH This project involves the removal and replacement $150,000 of settled and cracked approach pavement and the removal and replacement of the bridge expansion joints. 6 PRENTISS ST. BRIDGE This project involves the removal and replacement $375,000 of the existing triple corrugated metal pipe culvert with a bridge. 7 ROCHESTER AVENUE BRIDGE This project will replace the bridge over the North $320,000 Branch of Ralston Creek at Rochester Avenue and includes an 6' sidewalk. 8 SECOND AVENUE BRIDGE This project will replace the bridge over Ralston $250,000 Creek at Second Avenue and will include sidewalks. 9 SIXTH AVENUE BRIDGE This project involves the removal and replacement $250,000 of the existing twin box culvert with a larger bridge. 10 THIRD AVENUE BRIDGE This project will replace the bridge over the South $250,000 Branch of Ralston Creek at Third Avenue. · Streets 1 420TH ST NEAR INDUSTRIAL This project will include paving 420th Street to $1,056,000 PARK urban standards from Hwy 6 to approximately one half-mile east and intersection geometric . improvements at Hwy 6. This project will facilitate expansion of the industrial park. 2 AMERICAN LEGION-SCOTT TO This project will reconstruct the road to urban $2,100,000 TAFT standards and will include an 8' wide sidewalk on one side. 3 BENTON-ORCHARD/OAKNOLL This is a capacity related improvement identified $3,500,000 by the Arterial Street Plan. C-11 Capital Improvement Projects Unfunded Projects # Project Name Unfunded Amt 14 CEMETERY ROADS Resurface specified roadways within Oakland $100,000 RESURFACING Cemetery as part of the city-wide biennial asphalt resurfacing program. 15 DODGE ST - Street Reconstruction $5,320,000 GOVERNOR/BOWERY 16 DUBUQUE RD PAVING - Reconstruct and upgrade to urban cross sections. $600,000 BRISTOL/DODGE 17 DUBUQUE ST ELEVATION This project will elevate the north bound lane of $2,500,000 Dubuque Street between Taft Speedway and Foster Road. This project will eliminate the frequent flooding of the north bound lanes caused by locally heavy rains.. 18 DUBUQUE ST/PARK RD Add left turn lanes to improve capacity constraint. $350,000 INTERSECTION IMPRV. 19 DUBUQUE/CHURCH LEFT This project will construct left turn storage lanes on $300,000 TURN BAYS the north and south approaches of this intersection. Dubuque St capacity is constrained at this intersection because there are no dedicated storage lanes for left turning vehicles. 20 FOSTER RD-DBQ/PRAIRIE DU This project will pave this portion of Foster Road. $900,000 CHIEN 21 GILBERT ST IAIS UNDERPASS This project relocates the sidewalks of the Gilbert $282,000 St. underpass at the IAIS Railroad. The sidewalks are moved further from the street and existing erosion problems are addressed. 22 GILBERT ST IMPROV-N Reconstruction of Sand Road (S. Gilbert St.) from $2,250,000 LANE/SYC L Napoleon Lane to the Sycamore L and will include a four lane cross section from Napoleon Lane to the East-West Arterial and turn lanes at major intersections south of the East-West Arterial. This is a joint project with Johnson County, who will continue the improvements south to 480th Street. 23 GILBERT/BOWERY This project will add left turn lanes on Gilbert $420,000 INTERSECTION-LEFT LANES Street. This project will also include storm sewer along Prentiss Street to Ralston Creek. 24 HIGHWAY 921 STREETSCAPE Streetscape improvements on Hwy 921 entrance - $700,000 Sturgis Ferry Park to US Hwy 6. This project includes landscaping, lighting and sidewalk improvements. The project should be coordinated with Sturgis Ferry Park upgrade and/or Riverside Drive Redevelopment project. 25 HIGHWAY 965 EXTENSION This project will be initial phase of constructing $5,000,000 Hwy 965 extended from the south side of Hwy 218 to Melrose Avenue to arterial standards. C-12 Capital Improvement Projects Unfunded Projects # Project Name Unfunded Amt 26 HWY 6 LAKESIDE TO 420TH ST Extend the divided 4-lane cross section of Hwy 6 $4,845,000 from Lakeside Drive east to 420th Street and include turn lanes at intersections. 27 KEOKUK ST This project would reconstruct Keokuk St. and $1,540,000 RECONSTRUCTION remove the sharp turn south of Highland Avenue. 28 L MUSCATINE- Reconstruction of streets and sidewalks. $800,000 KIRKWOOD/SPRUCE 29 L MUSCATINE- This project will reconstruct Lower Muscatine Road $800,000 SPRUCE/DEFOREST from Spruce to DeForest and will include a center turn lane and improved pedestrian facilities. 30 LAURA DRIVE This project would reconstruct Laura Drive $500,000 RECONSTRUCTION between Foster Rd. and Forest View Trailer CourL 31 MAIER AVENUE UPGRADE Reconstruct and improve street to urban design $4,000,000 standards. 32 MELROSE-WEST-218/ClTY Reconstruct and improve street to urban design $3,000,000 LIMITS standards. 33 MORMON TREK-HWY This project includes paving, sidewalks, storm $5,725,000 921/SAND RD sewer and grading. This does not include the bridge spanning the Iowa River. 34 MORMON TREK-LEFT TURN Provide left turn lanes at major intersections; or a $4,000,000 LANES continuous center left turn lane through the corridor. 35 MYRTLE/RIVERSIDE TRAFFIC Signalization of intersection based on warrants. $80,000 SIGNALS 36 N DUBUQUE ST MEDIAN This project will improve the pavement cross $490,000 IMPROV. section, provides trees and shrubbery in the median and improved Iow level lighting. Some design budgeted in FY01, however, construction phase is on the unfunded projects list, beyond FY05. 37 NS MARKETPLACE PHASE 2 Continue improvements started in FY02. This $461,000 project will include decorative cross walks at the intersections of Jefferson & Linn, Market & Linn, and Market & Gilbed, as well as decorative street lighting on Bloomington from Linn to Gilbert and on Gilbert from Market to Bloomington and various benches, bike racks, and garbage receptacles. 38 OAKDALE BLVD This project would construct an extension of Krall $5,000,000 Avenue north across 1-80 to a new intersection with Iowa Hwy 1. C-13 Capital Improvement Projects Unfunded Projects # Project Name Unfunded Amt 39 RIVERSIDE DRIVE Streetscape improvements on Riverside Drive $2,000,000 STREETSCAPE between Myrtle Avenue and US Hwy 6. Project includes consolidation of driveways, undergrounding of utilities, installing sidewalks and landscaping. 40 S GILBERT ST IMPROVEMENTS Reconstruction from Benton Street to Stevens $6,000,000 Drive, estimate of $6 million on unfunded list. 41 SCOTT BLVD SIDEWALK This project will construct a sidewalk along the $71,999 east side of Scott Blvd in front of Scott Park. 42 SIDEWALK-BENTON STREET Install and widen sidewalks on Benton Street $200,000 between Riverside Drive and Sunset Street. Existing sidewalks would be widened from 4 feet to 8 feet wide. 43 SOUTH ARTERIAL This project would reconstruct Sycamore Street $6,500,000 DEVELOPMENT between Sand Road (Gilbert Street) and Sycamore Street, and extend a two lane arterial street from Sycamore Street through the Langenberg, Sycamore Farms and Streb properties to Scott Boulevard. 44 STURGIS/RIVERSIDE This project will provide a left turn lane for Sturgis $150,000 INTERSECT. Corner Drive at its intersection with Riverside Drive. 45 SYCAMORE-BURNS TO CITY Reconstruct Sycamore to arterial standards, 45 $2,778,300 LIMITS feet wide from Burns to Lakeside and 34 feet from Lakeside south to City limits. Storm sewer and sidewalk improvements included. Bike lanes are planned. 46 SYCAMORE-CITY LIMITS TO L Reconstruct Sycamore to arterial standards from $1,960,000 City limits to the Sycamore L. Storm sewer, sidewalk improvements and bike lanes are induded. 47 SYCAMORE-HWY 6/DEFOREST This project involves additional lanes to improve $1,350,000 capacity. 48 TAFT AVENUE Lower West Branch to American Legion Road. $3,500,000 49 TAFT SPEEDWAY This project will elevate Taft Speedway. $2,080,000 50 WASHINGTON ST ISLES Reconstruct the aging Washington Street Islands $50,000 RECONSTRUCTION in cooperation with Project Green. 51 U SMASH 'EM DEMOLITION Demolition of the U-Smash'm bulding; securing $190,000 adjacent foundations; and restoration of the area to grass. This does not include demolition of the bus depot of the Wilson's building. (A water pipe will need to be relocated before demolition can occur.) # ; p~ & grl~e T~aTis C-14 Capital Improvement Projects Unfunded Projects # Project Name Unfunded Amt 52 CITY PARK TRAIL LIGHTING Instal pedestrian lighting along the trail in City Park $150,000 to address safety concerns, and to make the trail more useable after dark. 53 COURT HILL TRAIL This project will establish a ten-foot wide $500,000 pedestrian/bicycle trail between Scott Park and Creekside park in east Iowa City along the south branch of Ralston Creek. The City has acquired nearly all of the property necessary for this trail to be constructed. It will be approximately 1.2 miles in length. 54 HWY 1 SIDEWALK / TRAIL Construct a 10 foot wide sidewalk along IA Hwy 1 $1,500,000 between Riverside Drive (921) and Mormon Trek Boulevard. 55 HWY 6 TRAIL-SYCAMORE Extend existing trail along Hwy 6 between $400,000 /LAKESIDE Sycamore Street and Lakeside Drive. 56 IA RIVER TRAIL-PEn This project would construct a trail and pedestrian $2,000,000 BRIDGE/R.S. bridge between Benton Street and Sturgis Drive on the west bank. 57 IRC-ELKS PROPERTY Construction of a trail along the Iowa River $200,000 Corridor (IRC) on the south side of the Elks property. 58 LINN ST PEn IMPROVEMENTS Installation of pedestrian and streetscape $338,300 improvements in walkway next to Van Allen Hall between Iowa Avenue and Jefferson Street. Also improve bus stop on Jefferson and signage at Linn Street and Iowa Avenue. 59 LONGFELLOW/TWAIN PEn Extension of Longfellow/Twain pedestrian trail to $120,000 TRAIL Pine Street. 60 N DISTRICT NATURE TRAIL Construct a trail along Williams pipeline easement $300,000 from Bristol Drive to Dubuque Street. 61 PEn BRIDGE - ROCKY SHORE Construct a pedestrian/bicycle bridge over the $800,000 TO PENINSULA Iowa River to connect the existing Rocky Shore sidewalk/trail with the future Peninsula Parkland trails. 62 PEDESTRIAN OVERPASS - Construction of an ADA accessible pedestrian $1,000,000 BENTON ST overpass over Benton Street at Roosevelt School. 63 RIVERSIDE DRIVE PEn TUNNEL Construction of a pedestrian tunnel through the $400,000 railroad embankment to provide a pedestrian route on the west side of Riverside Drive south of Myrtle Avenue. 64 SAND LAKE TRAIL Develop a walking/biking trail around Sand Lake to $400,000 tie in with existing iowa River Trail and the new Highway 6 Trail. C-15 Capital Improvement Projects Unfunded Projects # Project Name Unfunded Amt 65 SHIMEK SCHL/FOSTR RD EXT Construct a trail north of Shimek School to future $70,000 TRAIL Foster Road. 66 SIDEWALK-HIGHWAY 921 Construct a 10 foot wide sidewalk along S. $600,000 Riverside Drive (921) between US Hwy 6 and the future extension of Mormon Trek Boulevard. 67 SIDEWALK-ROCHESTER Complete gaps in the siewalk system on $100,000 Rochester Avenue between First Avenue and Scott Boulevard. 68 WATERWORKS PK TO Connect Waterworks Park and Peninsula Park $1,200,000 PENINSULA PK CONNECTOR with a trail under 1-80. TRAIL 69 WILLOW CREEK TRAIL - Kiwanis Park to Highway 1 (including culvert) $1,635,000 PHASE Ill 515,000; Highway 1 to Hwy921 $450,000; Hwy 921 to Napoleon Park $670,000. 70 WILLOW CREEK TRAIL-WEST Continue Willow Creek Trail from its current west $1,200,000 terminus, either under or over Highway 218, to connect with the new trail in Hunters Run Park and further west possibly as part of County Farm project. 71 WILLOW CREEK/SYCAMORE Construct a trail along the sewer easement $500,000 TRAIL between NapOleon Park and the South Wastewater Plant. 5 ~ Wastewater~ 72 NORTH BRANCH DAM TRUNK This project extends easterly along Ralston Creek $3,330,460 SEWER from the North Branch Dam to Scott Boulevard. 73 NORTHEAST TRUNK SEWER Reconstruction of an under-sized sewer through $4,503,800 the NE neighborhoods. 74 ROHRET ROAD LIFT STATION Construction of a lift station south of Rohret Road $1,177,000 and adjacent to the east property line of Hwy 965 extended. This project will be necessary to accommodate growth in the southwest district and to accommodate future expansion of the landfill. 75 ROHRET SOUTH SEWER This project would extend the 30" sanitary sewer $1,000,000 along Abbey Lane from Burry Drive to the west side of Highway 218. This project witl allow development within the watershed of Highway 218. 76 TAFT/COURT GROUND Construction of a one million gallon buried potable $1,250,000 STORAGE RES. water storage reservoir including pumping facilities. Land Acquisition was in FY02, F¥03. C-16 Capital Improvement Projects Unfunded Projects # Project Name Unfunded Amt 77 CARSON LAKE REGIONAL Construction of a regional storm water $1,000,000 STORMWATR management facility on the middle branch of Willow Creek immediately west of Highway 218. This facility will serve development west of Highway 218 and south of Rohret Road. Rohret South Sewer project is a prerequisite to this project. 78 HAFOR CIRCLE STORM SEWER This project involves improvements to the storm $600,000 sewer to alleviate yard flooding. 79 IOWA AVENUE CULVERT This project will repair a box culvert that carries $300,000 REPAIRS Ralston Creek under Iowa Avenue. 80 N BRANCH BASIN EXCAVATION Aerial mapping done for the updateto the flood $116,000 plain maps revealed that sedimentation has consumed a portion of the capacity of the facility. This basin is located in Hickory Hill Park. 81 OLYMPIC COURT Stormsewer retrofit to relieve localized flooding $400,000 STORMWATER from stormwater runoff. 82 SANDUSKY STORM SEWER Provide a larger storm sewer system designed to $405,000 reduce the depth of ponding in the stormwater management basin south of Sandusky Drive and east of Pepper Drive. 83 SUNSET ST STORM SEWER The area just north and south of Kineton Green, $380,000 east of Sunset, has experienced back yard flooding and drainage problems. 84 VALLEY ST STORM SEWER Repair storm sewer due to flooding. $150,000 8 -Parks & Recreation 85 CITY PARK RIVERBANK This project will use rip-rap and vegetative cover to $120,000 PROTECTION protect the riverbank along the east edge of City Park. 86 CITY PARK SIDEWALKS Replace existing 4 foot sidewalk between Templin $110,000 Rd and the lower park entrance with an 8 foot sidewalk; construct a 6 foot lighted sidewalk from the Festival Stage to the main parking lot. 87 DOG PARK DEVELOPMENT Develop a fenced area, at least five acres where $50,000 dogs can legally be exercised off leash. 88 FESTIVAL STAGE Future improvements which have been discussed $150,000 IMPROVEMENTS include restrooms and an open-air shelter. 89 LEISURE POOL DEVELOPMENT Retrofit City Park pool into a "leisure pool" facility ( $4,600,000 water slide, spray fountains, play area, etc.) 90 MERCER PARK BALL FIELD Replace and upgrade the lighting system on three' $225,000 LIGHTING of the Mercer Park softball/baseball diamonds. Improvements will better accomodate baseball usage. C-17 Capital Improvement Projects Unfunded Projects # Project Name Unfunded Amt 91 MESQUAKIE PARK This project will cover the entire old landfill with soil $1,500,000 for safety purposes in order to open up the green space for passive/semi-passive public use. 92 PENINSULA PARK This project involves initial funding for the $1,000,000 development of the lower elevation of the peninsula area into a "natural park", with prairie grasses, wildflowers, native woodlands and trails. This type of development and comprehensive plan will help protect the wellheads for the City's water supply. $1 million additional construction cost estimate is on the Unfunded / Pending projects list. 93 REC CENTER EXPANSION Expand the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation $5,000,000 Center, likely expansion would be to the east over the existing parking lot which would allow for an expanded gymnasium as well as additional space for racquetball, arts and crafts, community meetings and other activities. 94 SCOTT PARK DEVJBASIN This project will develop Scott Park into a $300,000 EXCV. neighborhood/regional park and will excavate the basin in order to serve its intended function as a stormwater management area. 95 SKATE PARK IMPROVEMENTS In anticipation of the new skate park becoming $150,000 very popular, improvements such as another open- air shelter and restrooms will likely be needed. 96 SOCCER COMPLEX TRAIL DEV. Construct a trail system at the Kickers Soccer Park $220,000 to create accessibility for persons with disabilities, and for general pedestrian/bicycle usage. 97 WATERWORKS PARK PH II Phase II of Waterworks Park FY02 project. $1,029,000 Includes FY04 and FY05 deferred by Council. 98 AVIATION COMMERCE PRK Construction of a 60,000 square foot building shell $4,000,000 SPEC BLD for the Aviation Commerce Park 't ~ ~ Other ProJe¢ts 99 CEMETERY MAUSOLEUM Construction of a mausoleum. $350,000 · 02 CHAUNCEY SWAN FOUNTAIN This project involves the reuse of components of $110,000 the old City plaza foruntain. -02 FIBER OPTIC SYSTEM This project connects City buildings onto a fiber $350,000 optic backbone, greatly increasing data transmission capacity. -02 FIRE STATION #1 RELOCATION Relocate and expand / modernize Central Fire $10,000,000 Station #1. -02 FIRE STATION #2 RELOCATION Construction of a relocated Fire Station #2 in the $1,500,000 Southwest Planning District. C-18 Capital Improvement Projects Unfunded Projects # Project Name Unfunded Amt -02 FIRE STATION #4 This project involves the purchase of land'to $700,000 constuct an additional fire station in the northeast area of Iowa City. Recent land annexations and in- fill development have increased service demands in this area. Construction costs are on the unfunded / out years. -02 FIRE STATION 5 Construction of Fire Station #5 in the South $1,500,000 Planning District. -02 FIRE TRAINING FACILITY This project will construct a state of the art fire $890,000 training facility to address all aspects of emergency service delivery including fire suppression, emergency medical services, hazardous material releases and rescue. The facility will be used for new recruits, continuing education for veteran firefighters and shared with the Johnson County Mutual Aid Association. -02 GIS COMPUTER PACKAGE This computerized system would provide an $900,000 interactive referenced database for City facilities from infrastructure records to permitting, with crime and accident data also included. -02 PUBLIC WORKS CONIPLEX Construction of Vehicle Maintenance bldg, truck $4,085,000 wash, salt storage location, and related site work. -02 RIVERSIDE DRIVE This project includes methane abatement, dynamic $2,180,000 REDEVELOPMENT compaction and fill at the 7 acre site owned by the City at Riverside Dr. and Hwy 6. This site preparation would allow for marketing of this property for commercial development. -02 SUMMIT ST. HISTORIC PLAN Streetscape and intersection elements through $260,000 Summit Street Historic District. Total Unfunded Projects $157,819,800 C-19 MiNUTES DRAFT IOWA CITY TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FRIDAY, JANUARY 2, 2004 -- 5:00 P.M. CITY CABLE TV OFFICE, 10 S. LINN ST.-TOWER PLACE PARKING FACILITY MEMBERS PRESENT: Kimberly Thrower, Terry Smith, Jim Pusack, Brett Castillo MEMBERS ABSENT: Saul Mekies STAFF PRESENT: Drew Shaffer, Mike Brau, Dale Helling OTHERS PRESENT: RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL The Commission unanimously passed a resolution recommending to the City Council that the negotiated rate settlement agreement with Mediacom be adopted. RATE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Smith, who had worked with staff on the agreement provided a synopsis of the agreement. Mediacom raised their basic tier rate to $13.95 in August and the City contested that amount with Mediacom appealing the City's rate resolution to the Federal Communications Commission. In the past four months the City and Mediacom have been working on a rate agreement. The current offer of a rate of $11.75 is the third offer made by Mediacom and involves several issues. The funding for Public Access Television (PATV) is provided by Mediacom and passed through the rate base to subscribers. The agreement stipulated that PATV's annual payment will be amortized over seven years in the FCC rate form used to calculate the maximum permitted rate. The basic tier rate will be frozen through July, 2005. Pusack said he was concerned that the agreement stipulated that it will be implemented "as soon as possible" but did not specify a deadline. Thrower voiced the same concern. Smith said that it is Mediacom's intent tO implement the new rate in the next billing cycle after approved by Council and pointed to a provision in the agreement that waives the required 30 day public notice of any rate change. Helling said that if Mediacom did not implement the new rate in the next billing cycle that they would need to show that there was no possible way to do so. Smith moved and Castillo seconded a motion to recommend to the City Council that the negotiated rate settlement agreement with Mediacom be adopted. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Smith moved and Castillo seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment was at 5:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, cD~;; ST~ilh strator A Plea foe a Positive, Peoductive Council By D¢¢ No~ton "A couple pieces of wisdom I want to pass on to you, but you probably don't them. "I do want to remind the council - the new and old, and the citizens, too - that you 'ye got to maintain your focus on solving problems. We don't need to scrap. We need to solve problems. We 'ye got plenty of them and that's the name of this game -- to find reasonable solutions to problems. "We need to avoid personal attacks, whether on the council or with the public, and vice versa for public citizens. We need to maintain a spirit of civility. That's the only way discussion proceeds, and the only way consensus arises. "It's not unanimity we're seeking, but reasonable consent. And we must accept compromises. That's the genius of this political system. "And l want to express at least a considerable concern about an air of negativity. I hope we can get away from that, whether on the part of the public, or sometimes on our part, and sometimes in the press. Things aren't perfect, but they're not all rotten either. "I say constructive criticism is one thing, gratuitous negativism is quite another. And I think it saps the energy of staff, and elected officials as well." Exceq~ts from Dee Norton's farewell comments at his final Iowa City City Council meeting December 7, 1999. MINUTES ~ PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2003 - 3:30 PM LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM Members Present: Barbara Camillo, Chuck Felling, Rick Fosse, James Hemsley, Mark Seabold, Terry Trueblood, Emily Walsh Members Absent: None Staff Present: Marcia Klingaman, Karin Franklin Others Present: None RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL: The Public Art Committee asks the City Council to approve a sculpture by local artist John Coyne for the Iowa Sculpture's Showcase display through May of 2005, with the condition that the Artist contact the owners of the F.S. Feeds building for approval in using the building likeness in the sculpture and that the windows in the sculpture are not hollow in nature. Call To Order Chairperson Felling called the meeting to order at 3:35 PM. introduction of New PAAC Commission Member, Mark Seabold Felling introduced the newest member of the Public Art Committee, Mark Seabold. Seabold is an Iowa City resident and is employed as an architect with the Shive-Hattery Architectural firm. He said he is looking forward to working with and contributing to the committee. Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Aqenda Felling stated he had a conversation with Tom Moeller, the individual who started the Irving Weber statue project, and he is still contemplating the idea of creating a statue of Paul Ingall sitting on a bench reading a book. Felling asked Moeller to keep him and the committee posted on any developments. Consideration of the Minutes of the October 2, 2003 Meeting Felling commented that the minutes were very well done. Hemsley noted the following corrections: Page 3 - 3rd paragraph, the last sentence should read, ...with the subject matter being more playful and light and abstract in nature. Page 3 - 4th paragraph, the last sentence should read, Coyne said an advance would be helpful for him and for most artists. Page 3 - 11th paragraph, the word 'be' should be inserted between the words may and important. MOTION: Trueblood moved to accept the minutes as amended. Fosse seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 7-0. Consideration of a Recommendation to the City Council for the Iowa Sculptor's Showcase for a Display of a Sculpture by John Coyne throuqh May 2005 Felling referred to the photocopy of the proposed sculpture that was included in the committee members meeting packets. Felling asked for feedback concerning the sculpture. The sculpture is the artists rendering of local landmarks, the F.S. Feeds building and the Oakland Cemetery Black Angel. The sculpture will be constructed of cast aluminum and is approximately eight (8) feet in height. Klingaman had questioned Coyne concerning the wording on the F.S. Feeds portion of the sculpture which he has altered to read J.C. Feeds. Coyne said the initials stand for John Coyne, and there are not any copyright issues. Coyne also said he is very confident in the durability of the sculpture, as there will be steel components used in the construction. Walsh asked if the windows in the sculpture would be constructed as hollow or solid windows. She said if they are left hollow they could be a potential hazard for garbage and leaves and might also encourage pedestrians to climb the structure. Klingaman agreed, but was unsure of the exact construction and will confer with the artist. Public Art Advisory Committee Minutes November 6, 2003 Page 2 MOTION: Fosse moved to approve the sculpture for display with the Iowa Sculptor's Showcase as presented with the condition that Coyne check with the owners of the F.S. Feeds building and secure approval of using the building likeness in the sculpture and also that the windows in the sculpture are not hollow. Trueblood seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 7-0. Trueblood stated that John Coyne has also volunteered to repair the missing and broken fingers of the Black Angel sculpture in Oakland Cemetery. Klingaman asked the committee if they would agree to allow the Coyne sculpture to stay in place until June of 2005 due to the late placement of the sculpture and the time required to place a new artist call. MOTION: Camillo moved to allow the Coyne sculpture to remain on display with the Iowa Sculpture's Showcase through May 2005. Walsh seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 7-0. Update on Themed Street Art Klingaman reported the Iowa City Visitor's and Convention Bureau and the University of Iowa Athletic Department will be holding a press conference November 7, 2003 for the unveiling of the "Herky On Parade" themed street art project. Klingaman, as a part of the steering committee, will act as the artist liaison for the project and also help in working through the artist's contracts. The Herky sculptures will be on display throughout the Iowa City and Coralville area from April through October 2004. The intent is that they will then be placed at Kinnick Stadium and placed for auction during the University of Iowa Homecoming celebrations. Committee Time/Other Business Felling noted that some of the neighborhoods are currently in the construction process for their Neighborhood Art projects and questioned when it would be appropriate to approach other neighborhoods for the project. Franklin stated she would like to see the first round of Neighborhood projects completed from selection, decision and execution in order to learn from the process. Felling suggested that neighborhoods that wish to become involved in the project contact Klingaman because the process is involved and takes time to get started. Also, he questioned if there are any budget implications regarding the project. Franklin stated the committee is on track with their budget and they can review this at the January meeting. She suggested the committee considers what they want to focus on and give attention to in the upcoming year, and this can be discussed at the January meeting also. Klingaman reported that phase II of Poetry In Public has begun. They are working with the Iowa City Schools who have started a program called "Poetry Alive" which encourages younger students to write poetry. The Poetry In Public program is suggesting that one poem from each grade be submitted for publishing consideration. The selection process is for poetry that will be published will be a bit more competitive this year as they expect more submissions, and due to budget constraints they can only produce/print a certain number of poems. Klingaman said in response to a question from Felling, that the response to the Poetry In Public program has had very positive feedback and has been very well received. Camillo volunteered to participate in the selection process committee. The committee agreed to not meet in the month of December due to schedule conflicts. The next meeting is tentatively scheduled for January 8, 2004. Adiournment MOTION: Hemsley moved to adjourn the meeting. Fosse seconded the motion. All in favor, motion passed 7-0. The meeting was adjourned at 4:22 PM. PRELIMINARY PENDING APPROVAL MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM 410 E. Washington St. Tuesday, November 25, 2003 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Lisa Beckmann, Keri Neblett, David Shorr, Rick Spooner, Jim McCue, Catherine Fribley, Valerie Garr, Billie Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: Paul Retish STAFF MEMBERS: Heather Shank '1. CALL TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. INTRODUCTION OF COMMISSIONER APPOINTED ON OCTOBER 14TM AND 28TM, 2003: CATHERINE FRIBLEY AND VALERIE GARR: Fribley introduced herself and said that she works for the Iowa Coalition against Sexual Assault. She states that she had done anti-sexual/domestic violence work in Iowa and she now coordinates a national technical assistant project for the coalition. Garr introduced herself and informed the Commission that she works in the Office of Admissions at the University of Iowa and has been with the University for 18 years. Gar works with underrepresented populations of students and she conducts diversity dialogue groups and diversity presentations. The Commission members introduced themselves to the new members. 3. APPROVAL OF REGULAR MINUTES: Motion to approve minutes was made by Sherr and seconded by McCue. Motion passed unanimously. 4. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None 5. NEW BUSINESS: Youth Town Meeting-Violence and Bullying-Scheduled for Dec 10th in Senior Center Assembly room, 28 S. Linn St.: Shank said that Lauren Reece has agreed to be a panelist. Shank explained the application process for the students. Beckmann suggested going through churches, boy scouts, girl scouts etc., she will make some contacts. She further suggests setting up another date in the spring as an addition. Fribley asked what the response was from Lauren Reece in regards to bullying. Shank explained that she talked to Reece about a project that Dr. Dan Olweus developed in Norway to address bullying. Information about the program is in the packet. When Shank explained the program to Reece, she seemed interested but there is a cost to the project. The biggest cost would be related to teacher books. Shank said that many of the kids that other people have contacted were afraid of being on the panel. Neblett added that she knew of a student that changed schools because of a bullying situation and now attends the alternative school and she will contact him to see if he is interested. She will provide the Beckmann asked for volunteers for the December 10th meeting. Fribley and Neblett volunteered to attend. Human Rights Ordinance revisions: Beckmann summarized the changes in the Human Rights Ordinance for the new Commissioners. Shank also stated that while the Commission had voted in favor of the changes, the vote had not been unanimous. She informed the City Council of the positions of the two Commissioners that voted against the changes. The City Council voted in favor of the changes. Beckmann added that the Commission was aiming for a more educational role because the Commission does not have the means to change the law. McCue asked to have the role of the Commission explained to the new members. Shank indicated she would provide a summary regarding the changes in the Ordinance as well as the Commissioner's role on the Commission. Spooner stated that it was a difficult decision to make and the ordinance revisions will change the direction of the Commission. He said that he disagreed with the changes and felt that the probable cause decision was something that the Commission should still be involved in. Townsend said that in her opinion the lawyers don't always make the right decision and she feels that if you give them additional feedback it might give them a chance to reconsider their decision. McCue said that he is.concerned about people coming up to him and asking about specific complaints. Beckmann and Shank both said that the cases are confidential. Shank said that next month all the closed case decisions would be available to them. Garr asked if Commission members were part of a panel that ruled for probable cause in the past. Townsend explained the process as far as the Commissioner's role in reviewing the complaint and signing the Commission opinion. Spooner stated his thoughts on the procedure and told the Commission members that he believed Commission feedback protected the citizenry of Iowa City. He further added that with the high turnover of the Commissioners the Ordinance changes could be revisited. Spooner believes the results are not always good when a Commissioner is taken out of the process.- Fribley asked what the outcome was when the Commissioners disagree with the attorneys. Shorr explained that the city must get behind the attorneys and support them. Beckmann announced that the ordinance changes had passed 5-1 6. OLD BUSINESS: a. Reports on Diabetic Health Fair and banquet; Night of 1000 Dinners; Shulamith Koenig, Shorr's conference call with the ICRD: Shank attended the Diabetic banquet and thought it was very interesting. Shank said that a physician spoke on various aspects of the disease and food habits of the very young. She recommended that the Commission sponsor this event again. Night of 1000 Dinners-Spooner said that he was in attendance and he found it a very sobering event involving dance, poetry and dialogue explaining the dangers of land mines. He added that 25,000 die yearly involving land mines. Spooner recommended sponsorship again next year. Shulamith Koenig- Shank said the speaker talked about making Iowa City a Human Rights city. Shank felt that Koenig was a good speaker and spoke of how easy it would be to institute human rights education into everyday lives. Shank feels it might not be the time to work on this project. Conference call-Dave Leshtz cannot attend a Commission meeting until February as he is working for "Dean for America." Shank called Leshtz to get his thoughts on the budget cutting proposals from the group hired by Vilsack to recommend ways to save money. One of the proposals of the group is the elimination of "unfunded mandates." The creation, funding, and staffing of the Human Rights Commission as set forth in 216.19 of the Iowa Civil Rights Commission is an unfunded mandate, that requires cities of 29,000 or more to adequately staff and fund a Human Rights Commission. Shank further stated that there are two possibilities: {1 ) the mandate is removed and the city has the choice of whether to eliminate or keep the Commission and staff; or (2) The state allows for one central Commission to take complaints, namely the Iowa Civil Rights Commission, and recommends the elimination of all local commissions. Shank said that she could not figure out how option two would save the state money. It has been suggested to Shank by other Human Rights Directors that the State's intent is to eliminate all local commissions. Consideration of these proposals is to take place in January 2004. Beckmann thinks some of the cities in Iowa are just shifting money around. It was suggested to Shank that by eliminating local commissions, it would successfully eliminate protection for person's that believe they have been discriminated against based on sexual orientation or gender identity. Shank also was told that a lot depended on how well Iowa does in the 4th quarter. b. Nominations for youth award; Youth Human Rights Awards-Does anyone want to do a Public Service Announcement? Beckmann said that the winners of the Human Rights Youth Awards would be presented at the April meeting. She explained the process/program to the new members and said that all that participated will receive a reward. Beckmann will appoint a nominating committee to go through the awards to make sure the criteria are being met which is broad. The criteria can be found in the nominating letter/application. She said that April 1st is the deadline and requested someone to do a public service announcement that will be filmed in January. Fribley and Garr are interested in making the announcement. Neblett will check into having a teen from UAY youth do an announcement as well. c. Camp Director: Shank said that the director's name is Bob Aossey and his address is P. O. Box 521, Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52405. Shank spoke with someone regarding the Commission's desire to speak with him and give support to his camp. Shorr indicated that he would write a letter to Mr. Aossey. d. David Leshtz: Covered earlier. e. Legislation: Covered earlier f. Education Committee: Shank said that there was a meeting scheduled but she couldn't attend. She gave a brief description of the Education Committee and said that they were currently involved in providing information to people about how to draft a resume, fill out applications, cover letters, mock interviews. Shank believes the event is quite successful and the next program will be at Broadway Center. Shank said that members of the education committee are gathering information about the needs of the citizens in the area by attending meetings and contacting city agencies. She added that the next Building Blocks for Employment is April 20, 2004. g. Latino Conference and Latino Institute: Shank gave a speech on discrimination law and Ellen Ramsay Kacena, the Human P,ights Investigator, spoke on other areas of employment law. Shank discovered later that the program stated that Kacena and Shank would be speaking about migrant rights. Shank and Kacena did not address migrant rights and this upset some of the participants. The Institute and Conference were, however, very successful. Beckmann would like two items specifically noted on next month's agenda: Keynote speaker for next year's human rights breakfast: Beckmann said she would like to have suggestions of possible speakers and finalize the selection at the January meeting~ Shank said that the breakfast is scheduled for September 23, 2004. Beckmann would also like to see the nomination form modified because people are being nominated for doing their job well. Beckmann noted that the Commission was receiving numerous letters of support for each nominee. Beckmann said that she would prefer one well-written nomination form signed by one person than letters of support. Shank will send another copy of the current nomination form to all members. She stated that she would like the nominating committee to meet before the January meeting and will then revise the form and present it to the Commission at the January meeting. Beckmann said that the selection committee suggested that at the next breakfast the chairperson would read a summary of the individuals accomplishments or the committee will write an abstract or summary for the chairperson to read. This would allow more time for the winner to speak and eliminate the speeches of the nominators. Beckmann brought up the date of the December meeting, after discussion it was decided to change the meeting to December 16th. Motion made by Fribley and seconded by Spooner. Motion passed unanimously. Shank will contact Retish with this information. 7. REPORTS OF COMMISSIONERS: Rick Spooner: He would like to lift up the troops in Iraq and hoped that people will keep them in mind. He said that they are making the ultimate sacrifice and by that sacrifice it allows us to enjoy the freedoms we have. Keri Neblett: No report David Shorr:No report Cat Fribley: She wanted to bring up the new anti-violence project that has been formed because of the verbal and physical harassment of gay people in downtown Iowa City. The group has tried some direct actions formats and held dance parties and handed out leaflets to raise awareness of the dangers of downtown. She will do some training at the next meeting being held Tuesday, December 16th. Shank asked her if anyone had contacted Faith Wilmot or anyone from HARP, T? Fribley said that the group had been trying to contact Wilmot but not sure if she was still involved with HAP, RT. Fribley believes that the people being targeted are younger and more gender bending in some ways and are really not sure where they are with 4 regard to their sexual identity. Shank said the Police Chief came and asked her about increased acts against gays and lesbians in town. Shank reported that she was only aware of two allegations. Fribley indicated that she would ask someone from the group to come to speak to the Commission. Beckmann would like an update at the next meeting. Valerie Garr:Garr announced that Cultural Diversity Day would be February 29th, 2004 from noon to five at the Field House. Beckmann would like this put on the agenda for December. Jim McCue: He announced that the Iowa City Foreign Relations Council would be meeting on the 16th of December. An Iowa City Sudanese lawyer named Asma Taha is the keynote speaker. McCue indicated he would email registration forms to Shank and she can distribute them. McCue also suggested that the Mosque be contacted to find out whether someone would be interested in discussing his or her experiences in Iowa City. Beckmann said that she thought it would be interesting to hear about their experiences. Beckmann directed McCue to contact the Mosque to see if someone would be interested in attending a Commission meeting in either the January or February meeting. Billie Townsend: Townsend was concerned with the effect of the new legislation on Medicare. She said it would be interesting to see the results in years down the road and feels that Medicare will be eventually dismantled. Lisa Beckmann: She is concerned with the Michael Jackson fiasco and believes that the result of the case will do damage to child abuse issues and violence issues in general and that there will be no positive outcome. She further said that having people come forward will be more difficult because they will see that enough money makes abuse charges go away. Beckmann believes all the legal maneuvering distracts from the real issue, which is child abuse. 8. STATUS OF CASES: Shank reported that Team A, Spooner and Beckmann, had cases to read. 9. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Motion made by Townsend to adjourn and seconded by Spooner at 8:45. DRAFT MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 11,2003 - 7:00 P.M. EMMA HARVAT HALL - CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Carlson, James Enloe, Michael Gunn, Michael Maharry, Mark McCallum, Jim Ponto, Amy Smothers, Paul Sueppel, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Shelley McCafferty OTHERS PRESENT: Mike Brennan CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Maharry called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA: Weitzel asked if a survey was done before the Department of Transportation committed money to the Transportation Center. McCafferty said she would find out. Maharry reminded Commission members that the annual planning meeting would be Saturday at noon. McCafferty distributed a packet of information for discussion at the Saturday meeting. She said that terms of office for Carlson, Gunn, and Ponto would be expiring at the end of March, and each of those who would like to remain on the Commission would have to reapply for the position. McCafferty added that there should be a representative from the Woodlawn District in the near future. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 1501 Center Street. McCafferty said this is an application to replace a window for a properly in the Longfellow Historic District. She said this house is a Moffitt Cottage that was built in 1948; however, it has since had replacement siding and windows. McCafferty said the current window is leaking badly, and the proposed window would comply with the guidelines. She stated that it would be a wood, metal-clad, double-hung window and would match the double hung windows on the rest of the house. Weitzel asked if the trim would match the original. McCafferty said she could specify that on the certificate. MOTION: Enloe moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for a replacement window for the house at 1501 Center Street, subject to the requirement that the trim be consistent with the original trim. Weitzel seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. GOOSETOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT: McCafferty referred to the map that had been prepared as a work in progress. She said she and Maharry have both looked at the neighborhood, but it needs to be looked at more closely in terms of distinguishing contributing properties versus non-contributing properties. Referring to the map of the proposed Goosetown Conservation District, McCafferty said the section in the upper right of the map from 628 Reno Street to 600 Reno Street consists of a series of ranch houses that Historic Preservation Commission December 11, 2003 Page 2 do not have a strong sense of the Goosetown District. She recommended that section be removed from the district. McCafferty said she would also recommend removing an area on the southeast end. She stated that 232 Mort is a Goosetown cottage, but the section from 1116 to 1130 Bloomington would be more appropriate combined with a future district that includes both sides of Rochester. McCafferty said there are some errors on the map. The lot lines from 1002 to 1027 Bloomington are incorrect. She recommended that half block be included. McCafferty stated that the southwest corner of North Market Square consists of early 20th century Four- squares and bungalows that would be more appropriate for a future Northside conservation district. She also suggested including the north side of the 800 block of Church Street because its character is consistent with the south side. Sueppel inquired about how the boundary is determined. He felt that this area was similar to Ronalds Street and therefore shouldn't Ronalds Street be included as well. McCafferty stated that Marlys Svendsen determined that Ronalds Street qualified as a historic district and is currently preparing the nomination for this district. Sueppel said he agreed that the areas that McCafferty is recommending being removed are not consistent but the neighborhood considers them to be part of Goosetown. McCafferty said to the north, they are relying on Svendsen's professional opinion and agreed that it can be difficult at times to draw hard boundaries. McCafferty stated that more information will be gathered when the neighborhood meetings are held, and the Commission can determine how the neighborhood defines Goosetown. She said in the meantime, the best attempt has been made to draw a boundary around a Goosetown conservation district. Sueppel said he had no problem with the boundaries. He said, however, that because the neighbors are calling it Goosetown, why would it all not be put in there. Maharry said the 1960s houses are not contributing structures. Sueppel agreed that they are non-contributing but said that they are still in Goosetown. Maharry said if the 1960s ranch houses are in the district, the owners would have to apply for a certificate for any exterior project requiring a building permit. He said part of this is an attempt to make it easier for those people. Enloe said the cultural aspect should have some weight, and Maharry said it has been a factor in the past. Weitzel said that if the buildings are gone, there is not a compelling reason to include it in a district McCafferty said that further along in the process, the Commission will at least have received a draft of the National Register nomination for the Ronalds Street Historic District. She agreed that while there is certainly a cultural component, the Commission also has to look at where the natural boundaries fall. McCafferty added that the input from the neighbors could change the way this is looked at. Maharry said if people come to the meetings and say they want their properties included, that would certainly be okay. Enloe said the reason Ronalds Street has been considered separately is that there is enough integrity in this area to designate it as an historic district, which would give it more protection that a conservation district designation. Maharry said the next step in the process is to hold the Goosetown neighborhood meetings. He said the map will be shown to the neighbors and the Commission can get input as to what people think. Maharry asked if there is a list of Goosetown Neighborhood leaders available. McCafferty said she can work with Marsha Klingaman to compile a list, and the first meeting could possibly held at the end of January. Historic Preservation Commission December 11, 2003 Page 3 Maharry pointed out that during the survey of the neighborhood, he noticed that on both sides of Rochester and on Hotz Street there is a group of about 50 cohesive homes that the Commission might want to consider for a survey sometime in the future. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE (TARP) McCafferty referred to information in the packet regarding the Targeted Area Rehabilitation Program (TARP). She said that the intent of TARP is housing rehabilitation and to some extent historic preservation. McCafferty said the goal of the program as assisting homeowners in targeted areas with the rehabilitation of owner-occupied residential units. She stated that the program is aimed at homeowners of moderate income. McCaffedy said one advantage of the TARP is that it is funded by the City so that there are fewer lead abatement issues. She said she has spoken with Steve Nasby and Karin Franklin about the program. McCafferty said there is the potential for the Commission to propose some revisions to the program such as modifying the boundaries. She said the areas were selected by overlaying the census tract information with the areas that were determined to be in need of rehabilitation. McCafferty stated that the City Council determines how much money goes to the program and what happens with it. McCafferty said other options include proposing a program to City Council that is specifically for historic preservation or forming a padnership with private organizations to fund a program. McCaffedy said the City Council is concerned about adding the economic hardship ordinance to the historic preservation ordinance and how to deal with it. She said that other communities have financial incentives for preservation. McCaffedy said it would be useful to have a fund that could pay for the up the difference between the cost of doing a project with preservation in mind and the cost of doing it the conventional way. Weitzel stated that he would prefer using this kind of financial aid to lessening the strength of the guidelines. McCafferty said the key question is where the money will come from. She said that for houses with less significance, the Commission might be more inclined to relax the guidelines. McCafferty said that for a property with landmark eligibility, the Commission may want offer financial aid and not relax the guidelines. She added that the TARP program consists of loans to homeowners. Weitzel said he knows there are people in other neighborhoods who are interested in assistance. McCafferty said she will continue to look at the options. She said she will find out the interest rate on the loans and will e~mail the information to Commission members. McCaffer[y added that 40% of the current historic and conservation district properties overlap the TARP districts. IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION HANDBOOK: McCafferty repo~:ed that the Handbook can be adopted by resolution. She said there is concern on the part of Franklin and the legal staff that the Commission understands that these are guidelines and can therefore be deviated from, as long as a clear reason is stated. McCafferty said that because these are guidelines and not an ordinance, they can be adopted by resolution. McCafferty said this will be on the City Council's January 6th agenda. She said an ordinance to allow for a design review subcommittee and a resolution amending the bylaws will also be considered at this time. She pointed out that adoption by resolution would only require a single vote of the City Council, and this would also not have to go through the Planning and Zoning Commission. Brennan said that in reading the guidebook, it states that the Commission's purview extends to the exterior of a building only. He said, however, that in the definition of "demolition" it mentions interior columns, especially with regard to demolition. McCafferty said that this likely comes from the old guidelines. Weitzel said the Commission is concerned only with the exterior appearance. McCaffedy said she will look at this definition to ensure that it is not misleading. Historic Preservation Commission December 11,2003 Page 4 Brennan asked about the definitions on page 71 regarding a primary building and structures. McCafferty said that in rare instances, a historic structure might not be a building. Brennan said that the Handbook should contain the definitions of object, site, and building. He said that the definitions of property and structure each refer to the other so that they are circular definitions. Brennan said he was okay with the guidelines but would be concerned with this if it became law. McCafferty said a property is evaluated as contributing or non-contributing based on the primary building and she will look at these definitions Brennan said his main concern is the new item number one under the definition of historic district. McCafferty responded that item number one comes from the requirement by State law that for an historic district, 60% of the properties have to contribute to the historic district. Brennan said he was not certain that was from State law. McCafferty said it was either from State law or the Secretary of the Interior. Brennan said State law requires compliance items 2 through 7 and number one is an additional requirement above and beyond. McCafferty said she would look into this but said the legal issues are based on the ordinance in place. She said if Brennan is concerned about the legal issues, it would be more appropriate to discuss this with the Legal Department. Brennan said he felt that if this was being changed, it is important for the Historic Preservation Commission to know how and why it is changing. McCafferty stated that this is based on the previous Handbook and the existing ordinance. She said the ordinance hasn't been completely rewritten yet. McCafferty said there may be some changes to the Handbook once the ordinance is evaluated more closely. Brennan said that by definition, if one has item one, then items 2 through 7 are also met He said that the conclusion from number one is that if an area qualifies under the National Register, then everything else falls into place. Brennan said that is putting the cart before the horse. McCafferty said the intention is to comply with State law and the Secretary of Interior and she will look further into this issue. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: NOVEMBER 13, 2003. MOTION: Weitzel moved to approve the minutes of the November 13, 2003 meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission, as written. Enloe seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte data on citynt/pcdlrc~ n u t eslhpc/h pc 12-11-03 doc DRAFT POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD ~ MINUTES - December 9, 2003 CALL TO ORDER Chair Loren Horton called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. ATTENDANCE Board members present: Candy Barnhill (7:15 p.m.), Loren Horton, Greg Roth, John Stratton, and Roger Williams; Board members absent: None. Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh and Staff Kellie Tuttle present. Also in attendance was Capt. Matt Johnson of the ICPD, and Public, Kevin Halstead. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Stratton, seconded by Roth, to adopt the consent calendar. · Minutes of the meeting on 10/29/03 · ICPD General Order 99-07 (Traffic) · ICPD General Order 99-10 (Domestic Violence) · ICPD General Order 99-11 (Arrests) · ICPD General Order 99-12 (Field Interviews And "Pat-Down" Searches) · ICPD SOG 03-05 (Off-Duty Employment) · ICPD Quarterly/Summary Report- IAIR/PCRB, 2003 · ICPD Use of Force Report- October 2003 Motion carried, 4/0, Barnhill absent. NEW BUSINESS Horton introduced new Board member Roger Williams. OLD BUSINESS None. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Kevin Halstead asked Board members what their current occupations were. BOARD INFORMATION Horton responded to an e-mail received through the Clerk's office regarding the origin of the Board. Turtle confirmed the procedure for future correspondence via e-mail, and the Chair would like to be contacted and will respond for the Board. STAFF INFORMATION Tuttle had been contacted by a complainant who had questioned the timeline of the review process. There was no previous procedure to notify complainants when the Chief or the Board had requested an extension. The Board reviewed a draft form letter. Motion by Stratton, seconded by Roth, to accept the draft form letter and procedure to notify complainants when an extension has been granted to the Chief or the Board. Motion carried, 4/0, Barnhill absent. EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by Barnhill, seconded by Stratton, to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1 )(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or PCRB-Page 2 October 29, 2003 to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11 ) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 5/0. Open session adjourned at 7:20 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Returned to open session at 7:30 P.M. Motion by Barnhill, seconded by Roth to investigate PCRB Complaint #03-08, #03-09 and #03-10 at the level 8-8-7(B)(1)(a), on the record with no additional investigation. Motion carried, 5/0. MEETING SCHEDULE · January 13, 2004, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room · February 10, 2004, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room · March 9, 2004, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room ADJOURNMENT Motion by Williams, seconded by Stratton, to adjourn. Motion carried, 5/0. Meeting adjourned at 7:34 P.M.