HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-01-16 Info PacketCity of Iowa City
MEMORANDU
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
January 5, 1996
City Council
City Manager
Material in Information Packet (Sent to Council Only)
Copy of letter from Mayor Novick to Bob Elliott regarding ad hoc committee
on economic development.
L~ttor f~om Jim Cq~9~ ~/,v
crC.~.y of l~tter'~m Kathy Gourley of the State Historical Society of Iowa ~ the City Manager's -~:¢~Py dated December 29, 1995.
Memoranda from the City Manager:
a. Bike Parking in the Central Business District
b. Correspondence from Bob Smith
Memorandum from the Director of Planning and Community Development regarding J~7
development on Coastal Mart Site.
Memorandum from the Economic Development Coordinator regarding "Opening A
Business in Iowa City" booklet.
Copy of letter from the Finance Director to the Convention and Visitors'
Bureau regarding hotel/motel tax monies.
Agenda and minutes of meeting of the Council on Disability Rights and
Education.
Building permit information for December 1995.
Letter from TCI of Eastern Iowa regarding visit by the C-SPAN School Bus.
Agendas for the January 2 and January 4, 1996, meetings of the Johnson
County Board of Supervisors.
Memorandum from the City Clerk regarding Council Work Session of
December 18, 1995.
Agenda for the 1/9/96 Informal meeting of the Board of Supervisors.
Memo from City Clerk re%arding revised schedule for first three months of 1996.
Hemo from City Mgr. regardinq M~scellaneous Budget things to think ~--7
about - FY97-99. I
Memo from City Hgr. regarding summary of major Council activity for 1995. c~
D' ~ ~'
Information distributed by Finance ~rector regarding the Budget.
Copy of article "Ann Innovative Aporoach Saves Hamilton's Bus Company""
Copy of Citizens' Summary 1997-99 Proposed Financial Plan.
Information regarding Transit, Parking, and Water fe~s distributed at
1/9 Budget worksession.
January 5, 1996
Bob Elliott
1108 Dover St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
Dear Bob:
The City of Iowa City is in the process of forming an ad hoc committee on economic development. On
behalf of the Iowa City City Council, I would like to invite you to serve on this committee. Before you
answer yes to serving, I would like to briefly outline the charge of the committee, the composition of the
committee, and the time frame for the committee's activities.
The recently adopted economic development plan, Economic Development Policies, Strategies, andActions
for the City of Iowa City, calls for the establishment of an ad hoc economic development committee. The
economic development plan outlines two major charges for the committee: 1 ) "designate targeted industries"
and 2) to "develop criteria to be used when the City considers granting or participating in the granting of
financial incentives to any particular firm in a targeted industry". In performing its task, the committee
should answer the following two questions: 1 ) When the City and local economic development organizations
encourage the expansion and attraction of business and industry, what specific types of businesses and
industries should we encourage in Iowa City? and 2) when the City consider~ financial assistance to a firm,
such as a grant, loan, or providing infrastructure, what characteristics and practices must the firm have to
obtain assistance? Once the committee answers these two questions, it will have accomplished its task.
The economic development plans states that the ad hoc committee should consist of a diverse group of
organizations, such as "industries, economic development organizations, labor, citizen and environmental
groups, the University of Iowa and others". The Council has plans to appoint thirteen individuals to the
committee from these various backgrounds.
Given that the committee has a specific charge, the committee should be able to achieve its objectives in
a six month time period as long as it meets at a minimum of once a month. The committee would begin its
task sometime in February and should complete it not later than July.
Thank you for considering serving on this committee. Please contact David Schoon at 356-5236 by January
10, 1996, regarding your decision to serve on the committee.
Sincerely,
Naomi J. Novick
Mayor
cc: City Council/
City Manager
Director of Planning and Community Development
December 29, 1995
Kathy Goudey, Archeologist
Community Programs Bureau
State Historical Society of Iowa
600 E. Locust
Des Moines, IA 50319-0290
CITY OF IOWA CITY
Dear Ms. Goudey:
In your letter of December 15, you have assumed as facts some statements that were made to your
office about the actions and intentions of Iowa City in regard to our efforts to construct a new water
plant for the City. Some of the statements made were blatantly false. I would like to present to you our
actions regarding this project and assure you the City of Iowa City has always had every intention to
comply with any State or Federal law.
The City is undertaking a significant project to provide a new water treatment plant for Iowa City which
will ensure clean, safe ddnking water and remove our treatment plant from the threat of flooding. To
this end, we have acquired two parcels of land, one north of 1-80 that consists of approximately 230
acres and another parcel south of 1-80 which consists of 115 acres. The 230 acre parcel was
purchased with local revenues. The 115 acres was purchased with CDBG Flood Hazard Mitigation
funds provided by the federal govemment after the 1993 flood event. The primary purpose for the
purchase of the 115 acres was to remove the land from potential development. A secondary purpose
to which we will put this land will be alluvial wells for our water supply. Contrary to the information
given you, no earth moving has been undertaken by the City on either of these sites. We have dug
test wells and done soil borings, as anyone would do before investing in hundreds of acres.
We have contacted your office, that is, the Office of Histodc Preservation. A call was made by Scott
Kugler, an Associate Planner, to Ralph Christian in the early part of November to determine whether
the water plant project required a Section 106 review. Mr. Christian informed us that such a review
was necessary and we proceeded to instruct our consultant, H.R. Green, to proceed with a cultural
resources survey. I know you are aware that we are proceeding with this survey, since you indicate
in your letter that you have been contacted by HR. Green representatives.
Likewise, we inquired of HUD officials on September 27, 1995, as to whether we would be required
to undertake an environmental impact statement for this project. They informed us that our
responsibility was to do an environmental assessment pursuant to Community Development Block
Grant regulations. We had undertaken such an assessment prior to acquiring the floodplain land in the
area south of 1-80. Although not required, we are pursuing an environmental assessment under
contract with RUST Environment and Infrastructure for both parcels of land. We are also pursuing a
404 permit from the Corps of Engineers. The Department of Natural Resources is fully aware of our
undertaking, since we have been in contact with them regarding this project for some time. We have
made every attempt to inform the appropriate agencies, and acquire the necessary permits for this
project. We would expect that as we pursue the necessary permits, any state or federal agency will
let us know if we have not complied with the law in any manner.
Ms. Gourley
December 29, 1995
Page 2
You apparently received your information from someone who has a number of lawsuits against Iowa
City because he believes his property is being wrongfully condemned for this public project and that
he is not being compensated enough for his ½ acre of land. He and the owners of the site north of
1-80 have operated a sand and gravel pit on the site for a number of years. They corded out an
estimated $50,000 worth of grading on this site and thereby altered the topography just prior to
completion of the condemnation proceedings. Your apparent source of information removed a heavy
equipment storage building from the site by excavating around and digging out the foundation, not
simply removing it. The previous owners of the site left the Butler residence to deteriorate with fallen
limbs on the roof, a hole in the roof, a collapsed porch and broken windows. Your sourco of
information obviously has more concern for the site after its disposal than when they had a vested
interest and the ability to protect it.
I find it regrettable that you did not feel it appropriate to place a phone call to me or another City official
for more accurate information, or at least our side of the story, before sending your letter of December
15 to me and to all the agencies you copied.
Iowa City is trying to provide a public water supply in an environmentally sensitive way and respond
to the Safe Drinking Water Act. We will comply with all necessary review and permits. We are
undertaking a 106 review, a separate architectural evaluation of the Butler house to stabilize and
protect it, an environmental assessment of both parcels of land, and pursuing all necessary permits.
We do not expect to begin any grading until spring 1996, after these reviews should be completed.
We plan to continue to pursue test wells and production well construction so that we can complete this
essential water project by the year 2002.
Since you are aware, through the contact of your office by our consultant H.R. Green Company, of our
intentions to complete 105 review, it is unclear to us what your expectations are of how.we are to
proceed. If anything stated in the paragraph above is not consistent with State or Federal law as you
understand it, please advise.
As you state in your letter, Iowa City does have a reputation for being concerned about our historic
properties. I believe the facts presented in this letter demonstrate our continued concern.
Sincerely,
S~'tephe' J. Atkin~ ~
City Manager
CC:
tpl-1
Don Klima, Advisory Council on Histodc Preservation
Patricia Ohlerking, Acting State Histodc Preservation Officer
Ralph Christian, Historic Preservation Officer
James Blanchar, Chief, Regulatory Functions Branch, Rock Island District Corps of Engineers
Dudley Hanson, Chief, Operations Branch, Rock Island District Corps of Engineers
Greg Bevirt, U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development
Dennis Grams, Regional Director, Region VII, Environmental Protection Agency
Lamj Wilson, Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources
Ralph Russell, Engineer, Howard R. Green Co.
Douglas Russell, Chairman, Histodc Preservation Commission, City of Iowa City
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
JanuaQ/3, 1996
To: City Council
From: City Manager
Re:
Bike Parking in the Central Business District
The Iowa City Central Business District Bicycle Parking Study, prepared by JCCOG in December,
1994, contained a number of recommendations to improve bike parking within the CBD. I felt it
was appropriate at this time to update the Council on the status of those recommendations.
New Bike Racks. All of the bike racks recommended in the study have been installed, except
a few which were delayed from the manufacturer. Those racks will be installed in the spring.
Upon completion of the installation of the new racks all of the old style, wheel bender racks will
be replaced. Additionally, the pilot program for bike racks on parking meters was implemented,
with ten of the racks being installed. Including the racks to be installed, a total of 320 bike
parking spaces are now available in the CBD, an increase of more than 100 spaces,
Bike parking counts taken during the summer and fall of 1995 showed a 41% increase in the
number of bikes parked in racks during peak periods. This increase is likely due to two factors.
First, people who previously were locking their bikes to sign posts, parking meters, etc. can now
park their bikes in racks. Second, the increased availability of convenient and secure bike parking
has encouraged people to ride their bikes downtown.
Parking Meter Bike Racks. The pilot program for bike racks on parking meters has proven
successful. Response to the racks has been positive. The racks have been heavily used and
no complaints from motorists regarding the racks have been received. Use of the racks is going
to be expanded to 16 additional parking meters along Clinton, Dubuque and Linn streets.
Problem Areas. Finding a location for a bike rack in the 200 block of Iowa Avenue continues
to be a problem. Staff is considering other options for this block, but no good location for a rack
has yet been identified.
To address the continuing problem of bikes being locked to the railing in front of the Holiday Inn,
a second bike rack will be installed in the 64-1a parking lot, adjacent to the Holiday Inn. The rack
will be located in an area where a utility pole interferes with a car parking space, but enough
room exists to install a bike rack.
Should you have any questions regarding bike parking please contact Charlie Denhey at 356-
5247.
cc: Jeff Davidson
Charlie Denney
13C3-1CD
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
January 5, 1996
City Council
City Manager
Attached Correspondence
I am attaching a copy of my reply to a letter which was on a recent
Council agenda from Bob Smith (letter unsigned). Yesterday my letter
was returned as being undeliverable. The address is the Oaknoll
Retirement Center and they have indicated they have no such resident.
Evidently the letter was written by someone who did not want to give
his name.
701 Oaknoll Drive
Iowa City 52240
Dear City Council members;
I saw in the newspaper that your staff wants to widen First
Avenue. Maybe it was a misprint, but the city planner said in
the paper that the traffic was 12,000 every day but capacity
was only 7,000 per day. This is confusing. This suggests that
5,000 never make it, but I know from driving it that it's not
that bad. And if the planner really believes this, than why only
widen to 3 lanes? If volume is almost double the capacity,
than you need to double the lanes. I think you need to find out
if your planner really knows what he's talking about or not.
Sincerely,
Bob Smith
December 22, 1995
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
Bob Smith
701 Oaknoll Drive
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Mr. Smith:
I am taking the liberty of responding to your recent letter to the City Council concerning traffic
on First near the intersection of Muscatine. I would agree that the issue of traffic volume and
capacity is somewhat confusing. When we assign a traffic-carrying capacity to a street, we do
so at a relatively free-flow low-delay condition. The street is physically able to carry more traffic
than the .=ssigned capacity, but it does so with greater delay and inconvenience to the motorist.
This is a situation we currently find ourselves in on First Avenue, and may find ourselves in
again at some point in the futura following a proposed reconstruction project.
When the City Council makes a decision on reconstructing a street, our planning staff provides
them with as much information as possible. This includes more factors than just moving traffic.
Preservation of existing trees and the sensitivity of residents living along the street are two
other important factors. You may recall recent editorial comments concerning this project,
whereby a neighborhood resident expressed his opinion. I believe the City Council has made
what they consider to be the best decision on the reconstruction of First Avenue, considering
the divergent interests. Also, please keep in mind when a news reporter preparas his/her story
it encapsulates into a very few words the discussions that occurred. It is, of course, the
opinion/expressions of what is interesting in the eyes and ears of the reporter, not the staff
member.
Sincerely,
Steph J. Atki~
City Manager
iccogtp~m~'~ ~
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 5, 1996
· o; oouns,,
From: Karln Franklin, Director, Planning & Community Develop
Re: Development on Coastal Mart Site
As you may have observed, redevelopment of the Coastal Mart site is beginning. Jim Clark is in
the process of purchasing the site and at this time is removing the environmental contamination
on the site. The proposed project is for a mixed-use building with the ground floor devoted to
commercial uses and three floors above to apar~.ents, These are permitted uses within the CB-5
zone. The project is subject to the design provisions of the CB-5 zone, with review and approval
of the design prior to construction. We have been working with Mr. Clark and his architect to
finalize the design plans and complete the site plan review process. It is anticipated that
construction on the site will begin this spring.
If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact me at 356-5232 or Doug
Boothroy at 356-5121.
cc: Doug Boothroy
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
January 5, 1996
To:
From:
City Council
David Schoon~-'-~
Re:
"Opening a Business in Iowa City" Booklet
Attached you will find a copy of the booklet "Opening a Business in Iowa City". The primary
purpose of the booklet is to briefly introduce a business to applicable city services and
regulations and to provide a contact for finding out more information about these services and
regulations.
The booklet is available at the Department of Planning and Community Development, at the
Department of Housing and Inspection Services, and in the Civic Center Lobby display case.
If you need additional copies, please call me at 356-5236. In addition, I plan to update the
booklet periodically and would welcome your suggestions or comments.
Attachment
MICROFILMED
BY
CRES-
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES
G- 84
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
January 5, 1996
To: City Council
From: David Schoon~__~'---~
Re:
"Opening a Business in Iowa City" Booklet
Attached you will find a copy of the booklet "Opening a Business in Iowa City". The primary
purpose of the booklet is to briefly introduce a business to applicable city services and
regulations and to provide a contact for finding out more information about these services and
regulations.
The booklet is available at the Department of Planning and Community Development, at the
Department of Housing and Inspection Services, and in the Civic Center Lobby display case.
If you need additional copies, please call me at 356-5236. In addition, I plan to update the
booklet periodically and would welcome your suggestions or comments.
Attachment
A Guide to
Opening a Busi-ness
In
Iowa'City
CITY OF IOWA CITY
December 1995
First Edition ,~,...".
Prepared by:
Economic Development Division
Department of Planning & Commur~ity
Development
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
319-356-5236
Table of Contents
3
Introduction ........................................
Places to Go for Assistance
Economic Development Division, City of Iowa City ..... 5
Iowa City Area Development Group, Inc ........ ' ......6
Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce ............... 7
Small Business Development Center ................ 8
Institute for Social and Economic Development ....... 9
SCORE ........................................ 10
Licenses and Pe~i-~ite
Business License ...........................
Home Occupation ..........................
Alcoholic Beverages ........................
Cigarettez ................................
Taxicab, Pedicah, or Horse-Drawn Vehicle ......
Restaurant, Food, or Vending Machine ........
Other Health Depart~nent Permit .............
Hotels and Motels, Licensed Daycare Centers,
Swimming Pools
.. 11
.. 11
.. 11
.. 12
.. 12
.. 12
Utilities
Water/Sewer ................................... 15
Sanitation/Recycling ............................. 16
Gas and Electricity .............................. 16
Telephone ..................................... ' 17.
Development Process and Permits
Zoning ........................................ 19
Rezoning ...................................... ' 19
Spedal Exceptions .............................. 20
Site Plan Approval .............................. 20
Building Permits ................................ 21
Pl~r~bing, Electrical or Heating Permits ............ 21
Parking Facility Impact Fees ...................... 21
Sign Pe~-~u~ts ................................... 22
Certificate of Occupancy .......................... 22
Construction in the Rights-of-Way ................. 23
Easement For Use of the Sidewalk/Public Right-of-Way 23
Construction Trades Licenzes ..................... 23
T~.xes
Sales and Use Taxes ............................. 25
HoteUMotel Tax ................................ 25
Property Tax ................................... 26
Urban Planning Division
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-5240
Rezoning ...................................... 19
Special exceptions ............................... 20
Water Division (mailing address)
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington St
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-5160
Water service for new buildings ................... 15
Temporary water for construction .................. 15
Wastewater Division
City of Iowa City
1000 S. Clinton St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-5170
(319) 356-5177 (sewer emergency calls)
Introduction
Welcome to the Iowa City business community!
The City of Iowa City welcomes your interest in opening a
business in Iowa City. You are joining over 2200 other businesses
in Iowa City and Johnson County that keep the local economy
vibrant. Whether it is the University of Iowa employing over
22,000, or a home-based business employing one, all businesses
provide citizens an opportunity to enhance their economic well-
being.
The purpose of this booklet is to start you in the right direction to
obtain the basic infor~r~ation you need to establish a business in
Iowa City. Please refer to the section "Places to Go for Assis-
tance". This booklet also explains the different requirements for
operating a business in Iowa City and describes different re-
sources available to individuals and existing businesses. This
booklet is a guide and provided as a public service. Though it does
not include a complete listing of all information relevant to
operating a business, it provides s good starting point.
Sewer leaks .................................... 15
While every effort has been made to present accurate information,
this booklet should not be misconstrued as a legal interpretation
of laws. The City of Iowa City expressly disclaims any liability for
errore or omissions contained herein.
3
4
Public Works Department
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-5140
Construction in the rights-of-way .................. 23
Easement for use of sidewalk/public right-of-way ..... 23
Sanitation Department (mailing address)
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington
Iowa City, IA
(319) 356-5180
Hazardous material regulations ................... 16
Landfill material bans ........................... 16
Special waste authorization ....................... 16
Treasury Division
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-5066
Water and sewer se~ice ......................... 15
Water and sewer billing questions ................. 15
29
Plumbing, electrical, or heating permits ............. 21
Sign pe~i¥~its ................................... 22
Site plan approval ............................... 20
Zoning ........................................ 19
Iowa City Assessor's Office
918 S. Dubuque
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 355-6066
Propertytaxes .................................. 26
Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance
Taxpayer Services
P.O. Box 10457
Des Moines, IA 50306-1457
1-800-367-3388 (from outside the Des Moines metropolitan area,
or from the Omaha or Moline-Rock Island calling areas)
(515) 281-3114 (from the Des Moines metropolitan area or from
out of state)
Sales and use taxes .............................. 25
Hotel/Motel tax ................................. 25
Johnson County Department of Public Health
1105 Gilbert Ct.
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-6040
Hotel and motel inspections ....................... 12
Licensed daycare center inspections ................ 12
Restaurant, food, and vending machine inspections ... 12
Swimming pool inspections ....................... 13
,,conomic Development Division
Iowa City Department of Planning and Community Development
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-5236
The Economic Development Division is the municipal office to
contact when an individual or business requires assistance from
the City of Iowa City regarding business activities. As a division
of the Iowa City Department of Planning and Community
Development, the Division has access to information and individu-
als throughout the city organization and will assist individuals
involved in pursuing business endeavors.
In addition to providing access to information throughout the city
organization, the Economic Development Division has available
a database o£economic and demographic information for the area.
The Division can also direct individuals to other sources of
information. The division prepares various regional analyses,
such as market area analyses and population projections.
Working in cooperation with other city departments and the Iowa
City Area Development Group, the Economic Development
Division assists developers and prospective companies with
specific commercial, office, and industrial development projects.
This assistance ranges from helping businesses understand local
regulations to dete~-~ining available local public financial assis-
tance for a specific firm. The Economic Development Division acts
as a municipal resource for the business community.
Iowa City Area Develop nent
Group, Inc.
325 E. Washington St., Suite 100
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 354-3939
The Iowa City Area Development Group, Inc. (ICAD) is a non-
profit organization whose mission is to position the re,on as a
quality place to work and live, and as one receptive to technolo-
gies of the future. The ICAD Group works as a confidential
advocate for expanding businesses and new industries.
The ICAD Group provides site location assistance in many forms
such as providing an inventory of available industrial, commer-
cial, and retail property, and assisting businesses with site visits
tc the area. ICAD also provides demographics and area informa-
tion to assist businesses with their site location decisions.
The ICAD Group serves as a liaison with the Iowa Depart~uent of
Economic Development, the University of Iowa, and other entities
by making businesses aware of the programs and services that are
available. ICAD often helps businesses pursue state and local
financial assistance. The ICAD Group is a resource for the
business community through its advocacy for expanding busi-
nesses and new industries, its site location assistance, and its goal
to position the region as a quality place to live and work.
Index of Subjects by Agency
Building Inspection Division
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-5126
Sewer service for new buildings ................... 15
City Clerk's Office
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-5040
Alcoholic beverage permits ....................... 11
Cigarette permits ............................... 12
Dancing permits ................................ 11
Outdoor service area permits ...................... 11
Sidewalk cafes .................................. 11
Taxicab, pedicab, horse-drawn vehicle permits ....... 12
Department of Housing & Inspection Services
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 356-5120
Building permits ................................ 21
Certificate of occupancy .......................... 22
Construction Trades Licenses ..................... 23
Home occupation ................................
Parking facility impact fees ....................... 21
also subject to the state sales tax. No additional tax permit, other
than the state sales tax permit, is required for hotels and motels.
Property Tax
In Iowa City, a property tax is levied on all real property and one
type of personal property, computers. Property taxes are payable
in two equal installments, the first due in September, the second
in March of the next year for taxes assessed the previous fiscal
year. Several entities receive the tax, including the School
District, the City, and the County. CONTACT: Iowa City
Assessor, (319) 356-6066.
Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce
325 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 337-9637
Since it was founded in 1921, the Iowa City Area Chamber of
Commerce has been an effective volunteer, non-profit organiza-
tion whose many committees and staff members provide support
to the business community. The Chamber's ultimate goal is to
enhance the business climate and the quality of life in Johnson
County.
For members, the Area Chamber provides networking, profes-
sional development, educat/on and advocacy. Programs designed
to provide exposure and promotion for member businesses include
the annual Walk of the Stars Business Fair and monthly Business
PMs, which are held at member businesses. Free educational
services include Brown Bag Luncheon Seminars, human resource
seminars, a human resources handbook, an annual membership
directory and a monthly 12-page newsletter, Reflections.
In addition, the Area Chamber serves as a resource fbr newcomers
to the community. Often called upon to provide business refer-
rals, the Area Chamber provides the names of member businesses
to over 5,000 individuals annually. The Area Chamber also
provides opportunities for non-members. Fee-based professional
development opportunities include the annual Community
Leadership Program designed to develop the leadership potential
existing in the communities of Johnson County; and "Focus
Forward" conferences, created primarily for women.
The Area Chamber also studies local, regional, state and national
economic development and legislative issues, form-~ position
statements and lobbies elected or appointed officials to encourage
the enactment of beneficial policies. The Iowa City Area Churn-
bar of Commerce is a resource for the business community
through its networking, professional development, and educa~
t/onal opportunities.
Small Business Development Center
The University of Iowa
S160 Pappajohn Business Administration Building
Iowa City, IA 52242
(319) 335-3742
The University of Iowa Small Business Development Center
(SBDC) is a non-profit organization founded in 1981. The SBDC
provides free and confidential business management assistance
to owners of small for-profit businesses and individuals interested
in starting their own small business. Existing small business
owners typically go to the SBDC with specific business questions,
while individuals starting a new business have more general
questions.
The Small Business Development Center can assist with develop-
ing a business plan, finding financing, determining the target
market, where to get necessary information about state and
federal taxes, registering the business name, licensing require-
ments, and much more.
Assistance is also provided to individuals who have found a
business they want to purchase and individuals looking at
franchise opportunit/es. The SBDC has the necessary tools to
help individuals decide if this is the right business for them. The
Small Business Development Center is a resource for the business
community through its var/ous forms of business management
assistance.
T~[xes
Sales and Use Taxes
Anyone making a retail sale in Iowa must obtain a retail sales tax
permit from the Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance. The
permit is available at no charge. Application forms may be
obtained from Taxpayer Services. All sales of tangible personal
property in Iowa - other than for processing or resale ~ are subject
to the sales tax unless specifically exempted by state law. Sales
of services are exempt from Iowa sales tax unless specifically
taxed by state law. Further detail is available in an information
booklet titled ]Iowa Sales and Use Tax available from Taxpayer
Services at the address or number below. Iowa City does not have
a local option sales tax.
A use tax is imposed when property purchased out of state for use
in Iowa is brought into Iowa. Every out-of-state retailer who
maintains a place of business in Iowa and/or who makes tangible
personal property or taxable services must obtain a ret~iler's use
tax certificate. The certificate is free of charge.
CONTACT: Iowa Department of Revenue and Finance, Taxpayer
Services, P.O. Box 10457, Des Moines, Iowa 50306-0457. If calling
from Iowa City, elsewhere in Iowa, or from the Omaha or Moline-
Rock Island calling areas, call toll free: 1-800-367-3388. If calling
from the Des Moines metropolitan area or from out of state, call
(515) 281-3114.
HotelfiVlot l Tax
Iowa City has adopted a local option hotel/motel tax. The tax is
assessed on the renting of sleeping rooms in any hotel, motel, inn,
bed and breakfast, public lodging house, rooming house, tourist
court, mobile home or in any place where sleeping accommoda-
tions are furnished to transient guests for rent. These rentals are
25
24
Institute for Social and Economic
Development
1901 Broadway St., Suite 313
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 338-2331
Founded in 1987, the Institute for Social and Economic Deve!op-
ment (ISED) is a private, non-profit organization that provides
training and technical assistance in Iowa and western Illinois.
ISED focuses on micro-level businesses (5 or fewer employees
including the owner) where capital needs are less that $25,000
(and usually less than $10,000). Special emphasis is placed on
individuals and communities with limited access to economic
resources. Since 1988, ISED has helped clients start or expand
over 475 businesses and 70% are still operating.
ISED offers a 13-week training program that focuses on assisting
participants with analyzing the feasibility of the business,'
preparing a business plan and a~-~essing financing. ISED's
business trainers and consultants work with prospective entre-
preneurs from the birth of the business idea to the day of the
business start-up.
Participants who complete business phius receive assistance in
securing financing. The three primary sources of financing are:
commercial banks, the Iowa Department of Economic Develop-
mentq and ISED's loan guarantee fund. ISED clients have
obtained over $2.2 million in financing - more than half of that
from commercial banks.
ISED's relationship with clients does not end atter business start-
up. Free consultation, technical assistance and workshops are
offered to microenterprlse owners across the State of Iowa.
SCORE
210 Federal Building
P.O. Box 1853
400 S. Clinton St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 338-1662
SCORE is the Service Corps of Retired Executives and is spon-
sored by the Small Business Administration (SBA). It is a non-
profit association pre-~iding free business counseling to anyone
wanting to start a new business or anyone presently operating a
business.
SCORE is a nationwide organization with 13,000 retired and
active executives in 400 chapters. The Iowa City Chapter has 15
members, who are ready to offer free confidential counseling, at
any time. In addition, SCORE periodically conducts seminars and
workshops that cover msjor considerations for running a business.
Contact the SCORE office to find out when and where these
workshops are held. The Service Corps of Retired Executives is
a resource for the business community through its counseling,
seminars, and workshops.
10
Construction in the Rights-of-Way
Any construction activity that requ/res construction equipment to
occupy the public right-of-way should be coordinated with the
Public Works Department. Excavation within the public rights~of-
way requires an excavation pe~-niit from the Public Works
Depar~u,ent. A refundable deposit is required to ensure testara-
tion is completed. CONTACT: Department of Public Works, (319)
3~6-5140.
Easement For Use of the Sidewalk/Public Right-
of-Way
In order to better comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), the City Council may grant an easement for the use of
sidewalks or public right-of-way to make local businesses physi-
cally accessible to persons with disabilities if physical limitations
prevent accommodations on private property. The Department of
Housing & Inspection Services should be contacted about specifi-
cations for accessibility. If an easement for use of the sidewalk or
public right-of-way is the preferred option, a written request with
construction drawings must be submitted to the Department of
Public Works for City Staff review and City Council approval.
CONTACTS: Housing & Inspection Services, (319) 356-5120;
Department of Public Works, (319) 356-5140.
Construction Trades Licenses
In Iowa City, a license is required to work as a pl~mbing contrac-
tor, electrical contractor, sewer and water installer, or sign
erector. Licenses are issued through the Housing & Inspection
Services Department. An application, an application fee, and
yearly renewal fee are required for all of the above licenses. In
addition, a test and test fee are required for plumbing contractors,
electrical contractors, and sewer and water installers. CONTACT:
Housing & Inspection Services, (319) 356-5120.
23
which may be paid in three installments, with the first install-
ment due before the certii~cate of occupancy is issued. CONTACT:
Housing & Inspection Services, (319) 356-51~.0.
Sign Permits
Most commercial and industrial signs visible to the public from a
street or public right of way require a sign permit. A sign permit
is required for any new signs or any change in the face or struc-
ture o£an existing sign. Signs and banners for special events also
require a sign permit. The use of a special events sign or banner
is restricted to no more than four times a year and for a single
duration of no more than 30 days. Certain types of signs, such as
roof signs and swinging signs, are prohibited. A few types of signs
do not require a pe~-~r, lt, although the size and placement of the
sign may be regulated. CONTACT: Housing & Inspection
Services, (319) 356-5120.
Certificate of Occupancy
A certificate of occupancy is required for any new structure or for
any change in use. The certificate of occupancy certifies that at
the time of issuance, the structure was in compliance with various
ordinances regulating building construction or use and the City
Zoning Ordinance. The cert/ficate of occupancy is the conclusion
of the building permit process. Sometimes no building permit has
been required, though a certificate of occupancy is still necessary
to occupy the building. Temporary certificates of occupancy are
issued for an additional fee ifa project is not completed but is safe
to occupy. CONTACT: Housing & Inspection Services, (319) 356-
5120.
Licenses ond Permits
Business License
Iowa City does not require a general business license.
However, some businesses are required to obtain a license or
permit to operate. The following is a brief description of permits
and licenses that are required.
Home Occupation
Iowa City does not require a license or permit for operating a
business in the home, however home occupations are regulated.
The regulations do not specify the exact type of occupation or
pro~ession permitted except to say that they must be accessory
(incidental) to the residential use of the premises and must be
carried on by a person residing on the premises. To ensure that
the business is a legal use, it is recommended that a written
proposal be submitted to the Housing & Inspection Services
Department for review and approval. CONTACT: Housing &
Inspection Services, (319) 356-5120.
Alcoholic Beverages
For businesses that involve the sale of alcoholic beverages, a
Liquor License or Beer Permi~ is necessary. A Dancing Permit is
required for dancing in connection with the sale of alcohol.
Selling alcohol outdoors on private property requires an Outdoor
Service Area permit; selling alcohol, food, or beverages on City
owned property requires approval as a Sidewalk Care. Applica-
tions for all of the above are obtained from the City Clerk's office.
Along with the application and application fee, a number of
requirements must be met before new or renewal licenses and
permits are issued. CONTACT: City Clerk's Office, (319) 356-
5040.
Cigarettes
A Cigarette Permit is required to sell, dispense or disperse
cigarettes. This includes cigarettes sold in a vending machine.
Along with the application and application fee, the business owner
has certain obligations to fulfill under Iowa City's Cigarette
Education Ordinance. CONTACT: City Clerk's Office, (319) 356-
5040.
Taxicab, Pedicab~ or Horse-Drawn Vehicle
A permit is required to own and/or operate a tozcicab, pedicab, or
horse-drawn vehicle. A number of requirements must be met
before the application and application fee can be processed by the
City Clerk. CONTACT: City Clerkfs Office, (319) 356-5040.
P~es*auront~ Food, or Vending Machine
A permit is required for any kind of food related business,
including grocery stores, restaurants, food carts, and vending
machines. Building and equipment plans must be approved by
the Johnson County Department of Public Health before con-
struction or remodelling occurs. When a change in ownership
occurs, a new permit must be obtained because the permits are
nontransferable. After a permit has been issued, the County
Health Department conducts regular inspections. An annual
inspection fee is required to cover the cost of the regular inspec-
tions. CONTACT: Johnson County Department of Public Health,
(319) 356-6040.
Other Health Department Pet-mits
The Johnson County Department of Public Health regularly
inspects businesses that affect public health. Construction and
remodelling plans for hotels and motels, and licensed daycare
centers must be approved by the County Health Department.
12
not required for minor site plan reviews, which are required for all
developments that do not require a major site plan. The site plan
review process for a minor site plan usually takes one to two
weeks. The City has an obligation to approve or deny a major site
plan within 21 working days, although the average review process
takes less time. CONTACT: Housing & Inspection Services, (319)
356-5120.
Building Permits
Most physical changes to cornmercial and industrial development
require a building permit. A building permit is required for any
new construction, any change in use, and most remodelling. A
demolition permit is required for the demolition of part or all of a
structure. A permit fee is collected at the issuance of the permit.
CONTACT: Housing & Inspection Services, (319) 356-5120.
Plumbing, Electrical or Heating Pet-mits
Most plumbing, electrical, or mechanical changes to a building
require a permit. A permit fee is collected at the issuance of the
pe:¥~-~it. CONTACT: Housing & Inspection Services, (319) 356-
5120.
Parking Facility Impact Fees
A parking facility impact fee, which deals with off-street parking
requirements, is required for development in most of the Near
Southside Neighborhood. The Near Southside is bound by
Burlington Street to the north, Madison Street to the west,
Gilbert Street to the east, and the Iowa Interstate Railway main
line to the south. The revenues from the impact fee are used by
the City to provide parking facilities in the Near Southside. A
formula is used to determine the amount of required off-street
parking and the amount of required parking impact fee. The
Department of Housing and Inspection Services collects the fee,
21
approval. The rezoning process takes approximately 12 weeks
from the time the application is filed to the final decision of the
City Council. CONTACT: Urban Planning Division, (319) 356-
5240.
Special Exceptions
Each zoning district contains a list of per,~itted and provisional
land uses that may be established on a preperty if the zoning
requirements, such as building height and parking spaces, are
adhered to. Each zoning district also contains a list of special
exceptions. Special exceptions are not permitted by right in a
zone, but after review by the Board of Adjustment may be
allowed, if there are no negative impacts on nearby proper~es, or
if any negative impacts may be ameliorated. ][£a special exception
is needed, the Urban Planning Division should be contacted for a
consultation. An application and application fee must be filed
with the City Clerk. After the application is submitted, the staff
reviews and makes a recommendation to the Board of Adjust-
ment. The Board of Adjustment holds a public meeting on the
item, then approves, approves with conditions, or denies the
special exception. The process takes approximately one month
from the time the application is filed to the final decision of the
Board of Adjustment. CONTACT: Urban Planning Division,
(319) 356-5240.
Site Plan Approval
The Department of Housing & Inspection Services should be
contacted to obtain current information concerning submission
and review of required site plans. Site plans are required for
construction of new buildings, remodelling, or for any change in
use of an existing building. A fee is required for review of major
site plans, which are required for nonresidential developments
over I0,000 square feet of floor area. The fee is collected when the
site plan is submitted to Housing & Inspection Services. A fee is
Hotels and motels are inspected regularly and licensed daycare
centers are inspected annually. An annual inspection fee is
required for both to cover the cost of the inspections. Swimming
pools inspected by the County Health Department include: public
swimming POols and spas; hotel/motel pools and spas; public
schools; and community facilities. An annual inspection fee is
required. Approval for swimming pool construction and remodel-
ling is through the State Department of Public Health. CON-
TACT: Johnson County Department of Public Health, (319) 356-
6040.
20 13
14
Development Process anal Permits
Zoning
The City of Iowa City has designated various areas thmugh~ut
the city as appropriate for industrial and commercial uses. When
looking for a business location, it is suggested that these areas be
considered first. The Department of Housing & Inspection
Services supplies general info,-~,-,ation on zoning and allowable
land uses in various zoning categories. Most information is
available over the phone or in person for no fee. Information on
rezoning property is provided below under "Rezoning". CON-'
TACT: Housing & Inspect/on Services, (319) 356-5120.
Rezoning ...
In the event a business location is des/red on property that i~ not
suitably zoned, the City may in some cases grant a rezoning. The
City's dec/sion to grant a rezoning will be based on the compre-
hensive plan, compatibility of the proposed zone with nearby
zones, the adequacy ofc/ty infrastructure and services in the area,
and public input. To discuss a potential rezoning, contact the
Urban Planning Division of the Plann/ng and Comm~_~_nlty
Development Department.
After consulting with staff, an application and fee must be filed
with the City Clerk. After the application is filed, the staff
prepares a report evaluating the proposed rezoning and makes a
recommendat/on to the Planning and Zoning Commission to
approve or deny the application. The Planning and Zoning
Commission has two public discussions at which cii/zens and
property owners have the opportunity to comment on the proposed
rezoning. The Planning and Zoning Commission then makes a
recommendation to the City Council. The City Council holds a
public hearing on the issue. If the Council decides to approve a
rezoning, three readings of the ordinance are required before final
19
18
Utilities
Water/Sewer
The City of Iowa City supplies water and sewer service to
businesses within the city limits. To order new service for an
existing line, contact the City Treasury Division. A service card
and deposit are required before service can begin. CONTACT:
City Treasury Division, (319) 356-5066.
When new water lines and sewer lines are involved, the contractor
generally orders water and sewer service. Applications are
required for water and sewer connect/ons. CONTACTS: Water
Division, (319) 356-5160, for informat/on on water connections;
Building Inspection Division, (319) 356-5126, for information on
sewer connections.
Water leaks should be reported to the Water Division Service
Department. Water Div/sion personnel determine the location of
the water leak. The property owner is responsible for the repair
costs for water leaks from the water main to and within the
property structure. For billing questions concerning excessive
water usage due to leaks, contact the Treasury Division. CON-
TACTS: Water Division Service Depa~t~ent, (319) 356-5166;
Treasury Division, (319) 356-5066.
When temporary water is needed for construction, new st~ucturss
will be given a utility account and will be billed "on construction"
fees as soon as the tap is made on the water main. CONTACT:
Water Division, (319) 356-5160.
Contact the Wastewater Division, to report sewer leaks, bad
smells, backed-up or plugged sewer lines, or any other type of
complaint. The property owner is responsible for repairs and
maintenance costs from the City main to and including the
building. Billing questions are referred to the Treasury Division.
15
CONTACTS:
Division, (319) 356-5066.
Wastewater Division, (319) 356-5177; Treasury small portion of southern Iowa City. The telephone number for
Eastern Iowa Light and Power is (319) 732-2211.
Sanitation/Recycling
Telephone
Private waste haulers provide sanitation and recycling services to
businesses in Iowa City. Businesses should contract with a
private hauler for sanitation services. Waste haulers serving
Iowa City include:
U.S. West Communications is the local phone company for Iowa
City. To order phone service for your business or to install service
at a new address, call 1-800-603-6000.
*Halstead's Hauling (319) 354-8447
,Hawkeye Waste Systems (319) 351-5932
*Iowa City Clean-up and Transfer Inc. (319) 358-9000
-Jim's Refuse Service Corp. (319) 351-7774
-Johnson Co. Refuse (319) 628-4498
~K & D Hauling (319) 626-6894
'N & N Sanitation (319) 354-2535
For recycling services, refer to the sanitation services above, or
contact:
· City Carton Co. Inc. (319) 351-2848
· Johnson Co. Recycling Center (319) 338-5620
Contact the Iowa City Sanitation Department for info~-~,ation
regard/rig hazardous material regulations, landfill material bans,
and special waste authorization. CONTACT: Sanitation Depart-
ment, (319) 356-5180.
Gas and Electricity
MidAmerican Energy Company serves most of the Iowa City area
for gas and electricity. Contact MidAmerican at (319) 338-9781
fo~ information on hook-up for either a new building or existing
address. Eastern Iowa Light and Power Cooperative serves a
16
17
Janua~ 4,1996
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
Wendy Ford
Convention and Visitors' Bureau
408 First Avenue
Coralville, IA 52241
Dear Wendy:
The City of Iowa City has budgeted $5,000 for the Iowa Arts Festival and $5,000 for the Jazz
Festival in each Fiscal Year (FY) 1997, 1998 and 1999. These payments are to be deducted
directly from the hotel/motel tax monies that are paid to th~ Conventi.on and Visitors' Bureau
(CVB). This is similar to what is occurring in the FY1996 budget. The deductions to the CVB
will be spread over the twelve months. The hotel/motel quarterly payment of 25% to the CVB
will be reduced by $2,500 each time a hotel/motel tax payment is made.
Please call me at 356-5052 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
DonaldJ~~.Yu a.
Finance Directol ~
City Ma age
City Clerk
actl.3 dy
Council on Disability Rights and Education
5.
6.
7.
8.
MEETING AGENDA
JANUARY 9, 1996 - 10:00 A.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CIVIC CENTER - 410 E. WASHINGTON ST.
IOWA CITY, IA 52240
Introductions
Approval of Minutes
Subcommittees/Reports
a. Housing
b. Transportation
c. Public Accommodations
d. Public Relations
Other Reports
Select Nominating Committee for Board of Directors
Other Business
Next Meeting Agenda - February 6, 1996
Adjourn
CC:
Iowa City City Council
Johnson County Board of Supervisors
mgrtasst~,cdm 1-9.egd
CDRE MISSION STATEMENT
The Council on Disability Rights and Education (CDRE) is a non-profit educational
organization dedicated to accessibility, full participation and inclusion of persons with
disabilities.
Our mission is to act as a comprehensive, community-wide educational resource for
promoting disability awareness, to provide technical assistance and to encourage
compliance with disability civil rights legislation.
Our goal is the attainment of community-wide accessibility and the full participation of
persons with disabilities to all facilities and services within our community.
Council on Disability Rights and Education
Board of Directors Election
Proposed Timeline
12/$195
Annual Meeting & Board Election: April 2, '1996
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 3
Name a Nominating Committee (90 days prior)
Board Nominees presented to CDRE membership (30 days prior)
Additional names may be submitted (14 days after nominees are presnted)
Ballots Mailed to Membership (14 days prior to the election)
Step 4 Election
Mamh 3
March 17
March 21
April 2
Council
on Disability Rights
MEETING MINUTES
DECEMBER 5, 1995
and Education
Present:
Mace Braverman, Linde Carter, Loren Schmidtt, Marjorie Hayden Strait, Orville
Townsend, Kevin Burt, Keith Ruff, Len Sandler, Doris Jean Sheriff, Ann Shires,
Anne Rawland, Dale Helling
Those present introduced themselves, Minutes of the November 7, 1995, meeting were
approved as written,
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS:
Housing: Kevin Burr indicated that the committee had conducted a few more surveys
and that a more complete report will be available next month,
be
Transportation: Linda Carter reported that this committee will now meet on the
second Wednesday of each month. At its most recent meeting, several issues were
discussed, including bus stops near the North Dodge Street Hy-Vee and at Cub Foods,
both of which may be hazardous for individuals who use the lift equipment. She
indicated that bus drivers will generally stop in a safer place if necessary. It was
further related that the City will be making a decision soon regarding budget cuts and
how they will affect the mass transit service, noting that both the Coralville Transit
system and SEATS run until midnight in Coralville. Iowa City Transit is putting its
schedule on tape. A question was raised regarding situations where there are two
persons who use wheelchairs on a bus and a third person using a wheelchair wishes
to board. Noting that the current practice is that the third individual will have to wait
for service, a local policy will be decided on or about December 22. It was additionally
noted that the City of Iowa City will be using both local taxicab operators during the
winter months. The transportation committee will not meet in December. Marjorie
Hayden Strait indicated that her observation is that all bus drivers do not make the
same accommodations for individuals who use wheelchairs. She questioned how the
CDRE might convey this information to the Transit Department and request that
accommodations be made consistently. Mace Braverman suggested that the
transportation committee draft a letter to the Transit Director with a copy to the
Mayor. A motion was passed in this regard.
Public Accommodations: Kevin Burt indicated that audits are continuing but that not
too many would be completed during December. The committee will be finalizing a
draft of the brochure listing businesses and addresses, as well as contact persons,
indicating the level of accessibility for each business and a rating key to explain each
rating level. Mace Braverman questioned whether or not any auditing or inspection of
new construction was being done. He suggested that this group might have some role
in assisting the City Department of Housing and Inspection Services in reviewing new
development plans for accessibilitv and making recommendations regarding the same.
There was discussion on how this might be accomplished. Keith Ruff indicated that
any effort made should take a positive approach. It was suggested that a memoran-
dum from the public accommodations committee to the HIS Department advise of our
availability and willingness to provide technical assistance. Len Sandler suggested that
perhaps by the time someone applies for a building permit, it is too late to have
meaningful input in that their plans are sometimes in final or near final form. He
suggested that we should perhaps focus on the construction industry, specifically
2
builders and architects, who are involved at an earlier stage. He suggested this might
be accomplished through the Chamber of Commerce, wider distribution of brochures,
etc.
d. Public Relations: This committee has not met since the last CDRE meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Mace Braverman passed out a proposed timeline for completing the process of election of a
Board of Directors. All agreed that the timeline appeared appropriate and was acceptable with
the exception of changing the January meeting from the 2nd to the 9th.
Len Sandler suggested that this organization might wish to pursue the use of student legal
interns to work with subcommittees regarding policies, lobbying efforts, etc. Noting that
some entities find it difficult to respond when several organizations or advocacy groups are
making different and even conflicting requests for public and private services, there is a need.
to have a more unified approach. Use of interns as suggested might help to accomplish this.
There was a general observation that the CDRE should perhaps seek a more diversified
representation from the communiW as we seek to get more people involved. It was
suggested that this needed to be a major focus of the public relations committee in broadening
our outreach efforts.
The next meeting will be on January 9, 1996, rather than on Januar~ 2.
Meeting adjourned at 11:15 a.m.
Council on Disability Rights and Education
BYLAWS OF THE COUNCIL ON DISABILITY RIGHTS AND EDUCATION
ARTICLE I - GENERAL
Section 1. Name
This organization shall be known asthe Council on Disability Rights and Education, hereinafter
referred to as the CDRE.
Section 2. Purposes
The CDRE is organized as an educational and advocacy council for the purposes of:
a. Educating individuals and entities about the rights of persons with disabilities.
b. Encouraging and assisting businesses to be accessible to and usable by persons with
disabilities.
c. Encouraging compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
d. Making recommendations to governmental and non-governmental agencies.
ARTICLE II - MEMBERSHIP
Section 1. Eligibilitv
Any persons interested in the activities of the CDRE are considered at-large members.
All persons serving on a committee (Article V, Section 1 ) are considered voting members of
the CDRE. The voting membership must include persons with disabilities; however, member-
ship shall not be limited to persons with disabilities. Also, the "Charter Membership" of the
CDRE shall be considered voting members.
For the purpose of implementation of these By-laws, the "Charter Membership" of the CDRE
shall be the "Current Membership" as listed on the attached list of charter members.
Section 2. Election
Application for at-large membership shall be made by attending a meeting and expressing an
interest in the CDRE.
Application for voting membership shall be made by attending a meeting and volunteering to
serve on a CDRE committee. Final approval of applications for voting membership shall be
made by a majority vote of the Board.
Section 3. Termination
Voting membership may be terminated at the recommendation of a committee as presented
by that committee's chair and approved by a majority vote of the Board.
2
Section 4. Voting Restrictions of Members
Every member is entitled to one vote in any election, referendum or meeting of the CDRE.
No voting by proxy shall be permitted. Ballots will be mailed to the address provided (and
updated) by each member.
ARTICLE III - MEETINGS
Section 1. Annual Meetinq
The Annual Meeting of the CDRE shall be held in September.
Section 2. Special Meetinas
Special meetings of the CDRE may be called by the Chair, by a majority of the Board, or upon
petition in writing of five percent of the membership. Notice of special meetings shall be
mailed to each member at least ten (10) days prior to such meetings.
Section 3. Quorums
The following are the quorum requirements for conducting meetings:
At an annual or special meeting of the CDRE membership, a quorum will be called
when the attendance is ten percent (1 0%) or greater of the C.DRE membership.
At any meeting of the Board of Directors, a quorum will be called when the attendance
is more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting members of the Board.
At any committee meeting, a quorum will be called when the attendance of the
committee is more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting members of a committee.
ARTICLE IV- BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Section 1. Power and Responsibilities
The management and policy making responsibilities of the CDRE shall be vested in the Board
of Directors.
Section 2. Composition of the Board
The Board of Directors shall be composed of thirteen (1 3) members of which at least five (5)
shall be persons with disabilities.
The Board of Directors, by a majority vote, may add additional ex-officio members. Ex-officio,
non-voting members may be the named person or their designee.
Section 3. Meetinqs
The Board of Directors will have the following meetings:
ao
Within thirty (30) days after the Annual Meeting, the Board of Directors for the next
year will meet to qualify and elect the following officers: Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secre-
tary.
Regular meetings of the Board of Directors shall be no more frequent than monthly. In
addition, special meetings may be called by the Chair at the written request of any five
(5) directors, Notice of special meetings (including the purpose of the meeting) shall
be given to each director at least three (3) days prior to said meeting.
A simple majority of those present shall decide any questions unless these bylaws
require otherwise.
Section 4. Procedures for Nomination of Candidates
Board nominations will be made by a Nominating Committee selected by the Board. The
Nominating Committee will be named at least 90 days prior to the annual election and
composed of five (5) members, including at least two (2) individuals drawn from the general
membership. Nominees must be presented to the membership at least thirty 30 days prior to
the election.
Additional candidates for Director may be nominated by notifying the Board of Directors, in
writing, within 14 days of the presentation to the membership of the slate of nominees by the
Nominating Committee.
Section 5. Candidates
All candidates for Director must be a member in good standing of the CDRE.
Section 6. Ballots
The ballot shall be prepared by the Secretary and shall contain the names of candidates
nominated by the Nominating Committee, listed in alphabetical order. Ballots shall also include
the date and location of the Annual Meeting and any other information deemed necessary by
the Nominating Committee and approved by the Board.
Section 7. Election
The Secretary shall mail the official ballots fourteen (14) days prior to the Annual Meeting to
all members of the CDRE.
Ballots shall be returned, in person, to the Annual Meeting. The election will be declared
closed by the Chair at the start of the meeting. Ballots will be tallied by the Nominating
Committee with results announced prior to the end of the Annual Meeting.
Section 8. Board Terms
The terms of the Board members are:
Initially two (2) years for seven (7) Directors and one (1) year for six (6) Directors.
Thereafter, all terms are two (2) years.
4
b. Limited to two (2) consecutive terms, with the exception of the initial six (6) one-year
Directors, who may serve three (3) consecutive terms.
The unexpired term of a Board member being replaced, should an appointed be re-
quired to fill a vacancy.
Section 9. Vacancies of the Director
Unexpired terms of the Board of Directors shall be filled by an individual who has been
nominated by the Board and approved by a majority vote of the Board of Directors at a
regularly scheduled meeting.
Section 10. Removal of Directors
Directors may be removed by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of other Board members for failure to
perform the duties of a Director. Three (3) consecutive unexcused meeting absenses shall be
deemed failure to perform such duties. ·
ARTICLE V - OFFICERS
Section 1. Officers
The officers of the CDRE shall be the Chair, Vice-Chair and Secretary. All the officers shall be
voting members of the Board.
Section 2. Nominations and Election of Officers
As set out in Article IV, Section 3, within the thirty (30) days after to the Annual Meeting, the
Board of Directors for tho next year will meet to qualify and elect the following officers: Chair,
Vice-Chair, and Secretary.
Section 3. Determination of Officers
Chair: The Chair shall be the head of the CDRE and shall preside at the meetings of the
membership and the Board of Directors. The Chair, with the advice and counsel of the
Vice-Chair, and the Secretary, shall determine the need for an ad-hoc committee
subject to the approval of the Board of Directors and shall select all ad-hoc committee
chairs and assist in the selection of ad-hoc committee personnel. The Chair shall serve
as the chair of the Executive Committee. With approval of the Board of Directors, the
Chair shall sign all instruments.
bg
Vice-Chair: The Vice-Chair shall serve as the first assistant to the Chair of the CDRE
performing the duties of the Chair when the Chair is absent.
Go
Secretary: The Secretary shall serve as the documentarian for the CDRE, which
includes sending notifications and preparing minutes. The Secretary may, as appropri-
ate, enlist the assistance of governmental or non-governmental agencies.
5
Section 4. Executive Committee
The Executive Committee shall consist of the Chair, Vice-Chair and Secretary. The Executive
Committee shall act for the Board of Directors between regular meetings of the Board or in
the absence of a quorum, thereof, except with respect to Article VIII, Section 1.
Section 5. Removal of Officers
Any officer may be removed by a two-thirds (2~3) majority vote of the Board of Directors for
failure to perform duties as required herein.
Section 6. Fillinq a Vacancy
In the event that a vacancy is created by removal, termination, or death, it shall be filled by
nominations by the Board of Directors and majority vote of the Directors.
ARTICLE VI - COMMITTEES
Section 1. Appointment and Authority
Committees shall elect chairs annually, within thirty (30) days after the Annual Meeting.
It shall be the function of the committees to make investigation, conduct studies and hearings,
make recommendations to the Board of Directors and to carry on suqh activities as may be
delegated to them by the Board. The Chair (or his/her agent) shall be an ex-officio member of
all committees, unless otherwise provided. Committee meetings may be called at any time by
the Executive Committee or by the committee chair.
Section 2. Limitation of Authority
No committee shall take or make public any formal action, or make public any resolution, or
in any way commit the CDRE on a question of policy without first receiving approval of the
Board of Directors. Special committees shall be discharged by the Chair when their work has
been completed and their reports accepted, or when, in the opinion of the Board of Directors,
it is deemed wise to discontinue the committee.
ARTICLE VII - PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURES
Section 1. Authority
The proceedings of the CDRE shall be governed by and conducted according to Robert's Rules
of Order as revised. The Parliamentarian of the Board of Directors shall be the Chair (or a
designee).
Section 2. Seal
The CDRE shall have no seal.
6
ARTICLE VIII - AMENDMENTS
Section 1. Revisions
These bylaws may be amended or altered by: 1. three-quarters (3/4) vote of the full Board of
Directors or, 2. by a two-thirds {2/3) vote of members present at any regular or special
meeting of the CDRE called for that purpose, provided 30 day notice has been given to the
entire membership.
mgr~asst~cdrebylw 1 216195
~/~DECEMBER 1995 :
BUILDING PERMIT INFORMATION,
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
KEY FOR ABBREVIATIONS
Type of Improvement:
ADD Addition
ALT Alteration
DEM Demolition
GRD Grading/excavation/filling
REP Repair
MOV Moving
FND Foundation only
OTH Other type of improvement
Type of Use:
NON Nonresidential
RAC Residential - accessory building
RDF Residential - duplex
RMF Residential - three or more family
RSF Residential - single family
MIX Commercial & Residential
OTH Other type of use
ADD NON 0 0 $ 3S000
BLD95-0685 TERRY ROBINSON 1121 PHEASANT VALI~Y ST
13'8~ X 14'3# SCP. SEN PORO{
ADD RSP I 0 $ 35000
ADD .RSF i 0 $ 12000
ADD P~F 1 0 $ 11200
ADD RSF I 0 $ 6000
ADD RSF 1 0 $ 3912
ADD RSP 1 0 5 2000
ADD RSF pe:Tait, s: 6 $ 70112
ALT NON 1 0 $ 30000
ALT NON 1 0 $ 15000
ALT NON 0 0 $ 7500
ALT NON 0 0 $ 4000
ALT NON 0 0 $ · 500
ALT NON permits: S $ S?000
ALT RMF 0 0 $ 1800
0 0 $ 1500
From: 12/01/95
Permit Applican~ name Address Type Type Stories Units Valuation
No. Impr Use
ALT RMF 0 0 $ 1000
BLD95-0691 JASON LEE
ALT RSF 0 0 $ 9090
ALT RSF 0 0 $ 1000
ALT RSF permits: 3 $ 19500
GRD RSF 0 0 $ 0
NEW NON I 0 $ 500000
NEW NON 1 0 $ 13000
NEW NON permits: 2 S 513000
NEW RAC 1 0 $ 25000
NEW RAC permits: 2 $ 36904
NEW RDF 2 2 S 268300
~EW RDF permits: I 2 $ 260300
NEW ~24F 2 8 $ 200000
Date: 01/02/96
From: 12/01/95
Pez~: Applicant name Address Type Type Stories Units Valuat£on
NO. Impr Use
BLDg5-0710 I~IN KIIYdRLL 709 pRppER DR
$-F.D. WITH TWO CAR GARAGE
~ RSp 2 1 $ 525000
lflrd RSF 2 1 $ 195405
I~ RSP 2 1 $ 186720
NEW ~F 1 1 $ 91110
1~ RSF I . 1 $ 71040
TCI OF ERSTERN IA
ID:3195515839
3RN 03'96 15:07 Nn.005 P.02
TCI of Eastern Iowa
REMINDER
]an.~/3,1996
Dear City Council:
As par~ of our continuing commitment to education and public service, TCI will
sponsor a visit by the C~PAN School Bus, The 4§-foot motor coach, a traveling TV
studio and media demonstration center, is visiting our community on C-5PAN's
Campaign '96 tour of America's schools and able systems. We have arranged for the
Bus to be parked in the parking lot north of the city parking ramp and south of the
libratad in Iowa City on January 8th from 2:00 pm to 6:00 pro. Through tours and
presentations aboard the Bas, teachem and students in our community will learn how
C-SPAN and its campaign and election programming can be used in the classroom.
While the Bus is on the campaign trail, C-SPAN follows it progress by televising
on-air updates and short programs from various places of historical interest.
Campaign and election programming will aho air live from the Bus as it stops at
campaign sites across the country.
Amelia's cable television compeni~ created C-SPAN in 1979 to provide live, gavel-
to-gavel coverage of the U.S. House of Representatives. With in-depth coverage of the
campaign and election process, the executive and judicial branches of government,
and other national and international public affairs programming, OffPAN viewers
receive a comprehensive public affairs picture. C-SPAN airs locally on channel 17.
All of the programming produced by the network is commercial-free and copyright.
cleared for educational use. We are proud that our support of C-SPAN makes these
programs available for use by our local educators. If you have any questions or need
any further details, please feel free to contact me at 351-3984.
Sincerely,
TCI of Eastern Iowa
William Blough
Gener~l Manager
From ~o hogarty 12-29-95 l:31p. p. 2 oF 4
Johnson Couni7
Charlos D. Duffy, Chairperson
Joe Bolkoom
Stophen P. Lacina
Don Sehr
Sally Slutsman
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
January 2, 1996
INFORMAL MEETING
A~enda
1. Call to order following fi~e formal organizational meeting.
2. Review of the formal minu~es of December 28th.
3. Business from the County Engineer.
a) Discussion re:
540th Street.
b) Other
request to vacate a portion of Maier Avenue North of
4. Business with the Legislators with the upcoming legislation/discussion.
5. Business from the Board of Supervisors.
a) Discussion re: devolution teleconference spomorcd by NACo.
b) Discussion re: appointments to the Cluster Board/Social Welfare
Board and Compensation Commission.
c) Reports
d) Other
913 SOUTH DUBUQUE ST. P.O. BOX 1350 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52244-1350 TEL: (319)
To: TO'~ CTTY CLERK
From: ~o hogarty 12-29-95 l:31pm p, 3 oF 4
Agenda 1-2-96
Page 2
6. Discussion re: of the following budgets:
a) Zoning (19)
b) Physical Plant (17)
Conservation Board (24)
d) Special Resource Enhancement (32)
e) Other
7. Continuation of informal meeting January 3, 1996.
a) Information Services (07)
b) Ambulance (01)
Emergency Medical (31)
d) Recorder (11)
e) Sheriff (08)
f) Law Enforcement Proceeds
g) Disaster Services (09)
h) S.E.A.T.S. (12)
i) Veterans Affairs (50)
j) Human Services (45)
k) Mental Health (42)
1) ICFhMR~esidential (43)
m) Auditor (03)
n) Elections 03)
o) Mapping 05)
p) Central Services (18)
q) InstitutionalAccounts (41)
r) Workers Unemployment Comp/rort (22)
s) Medical Examiner (10)
t) Block Grants (20), (21) and (23)
u) County Attorney (02)
v) Court Services (28)
w) Prosecutor Forfeit (69)
Juvenile Crime Grant
y) Other
To: IO~ CI~ CLERg
Agenda 1-2-96
Page
8. Continuation of informal meeting January 4, 1996.
a) Board of Supervisors (05) ,-:
b) County Farm (25) :..
c) Cordlap (34) ~ .--.
d) Soft Comerration (23) ....
e) Secondary Roads (49) ..
f) Reservoir Roads Trust (81) ---
g) Weed Eradication (55)
h) Other
9. Continuation of informal meeting January 5, 1996.
a) Treasurer (14)
b) Historical Society (20)
Other
I0. Continuation of informal meeting January 8, 1996.
a) Health (04)
b) Comervarion Trust (82)
c) Other
l 1. Discussion'from the public.
12. Recess.
To: ~0~ C~TY CLERg
F~om ~o hooa~%¥
1-3-98 8:5?aa p. ~ oF 3
Johnson Counb'
Don Sohr, Chairporson
Joe Bolkcom
Charles D. Duffy
Stephon P. Lacina
Sally Stutsman
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
January 4, 1996
1. Call to order 9:00 a.m.
2. Action re:claims
3. Action re:
FORMAL MEETING
Agenda
the formal minutes of December 28th.
4. Action re: payroll authorizations
5. Business from the County Auditor.
a) Action re: permits
b) Action re: reports
c) Other
6. Business from the Assistant Zoning Administrator.
a) Action re: requesting Board of Supervisors approval of a contract
offered by East Central Iowa Council of Govemments to create a new
comprehensive plan for Johnson County.
b) Other
7. Business from the County Attorney.
a) Report re: other items.
913 8OBTH DUBUQUE ST. P O. BOX 1350 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52244-1350 TEL: (319) 356-6000
FAX:(319) 356-6O86
To'* IO~ CITY CLF. R](
Agenda 1-4-96
Page 2
8. Business from the Board of Supervisors.
a) Action re: setting public hearing for Road Vacation 1-96 for Thursday,
February 1, 1996 at 9:00 a.m. (A portion of Maier Avenue SW
beginning at its intersection with 540th Street; thence Northerly
approximately 1/4 mile.)
b) Resolution authori~.iug the County Engineer to act on behalf of the
Board of Supervisors re: farm-to-market construction
projects/discussion/action.
c) Resolution re: authorizing IDOT to hold lettings on farm-to-market
projects/discussion/action.
d) Resolution re: closing ofroads/di.~cussion/action.
e) Action re: appointment to the Case Management Advisory Board and
Mm~tal Health/Developmental Disabilities Planning Council.
f) Action re: appointments to the Cluster Board/Social Welfare Board.
g) Other
9. Adjourn to infernal mea~g.
a) Inquiries and reports from the public.
b) Reports and inquires from the members of the Board of Supervisors.
Report from the County Attorney.
d) Other
10. Adjournment.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 4, 1996
To: Mayor and City Council
From: City Clerk
Re: Council Work Session, December 18, 1995 - 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers
Mayor Susan Horowitz presiding. Council present: Horowitz, Kubby, Novick, Pigott, Throgmorton.
Absent: Baker, Lehman. Staff present: Atkins, Helling, Woito, Karr, Franklin, Miklo, Schoon,
Trueblood, Milkman. Council-Elect present: Norton, Thornberry. Tapes: Reel 95-142, side 2; 95-
145, all,
REVIEW ZONING MATTERS
Reel 95-142, Side 2
Senior Planner Miklo presented the following Planning and Zoning items for discussion:
SettinQ a public hearin~l for January 16, 1996, on an ordinance amendin.q the Zonincl
Chapter bv chan(~in.cl the use re.qulations for a .5 acre property located at 840 Cross Park
Avenue from CO-1, Commercial Office, to CC-2, Community Commercial (Sunblad).
Setting a public hearin.q for January 16, 1996, on an ordinance amendinq the Zonin.q
Chapter bv chan~inq the use re.qulations of an approximate .3 acre pro13ertv located at
1500 Sycamore Street from RS-5, Low Density Sin.qle-Familv Residential, to CO-1, Office
Commercial (4C's).
Settin.q a public hearin.q for January 16, 1996, on an ordinance amendin.q Title 14, Chapter
6, entitled "Zoninq," Article D, entitled "Residential Zones," Section 5, entitled
"Nei.qhborhood Conservation Residential Zone (RNC-12)," to clarih/the number of roomers
permitted in duplex units in the RNC-12 zone.
Public hearin.q on an ordinance amendinq Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zonin.ch" to allow
recvclinq processin(~ facilities in the I-1, General Industrial, zone and related amendments.
Miklo stated he will investigate if PailIon Pyrotech/Spencer Potter is considering a specific
site.
Public hearin.q on an ordinance amendin.q Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled "Zoninq," Article N,
entitled "Off-Street Parkin~ and Loadinq," to reference the Parkin.q Facilitv Impact Fee
Ordinance in the off-street parkin.q re.qulations section of the Zonin.q Chapter.
Ordinance amendinq Title 14, Chapter 6, ent ted "Zonin~l," Article 5, entitled "Performance
Standards," Section lOB, concemincl the location of above.qround stora.qe tanks. (First
consideration)
Ordinance amendin.q the Zonin.q Chapter to clarify the definition of time/temperature si.qns.
(First consideration)
2
Ordinance amending the Zonina Chapter bv repealina Title 14, Chapter 6, Article J,
.Section 1, River Corridor Overlay Zone. (Second consideration)
Novick requested that Council consider collapsing items H, I, J, and K.
Ordinance amending Title 14, Chapter 5, Building and Housing, Article H, Site Plan
Review, to include a reference to the Sensitive Areas Site Plan. (_Second consideration)
Ordinance amendin(~ Title 14, Chapter 5, Building and Housinch Article I, Grading
Ordinance, to make it consistent with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. (Second
consideration)
Ordinance amendin.q Title 6, Public Health and Safetv, Chapter 3, Weed Control, Section
3, Natural Areas, to make it consistent with the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. (Second
consideration)
Ordinance amending the Zoning Chapter to allow adult day care, elder familv homes, and
elder qroup homes under certain conditions in Iowa City, and to chan.qe the definition of
elderly. (Second consideration)
Ordinance amending the Zonincl Chapter to require bicycle parking for commemial and
multi-family residential developments. (Second consideration)
COUNCIL AGEND/VTIME
Reel 95-142, Side 2
(Agenda item #18 - Shive Hattery FEMA floodplain maps). In resp~)nse to Kubby, Schoon
explained that this would update the City's floodplain maps to include all of the streams
and dvers in the watershed areas.
SEE COUNCIL AGENDNTIME CONTINUED.
OLD CAPITOL MALL REDESIGN - TALBOTS PROJECT
(agenda item #15)
Reel 95-142, Side 2
Economic Development Coordinator Schoon, Talbots Representative Bill Holland, and Design
Review Committee Member Laura Hawkes presented information. Schoon stated he will obtain
more information regarding the moving of the Osco and theatre signs.
LETTER OF DECEMBER 11 FROM BURNS AND EASTHAM/CDBG/HOME FUNDING
(consent calendar 4g(1)) Reel 95-142, Side 2
Community Development Coordinator Milkman and Developer Bob Bums presented information
regarding the request by the Partnership to buy existing condominiums or to construct such units.
Council agreed in concept to the request subject to location and cost of the units; and asked the
Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) to review any specific project.
Staff Action: Staff will continue to work with Mr Burns and the Greater Iowa City
Fellowship, (Milkman)
3
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AD-HOC COMMITTEE
Reel 95-145, Side 1
City Manager Atkins, Economic Development Coordinator Schoon responded to Council. Council
agreed to either Stacy Pugh or Bob Elliot as the Industrial representative, and John Buchanan
or David Skorton as the University representative.
Staff Action: Letters sent to Pugh and Buchanan on December 19. (Sohoon)
CENSUS VIDEO
Reel 95-145, Side 1
City Clerk Karr presented the 1996 Special Census Video, distributed census informational
brochures, and responded to comments.
COUNCIL AGENDA/TIME CONTINUED
Reel 95-145, Side I
Novick noted that HACAP agreed to an annual contribution in lieu of taxes for their project
on Broadway and asked that a letter be sent thanking them.
In response to Novick, Atkins stated a water and sewer rate ordinance will be prepared
in accordance with the City Attorney's December 14, 1995 memo.
Novick requested that staff look at other areas including Mormon Trek and Longfellow
neighborhood to use the tunnelling equipment while it is available at another City project.
Novick referred to Atkins' December 14, 1995 memo regarding con. struction management-
wastewater projects, and requested further explanation. City Manager Atkins presented
information.
o
Throgmorton referred to Atkins' December 11, 1995 memo regarding Jensen tract-
Harlock/VVeeber area. In response to Throgmorton, Atkins stated he will contact area
residents about contributing funds to buy land for parks.
7. Throgmorton distributed a letter to Council Members regarding his 25 months in office.
(Agenda item #19 - First Avenue Improvements Project and agenda item #4, g(3) letter
from Bob Smith regarding First Avenue Project.) In response to Pigott, there were not a
majority of Council members who wished to re-open discussion about the First Avenue
Improvements Project.
(Agenda item #4 g(2) Letter from Mark Ginsburg requesting funding for the Iowa City Jazz
Festival.) In response to Pigott, City Manager Atkins stated $5,000 is in the budget for
the Iowa City Jazz Festival.
10.
(Agenda item #4 g(5) - letter from Ed Barker regarding water and wastewater rates.)
Kubby requested that a response be sent to Barker explaining Council position regarding
downpayment and time frame of the projects.
11.
(Agenda item #17 - Revise schedule of fees and charges for Parks & Recreation services
and programs.) Kubby requested that the potter and user fees be separated out of the
resolution, as she will abstain from voting on those fees.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
4
(Agenda item #17 - Revise schedule of fees and charges for Parks & Recreation services
and programs.) Novick inquired about the revised fee schedule and the racquetball court
fees and monthly locker rental fees not being increased. Parks and Recreation Director
Trueblood explained that increasing racquetball court fees would reduce use and monthly
locker fees may be eliminated due to low usage.
Kubby referred to Franklin's December 8, 1995 memo regarding the Neuzll tract. Council
agreed to proceed with an appraisal as outlined in the memo.
Kubby referred to City Attorney Woito's December 14, 1995 memorandum regarding IDNR
administrative appeal to be handled as a contested case (mercury levels). In response
to Kubby, City Manager Arkins stated he will obtain information about mercury compliance
in other communities.
(Agenda item #4f(6) - Shared access easement agreement and a perpetual parking
easement agreement for 820 and 824 E. Burlington St.) Horowitz stated the two
paragraphs were inconsistent. City Attorney Woito stated she will check on it.
(Agenda items ~f(4) - Letter from Becky Feuerbacher of Coralville regarding a
skateboarding facility.) Horowitz noted she will respond to the letter.
Horowitz noted sesquicentennial events scheduled for December 28, 1995.
Meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
To: I0~ CI~ CL£R~
From;
~ehmon CDunb'
-- 1/ 10WArn)
Don Sohr, Chairperson
Joe Bolkcom
Charles D. Duffy
Stephen P. La¢ina
Sally Slutsman
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
January 9, 1996
INFORMAL MEETING
Agenda
1. Call to order 9:00 a.m.
2. Review of the formal minutes of January 2nd and January 4th.
3. Business from the Board of Supervisors.
a) R~o~
~ Oth~
4. Discussion from the public.
5. Recess.
913 SOUTH DUBUQUE ST. P.O. BOX 1350 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52244-1350 TEL: (319) 356-15000
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
Please
January 8, 1996
City Council
Madan Karr
Revised Schedule for the first three months of 1996
mark your calendar accordingly:
Monday. January 8, 6:30 - Budget
Tuesday. January 9, 6:30 - Budget
Monday, January 15, 6:30 - Work Session
Tuesday, January 16, 7:30 - Formal
Monday, January 22, 6:30 - Budget
Tuesday, January 23, 6:30 - Budget
Monday, January 29, 6:30 - Work Session
Tuesday, January 30, 6:30 - Formal
February ~ normal schedule as attached
Monday, March 4, 6:30 - Special Work Session
Tuesday, Mamh 5, 7:30 - Special Formal
Monday, March 25, 6:30 - Work Session
Tuesday, Mamh 26, 7:30 - Formal
Please call with any questions you may have.
cc: Department Directors
cJet~tl)udget
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 8, 1996
To: Mayor and Council Members
From: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk
Re: Revise~ Meeting Schedule for
1996
1996
January 1996 February 1996 March 1996
SM TW T F S S M TW T F S S M TW T F S
I 23458 I 23 1 2
7 8 ~.9..10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 3 4 {~)6 ? 8 9
14 15 ~{D17 18 1920 11 12([~)14 15 16 17 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
21 222_3..24 25 26 27 18 19 2~J~21 22 23 24 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
28 29{~..~31 25 26~..~)28 29 24 25(~27 28 29 30
31
May 1996 June 1996 July 1996
S M TW T F S S M TW T F S S M TW T F S
, 2 3 4 , 1(~03 4 56
5 6~8 9 10 11 2 3 t~)15 8 7 8 7 8 I I1 12 13
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 2 13 14 15 14 15(~17 18 1920
19 20~22 23 24 25 16 17~L~J19 20 21 22 21 22 .~3.24 25 26 27
26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 28 29
30
September 1996 October 1996 November 1996
S M TW T F S S M TW T F $ S M TW T F S
~ 2~4 5 6 ? 1 2 3 4 5 1 2
~ 9 11 12 13 14 6 7 (~) 9 101, 12 3 4 ~) 36 7 8 9
15 16 1].18 19 20 21 13 14 1.~16 17 18 '9 10 1t 1 14 15 16
22 23 2(2(2(2(~25 26 27 28 20 21 2(.~.~23 24 25 26 17 18 {~)20 21 22 23
29 30 27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Apr,I 1996
S M TW T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8~)10 11 12 13
14 15 1_.~17 18 19 20
21 22(~.3.)24 25 26 27
28 29 30
August 1996
$ M TW T F $
1 2 3
4 5(~ 7 8 9 10
II 12 14 15 16 17
18 $9 2~...21 22 23 24
25 26G_..~/28 29 30 31
0ecember 1996
1 2 5 6 7
8 9 10 ~ 12 13 14
15 16(~[~)18 19 20 21
22 23.~.~25 26 27 28
29 30 3(3(3(3(~
cc: Department Directors
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 8, 1996
To: City Council
From: City Manager
Re: Miscellaneous Budget Things to Think About - FY97-99
Library - The Library Board is pursuing an expansion and renovation of the Library. While we
have more than adequate debt capacity to finance this capital construction, I am concerned about
a future commitment of new staff in order to operate the newly expanded facilities. These staff
expenses are a direct cost to General Fund.
Airport- If your policy of "no new airport - it won't be moved" is to be sustained, I would suggest
you consider how to implement the master plan - sooner than later.
Stormwater Fees - While it appears the federal government will postpone its efforts to regulate
stormwater, at least until 2000, we must be vigilant about the significant costs that could be thrust
upon us. Currently stormwater capital projects are financed by general obligation debt and some
Road Use Taxes. Many projects are financed by general fund. We need to consider how to
finance these improvements in the future.
IVtachlnery & Equipment Tax Exemption
Economic Development
With the elimination of M&E tax and the State's desire to make Iowa more attractive for economic
development, in accordance with State policy, the City must think of the M&E not only as a loss
of revenue, but the State's desire to see economic development occur, notably job generating
economic development activities. How we respond to the state's policy has local land use and
related economic ramifications.
- Do we want more commercial/industrial growth?
- If so, where?
- We have a shortage of available industrial land.
2
- How do we pumhase (public investment) land for industrial purposes from the very revenues
the State restricts?
- State grand plan - cities will grow in accordance with State economic development ideals, not
those determined locally.
Airport/Public Works - We are in the process of preparing a plan to relocate the public works
yard from its current location at Riverside Drive. The buildings are outdated, many beyond repair,
and inefficiently planned. The transit building would remain. In relocating to another location, a
seven acre parcel of property is created for future sale and development. The proposed
relocation would be to airport property. In that the proceeds from the sale of the seven acre parcel
would be used for the development of a new public works yard and other financing to be
arranged, the position of the Airport Commission is the City should pay for or lease property at
the airport. We will need to resolve the issue in that the City owns the airport property and
therefore if we were to be charged lease and/or purchase, these monies would merely pass
through the general fund to the airport Commission, reduce their subsidy, or create a financial
windfall. The council will need to inform the Airport Commission of your desires with respect to
the public works yard relocation to airport property and your willingness to pay for and/or lease
property at the airport.
Cable Television - You will need to consider your ideas, etc. concerning the 50¢ pass through
available to City. I would encourage it sooner than later. The Cable companies will find every
way to push the edge in their pricing and possibly make the 50¢ more difficult for us.
Many ideas are floating around.
1. Joint facility for Cable and PATV. Move out of Library and Civic Center.
2. How to coordinate (read as Staff) for improved community programming, schools, senior
center, city, etc. I think schools, senior center are expecting something from the 50¢ pass
through.
mgt~97-9[ist
Date:
To:
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
January 8, 1996
City Council
From: City Manager
Re: 1995
The following represents a summary of major Council activity for 1995:
Th.e Longfellow area storm sewer and sanitary sewer reconstruction project was
concluded. The project, at a cost of $600,000, involved over 1,400 feet of sanitary sewer
and 2,100 feet of storm sewer. This project was intended to relieve many of the sanitary
and stormwater collection problems in the Longfellow neighborhood. A similar project for
the High Street/Fairview area was also initiated. That project had a cost of $300,000,
The Council formally accepted the final work on the Whispering Meadows wetland park,
This was one of our more unique recreational areas. The subdivision and the wetland
were closely tied and created a unique recreational environment for both the neighborhood
and the community, as well as managing stormwater-for the area.
The City secured a vacant lot at 1109 Fifth Avenue and through the efforts of our
Community Development Division were able to construct and have sold to a low income
family a new home at that site. The securing of such in-fill housing sites has been most
difficult.
The Senior Center received a major waterproofing/masonry restoration treatment. Due
to the age of the building, water was penetrating at many points and causing both external
and internal damage. The $100,000 project was completed in 1995.
The City concluded the purchase of the Peninsula property, approximately 208 acres
located immediately west and south of the Elks Country Club. The purchase price was
$2 million. This project was financed by way of a federal community develop-
ment/fioodplain retention grant of $700,000 and the remaining $1.3 million from the City's
2
general fund reserves. The pumhase of the site provided for the preservation of 100
acres in the floodplain and will serve as a potential source of water for our upcoming
water project. A development plan is being proposed for the upper portion of the
Peninsula final disposition/sale of the site.
Following a recommendation by the Mayor's Youth Employment Board of Directors, this
youth employment program was formally separated from the City. They now have greater
latitude in seeking funds for their operations. Previously, as an extension of a local
government. they were restricted in many of their fundraising initiatives. The split was
mutual and both parties agreed it was in everyone's respective interests.
The City Council awarded a proposal for the construction of tattletale chains along Iowa
Avenue. With the frequency of vehicles running into the Iowa Avenue railroad bridge, this
is believed to be at least one effort at warning ddvere, This project was approved,
although installation will not occur until the spring of 1996.
The City Council saw the creation of a new Housing and Community Development
Commission, which is a combination of the Committee on Community Needs and the City
Housing Commission. This new commission will provide recommendations on many of
the activities formerly split between the two commissions.
10.
11.
The Council awarded the construction of a $500,000 landfill leachate lift station
construction project. This will provide for improved capacity to pump leachate from the
landfill to our wastewater treatment plant. This helps reduce the environmental
degradation that can occur due to landfill leachate.
The Council formally approved amendments to the Human Rights Ordinance. The
amendments provide for the Commission to have authority to issue subpoenas and order
discovery in cases alleging discrimination. A second amendment provides for language
concerning a new protected class: gender identity.
The requirement by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development to
prepare a disposition plan was approved with respect to the sale of 18 three-bedroom
3
units at 1926-1946 Broadway. HACAP has purchased this property through the use of
CDBG monies, as well as other funds, and will provide transitional housing. The $750,000
will be directed to our Assisted Housing Program and replacement housing secured at a
later date.
12.
The City was notified that the federal HUD would provide $133,000 in additional funding
to our Assisted Housing Program. These funds are for the improvement/maintenance of
the City's public housing units. Known as the Comprehensive Improvements Assistance
Program (CLAP), this' successful grant application will be helpful in the maintenance of
· public housing units owned by the City's housing authority.
13.
The City Council, in anticipation of the need to replace the Summit Street bridge over the
Iowa Interstate Railroad, has directed that design services be initiated for this bddge
reconstruction. Construction could begin as early as 1997.
14.
The City Council approved the construction of a new landfill cell as well as providing for
the final cover over an old landfill cell. This $1.2 million project was funded by landfill
revenues.
15.
Following the environmental assessment and extended debate, the City Council, by
resolution, approved the design parameters for Melrose Avenue street and bridge
reconstruction between Byington and the City of Universi.ty Heights. The Federal Highway
Administration must give final approval of the environmental assessment and release the
funds for this project; however, they have been involved in all stages of design and their
approval is expected. Construction may begin as early as next fiscal year.
16.
Following public hearings and several years of negotiations, the City Council approved a
new cable television agreement with TCI. This is a renewal of a non-exclusive TV
franchise agreement and provides for funding for our cable TV/community programming
operations, public access channel, as well as providing for a number of upgrades to the
cable system.
4
17.
Following the recommendations of a citizens' committee concerning proposals for a
sensitive areas ordinance, the ordinance was adopted. This ordinance will provide for
development regulation of environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, stream
corridors, steep slopes, wooded areas, hyddc soils, prairie remnants, and archaeological
sites. This ordinance was reviewed by the Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission, the
Planning and Zoning Commission, and finally, following public hearing with the City
Council, was adopted.
18.
A new joint agreement on communication and cooperation concerning the division of
property taxes for industrial jobs and their related training responsibilities at Kirkwood
Community College was approved.
19.
The City Council awarded contracts for the construction of production well in the Jordan
aquifer and silurian aquifers. This is part of the planned new water rssouroes for the city.
The Council also approved the renovation of pumping systems at the three 2-million gallon
ground reservoir/booster stations in our community. This work will help improve the
pressure and flow throughout the city's water distribution system.
20. In January monthly billing for all City utilities was approved,
21,
The award of a $420,000 contract for continuing work along Dubuque StreaFTerrsll Mill
park for the repair of public property and right-of-way as a result of the 1993 flood. This
contract was funded approximately 80% by the Soil Conservation Service and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
22.
River Corridor Trail projects were initiated and funding secured from the Transportation
Enhancement funds. The projects were reviewed and approved by JCCOG. The
University shared in the design of the River Corridor Trail between the Iowa Memorial
Union bridge and Iowa Avenue. The Univereity will maintain the trail thereafter.
23.
The Council authorized a bond issue in February 1995 for $8.2 million in General
Obligation debt for a variety of water and wastewater projects.
5
24.
The Council authorized the Airport Commission to proceed with the construction of a new
ten-unit aircraft hangar. The $250,000 project cost will be financed from City reserves and
repaid on a scheduled basis by the Airport Commission as a routine part of their annual
budget.
25.
At a special meeting in February, the Council approved plans and specifications for the
Whispering Meadows housing development. The City's Department of Housing &
Inspection Services secured a $3+ million federal grant for the construction of 33 single-
family housing units to be constructed in the Whispering Meadows area. Two local
contractors, McComas-Lacina and Frantz Construction, were the successful bidders.
26.
The Council initiated a refinancing of $2.5 million in Parking System Revenue Bonds.
With the refinancing the City enjoyed a lower interest rate as well as a onetime savings
of $150,000.
27. The Council established regulations for sidewalk cafes in the downtown.
28.
The Charter Review Commission which was appointed in May 1994, prepared and
' submitted to the Council recommendations for the City Charter. A public hearing was held
in February 1995 and no comment was received. The nine Commission members were
thanked by the Council for their work effort and the Charter Ordinance was approved as
recommended.
29.
A new historic district was established along Muscatine Avenue just north of Court. The
Moffitt Cottage Historic District recognized the work and architectural design of the unique
Moffitt Cottages in Iowa City.
30.
Phase II of the Rohret Road Reconstruction Project was approved and construction
completed in 1995. The $1.5 million cost was financed through General Obligation debt
and concluded the two phases of the reconstruction of Rohret Road and overpass over
Highway 218. Streb Construction of Iowa City was the contractor and completed the
project, two months ahead of schedule.
6
31.
The Council approved an agreement with the planning consulting firm of Gould Evans
Associates for $56,000 to design a Near Southside Development Plan. The plan was
reviewed and approved by Council following review by community interest groups.
32.
The $600,000+ asphalt resurfacing program continued. Road Use Tax monies were used
for various street projects throughout the community. The City allowed the City of
Coralville to share in this bidding process in order to secure a better price.
A public hearing was held in May to adopt the "Iowa City: Beyond 2000" recommenda-
tions. These were the result of a visioning process involving over 80 Iowa City citizens
on nine task forces. The task force recommendations were reviewed by boards and
commissions prior to final recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission. This
work effort will now be used In future Comprehensive Plan amendments.
34.
The condemnation process for the Water Plant site began in November 1994, and was
finally concluded with a settlement agreement in May 1995. The site was annexed.
35.
The Council awarded $25,000 in the new "Program for Improving Neighborhoods" (PIN)
grant program. The neighborhood associations submitted to the neighborhood council
various project applications. The neighborhood council reviewed and recommended, and
sought the approval of the City Council in this new grant program.
36.
The Council authorized two major annexations during 1995, those being the Water Plant
site of some 230 acres and the annexation of 115 acres near Highway 218/Highway 1
interchange for the new Winebrenner Ford location.
mgr~nsLsla
1995
Grant Fund Activity
Janua~ 8,1996
Police traffic enfomement grant
Narcotics enforcement grant
Crime Bill (new officers)
Historic Preservation:
Survey N. DubuqueiN. Linn area
National Register nominations for
College Green historic area
State of Iowa Library reciprocal lending
Transit:
Federal operating assistance
State operating assistance
Capital grant (new buses)
Federal transportation planning funds
Iowa River Bank repairs (Soil Conservation Service)
Rohret Road pedestrian bridge
Airport master plan study (FAA)
Housing assistance o certificates/vouchers
Public housing - new construction (33 units)
Acquisition of housing (10 units)
CDBG - HOME
$24,000
57,000
(3 years) 900,000
9,000
2,500
52,000
260,000
240,000
650,000
66,000
340,000
481,000
93,000
4,071,000
3,237,000
931,000
2,163,000
$13,576,500
mgr~jfan~95
PLATS:
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES - 1995
18 commercial lots on 49 acres In the Boyrum Subdivision (Hy-Vee - Hwy 6); Kennedy's
Waterfront (S. Gilbert Street); and D & L Subdivision (Meinard's).
92 residential lots on 41 acres in the East Hills; Oakes 5th; Galway Pt. 2; and Walden
Wood, Pt. 8 and 9.
REZONINGS:
MORMON TREK VILLAGE - 29 acres rezoned from RS-5 to OPDH-8 for 232 townhouse
and condominium units at Mormon Trek Boulevard and Rohret Road.
WINDSOR RIDGE - 34 acres rezoned from RS-5 to multi-family and neighborhood
commercial to create a new mixed-use and mixed-density neighborhood.
EAST SIDE INDUSTRIAL PARK - 68 acres in the County rezoned from RS to M-1 for
future expansion of the BDI industrial park.
ANNEXATIONS:
40 acres on the west side near Highway l/U.S. 218 intersection for commercial
development. (Winebrenner).
250 acres north of 1-80 for water plant site.
Defeated OPDH-8 rezoning of 7 acres on Dubuque Road for low to moderate income housing
development proposed by Burns/GICHF,
pl~Sdlt~mJtaCt[v,ld
APPOINTMENTS MADE TO BOARDS/COMMISSIONS DURING 1995
Board/Commissions
N~me
Animal Control Advisory Board
Board of Adjustment
Board of Appeals
Board of Appeals
Board of Library Trustees
Board of Library Trustees
Board of Library Trustees
Board of Library Trustees
Broadband Telecommunications Commission
Design Review Committee
Design Review Committee
Design Review Committee
Design Review Committee
Design Review Committee
Design Review Committee
Historic Preservation Commission
Housing and Community Development Commission
Housing and Community Development Commission
Housing and Community Development Commission
Housing and Community Development Commission
Housing and Community Development Commission
Housing and Community Development Commission
Housing and Community Development Commission
Housing and Community Development Commission
Housing and Community Development Commission
Human Rights Commission
Human Rights'Commission
Human Rights Commission
Human Rights Commission
Human Rights Commission
Parks and Recreation Commission
Parks and Recreation Commission
Planning and Zoning Commission
Planning and Zoning Commission
Planning and Zoning Commission
Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission
Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission
Senior Center Commission
Senior Center Commission
Julie Seal
Lowell Brandt
C. Wayne Maas (reappointment)
John Staska
Mark W. Martin
Charles T. Traw (reappointment)
Mary McMurray
Jim Swaim
Betty McKray
Karyl Larson (reappointment)
Gary Nagle (reappointment)
Martin K. Haynes
Clara Swan (reappointment)
Randy Rohovit
Philip M. Reisetter
Ruedi Kuenzli
Linda Murray
James Harris
Elizabeth Swenson
Christina Randall
Charles Eastham
Ann M. Donovan
John R. Falb
Tim Ruxton
Gretchen Schmuch
Patricia A. Harvey (reappointment)
Tom Dickerson
Ann K. Shires (reappointment)
Osha Gray Davidson
Diane Martin
Ross Wilburn
Allen Stroh
Lea Supple
Ann Bovbjerg (reappointment)
Eric L. Engh
Jessica Neary (reappointment)
Richard A. Hoppin (reappointment)
Philip Zell
Kenneth Mobily
Approved appointments to Boards/Commissions as recommended by Johnson County
Board of Supervisors:
Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission
Nancy F. English (reappointment)
1/8196
City of iowa City
Proper[7 Tax History
i FY 91 FY 92 FY 93 FY 94 FY 95 FY 98 *FY 97 *FY 98
PROPERTY TAX DOLLARS
LEVYHiST X~,S
*FY 99
General 9,718,663 9,934,348 10,469,757 10,792,606 11,548,818 11,997,774 12,701,324 12,957,540 13,542,943
Library 0 0 348992 359754 384,961 399,926 423,377 431,918 451,431
Transit 647911 662290 1227934 1265799 1,343,006 1,407,146 1,489,661 1,519,711 1,588,370
Subtotal General Levies 10,366,574 10,596,638 12,046,683 12,418,159 13,276,785 13,804,846 14,614,362 14,909,169 15,582,744
1,603,083 2,363,751 2,540,412 2,762,942 2,823,912 2,908,280 3,326,729 3,225,032 3,421,358
2,600,000 2,600,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,376,857 2,544,714 1,892,000 2,740,000 3,570,000
Employee Benefits
Debt Service
Subtotal City Property Taxes
14,569,657 15,560,389 16,587,095 17,181,101 18,477,554 19,257,840 19,833,091 20,874,201 22,574,102
Agland Property Taxes
Total Property Taxes
6,943 6,647 6,256 5,954 6,082 6,293 6,124 6,124 6,124
14,576,600 15,567,036 16,593,351 17,187,055 18,483,636 19,264,133 19,839,215 20,880,325 22,580,226
PROPERTY TAX LEVIES
General 8.10000 8.10000 8.10000 8.10000 8.10000 8.10000 8.10000 8.10000 8.10000
Library 0.27000 0.27000 0.27000 0.27000 027000 0.27000 0.27000
Transit 0.54000 0.54000 0.95000 0.95000 0.94194 0.95000 0.95000 0.95000 0.95000
Subtot~ GeneralLevies 8.64000 8.64000 9.32000 9.32000 9.31194 9.32000 9.32000 9.32000 9.32000
Employee Benefits 1.33609 1.92729 1.96541 2.07363 1.98061 1.96345 2.12155 2.01603 2.04631
Debt Service 2.15192 2.10318 1.54068 1.49623 1.66144 1.70898 1.19627 159847 2.11808
Total City Property Tax Rate
12.12801 12.67047 12.82609 12.88986 12.95399 12.99243 12.63782 13.03450 13.48439
Agiand Levy 3.00375 3.00375 3.00375 3.00375 3.00375 3.00375 3.00375 3.00375 3.00375
Machinery & Equipment Valuation Phase Out
Senate File 69, 1995 Legislative Session
City of Iowa City
Fiscal
Year
'89-90
'90-91
'91-92
'92-93
'93-94
'94-95
'95-96
'96-97
'97-98
'98-99
'99-00
'00-01
'01-02
'02-03
'03~04
'04-05
'05-06
Revenue
ffomM&E
483 137
532 070
629 980
696 767
768 401
714 823
827 311
812 617
771 044
733 851
681 902
464 681
201 494
37,391
State M&E Total M&E + PercentofTotal--
Reimb. Reimbumement Taxes
$ 483,137 3.5%
$ 532,070 3.7%
$ 629,980 4.0%
$ 696,767 4.2%
$ 768,401 4.5%
$ 714,823 3.9%
$ 827,311 4.3%
$ 812,617 4.1%
58,914 $ 829,958 4.0%
124,761 $ 858,612 3.8%
185,306 $ 867,208
411,188 $ 875,868
$ 201,494
$ 37,391
$
$
$
Assumptions
Replacement Rate
C&t Growth Rate
Tax Rate Growth (After FY99)
8%
3.0%
1.0%
1/8/96
Page 1 of 1 G:\FINDATA\DMDATA\SATKINS\M&ELOSS.XLS
Descripti,qn' Residential
Commercial, Less: Exemptions
Industrial & Military &
Utilities TIF Values
Fiscal Year 1997
100% Assessment 91,344,181,100
State rollback .593000
Less: Exemptions --
Taxable Assessed Value ,9 79_7~099~_3_93,
Fiscal Year 1996
100% Assessment 91,136,350,300
State rollback .675074
Less: Exemptions -*
Taxable Assessed Value 9 767,120~599
Taxable
Assessed
Valuation
9806.643,278 -- $2,150,824,378
.970000 -- (571,281,008)
-- (13,517,546) (13,517,546)
?.e2,443,97~ ,~(! 3,517,546) ,~,1.~566,02_5..826
9728,058,842 -- 91,884,409,142
.... (371,197,969)
-- (12,004,486) (12,004,488)
.~72Q.~90,574 ~12,004~486) $1,48? ,206,687
State Rolled Back Utilities to .97209; Commercial and Industrial are at 100%
Fiscal Year 1995
100% Assessment 91,089,889.230 9693,293,313 9 · -
State rollback .680404 None · -
Less: Exemptions .... (9,078.219)
Taxable Assessed Value ,~ 741.5~4~958 .~6~t3.29:~,31:~ ~ (9,078,219)
Fiscal Year 1994
100% Assessment 9 949.139,460 9851,001,898 9 - -
State rollback .726985 None - -
Less: Exemptions .... (8.§91,624)
Taxable Assessed Value _8. 6.90,0~0.2q~ ~6.5..1,001.896,
Fiscal Year 1993
100% Assessment 9 925,388,170 9626,415,370 9 - -
State rollback .730808 ....
Less: Exemptions .... (9.948,833)
Taxable Assessed Value {~ 67~6,096,043 ~626,~15,370 ~ (9~48,83:~)
Fiscal Year 1992
100% Assessment 9 832,042,560 9579,546.900 9 - -
State rollback .794636
Loss; Exemptions .... (14,255.105)
Taxable Assessed Value ~ 661.170~984: 9579,546~.9,00 .9(14,255,1,05)
$1,783,182,543
(348,324,272)
{9,078,219)
~1 ,~25,760_,,052,
91,8oo.141,356
{259,129,258)
(8,591,624)
~ 1,332~420,4,7.4'
91,551,803,540
{249,292,127)
{9,948,833}
9(1,292 ~_5~,5,80.
91,411,589,450
(170,871,586)
(14.255,1o6)
~ 1,226,462,759
Commercial,
Industrial &
Percentage Changes Residential Utilities Exempfio .ns, Tots. [.
FY97 100% Assessment 18.29% 10.79% N/A 15.36%
FY96 100% Assessment 4.26% 5.01% N/A 4.56%
FY95 100% Assessment 14.83% 6.50% N/A 11.44%
FY94 100% Assessment 2.56% 3.48% N/A 3.00%
FY93 100% Assessment 11.22% 8.09% N/A 9.93%
FY97 State rollback {12.16%) i3,00%) N/A N/A
FY96 State rollback {0.78%i NIA N/A N/A
FY95 State rollback (6.41%i N/A N/A N/A
FY94 State rollback {.50%) NIA N/A N/A
FY93 State rollback (8,06%) NIA N/A NIA
FY97 Taxable value 3.91% 7.47% 12.60% 5.73%
FY96 Taxable value 3.~,5% 4.73% (32.23%) 3.89%
FY95 Taxable value 7.47% 6.50% (5.66%) 7.01%
FY94 Taxable value 2.06% 3.48% (13.64%) 3.00%
FY93 Taxable value 2.26% 8.09% (30.21%} 5.39%
CITY OF IOWA CITY
FY 97 RESIDENTIAL VALUATION
RESIDENTIAL VALUES
'~)ALUATION 100%
ROLLBACK
TAXABLE RESIDENTIAL VALUATION
TAX RATE
TOTAL CITY TAXES FROM RESIDENTIAL
# OF UNITS PER ASSESS REPT
FY96 {1/94)
1,136,350,300
0.675074
767,120,599
12.992
9,966,431
12,401
Estimate
FY97 (1/95)
1,344,181,100 18.29%
0.593000 -12.16%
797,099,392 3.91%
12.638 -2.72%
10,073,742 1.08%
12,843 3.56%
AVG. RESIDENTIAL VALUE 100%
AVG. RESIDENTIAL VALUE - TAXABLE
AVG. TAX BiLL FOR CITY SERVICES
91,634
61,860
803.69
104,663 14.22%
62,065 0.33%
784.38 -2.40%
$100,000 Residence in FY96
100% Value
Taxable Value
City Tax Rate
City Property Taxes
$Change
100,000
67,507
12.992
877.05
115,468 15.47%
68,473 1.43%
12.638 -2.72%
865.36 -1.33%
(11.69)
8150,000 Residence in FY96
100% Value
Taxable Value
City Tax Rate
City Property Taxes
~Change
150,000
101,261
12.992
1,315.58
173,202 15.47%
102,709 1.43%
12.638 -2.72%
1,298.O4 -1.33%
(17.54)
$200,000 Residence in FY96
100% Value
Taxable Value
City Tax Rate
City Property Taxes.
$Change
200,000
135,O15
12.992
1,754.11
230,936 15.47%
136,945 1.43%
12.638 -2.72%
1,730.71 -1.33%
(23.40)
Revaluation FY97 Residential
Percent Incr. to FY96 Residential Values
175,770,929
15.47%
Analysis of FY97 Residential Changes
New Growth
Revaluation
Annexation
Reclasses from Agricultural, Comm. Etc.
PctofFY
33,126,880 2.92%
175,770,929 15.47%
51,910 0.00%
(1,365,O49) -0.12%
/funits
415
1
(20)
vg: 79824
Note: FY97 Values are estimated per Assessor's Report
g:~fy97bud\ AVGRESID.XLS 1/5/96
CITY OF IOWA CITY
FY 97 COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL VALUATION
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL
VALUATION 100%
ROLLBACK
TAXABLE RESIDENTIAL VALUATION
TAX RATE
TOTAL CITY TAXES FROM RESIDENTIAL
# OF UNITS PER ASSESS REPT
593,860,503
593,860,503
12.992
7,715,436
1,405
673,936,583 13.48%
O.97OOOO
653,718,486 10.08%
12.638 -2.72%
8,261,694 7.08%
1,420 1.07%
AVG VALUATION OF COMM / INDUSTR.
PROPERTY TAXES ON AVG.
422,677
5,491
460,365 8.92%
5,818 5.96%
Note: FY97 Values are estimated per Assessor's Report
g:\fy97bud~ AVGRESID.XLS 1/5/96
CITY OF IOWA CITY
HOTEL MOTEL TAX FROM FY 1984 PROJECTED THRU FY1999
INCLUDING DISTRIBUTION BY CATEGORY
Percent
Fiscal Year Tax
FY84 5%
FY85 5%
FY86 5%
FY87 5%
FY88 5%
FY89 5%
FY90 5%
FY91 5%
FY92 5%
* FY93 5% - 7%
FY94 7%
FY95 7%
FY96 Budget 7%
FY97 Prc,~osed 7%
FY98 Projected 7%
FY99 Projected 7%
Total HoWl /
Mo~l Tax
99 126.97
132 835.9O
210 541.77
219 714.72
242 520.76
209 655.20
222 860.87
337 145.49
328 152.94
306 198.76
427 228.62
456 633.85
440,000.00
440,000.00
440,000.00
440,000.00
Convention
Bumau
25%
24,781.74
33,208.98
52,635.45
54,928.68
60,630.19
52,413.81
55,715.23
84,286.38
82,038.24
76,549.70
106,807.16
114,158.45
110,000.00
110,000.00
110,000.00
110,000.00
Police Patml
50%
49,563.48
66,417.94
105,270.88
109,857.36
121,260.39
104,827.59
111,430.43
168,572.74
164,076.46
153,099.38
213,614.32
228,316.93
220,000.00
220,000.00
220,000.00
220,000.00
*Percentage changed at November 1992 election from 5% to 7%.
7% tax first received in 3__r_d__q_u_a.rt. er_.pa__yment, FY_93..._ ...................
MercerPark
Aquatics
15%
24,781.75
33,208.98
52,635.44
54,928.68
43,653.74
31,448.28
33,429.13
50,571.82
49,222.94
45,929.81
64,084.29
68,495.08
66,000.00
66,000.00
66,000.00
66,000.00
Parkland
Acquisition
10% thru 1992
then 7%
16,976.45
20,985.52
22,286.08
33,714.55
32,815.30
26,123.13
29,906.00
31,964.37
30,800.00
30,800.00
30,800.00
30,800.00
Parkland
Development
3%
4,496.75
12,816.86
13,699.02
13,200.00
13,200.00
13,200.00
13,200.00
G:\ HOTMOTEL.XLS\ hotmot 97budg
RE?~/ENUE SOURCE FY90
STATE POPULATION ALLOCATION 630,210
(fort*hefty Munnpal Assistance & Uqour
Profit~ FY92 & !mio~)
% TO TOTAL REVENUES 3.35%
Appropriated Annuatly. Distributed on a per capita basis
MONIES & CREDITS
% TO 'I'OTAL REVENUES
Flat a~nount from State
Schedule of State Population Allocation, Monies & Credits and
Personal Property Replacement Tax Revenues from FYgO thru FY99
and as a Percentage to Total General Fund Revenues Received
FY91 FY92 FY93 FYS4 FY95
630,054 679.002 636,260 635,203 635,071
3.12% 3.18% 2.76% 2.57% 2,38%
27,943 27,943 24,718 27,048 27,327 23,195
0.15% 0,14% 0.12% O.12% 0.11% 0,09%
* PERSONAL PROPERTY REPLACEMENT 386,435
% TO TOTAL REVENUES 2.05%
Flat emoum from State
° This was included in the 8.10 tax levy prior to FY88
386,435 341,846 320,522 320,267 320,777
1.91 % 1.60% 1,39% 1.29% 1,20%
TOTAL Chapter 405A Revenues
% to To~J Revenues
1,044,588 1,04~4,432 1,045,556 983,830 982.797 979,043
5.55% 5.17% 4.89% 4.26% 3.97% 3.68%
TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUES 18,832,289
POPULATION USED FOR PER CAPITAL
DISTRIBUTION: 50,509
satkins\ STATAID.XLS 1/8/96
20,207,495 21,361,923 23,081,156 24,741.422 26,636,848
50,508 59,738 59,738 59,742 59,767
} ** FY97 ** FY98 FY99
~ate Proposed Pr~ected ~ojec~d
000 636,000 636,000 636,000
34% 2.21% 2,17% 2.12%
000 26,000 26.000 26,000
10% 0.09% 0,09% 0.09%
DO0 320,000 320,000 320,000
18% 1.11% 1.09% 1.07%
000 982,000 982,000 982,000
52% 3.42% 3.35% 3.28%
540 28,724,996 29,355.181 29,971,375
FY96
Re. Estimate
636
320,000
982,000
27,139,540
59,767 59,767 59,767 59,767
CITY OF IOWA CITY - GENERAL FUND REVENUES FOR FISCAL YEARS 1991 THRU 1999
BY REVENUE TYPE AND AS A PERCENTAGE TO TOTAL REVENUES
1)
2)
3)
4)
10000 GENERAL FUND FY 9t
RECEIPT TYPE ACTUAL
PROPERTY TAX 10,427,736
% of Total Revenues52%
TRANSFER: EMPL BENEFITS LEVY 1,644,642
% of Total Revenues
ROAD USE TAX 2,143,662
% Of Total Revenues
STATE I FEDERAL FUNDING:
STATE AID {formerry Municipal 630,054
Assistance and Liquor Profits)
PERSONAL PROPERTY REPLACEMEN 386,435
LIBRARY-OPEN ACCESS 45,548
MISC GRANTS ! FEMA REIMB-FLO0 0
POLICE FEDERAL CRIME GRANT 0
BANK FRANCHISE TAX 246,037
C.t97~UD~ 9?GFHIS¥ XL$~ GF Revefiu8 to ¥o~al
FY 92 FY 93 FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 FY 99
ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED
10,659,417 12,177,226 12,418,439 13,241,127 13,811,139 14,520,362 14,915,169 15,588,744
50% 53% 50% 50% 51% 51% 51% 52%
2,142,780 2,420,863 3,201,233 3,223,388 3,418,500 3,834,848 4,059,896 4,050,663
10% 10% 13% 12% 13% 13% 14% 14%
2,087,214 2,080,359 2,233,133 2,228,721 2,673,300 2,964,394 3,004,421 3,131,839
10% 9% 9% 8% 10% 10% 10% 10%
679,002 636,260 635,203 635,071 636,000 635,000 635,000 635,000
341,846 320,522 320,267 320,777 320,000 320,000 320,000 320,000
43,355 39,903 42,487 52,670 0 50,000 50,000 50,000
216,472 0 249,423 66,872 0 4,000 4,000 4,000
0 0 0 0 222,271 228.000 240,000 0
109,545 135,794 139,173 957 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
TOTAL STATE FUNDING 1,308,074 1,390,220 1,132,479 1,386,553 1,076,347 1,278,271 1,337,000 1,349,000 1,109,000
% of To~ Rev~uos 6% 7% 5% 5% 4% 5% 5% 5% 4%
5) CHARGEBACK OF SERVICES
ADMIN EXPENSE CHARGEBACK 886,275 979,758 1,035,210 1,024,744 1,073,217 1,147,620 1,183,663 1,218,303 1,253,982
CITY ATTORNEY CHARGEBACK O 0 0 0 39,652 60,000 43,000 43,000 43,000
TOTAL CHARGEBACKS 886,275 979,758 1,035,210 1,024,744 1,112,869 1,207,620 1,225,663 1,261,303 1,295,982
CITY OF IOWA CiTY - GENERAL FUND REVENUES FOR FISCAL YEARS 1991 THRU 1999
BY REVENUE TYPE AND AS A PERCENTAGE TO TOTAL REVENUES
6)
10000 GENERAL FUND
RECEIPT TYPE
FINES PERMITS & FEES
FY 91 FY 92 FY93 FY94 FY 95 FY 96
ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET
RECREATION FEES 595,375 633,300
BUILDING PERMITS & INSPECTIONS 254,919 321,947
PARKING FINES- ,$5 223,854 248,451
LIBRARY SERVICES 87,110 89,708
POLICE SERVICES 65,858 76,620
MAGISTRATES COURT 142,231 124.999
HOUSING PERMITS & iNSPECTIONS 87,067 80,408
FOOD & LIQUOR LICEN & PERMITS 81,784 102,453
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES 58,651 70,793
BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT FEES 25,924 26,24~0
CEMETERY FEES & CHARGES 32,141 35,002
624 590
336 215
274 376
135 768
106 513
108 724
86,463
112,386
71,138
46,205
33,534
C t978UD~ 9?GFPJST XLS~ GF Revenue to Total
FY 97 FY 98 FY99
PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED
645,754 661,095 717,129 729,709 733,209 737,209
457,598 471,430 468,925 444,100 449,100 449,100
284,148 364,440 275,000 340,000 340,000 340,000
216,485 266,867 207,592 293,255 294,668 296,130
168,526 153,711 53,250 86,000 70,000 62,000
126,723 152,522 110,O00 145,000 145,OO0 145,O00
95,040 121,373 123,350 120,250 120,250 120,250
88,603 91,282 83,730 86,700 86,700 86,700
83,184 78,322 71,400 76,600 76,600 76,600
49,010 57,060 46,000 45,300 45,300 45,300
35,263 50,185 30,000 35,000 35,000 35,000
TOTAL FINES PERMITS & FEES 1,654,914 1,809,921 1,935,912 2,250,334 2,468,287 2,186,376
% of To~ ~,,~,,u~ 8% 8% 8% 9% 9% 8%
7) CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
UNIVERSITY FIRE CONTRACT
JOHNSON COUNTY CONTRACT
2,401,914 2,395,827 2,393,289
8% 8% 8%
529,471 545,667 617,178 678,933 721,576 705,000 747,300 770,000 793,000
233,361 258,550 307,394 308,234 317,882 313,200 322,000 328.000 335,000
TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 762,832 804,217 924,572 987,167 1,039,458 1,018,200 1,069,300 1,098,000 1,128,000
% of Tota~ Reven,~es 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4%
CITY OF ~OWA CiTY - GENERAL FUND REVENUES FOR FISCAL YEARS 1991 THRU 1999
BY REVENUE TYPE AND AS A PERCENTAGE TO TOTAL REVENUES
10000 GENERAL FUND
RECEIPT TYPE
FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY 95 FY 96
ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET
8) HOTEL/MOTEL TAX 337,146 328,152 306,199
9) ALL OTHER INCOME
FY 97 FY 98 FY 99
PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED
427,228 456,633 440,000 440,000 440,000 440,000
2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1%
iNTEREST iNCOME 330,937 212,708 221,289
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 221,677 390,143 365,076
MONIES & CREDITS 30,715 28,068 27,048
MILITARY CREDIT 12,794 12,872 11,857
CEBA LOAN PROCEEDS 0 0 0
LOAN REPAYMENTS 0 94,144 0
TRANSFER IN- CABLE TV 15,344 33,284 75,000
PARKING FINES TRANSFER TO GF 252,265 289,025 268,066
LIBRARY LOAN AND TRANSFER 0 0 0
FIRE REPLACEMENT TRANSFER 178,480 100,000 100,000
TIF INTERFUND LOAN REPAYMT 0 0 0
TOTAL ALL OTHER INCOME 1,042,212
% o~ Total Rever~ues 5%
GRAND TOTAL REVENUES 20,207,495
193,364 392,304 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000
170,784 91,645 59,310 71,015 72,065 73,358
27,327 27.911 26,000 26,000 26,000 26,000
11,441 11.406 11,500 11,500 11,500 11,500
0 635,000 300,000 0 0 0
82,710 36,041 0 20,000 20,000 20,000
25,000 25,000 25,000 0 0 0
301,965 472,676 400,000 440,000 440,000 440,000
0 0 50,000 0 0 0
0 50,000 0 0 0 0
0 48,035 34,324 62,000 62.000 62,000
1,160,244 1.068,336 812,591 1,790,018 1,106,134 830,515 831,565 832.858
5% 5% 3% 7% 4% 3% 3% 3%
21,361,923 23,081,156 24,741,422 26,636,848 27,139,540 28,724,996 29,355,181 29,971,375
6% 8% 7% 8% 2% 6% 2% 2%
CITY OF IOWA CITY
PUBLIC SAFETY RESERVE
FY 1993 THRU FY 2003
PUBSAFET,XLS\ tfunct-pubsafew
ACTUAL I ACTUAL
Beginqin~Ba!a-n-(~e- .-i -
t'-3-'3!7--'-~S-2' t .~,.S.2e473 ~ 3~a06.047 3,E,0,3~3. 4,S46,B42', e,2BB..~.7.i ~,~.9,~OBI ~.0~,~,Si
interera Income I ~ 261,813 4 814,771 159.957'[-'~;631,~b5-~--~5~,'~0~ j-" 1'~0~5'j --~'~7600 1~5 000 90,000
U~.ce,,~o~.,.ve.u.i '~T~.~.~s~ I--- ~:~j ......~:"~s~8 ~ ...._~-~. ~%~ ....~--~ ......~ ............[ ............
' ~ ~ ~ ............... i
Total Receipts [ 3.347.252 293.967 816.247
Expendi{t~r~- ........................
Services And Charges ...... 30,956 68
;r~.~-I~-~ pe ndit u r es .....
~'--~'T~'A~' -I ACTL~,~.--t '~'§'h-~"~-' '-"~'O~-~"-- 1~'~(~3b'~T-i~'~,'P~3[~fION l'P'R6Ji~g-'r'10NI PROJI~EflON PROJE~TION P~o3~CTION
1,511,522 661.294
50,000 ' 15,600
160.O35 1,631,4OO [ 200,000 190,OOOI 166,OOO 125,O00 _ _.9.O., OO.O ..... .5.O,_OO(~ ..... ! _5.,?.0~...
53,763 ...... 71 215 ~1- ~' ~_- -- 228
- 5.'9 .~ ;~ 0.'~. ~'~-._-5__95, (~3 .- 457,~)'~ 790.~-~.~ 832,000 .... ~50~'~- ~-- ' '8-~.5'~)5 'l' ' '~ (~ :~'~..~.' 1--'-- 6--~,~-~
! 1 / ..........~t_. - ....; ......~ .........i ...........i ...........
3,510,313 I 4,546,642 i 4,289,427 i 3,689,206 I 3,021,978 2,296,750 ! 1,511,522 661,294
~n~-'B~l~nce i 3,347,2.52I 3,524,273! 3,908,041i
Page 1
GENERAL FUND
FY97
January 2, 1996
REVENUE SOURCE
Property Tax
State sets allowable rate ($8.10), tax base, rules/regulations on administration
FY97
PROPOSED
$14,620,362
Transfer: Emp Benefits Levy
State sets allowable rate (unlimited), tax base, rules/regulations on administration
Road Use Tax
State sets tax base (gasoline, fuel purchases) and amount to be distributed -
State formula on per capita basis.
a. State Funding
State sets tax base and amount to be distributed
b. Federal Funding
Crime bill
Chargeback of Services
City sets rate or % and administrative rules
Fines, Permits & Fees
Recreation fees -
Building permits -
Parking fines -
Magistrate's Court -
Library -
Police services -
Food, liquor-
Housing inspection -
Cemetery -
Building fees -
Animal Control services -
Contractual Services
City sets rates
City sets rates
State sets maximum rate
State sets maximum rates, City determines what is
filed with Court
City sets rates
City sets rates
State sets rates, City collects revenue
City sets rates
City sets rates
City sets rates
City sets rates
City negotiates with other governments
Hotel/Motel Tax
State sets rate, tax base, rules/regulations
All Other Income
Interest income -
Miscellaneous -
Monies & Credits -
Military Credit -
Parking Fines -
Rates determined by private market, City invests
within State guidelines
C~ty
State determines amount
State determines amount
City determines transfer of money. State sets maxi-
mum rates.
GRAND TOTAL REVENUES
3,834,848
2,964,394
1,105,000
228,000
1,237,813
2,401,914
1,069,300
440,000
823,365
$28,724,996
mgr~budget\revenues
· A full demand
~z~to~f Olivaz, le~ sko~s O. ff pt~ for~ ~
paratransit were' imple-
mented, ~me m~.~
~ ~ bu~ ' '
Hamilton chose innovation.
For the ~ six months, the
ci~'s approximately 61,000
residents have er~oyed
See ~age 7, column
From p~ge ~
persooaliTed, accessible, curb-
to-tilth service within their
neighborhoods or to the down.
town transfer point to connect
with other buses in the system.
Introduction of the service,
known as Personal Plus, has
earned Hamilton the distinction
of being the first American city
to fully convert from a freed-
route to a personal!Ted point de-
vialion operalion.
"As a result of this first. in.the-
n~ion point deviat/on system,
The Bus Company has not only
been salvaged, but is on the road
towards being a ~ah~of-the-art,
one-of-a-kind serv/ce," said
Mayor Adoff Olivas, a member of
NLC's Advisory Council.
"Introduction of this new,
more convenient service enabled
The Bus Company to continue to
provide public transportation to
the residen~ of Hamilton and
comply with the requirements of
the Americans with Diqahilities
Act," sa/d Bus Company General
Manager M/chael Melaniphy.
"The new service is totally ac-
cessible to the di~ah!ed and
lows The Bus Company to pro-
vide the same level of service to
all residents of Harailton,
Melamphy added. "In addition,
The Bus Company will be able to
provide th/s pemonalized service
at a lower annual opera~ cost
than the fixed-route service."
Under Personal Plus, passen-
gers arrange to be picked up at a
designated location at a specified
time by camng Monday to Priday
during business hours, at least
24 hours, but not more than a
week in advance, to schedule a
ride.
Riders can aiso catch buses at
designated stops at razor points,
such as shopping centers, hospi.
t~{$ and schools, a~ well as flag
them down along routes.
Regular trip~ ~ be resel'red
and will be scl~edaled until can-
celed. The Bus Company also
tries to accommodate trips re-
quested less than 24 hours in
advance, although it may have to
schedule them somewhat earlier
or later than desired.
Service is available throughout
the city weekdays from 6:00 ~m.
to 6:00 p.m. Fare~ for the new
setrice have remained the same
as under the previous fixed.route
system, and tranders are pro-
vided at ~ charge.
Personal Plus was ini~ on
an experimental basis in one
low- ridersinp area in October,
1992, and transit manager
Melaniphy said he was
"stunned" by the results.
Ridership increased there, which
he attributed to regqd~r patrolIs
using the system more fre.
quently. Point deviation service
also provided the elderly and
handicapped, whose numbers
have increzsed dren~a~r~Uy in
recent years and now comprise
40 percent of Hamilton's bus
passengers, with a means to
travel.
Introduction of Personal Plus
was supported by an aggressive
,r~rketing plan. For about eight
weeks prior to implementation,
the public and riders received
the message through the print
and broadcast media and colht-
eral material.
Opening day ceremonies were
held March 29 in the parldng
area hehiod city hall. Represen-
iatives of the Ohio Department
of Transportation and the Ohio,
Kentucky, Indiana Regional
Council of Governments joined
city officials in celebrsting "how
Harailton conquered the ADA
hurdles," in Melaniphy's words.
Officials anvelled one of the
24 new signs that have been
placed at designated bus stops
downtown and throughout the
city. The signs provide the
printed route number as well as
information in Braille and tactile
for the visually impaired.
One of the system's ten new
vandal-resistant, weather-proof
waiting shelters was temporarily
set up for inspection. The shel-
ters, which accommodate wheel-
chairs, have been installed at ma-
jor boarding points.
During Idck-off week, The Bus
Company w'as flooded with re-
For the past six months, the city's
approx]mately 61,000 residents have
enjoyed personalized, accessible, curb-to-
curb service within their neighborhoods.
quests. Even though a new ~ele-
phone system had been installed
for the occasion, many callers
encountered busy signals.
More telephone lines were
quickly added and additional em-
ployee~ ass/gned to taking e~ll~,
A new system with a se-
quencer and triple the number of
ago and is running smoothly
A recent passenger survey
elicited very positive comments
and indicated that 15 percent of
current riders began using the
system since the ius~tofion of
point deviation.
Meianiphy's predictions of
cost savings have been horne
out. Hamilton's bus system ts
now serving a greater geo-
graphic area at 80 perceut of its
previous operating costs, and
has seen a 35 percent reduction
in railes traveled.
Personal Plus was honored
with the 1993 Innovatinn Award
by ATE Management and Service
Company, manager of the sys-
tern. The award was presented in
August at the annual transit man.
agement meeting attended by
top personnel of the 50 systems
ATE manages nationw/de.
Hamilton created Personal
Plus, envisioning a snudl-systeln
alternative for meeting ADA re-
quiremenLq. Officials have heen
approached by a number of
other junsdictious seeking to im-
plement a s'unilar system. (Point
deviation is used in nnly two
other American cities, and only
on a 'lunited basis.)
Inquiries have also come from
larger communities considering
it for use at night or in low.
ridemhip areas.
"We are very proud of the
strides we have taken with our
bus company in Hamilton,"
Mayor Olivas said. "We antici.
pate its model being used else-
where in the nation."
For more infominion, contact
Olivas: Municipal Building, 20
High Street, Hamilton, Ohio
45011; (513) 868-5800. I
CITIZENS' SUMMARY
CITY OF IOWA CITY
1997-99 PROPOSED
FINANCIAL PLAN
CITY OF IOWA CITY
December, 1995
City Council
City of Iowa City
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
Re: FY97-99 Financial Plan
Mayor and City Council Members:
In the preparation of the FY97-FY99 three-year financial plan, as a community we are at a
critical point in our budget planning. Never has there been a greater need for long-term
financial planning. While I believe this long term planning is necessary, the state and the
constant changes in tax policy removes such a possibility from our grasp. The state continues
to impose requirements and regulations on local government programs of service, and then
restricts the means by which we finance that program of service. Officials of the state
government have recently indicated property tax law in Iowa is outdated and overly complex.
Hopefully this is a sign that changes are to be considered.
State regulation of local government finance has become so unpredictable that meaningful
long-term planning is an exercise in futility. As we identify community needs, prepare budget
estimates and make commitments, we often find the very foundation of our financing undone
by direct action of the state or some formula-driven tax policy, which the State legislature
abhors. Cities are chastised for relying on the property tax and yet meaningful alternatives
to finance local government services are not provided. Cities in Iowa do not enjoy the benefit
of the broad tax-base authority such as that of the state government, and therefore cannot
fashion financing in accordance with the unique characteristics of each community. State
control of local government can be seen in many instances. Property tax freezes, elimination
of tax base such as machinery and equipment and personal property, a failure to fully
reimburse for loss of tax base, freezes and/or caps on other revenues to cities, such as bank
franchise taxes, and limiting payments such as municipal assistance by way of the state
appropriation process and reducing appropriations mid-year are examples. All of this erodes
the financial foundation of Iowa's cities and makes long-term commitments and planning
difficult, at the very least. Our ability to plan becomes very limited and we find ourselves
responding each year to what the state may have in store for its cities.
State budgeting and legislative processes as they affect municipalities are, in my judgment,
an exercise in contradiction. As Iowa's economy moves more toward expanding manufactur-
ing and industrial components for job creation, cities can and should play a major role. By
virtue of the services provided by cities, they become the center for such development, and
yet cities are left without the fiscal means to fulfill that objective. Our ability to finance the
very services necessary to fulfill state economic development policy is stifled.
The budget proposals you will review are also somewhat of a problem in contradiction in that
there are services in need of expansion to meet our community's growth, although resources
are not now available. There are others that are proposed for reduction in service, and in
EAST q~'ASH I NGTO~q STRE£T · IOWA CITY. IOWA ~2240- 1826 · (.~19) ~6-}000 · FAX
virtually every instance, the change and/or decline in a particular service is due to an erosion
within the financial base which supports the particular service.
This budget plan provides for the first full year of an additional six police patrol officers and
the implementation of neighborhood policing concepts. These officers are financed by the
federal crime bill grant for the next three years. The streets maintenance budget proposes the
addition of two employees in order to meet expanded street mileage within our community
and allows for us to create an additional snow removal district (from nine to ten). Additional
efforts can also be directed toward street and curb repair in our older neighborhoods, brick
street replacement, leaf pickup, and other related street maintenance services. Our sl~reet
maintenance and traffic enginesring/street lighting programs are financed by an annual
allocation from the State road use tax.
It is projected that the transit system will lose the $260,000 annual federal operating
assistance by FY99. Furthermore, congressional plans for reductions in capital assistance
from an 80/2q federal/local formula to a 50/50 formula for the purposes of bus purchases and
related capital equipment also appear inevitable. The County has requested a 30% increase
in the SEATS budget. In order to meet this challenge, the budget plan proposes a transit fare
increase from 50¢ to 75¢ and the elimination of nighttime service.
Our community relies substantially for growth in our tax base by way of new construction and
increases in property values to finance our program of service. To date, this has been
sufficient to offset the effects of inflation in our expenditures and at the same time provides
some margin to consider services to be expanded to meet our community's growth. The state
has also chosen to reduce values not only on residential, but also commercial property.
Predicting tax base becomes less reliable.
The FY97-99 three-year financial plan is balanced in accordance with sound accounting and
management policies. There are many issues pending that can place a burden on the general
fund for the future. Our reserves are satisfactory in the short-term; however, any further
state erosion of tax base can jeopardize that foundation.
Requests to expand services were presented. Additional staff at the Senior Center, a need
to plan for improved fire response as our community grows, a proposed capital and operating
expansion of the library, administration of new regulatory ordinances, maintenance of newly
acquired open space - all of these activities will require commitments from our general fund,
that which is most regulated by the state. Your discretionary ability as an elected body grows
more limited. We can only hope the state will take this as a truly legitimate local government
financial concern and set aside political issues so that local governments can meet economic
challenges the state has delivered to our doorstep and allow us to create healthy and
economically vital local governments.
Steph~~j. Atki~
City Manager
-2-
Airport 8oards &
Coranisslon Coa~issions
A~an~age~age~sjstanN
City J
Broadband
~?eleco~'aunicatlons
---Civil Rights
---Personnel Administration
~AdnHnistration
~BD ~alntenance
---Cemetery
mForestry
---Government Buildings
mParks
-~Recreatson
City of Iowa City, Iowa
Organizational Chart
Citizens of
Iowa City
Iowa City
City Council
City
Attorney
Library
City City Board of
Uanager Clerk Trustees
---Administration
~Accounting
---0ocument Services
~[nformation Services
---Purchasing
---Risk ganagement
~Treasury
~Admin~stration
---Community Development
--JCCO6 Programs
--Urban Planning
---~conomic Oevelopment
---tteighborhood Services
!ilrra~C~operatJons
- 3 °
1
FireChief)
--Admin./Training
---Fire Prevention
---Fire Suppression
Po!lce
--Administration
--Animal Control
---Cogsunity Services
~-Criminal Investigation
-~Xcmergency Communications
---Patrol
---Records & Ident,fication
C°!~Se~jo~ Center
--Administration
Assisted
--Housing
Building
--inspect~on
Housing
--inspection
--Administration
Energy
-Conservation
--Engineering
-*Equipment
Maintenance
--Solid Waste
--Streets
Traffic
--Engineering
Wastewater
--Treatment
--Water
FINANCIAL PLAN OVERVIEW
The Three-Year Financial Plan Ithe Plan) is again being used for Fiscal Years (FY) 97 through
FY99, which begin on July 1 and end on June 30. This is a one year annual budget that
meets State of Iowa code requirements for budgets, but also provides an additional two years
of projections as a planning tool for City government. The "Financial Plan Overview"
discusses the basis that the financial plan has been built upon. The Financial Plan operating
budget plan includes General Governmental Fund "Enterprise Operating and Reserve Funds."
A separate seven-year Capital Improvements Program (CIP) budget is included in the appendix
of this document.
The role of a government's operating budget differs from that of a private business. Budgets
are an important internal planning tool for business. However, in government, budgets also
plav an external role. A multi-year financial plan informs parties both inside and outside
government of its future objectives in providing services to its constituents.
The three year plan permits particular emphasis to be placed on property tax levies, user fee
projections, fund balances, the scheduling of capital purchases (both equipment and major
improvement projects) and debt service/bond financing costs. Rather than approaching the
budget as an annual agony, the three year planning process provides a means to meet most
funding needs at some time within the three year period. The Three Year Plan is a reliable
planning document and a management tool.
The modified cash basis of accounting has been used for preparation of the Plan because the
City maintains its daily accounting records on this basis. Therefore, revenues are recorded
when received, not necessarily when they are earned, and expenditures are recorded when
paid instead of when they are incurred. The Financial Plan summarizes the budget by major
category within each division. Actual receipts and expenditures are monitored carefully on
a line-item basis by the Finance Administration Division and the department head in charge
of each division and compared to the budget throughout the fiscal year. Department heads
are ultimately responsible for ensuring that the divisions under their control stay within
budget.
44-
FINANCIAL PLAN ANALYSIS
GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS
General Governmental Operations consist of the General Fund, the Debt Service Fund, the Trust and
Agency Funds, Internal Service Funds and the Special Revenue Funds.
A. PROPERTY TAX
Property tax is the single largest revenue source for the City General Fund, accounting for over
64% of FY97 General Fund revenues. The City's property tax requests for FY97 through
FY99, including the FY96 certified tax requests, are proposed to be levied as follows:
FY96 FY97
Tax Rate Tax Rate
Dollars Pe~ Dollars Per $1,000
General' 11,997,774 8.100 12,701,324 8.100
Library 399,926 .270 423,377 .270
Transit 1,407,146 .9~0 1,489,661 .950
Subtotal 13,804,846 9.320 14,614,362 9.320
Employee Benefits 2,908,280 1.963 3,326,729 2.122
Debt Service 2,544,714 1.709, 1,892,000 1.196
Subtotal 19,257,840 12.992 19,833,091 12
% Chge from prior year 4.2% 0.3------~'~ 3.0% (2.7)%
Ag. Bldgs. & Land 6,293 ,, 3.00.4, 6,124 ,3,0q4,
TOTAL LEVIED 19,2_64<! 33, ,!9,839,215,
FY98 FY99
Tax Rate Tax Rate
Dollars Per $1OOQ Dollars Per .~1000
General 12,957,540 8.100 13,542,943 8.100
Library 431,918 .270 451,431 .270
Transit 1.519,711 .950 1,588,370 .950
Subtotal' 14,909,169 9.320 15,582,744 9.320
Employee Benefits 3,225,032 2.016 3,421,358 2.046
Debt Service 2,740,000 1.698 3,570,000 2.11 ~
Subtotal 20,874,201 13.03_____~4 22,574,102 ~13.484,
% Chge from i~rior year 5.3% 3.1% 8.1% 3.5%
Ag. Bidga. & Land 6,124 3.00~4 6,124 3.00____._~4
TOTAL LEVEED 20,88 r0,325, 22,580,2,2.6_
-§-
Following is a schedule highlighting the changes from FY92 through FY97 in assessed value,
state rollback, exemptions and taxable assessed value. Taxable assessed value is calculated
by applying the state rollback factor to residential value and by subtracting military and TIF
exemptions.
Commercial, Less: Exemptions
Industrial & Military & Taxable
Descril~t!on Residential Utilities TIF Values Assessed
Valuation
Fiscal Year 1997
100% Asseesment $1,344,181,100
State rollback .593000
Less: Exemptions o-
Taxable Assessed Value $ . 797,01~9~393
Fiscal Year 1996
100% Assessment $1,136,350,300
State rollback .675074
Less: Exemptions --
Taxable Assessed Value } 767~120,599,
$806,643,278 - - $2,150,824,378
.970000 - - (571,281,008}
- - (13,517,546) (13.517,546)
782, ~43.979 ,$(13,517,546) $.1,566,025,826
8728,058,842 - - $1,864,409,142
.... {371,197,969)
-. (12,004,486) {12.004,486)
~726,090.574 $(12,004,48~) $1,481,206,687.
State Rolled Back Utilities to .97209; Commercial and Industrial are at 100%
Fiscal Year 1995
100% Assessment 91,089,889,230 9693,293,313 $ . - $1,783,182,543
State rollback .680404 None - - (348,324,272)
Less: Exemptions .... (9,078,219) (9,078.219)
Taxable Assessed Value .{, 741,564.9~8. 9693,~,9,~313. ~ (9.078,219,) ~1~4~5,780'05~
Fiscal Year 1994
100% Assessment 9 949,139,460 9651,001,896 $ - - 91,600,141,356
State rollback .726985 None · * (259,129,258)
Less: Exemptions .... (8,591,624) (8,591,624)
Taxable Assessed Value $ 690,010,202. ~651,001,896 ~ {8,591 ~624:) ~ 1 ~332,420.~74:
Fiscal Year 1993
100% Assessment $ 925,388,170 9626,415,370 $ - - 91,551,803,540
-. (249,292,127)
State rollback .730608 - -
Less: Exemptions .... (9,948,833) (9,948,833)
Taxable Assessed Value 9 676,096,043 ~626.41.5,3~70~ ~ (9,948,8~3~) 9(1,292,562,58q
Fiscal Year 1992
100% Assessment 9 832,042,560 9579,546.900 $ · - 91,411.589,450
State rollback .794636 .... {170,871,586)
LOSS: Exemptions .... (14,255,105) (14,255,105)
Taxable Assessed Value $ 861.170,96~ ~5~9,546,9.00 ~(1.4,255,105) 91,226.462'759
Commercial,
Industrial &
PeruentailS Chan~es . Residential Utilities Exemptions. Total
FY97 100% Assessment 18.29% 10.79% N/A 15.36%
FY96 100% Assessment 4.26% 5.01% N/A 4.56%
FY95 100% Assessment 14.83% 6.50% N/A 11.44%
FY94 100% Assessment 2.56% 3.48% N/A 3.00%
FY93 100% Assessment 11.22% 8.09% N/A 9.93%
FY97 State rollback (12.16%) (3.00%) N/A N/A
FY96 State rollback (0.78%) N/A N/A N/A
FYg5 State rollback (6.41%1 NIA N/A N/A
FY94 State rollback {.50%) N/A N/A N/A
FY93 State rollback (8.06%) NIA N/A N/A
FY97 Taxable value 3.91% 7.47% 12.60% 5.73%
FY96 Taxable value 3.45% 4.73% {32.23%) 3.89%
FY95 Taxable value 7.47% 6.50% (5.66%) 7.01%
FY94 Taxable value 2.06% 3.48% {13.64%) 3.00%
FY93 Taxable value 2.28% 8.09% [30.21%) 5.39%
-6-
100% assessed value increased by 15.36% from FY96 to FY97; however, after applying the
state rollback factor and exemptions, taxable assessed value increased by 5.73%.
The State controls local growth in taxable assessed value through the rollback factor on
residential property. The residential rollback factor is tied to the growth in agricultural value
state-wide. The FY97 rollback ~actor of .593000 is 12.16% lower than FY96. The rollback
factor along with the maximum state imposed tax rates In the General (8.10), Library (.27) and
Transit {.95) levies allows the state to control and limit taxable growth Iooally.
The FY97 General 8.10 property tax levy totaling $12,701,324 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 98.10 per 91000 of taxable assessed valuation per State law.
The FY97 Library tax levy of $.27, which was voted in by a majority of the residents in 1991,
will generate approximately $423,377. The initial levy was used to expand Library services
and continues to maintain that level of service.
The FY97 transit levy totaling $1,489,661 is a "general" levy for transit use and must be
receipted into the general fund and then transferred to the Transit Fund. FY98 and FY99 are
estimated at 2% and 4.8% higher than the previous year, respectively.
The Employee Benefits property tax levy is used for General Fund em~lover costs of social
security (FICA - 7.65%), the Iowa Public Employees Retirement System costs (IPERS
the Police and Fire Pension contributions (19.00%), health insurance, life insurance, disability
insurance, worker's compensation insurance premiums and unemployment compensation. In
FY96, FY97, FY98 and FY99 the City has or is proposing to levy the Employee Benefits tax
at $2,908,280, $3,326,729, $3,225,032 and $3,421,358, respectively. 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, approximately
$595,000 was used in FY96 and in FY97, FY98 and FY99, $457,000, 9790,000 and
$832,000, respectively.
The Debt Service (DS) levy provides funds for the payment of the principal and interest on
general obligation bonds of the City. It can also be utilized to fund the payment of any
judgments against the City, unless other funding sources are provided. The FY97 levy
decreases to $1,892,O00 from $2,544,714 in FY96 due to a lower than expected bond issue
in Calendar Year 1996. The levy is projected to increase to $2,740,000 in FY98 and
$3,570,Q00 in FY99. New debt issues to pay for the cost of repairs and renovation to streets,
bridges, recreation buildings, etc. in 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999 are $2.0 million, $6.0
million, $7.0 million, and $4.8 million, respectively.
GENERAL FUND REVENUES
Overall, General Fund revenues in FY1997, 1998 and 1999 increase approximately $600,000
each year. FY97 revenues are approximately $28.7 million or 5.8% greater than the FY96
budget. General Fund revenues are summarized into nine major categories. The analysis of
each category follows:
Prol~ertv Taxes -- This includes the General (8.10), Transit {.95), Library (.27) and Ag
Land levies. The property taxes as proposed are at the maximum allowable rates as
shown above. FY97 property tax revenues are projected to be $14,620,486 or 5.9%
greater than FY96. FY98 is projected to increase by 2 % to $14,915,293 and by 4.5 %
to $15,588,744 in FY99.
-7-
Transfer: Emolovee Benefits Levv -- this property tax revenue source is receipted into
the Employee Benefits Fund and then transferred to the General Fund to pay for
benefits of employees (employer share of FICA, IPERS and Police and Fire Pension
contributions; health premiums, etc.). FY97 transfers are estimated to be $3,834,848.
Road Use Tax -- This Is a gas tax that is received by the State of Iowa paid to the CiW
on a per capita basis, receipted into the City Road Use Tax Fund and then transferred
to the General Fund to pay the actual costs of the Traffic Engineering and Streets
Divisions less other revenues received by these divisions. Starting in FY96 an
additional transfer was made to the General Fund to fund a new forestry position. This
position is directly related to the maintenance of City street right-of-way.
State/Federal FundlnR -- The ongoing revenue sources that come from the State of
Iowa consist of state aid, personal property replacement tax, bank franchise tax and
library open access. The State remits state aid and personal property replacement
revenue to the CiW in two equal installments, one in December and the other in March.
The state remitted bank franchise to the CiW at the beginning of FY96 for the previous
fiscal year (FY95), which is why FY95 is so low.
All of the the state revenues are budgeted at approximately the same amount as
actually received for FY95, except for bank franchise tax, and reflect no increases in
future years.
Six police officers were added in FY96, with salaries and benefits funded from a
Federal Crime Grant. The grant proceeds are for three years (FY96 - FY98).
Chef, aback of Services -- This revenue source consists of administrative charges to
the Enterprise Funds (Ex.: Water, Parking, Wastewater, etc.) for services provided in
the Finance and Public Works Administrative Divisions, use of the Document Services
Division, use of Central Services, Cable TV support to the Libraw for Audio Visual Lab
services and a CiW Attorney chargeback for services.
Fines, Permits and Fees -- This category includes quite a variety of different revenue
sources. The largest are Recreation fees, building permits and inspections, parking
fines, library services and magistrate court fines.
Contractual Services - Included in this revenue line item is the contract for Fire
Department services provided to the University of Iowa.
Johnson County contracts with the CiW for the use of the Libraw and Senior Center
for residents who live outside the CiW limits of Iowa City but within Johnson County.
Hotel/Motel Tax - This revenue is from the 7% hotel/motel tax that is assessed to
those establishments within the city limits of Iowa City. Actual receipts are allocated
as follows:
Police Patrol (50%), Convention Bureau (25%), Mercer Park Aquatics (15%) and
Parkland Fund {10%). The 10% amount that goes to the Parkland Fund is further
broken down into Acquisition (7%) and Development {3%).
All Other Income -- The largest two revenue sources in all other income are interest
income and transfer of parking fines to the General Fund. CEBA loan proceeds are
funds from the state for approved applications from local businesses for economic
development. The CiW acts as a pass-through agent and distributes the funds to the
approved applicants. TIF Interfund loan repayments'are from property taxes associated
with the Villa Garden TIF project.
-8-
CITY OF IOWA CITY
GENERAL FUND REVENUES BY MAJOR CATEGORY
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995 THROUGH 1999
FY 96
10000 GENERAL EUND FY 95 AMENDED FY 97 FY 98 FY 99
RECEIPT TYPE ACTUAL BUDGET PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED
1) PROPERTY TAX 13,241,127 13,811,139 14,820,382 14,915,169 15,588,744
2} TRANSFER: EMPL BENEFITS LEVY 3,223,388 3,418,500 3,834,848 4,059,896 4,050,663
3) ROAD USE TAX 2,228,721 2,673,300 2.964,394 3,004,421 3,131,839
4) STATE ! FEDERAL FUNDING:
STATE AID (formerly Municipal 635,O71 636,000 635,000 635.000 635,000
Assistance and IJquor Profits)
PERSONAL PROPERTY REPLACEMENT 320,777 320,000 320,000 320,000 320,000
LIBRARY-OPEN ACCESS 52,670 0 50,000 50,000 50,000
GRANT*FEMA REIMS-FLOOD 50,880 0 0 0 O
POLICE FEDERAL CRIME GRANT 0 222,271 228,000 240,000 O
BANK FRANCHISE TAX 957 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
TOTAL STATE FUNDING 1,060,355 1,278,271 1,333,000 1,345,000 1,105,000
5) CHARGEBAC~( OF SERVICES
ADMIN EXPENSE CHARGE~ACK 977,317 1,037,905 1,O76.088 1,107,501 1,139,856
CITY A~I'ORNEY CHARGEBACK 39,652 60,000 43,000 43,000 43,000
OTHER CHARGES FOR SERVICES 114,600 117,345 118,725 122,092 125,559
TOTAL CHARGEBACKS 1,131,569 1,215.250 1,237,813 1,272,593 1,308,415
6} FINES PERMITS & FEES
RECREATION FEES 661,095 717,129 729,709 733,209 737,209
BUILDING PERMITS & INSPECTIONS 471,430 468,925 444,100 449,100 449,100
PARKING FINES- $5 364,440 275,000 340,000 340,000 340,000
LIBRARY SERVICES 266,867 207.592 293,255 294,668 296,130
POLICE SERVICES 153,711 53,250 86,000 70,000 62,000
MAGISTRATES COURT 152,522 110,000 145,000 145,000 145,000
HOUSING PERMITS & INSPECTIONS 121,373 123,350 120.250 120,250 120,250
FOOD & LIQUOR LICEN & PERMITS 91,282 83,730 86,700 86,700 86,700
ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES 78,322 71,400 78,600 76,600 76,600
BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT FEES 57,060 46.000 45,300 45,300 45,300
CEMETERY FEES & CHARGES 50,185 30.000 35,000 35,000 35,000
TOTAL FINES PERMITS & FEES 2,468,287 2,186,376 2,401,914 2.395,827 2,393,289
7} CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
UNIVERSITY FIRE CONTRACT 721,576 705,000 747,300 770,000 793,000
JOHNSON COUNTY CONTRACT 317,882 313.200 322.000 328,000 335.000
TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICE 1,O39,458 1.018,200 1,069,300 1,098,000 1,128,000
8) HOTEL/MOTEL TAX 458,633 440,000 440,000 440.000 440,000
9i ALL OTHER INCOME
INTEREST INCOME 392,304 200,000 200,000 200.000 200,000
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 72,945 51,680 59.865 60,775 61,925
MONIES & CREDITS 27.911 26,000 26.000 26,000 26.000
MILITARY CREDIT 11,406 11,500 11,500 11.500 11,500
CEBA LOAN PROCEEDS 635,000 300.000 0 0 0
LOAN REPAYMENTS 36,041 O 20,000 20.000 20.000
TRANSFER IN. CABLE TV 25,000 25,000 O O 0
PROCEEDS FROM SALE OF HOME 0 0 0 0 0
PARKING FINES TRANSFER TO GE 472.676 400,000 440,000 440.000 440.000
LIBRARY LOAN AND TRANSFER 0 50,000 0 0 0
FIRE REPLACEMENT TRANSFER 50,000 O 0 0 0
TIF INTERFUND LOAN REPAYMT 48.035 34,324 62.000 62,000 62,000
GRANTS-POLICE/SENIOR CENTER 15.992 0 4,000 4,000 4.000
TOTAL ALL OTHER INCOME 1,787.310 823,385 824,275 825.425
GRAND TOTAL REVENUES
1.098,504
26,636.848 27,139,540 28,724,996
-9-
29.355,181
29.971,375
C. GENERAL FUND - EXPENDITURES
The proposed General Fund expenditure budget in FY97 is 928,830,264 and is operationally
the same as the FY98 Budget for most departments, with the exception of expanded services
provided by the Streets Department with the addition of two new employees. The FY96
budget included the addition of six police officers and a Forestry Division employee to maintain
trees along the right-of-way of public streets. A federal grant pays for the six police officers'
salaries and benefits in FY96, FY97 and FY98. A comparison of dollars and percentage
changes by major classification of expenditure follows:
DOLLARS
Actual Budget Proposed Proposed Proposed
FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99
Personal Services
Commodities
Services & Charges
Capital Outlay
Transfers
Contingency
TOTAL
EXPENDITURES
815,783,494 $17,042,321 ~18,014,692 $19,O39,112 920,124,924
816,025 980,287 1,006,099 1 ,O11,030 1,041,356
4,477,357 5,567,343 '5,013,242 5,134,550 5,262,239
917,593 2,908,794 1,353,662 917,717 978,564
2,615,308 3,380,470 3,152,569 3,469,768 3,133,801
- - 183,514 290,000 300(000 310,000
~24,~09,777. ~30,062~7~9. ;~8,930,264 .~29~-~2~1,77, t~30,850,884
PERCENTAGE
CHANGE FROM
PRIOR YEAR
Actual Budget Proposed Proposed Proposed
FY~5 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99
Personal Services
Commodities
Services & Charges
Capital Outlay
Transfers
Contingency
TOTAL % CHANGE
4.9% 8.0% 5.7% 5.7% 5.7%
3.9% 20.1% 2.6% 0.5% 3.0%
1.7% 24.3% 19.9)% 2.4% 2.5%
(0.1)% 217.0% (53.5)% 32.2% 6.6%
25.7% 29.2% (6.7)% 10.1% {9.7)%
...... 3.4% 3.3%
5.2% 22.1% (4.1)% 3.6% 3.3%
Personal Services
Personal services includes salaries and benefits (health, life, disability insurance and
employer share of FICA, IPERS, and Police/Fire retirement contributions. The FY95
budget includes scheduled step increases and an estimated bargained adjustment.
Personnel costs are primarily controlled by collective bargaining agreements.
Employees of the City are represented by three unions: AFSCME (Local //183), the
Police Labor Relations Organization of Iowa City, and the Iowa City Association of
Professional Fire Fighters, IAFF, AFL-CIO (Local #610). All supervisory, confidential,
temporary and other emplovees 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.
The majority of City employees are represented by AFSCME. 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 two-year contract
on July 1, 1994, and includes a 3.00% adjustment to wages in FY96 plus an,/
scheduled step increases.
-10-
Sworn police officers are represented by the Police Labor Relations Organizations of
lows City. The bargaining unit is composed of all Iowa City police officers. Exempt
from the unit are the police chief, lieutenants, captains, sergeants, and other
confidential, administrative, supervisory and less than half-time employees. The police
officers union agreed to a three.year contract that spans July 1, 1994, through June
30, 1997. This agreement included a 3.0% adjustment to wages in July 1994, 3.25%
in July 1995, 2% in July 1996, 2% on December 28, 1996, plus any scheduled step
increases in each fiscal year.
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 firefighters negotiated a one-year contract, July 1, 1995, and
includes a 3.25% adjustment to wages plus any scheduled step increases.
Employees who are administrative, supervisory or otherwise ineligible for collective
bargaining are covered by the Personnel Rules and Regulations. Some are eligible for
Civil Service. Salaries and benefits are determined by the City Council upon the
Tecommsndation of the City Manager. Approximately 100 administrative and
confidential employees received a 3% adjustment July 1, 1995, plus any scheduled
step increases.
Commodities
Commodities mainly consist of office and cleaning supplies, and maintenance and
repair materials for buildings, streets and equipment. Supplies and materials are
projected to increase by 2.6% in FY97, 0.5% in FY98, and 3.0% in FY99.
Services and Charges
Services and Charges cover expenses for liability insurance premiums, Aid to Agencies
payments, printing and postage, various service contracts, repairs and maintenance to
vehicles, equipment and buildings, chargeback for internal service funds and utilIW
costs. FY97 is estimated to decrease $550,000 or 10% less than FY96. The main
reasons for the decrease are the one-time Pavment of $400,000 in FY96 to Moore
Business for the Community Economic Betterment Association grant from the State of
Iowa and moving the information Services chargeback to a transfer out line item in
FY97.
-11 -
The Aid to Agencies budget is partially funded from Community Development Block
Grant monies and the remainder funded from property tax revenues in the General
Fund. The City Council appropriates money annually to each agency. The FY97
budget is proposed to be $383,450 [$105,000 CDBG, $278,450 General Fund).
Human services received FY97 requests for funding totaling $456,885, an increase of
$86,857 or 23,6% more than the FY96 budget - $60,685 is increases to current
agencies that receive funding and $26,000 is from two new requests, $2,000 -
Independent Living and $24,000 - Youth Homes. The financial plan provides funding
in FY98 of $391,804 {$105,000 CDBG, $286,804 General Fund).and FY99 of
$400,408 {$105,000 CDBG, 9295,408 General Fund). Below is a detailed listing of
the actual funding of agencies from FY93 to FY95 and the budget for FY98.
Actual Actual Actual Budget
FY93,. FY94,, FY95 , Fy98
Big 8rothers/Big Sisters $ 28,500 9 30,000 9 31,500 933,075
Crisis Center 24,900 26,892 29,692 31,200
Domestic Violence Program 31,400 38,900 42,000 44,100
Elderly Services Agency 47,750 48,750 51,000 53,500
Emergency Housing Project 2,000 3,500 5,250 6,000
HACAP 8,000 6,000 6,000 6,240
Mayor's Youth Employment 39,691 35,000 36,000 35,000
MECCA 15,000 20,000 22,O00 24,500
Rape Victim Advocacy 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000
Red Cross 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,410
United Action for Youth 47,000 49,000 50,000 53,000
Neighborhood Centers 27,000 42,978 45,000 47,250
ICARE 7,500 8,500 8,500 9,925
Life Skills Housing 14,844 16,990 15,560
Free Medical Clinic o0- -0- -0- 5,000
Contingency -0- -0' ~,0: 5,990
Subtotal $308,785 9342,708 9357,702 $370,190
LESS: Amount Funded (102,535) [121,990) (120,560) (105,000)
Dirsctly by CDBG
Net General Fund Total 208.~____~ 22~ ~2~,7,14~ $265,1 ~0,
-12-
4. Transfers
Following ia an itemized listing of actual transfers from the General Fund for FY94 and FY95,
the FY96 Budget and Proposed for FY97, FY98 and FY99.
GENERAL FUND FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99
TRANSFER TO Actual A~tusl Budget Proposed Proposed Proposed
Airport Operations 58,156 99,328 103,450 123,000 100,000 104,000
Transit Operations 1,263,240 1,338,844 1,407,146 1,489,861 1,519,711 1,588,370
Transit Operations 213,500 317,833 469,000 315,000 452,000 487,000
JCCOG 85,292 67,805 94,966 85,500 91,250 98,000
Employee Benefits Reserve 200,~]00 200,000 200,000
Trails 8,476 164,499 18,192
Intra City Trails 4,950 30,000 30,000 30,000
CIP- Streetscape-near Southside 13,913
28,818 22,160
205,948 387,635 167,770
CIP-Civic Center, Airport, All
Other 234,764 387,835 189,930
Information Services Transfer
CIP-HVAC Digital Controls
Equipment Division Loan
Landfill Loan Rspay-Rre 177,071
Fire Truck Replacement
ClP-Park Renovation &
Improvemere 17,761
Computer Replacement Reserve-
Library 14,800
Cable Channel Replacement-
Library 9,000
Loan Repayment-Library
CIP-Bullding Design-Library
Parking-Senior Center
Landfill-Loan Repayment-St.
Center
6,000
CIP-Parks Land Acquisition
CIP-Park Development
Total Transfer from General
Fund 2,080.751
50,000 50,000
30,000
50,000
519,076 707,167 456,791
9,000 6,500 8,500
4,000 4,000 4,000
50,000 29,250 29,250 29,250
188,855 29,250
69,508 152,742 65,000 65,000 65,000
30,000 45,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
9,500 20,292 11,790 11,790 11,790
50,000
86,774 8,336
6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 8,000
20,000 9,000 30,000 30,000 30,000
131,874 57,100 57,100 57,100
12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000
2,615,308 3,380,470 3.152,569 3,469,768 3,133,801
5. Contingency
The FY96 original contingency budget was 9376,357. The balance at 11-30o95 is $183,514
as budget amendments have been processed using contingency. The City Council added
9120,000 to the original FY96 contingency of $ 256,357 for a total of 9376,357. Contingency
is set at approximately 1% of total revenues. FY97, FY98 and FY99 contingency is $290,000,
$300,000 and 9310,000.
-13-
D. GENERAL FUND YEAR-END CASH BALANCE
The City separates the General Fund cash balance into a Pure Fund Cash Balance and a Reserve
Fund Cash Balance. The Pure Fund Cash Balance is that portion of the balance maintained as
working capital which is not available for allocation except in emergency situations. The Reserve
Fund Cash Balance is allocated for Parkland Acquisition/Development and Library computer
equipment replacement, AV/Public Access equipment replacement and State reciprocal borrowing
activity. (Fire Apparatus replacement reserve was moved out of the General Fund in FY95 and
established as a reserve of the Equipment Division [internal Service Fund].)
The annual year-end cash balance minus the reserve cash balances equals the Pure Fund Cash
Balance or the General Fund's working capital position. The following chart gives the Pure Fund
Cash Balance for fiscal years 1995 through 1999.
FY95 FY96 ' FY97 FY98 FY99
,Actu,a! Budslet Prqposed Proposed proposed
Beginning Cash
Balance
Receipts
Expenditures
Ending Cash
Balance
Less Reserve
Balances
$ 7,268,824 $ 9,295,895
26,636,848 27,139,540
(24,609,777) (30,062,729)
9,295,895 6,372,706
$ 6,372,706 9 6,267,438 $ 5,760,442
28,724,996 29,355,181
(28,830,264) {29,872,177)
6,267,438 5,750,442
29,971,375
(30,850,884)
4,870,933
(694,373) (646,789) {696,407) (784,186) (868,987)
Pure Fund Balance 8,601,522 ~ 5,725,917 5,571,031' _~ 4¢966,256 9 4x001,946
The Pure Fund Balance is 35% of expenditures in FY95, and drops to 13% by FY99. Any
unexpected deterioration of the City's cash position will need to be monitored closely. Follo~ving
the Financial Plan Overview are schedules summarizing the General Fund cash reserve balances.
The Pure Fund Balance is used to provide for cash flow in the first quarter of the new 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 of the past five years.
3 mos @ Shortfall
Sept. 30 Raceiota Exoenditures in Receipts
1995 $4,612,297 $8,637,663 ($4,025,366)
1994 $4,137,291 96,690,150 (92,552,859)
1993 $3,835,374 $6,205,082 ($2,369,708)
1992 $3,814,379 95,686,785 ($1,872,406)
!991 $3,492,693 $5,348,695 ($1,856,002)
The pure fund balance at year-end will provide fundin~j for the shortfall.
E. DEBT SERVICE FUND
This fund provides for the payment of the principal and interest due on general obligation debt of
the CiW. Funding is provided by the Debt Service Tax Levy and abatement transfers from various
Enterprise Funds for their capital improvements which were funded by General Obligation Bonds.
Debt Service expenses in FY97 through FY99 include proposed bond issues of 92.0 million in
Calendar Year (CY) 1996, $6.0 million in CY97, $7.0 million in CY98, and $4.8 million in CY99.
-14-
As stated in the City's Fiscal Policy, "Debt incurred as a general obligation of the Ciw 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 shows the relation of Iowa City's allowable debt margin and the debt
incurred for FY90 through FY99. The total property valuation amounts are actual for FY90-FY96,
but are estimates for FY97 through FY99.
Total Allowable Debt Debt as % of
Property Margin (5% of Outstanding Debt Allowable
Valuation Total ProJ3erW Val.) at July 1 Debt Mar~in
· FY99 $2,039,579,677 $101,978,983 t~35,594,325 35%
· FY98 1,980,17z~,443 99,008,722 31,314,069 32%
'FY97 1,922,499,460 96,124,973 27,620,973 29%
FY96 1,866,504,330 93,325,216 29,675,380 32%
FY95 1,783,182,543 89,159,127 20,955,000 26%
FY94 1,600,141,356 80,007,068 11,433,900 14%
FY93 1,551,803,540 77,590,177 13,711,322 18%
FY92 1,413,802,243 70,690,112 16,462,582 23%
FY91 1,379,028,589 68,951,429 14,985,000 21%
FY90 1,308,653,903 65,432,695 15,170,000 23%
'Estimate
The Fiscal Policy also includes the guideline that "the debt service levy shall not exceed 25% of
the total levy in any one fiscal year." The following chart shows the debt service levy as a
percentage of the total levy for FY90 through FY99. The levies for FY90-FY96 are certified and
the FY97-FY99 are projected levies. (The State will certify the levy for FY97 in June 1996.)
Debt
Total Levy Service Levy As % of Total
* FY99 13.484 $ 2.118 16 %
°FY98 13.034 1.698 13%
~FY97 12.638 1.196 9.5%
FY96 12.992 1.709 13%
FY95 12.954 1.661 13%
FY94 12.889 1.496 12%
FY93 12.826 1.541 12%
FY92 12.671 2.103 17 %
FY91 12.128 2.152 18%
FY90 12.028 2.253 19%
F. TRUST AND AGENCY FUND
The Trust and Agency Fund budgets for Johnson County Council of Governments {JCCOG). The
JCCOG fund is an agency fund. The City acts as custodian for the fund and provides accounting
services. JCCOG provides counW-wide planning assistance for transportation, human services and
solid waste planning.
G. INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
Internal Service funds include the Equipment Maintenance Fund, Equipment Replacement Fund, the
Central Supply and Print Shop Fund, the Risk Management Loss Reserve Fund, the Health
Insurance Reserve Fund and a new Information Services Fund (formerly a division within the
General Fund).
-15-
The Equipment Maintenance Fund provides maintenance for all City vehicles and equipment and
rants vehicles to other City departments from a central vehicle pool. Funding is provided from a
chargeback to all departments for the maintenance services and the rentals of vehicles.
The Equipment Replacement Fund is used to replace almost all of the rolling stock of all City
vehicles. Funding is provided from a chargeback to all departments based on the estimated
replacement value at the time of replacement.
The Central Services Fund covers the operation of the general office supply inventory, the print
shop, copiers, phone communications, mail services, radio maintenance and the FAX machine. 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 except the General
Fund. All funds are charged based on their loss experience and prorated share of the insurance
premium.
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.
The Information Services Fund accounts for the Data Processing operating support and replacement
of all computer equipment for all divisions except Library. Currently, all operating support funding
is from a chargeback to the General Fund. A new chargeback system for ell funds will be
implemented soon.
H. SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
The Special Revenue Funds include the Employee Benefits Fund, Community Development Block
Grant Fund (CDBG), Road Use Tax Fund, Public/Assisted Housing and Special Assessments.
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.
The CDBG and Public/Assisted Housing Funds account for revenue from the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development programs and is restricted in use for eligible projects as defined
by Federal regulations,
The Road Use Tax Fund accounts for revenue from the State and is used to pay for street related
maintenance and planning, traffic engineering and street related construction costs.
h ENTERPRISE FUNDS
The Enterprise Funds include Parking, Wastewater Treatment, Water, Refuse, Landfill, Airport,
Transit and Broadband Telecommunications. These are primarily funded from user fees for services
provided with the exception of transit and airport. They receive most of their funding from
property taxes, federal and state grants, General Fund subsidy, and the balance from fees. The
other six funds are self-supporting from revenue that they generate.
1. PARKING FUND
Parking rates were increased last on July 1, 1992. There are no rate increases calculated into
the three-year financial plan. Revenues for the three-year plan are flat, Parking fines are
receipted into the parking fund to satisfy revenue requirements for Parking Revenue bond
covenants. If the bond covenants are satisfied and the cash balance at year end is adequate,
the revenue from fines is transferred to the General Fund. Based on the cash balances
-16-
declining from approximately $980,000 at the end of FY96 to approximately $224,000 at the
end of FY98, a rate increase to fund operations may need to be enacted sometime within the
three-year financial plan.
Parking expenditures reflect no change in staffing or operations. Transfers are approximately
one-half of the operating budget. Transfers include the funding for debt payments, parking fine
transfer to the General Fund, parking reserve for ramp repairs and an operating subsidy to the
transit operations.
2. WASTEWATER TREATMENT FUND
The wastewater treatment {und reflects the most recent 35% rate increase enacted for bills
on or after March 1, 1995, and a change to monthly billing on July 1, 1995. Wastewater fees
reflect increases of 15%, 12%, 10% and 10% for billings on or after March 1, 1996, 1997,
1998 and 1999, respectively. The rates, as proposed, comply with the City Council's direction
of accumulating cash of 20% (approximately t~7.6 million) of the cost of three major
wastewater projects estimated at approximately $37.8 million. This cash will be used to pay
for part of the project costs as well as new debt service on bonds to be issued for the balance
of the project costs.
Expenses reflect no new increases in staff in the three-year plan. Transfers are the largest
portion of the operating budget and are predominantly for the payment of principal and interest
payments on debt that has or will be issued. The three-year plan reflects debt service transfers
for revenue bond debt to be issued in Calendar Year (CY) 1996 - $18.9 million, CY97 - $8.8
million, and CY98 - $7.3 million.
3. WATER FUND
The water fund reflects the most recent 40% user fee rate increase (24% on the minimum and
40% on usage past the minimum) enacted for bills on or after March 1, 1995, and a change
to monthly billing July 1, 1995. Water fees reflect increases of 30%, 25%, 22% and 20%
for billings on or after March 1, 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999, respectively. The rates, as
proposed, comply with the City Council's direction of accumulating cash of 20% {approximate-
ly $10.7 million) of the cost of three major water projects estimated at approximately $54.1
million. This cash will be used to pay for part of the project costs.
Expenses reflect no new increases in staff in the three-vear plan. Transfers include the water
portion of General Obligation debt that has been issued and new Revenue Bond debt. The
three*year plan reflects new debt service transfers for bonds issued in CY96 - $6.2 million,
CY97 - $11.75 million, and CY99 - $25.5 million.
4. REFUSE FUND
FY96 operations reflect the new curbside recycling route added March 1, 1995. Curbside
recycling fees are scheduled to be increased on March 1, 1996, from $2.25/month to
$2.80/month. A recycling container will be provided to all residents. Revenues also reflect
the change to volume-based curbside refuse service. A base fee of 88.75/month allows for
two containers of refuse to be picked up each week. Any refuse over the two-container limit
will need a $1.00 sticker attached. There are no significant changes in operations in FY97 to
FY99.
5. LANDFILL FUND
The three-year financial plan reflects no increase in tipping fees. There are no significant
changes in operations or transfers within this fund. The $1.7 million annual transfer from the
operating fund to landfill replacement reserve is then used to pay the cost of constructing new
-17-
landfill cells, purchase of additional landfill land, and any major capital projects that are needed
at the landfill.
AIRPORT
Revenues reflect increased income from the new hangar rentals. The Airport operating fund
reflects no significant change in operations. Transfers include a loan repayment to the Landfill
Reserve fund for the new T-Hangar, an asphalt overlay project and a major roof repair. The
General Fund subsidy is approximately 50% of the airport operating budget in FY97 and
decreases to 43% in FY98 and FY99.
7. TRANSIT FUND
The Transit Operating Fund reflects many changes in the three-year plan. The three-year plan
reflects a recommendation to increase fares from 50¢ to 75¢ per ride effective January 1,
1996. This is estimated to increase fare revenue by approximately $180,000. Federal grant
revenue is scheduled to be phased out over the three years, $250,000 in FY97, $65,000 in
FY9B and zero in FY99. Staff is also recommending to eliminate bus operating hours after
7:00 p.m.
For accounting purposes, the Transit Operating Fund is considered an enterprise fund, which
means fees pay for the majority of the costs associated with this fund; however, fees are one
of the smallest portions of this budget. The majority of the funding in the Transit Fund is
generated from a $.95 levy on all taxable property within the City of Iowa CiW. This generates
approximately 81.4 to $1.6 million a year. In addition, the General Fund is projected to
subsidize an additional 8315,000 in 1997, $452,000 in 1998 and $487,000 in 1999 to
operate this fund. This subsidization has a direct impact on the General Fund operations.
State grant revenue is estimated to be approximately $250,000 per year. Starting in FY95,
$90,000 per year is being transferred from the Parking Fund to the Transit Fund as an
operating subsidy.
The three-year plan reflects the elimination of the transfer to the transit replacement fund. The
CIW will pay their portion of new buses through loans and repay from the debt service property
tax levy.
Below is a summary of revenues by source and the percentage change from the previous year:
FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99
Actual Budge.t, Proposed. Proposed Propos.e.d,
Fare Revenue 8652,166 8645,000 8736,500 $831,500 8831,500
{3.0) % { 1.0)% 14.2% 12.9% - -
Miscellaneous 38,012 32,500 32,500 32,500 32,500
Revenue 9.2% (14.5)% ......
Federal & 554,119 570,260 500,000 315,000 250,000
Slate Asst, 9,6% 2.9% {12.3}% (37.0)% (20.6)%
Transit Tax 1,338,844 1,407,146 1,489,661 1,519,711 1,588,370
Levy 6.0% 5.1% 5.9% 2.0% 4.5%
Operating 407,633 559,000 405,000 542,000 577,000
Subsidy 90.9% 37.1% (27.5)% 33.8% 6.5%
Total 82,990,774 $3,213,906 83,163,661 $3,240,711 $3,279,370
-18-
8. BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
This fund accounts for the Cable TV operations of the City. The funding source is from a 5%
cable franchise fee which is part of the monthly bill for Cable TV. There are no significant
changes within this fund over the three-year plan. Transfers include an operating subsidy to
the Library for cable TV of $40,365 in FY97 and an increase to $43,240 In FY99. In addition,
$10,000 a year is transferred to the Cable TV replacement reserve fund, .which is used to
replace equipment on an as-needed basis.
J. RESERVE FUNDS
The revenue bond ordinance covenants require that Parking and the Wastewater Treatment Fund
set aside these special accounts:
a) Bond and Interest Sinking Reserves - amounts sufficient to pay current bond and interest
maturities. (Transfers from the appropriate operating fund are made monthly.)
b) Bond and Interest Reserves - balances to be maintained that are equal to the maximum amount
of principal and interest due on the bonds in any succeeding fiscal year. (Currant parking
balance is $669,000 and Wastewater balance is $3,513,900.)
c) Depreciation, Extension and improvement Reserve or Renewal and Improvement Reserves -
t~240,000 transferred annually for Wastewater Treatment until a balance of $2 million is
reached (current balance is 82,000,000) and $60,000 transferred annually for Parking until a
balance of $300,000 is reached (current balance is $300,000).
Parking, Landfill, Water, Transit and Broadband Telecommunications have separate reserves for
future capital expenditures. The Parking reserve is to be used for ramp repairs/maintenance, which
is performed biannually, end for a future parking facility. Landfill's reserve is to be used for the
purchase of additional landfill land and ceil construction, closure funding and a perpetual care fund.
The Water reserve is available to fund major capital improvement projects for the water plant in
future years. The Transit reserve will be used to repay loans from the federal and state
governments and to fund future bus acquisitions. Broadband Telecommunications' reserve is for
future equipment replacement.
-19-
FY97 Proposed Expenditures
by Division
FYg7 Proposed P/g8 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel 839,137 $41,592 $44,206
Commodities 1,746 1,797 1,851
Services/Char~es 46,730 48,132 49,57~5
Total Exp. 987,613 $91,521 $95,632
CITY CLERK
FYg7 Proposed FY98 Projection FYg9 Projection
Personnel $192,589 $204,249 9216,642
Commodities 1,167 1,202 1,237
Services/Charges 51,242 77,778 54,361
Total Exp. $244,998 9283,229 9272,240
~r~ III'?. AfrTORNEY' - , ·
FY97 Proposed FYg8 Projection
Personnel $325,294 $345,201
Commodities 9,732 10,024
Services/Charges 37,022 38,132
Capital Outlay 366 0
Total Exp. $372,414 $393,357
FYgg Pr~ectton
9366,372
10,324
39,275
0
9415,971
' CITY; MANAGER '... '.:
FYg7 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $278,630 $295,171 9312,756
Commodities 1,724 1,776 1,829
Services/Charges 53,27!. 54,868 56,514
Total Exp. $333,625 $351,815 9371,099
FY97 Proposed FYg8 Projection FYg9 Projection
Personnel $168,297 $178,343 9189,018
Commodities 7,162 7,378 7,601
Services/Charges 104,149 107,275 110,495
Total Exp. 9279,608 9292,996 9307,114
-21 -
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $215,633 9228,675 $242,536
Commodities 2,244 2,311 2,380
Services/Charges 19,581 20,169 20.774
Total Exp. $237,458 9251,1 55 $265,690
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel 8319,791 9338,978 $359,369
Commodities 3,003 3,093 3,185
Services/Charges 57,704 59,435 61,219
Total Exp. $380,498 ~401,506 $423,773
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel ~ 179,073 9189,813 9201,225
Commodities 2,226 2,293 2,361
Services/Charges 15,227 15,684 16,153
Capital Outlay 1,725 2,060 0
Total Exp. $198,251 9209,850 $219,739
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $408,988 $433,373 $459,281
Commodities 2,455 2,529 2,605
Services/Charges 205,024 211,176 217,510
Capital Outlay 10,597 1,869 1,224
Total Exp. $627,064 $648,947 $680,620
-22-
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Total Exp,
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Exp,
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Total Exp.
Services/Charges
Total Exp,
FY97 Proposed
$167,569
6,265
15,517
$189,351
FY97 Proposed
$122,'150
22,236
122,360
3,400
9,000
$279,146
FY97 Proposed
$63,751
1,500
17,278
$82,529
FY97 Proposed
$489,125
$489,125
FY98 Projection
$177,762
6,454
15,983
9200,199
FY98 Projection
$129,369
22,9.01
126,030
2,100
6,500
$286,900
FY98 Pr~ection
$67,393
1,545
17,797
$86,735
FY98 Pr~ection
8503,799
9503,799
FY99 Projection
$188,602
6,649
16,461
$211,712
FY99 Projection
$137,036
23,587
129,810
1,200
6,500
$298,133
FY99 Projection
$71,257
1,591
18,332
$91,180
FY99 Pr~ection
$518,912
$518,912
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $154,907 $164,231 9174,142
Commodities 2,447 2,522 2,599
Services/Charges 43,387 44,688 46,029
Total Exp. $200,741 $211,442 $222,770
-23-
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel 8190,045 8201,464 $213,599
Commodities 3,165 3,261 3,358
Services/Charges 43,365 44,666 46,005
Total Exp. 8236,575 8249,391 $262,962
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel 856,361 859,706 $63,260
Commodities 681 701 721
Services/Charges 18,219 18,766' 19,329
Capital Outlay 25,370 25,000 25,000
Total Exp. 8100,631 8104,173 $108,310
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $55,162 858,446 861,935
Commodities 480 495 510
Services/Charges 7,024 7,235 7,452
Capital Outlay 154,000 .. 4,000 4,000
Total Exp. 8216,666 870,176 873,897
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel 854,703 857,975 861,452
Commodities 1,835 1,891 1,947
Services/Charges 69,201 71,278 73,415
Capital Outlay ..21,600 20,000 20,000
Total Exp, 8147,339 9151,144 $156,814
-24-
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $ 542,799 $ 574,999 $ 609,204
Commodities 9,594 9,882 1 O, 177
Services/Charges 67,052 69,063 71,136
Capital Outlay 4.860 450 0
Total Exp. 9624,305 9654,394 9690,517
' A DIVIINISTRATi'ON;
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel 9139,205 9147,615 9156,554
Commodities 697 718 740
Services/Charges 5,278 5,439 5,603
Capital Outlay 585 0 0
Total Exp. $145,765 9153,772 9162,897
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $1 i 2,220 9118,414 9124,978
Commodities 7,888 8,124 8,368
Services/Charges 42,306 43,561 44,853
Capital Outlay 23,450 21,130 21,690
Transfers Out 4,000 4,000 4,000
Total Exp. $189,864 $195,229 $203,889
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel 931,477 $33,424 935,495
Commodities 639 658 678
Services/Charges 4,095 4,219 4,346
Total Exp. 936,211 $38,301 $40,519
-25-
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Total Exp,
:'
I ~ r.,1'l~,~'i-~. ~!r~l/'c'~ :" .'.'
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Total Exp,
FY97 Proposed
$327,953
85,738
480,010
5,000
9898;701
FY97 Proposed
91,040,898
262,917
574,818
186,760
92,065,393
FY98 PrHecfion
9347,298
88,308
494,405
5,000
9935,011
FY98 Pr~ection
91,100,791
270,805
591,974
105,500
92,069,070
FY99 Pr~ectlon
9367,847
90,957
509,229
5,000
9973,033
FY99 Pr~ection
$1,164,352
278,929
609,643
105,500
92,158,424
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $174,377 9184,270 9194,762
Commodities 4,954 5,103 5,256
Services/Charges 72,220 74,096 76,026
Capital Outlay 10,080 5,080 5,970
Total Exp. 9261,631 9268,549 9282,014
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel 9159,428 9168,429 9177,971
Commodities 7,572 7,801 8,037
Services/Charges 30,838 31,746 32,680
Capital Outlay 10,895 7,595 1,470
Total Exp. 9208,733 9215,571 9220,158
-26-
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $260,729 9275,687 9291,549
Commodities 6,112 6,294 6,482
Services/Charges 37,676 27,477 28,301
Capital Outlay 2,622 750 4,200
Total Exp. 9307,139 9310,208 9330,532
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Total Exp,
FYg7 Proposed
93,035,242
149,378
119,820
210,540
93,514,980
FY98 ~ojection
93,204,980
128,592
98,011
159,116
93,590,699
FY99 Pr~ection
93,384,508
132,447
100,949
131,300
93,749,204
-INVEs.TiGA"I:ION .'
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Total Exp.
FY97 Proposed
9487,653
3,105
13,643
10,245
9514,646
FY98 Pr~ection
9514,533
3,199
13,737
5,845
9537,314
FY99 Projection
9542,948
3,295
14,150
1.600
9561,993
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Total Exp,
FY97 Proposed
9190,471
10,670
55,847
4,366
9261,354
FY98 Proje~ion
9201,448
10,990
57,523
10,575
9280,536
FY99 Projection
9213,084
11,318
59,248
5,400
9289,050
-27-
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel ¢ 164,836 $173,185 9181,978
Commodities 15,039 15,491 15,954
Services/Charges 18,457 19,012 19,582
Total Exp. $198,332 $207,688 9217,514
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel t¢412,664 9436,741 9462,307
Commodities 8,075 8,317 8,566
Services/Charges 97,098 100,009 103,010
Capital Outlay 6,322 1,910 810
Total Exp. ~¢524,159 9546,977 9574,693
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $196,757 9208,250 9220,456
Commodities 20,203 20,808 21,429
Services/Charges 41,806 43,054 44,341
Capital Outlay 2,930 14,114 1,000
Total Exp. 9261,696 9286,226 9287,226
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel 82,920,600 $3,079,394 93,247,269
Commodities 75,389 77,654 79,983
Services/Charges 290,397 299,119 308,091
Capital Outlay 83,925 48,775 46,125
Transfers Out 29,250 29,250 29,250
Total Exp. 93,399,561 $3,534,192 93,710,718
-28-
H:J:S. '" ': ''
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel 9169,173 $179,349 $190,164
Commodities 1,182 1,218 1,254
Services/Charges 26,988 27,798 28,634
Capital Outlay 2,927 0 0
Total Exp. $200,270 $208,365 $220,052
INSPECTION:'
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $289,272 $306,563 8324,935
Commodities 6,250 6,439 6,632
Services/Charges 46,677 48,075 49,516
Capital Outlay 500 0 3,500
Total Exp. 8342,699 $361,077 $384,583
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $183,752 $194,861 8206,671
Commodities 3,120 3,215 3,312
Services/Charges 20,910 21,538 22,183
Capital Outlay 0 0 0
Total Exp. $207,782 9219,614 8232,166
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Total Exp.
FY97 Proposed
91,299,718
121,186
395,906
88,350
81,905,160
FY98 Pr~ectlon
$1,366,022
124,826
407,784
69,900
$1,968,532
FY99 Pr~ection
$1,436,042
128,574
420,010
38,550
$2,023,176
-29-
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Exp.
FY97 Proposed
$530,403
47,546
199,665
61,450
103,000
9942,064
FY98 Projection
$561,125
48,971
205,501
47,300
103,000
9965,897
FY99 Projection
9593,732
50,441
211,513
50,300
103,000
91,008,986
RECREA.TION AD]VIIN.-
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Total Exp.
FY97 Proposed
9142,296
1,516
16,533
9160,345
FY98 Projection
9150,914
1,563
1 7,028
9169,505
FY99 Projection
9160,075
1,611
17,539
9179,225
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Exp,
FY97 Proposed
91,903,18O
64,987
329,481
363,427
71,790
92,732,865
FY98 Proje~ion
92.013,598
66,938
339,365
347,648
71,790
92,839,339
FY99 Pr~ection
92,130,793
68,949
349,545
503,270
71,790
93,124,347
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel 9271,926 9288,010 9305,093
Commodities 15,831 1 6,307 16,796
Services/Charges 161,956 166,815 171,821
Capital Outlay 32,370 12,000 1,455
Transfers Out 36,000 36.000 36,000
Total Exp. 9518,083 9519,132 9531,165
-30-
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Transfers
Total Exp.
FY97 Proposed
9957,232
33,194
514,393
1,629,598
93,134,4!7
~ASTEWATER TREATMENT.,. ' '--" "-.-
OPERATION'.'. · · ' .:. '.:..." ....
FY97 Proposed
Personnel 91,174,443
Commodities 264,100
Services/Charges 1,253,348
Capital Outlay 316,355
Transfers 6,440,083
Total Exp. 99,448,329
FY98 Projection
~1,015,105
34,188
529,754
1,624L303
$3,203,350
FY98 Projection
$1,243,383
271,367
1,289,634
289,345
7,088,195
t~10,181,924
FYg9 Projection
$1,076,616
35,213
545,578
1,637,033
$3,294,44O
FYg9 Projection
$1,316,590
278,845'
1,327,011
206,571
7,349,024
$10,478,041
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Transfers
Total Exp.
FY97 Proposed
t~ 1,220,017
840,724
1,170,588
258,140
2,035.050
$5,524,519
FY98 Projection
91,291,224
857,247
1,205,673
145,000
2,675,305
96,174,449
FYg9 Projection
$1,366,831
874,262
1,241,808
150,000
3,359,521
$6,992,422
FYg6 Proposed FY97 Projection FY98 Projection
Personnel 9760,128 $804,953 $852,552
Commodities 46,978 48,388 49,840
Services/Charges 1,079,074 1,094,334 1,110,047
Capital Outlay 1,000 0 0
Transfers 20,000 20,000 20,000
Total Exp. $1,907,180 $1,967,675 92,032,439
-31 -
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Transfers
Total Exp,
FY96 Proposed
9544,626
23,766
1,126,384
1,700,000
93,394,776
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Transfers
Total Exp,
FY97 Proposed
973,528
7,943
92,309
16,900
55,000
9245,680
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Total Exp,
FY97 Proposed
91,866,494
399,819
782,420
84,573
93,133,306
FY97 Proposed
Personnel 9199,425
Commodities 6,467
Services/Charges 44,227
Capital Outlay 8,000
Transfers 50,365
Total Exp, 9308,484
FY97 Pr~ection
9576,423
24,480
1,147,439
1,700,000
93,448,342
FY98 Pr~ection
977,888
'8,181
89,257
2,600
55,000
9232,926
FY98 Pr~ection
91,977,295
405,067
805,832
35,573
93,223,767
FY98 Pr~ection
9210,733
96,661
45,467
0
51,778
9314,639
FY98 Pr~ection
9610,184
25,214
1,169,131
1,700,000
93,504,529
FY99 Pr~ection
982,523
8,427
91,466
0
55,000
9237,416
FY99 Pr~e~ion
92,095,006
410,470
829,948
0
93,335,424
FY99 Pr~ection
9222,725
96,862
46,742
0
53,24O
9329,569
-32-
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Beginning Bal. $ 620,461 $ 470,267 $ 272,660
Debt Svs. Levy 2,058,470 2,809,572 3,701,399
Bond Transfers 1,440,368 1,393,857 1,346,519
Abatements 556,505 533,779 498,732
Misc. Transfer 524 0 0
Total Revenues $4,055,867 $4,737,208 $5,546,650
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Beg. Balance $ 668,405 $ 942,781 $1,226,028
Emp. Ben. Levy 3,326,729 3,225,032 3,421,358
Fire Contract 80,504 82,517 84,580
(Sen. Fund Transfer 200,000 200,000 0
Misc. Transfer 457,000 790,000 832,000
Total Revenues $4,064,233 $4,297,549 $4,337,938
Beg. Balance
Road Use Tax
Interest Income
Total Revenues
Services/Charges
Transfers
Total Exp.
Ending Balance
FY97 Proposed
$1,426,906
4,000,000
100,000
4,100,000
1,865
4,439,049
4,440,914
~1,085,992
FY98 Projection
$1,085,992
4,300,000
100,000
$4,400,000
1,921
4,454,486
4,456,407
$1,029,585
FY99 Projection
$1,029,585
4,400,000
100,000
$4,500,000
1,979
4,058,554
4,060,533
$1,469,052
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel $50,847 $53,968 $57,289
Commodities 613 632 651
Services/Charges 7~724 7,956 8~194
Total Exp. $59,184 $62,556 $66,134
-33-
'JCcOG"..-' .- '..' .:
~R,ANS PO R:T-AT-iO N.
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Total Exp.
JC'C0G HUMAN
~'I~RVI'C-- ES / - ' :: '.?'.
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Total Exp.
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Total Exp,
Services/Charges
Total Exp.
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Total Exp,
FY97 Proposed
$116,584
1,969
15,471
$134,024
FY97 Proposed
$49,558
579
11,170
$61,307
FY97 Proposed
$52,613
763
5,190
$58,566
FY97 Proposed
$22,308
$22,308
FY97 Proposed
5276,264
13,985
108,457
82,950
5481,656
FY98 Projection
$123,628
2,028
15,936
$141,592
FY98 Pr~ection
$52,514
596
11,506
$64,616
FY98 Pr~ection
$55,778
787
5,347
$61,912
FY98 Projection
~22,977
$22,977
FY98 Pr~ection
$293,049
14,406
111,711
288,000
$707,166
FY99 Projection
t~131,117
2,087
16,415
$149,619
FY99 Pr~ection
$55,656
613
11,852
$68,121
FY99 Pr~ection
$59,141
811
5,507
$65,459
FY99 Pr~ection
$23,666
$23,666
FY99 Pr~ection
$310,895
14,835
115,061
16,000
$456,791
-34-
..AiNTENA' NC:-E.~ ;.
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Total Exp,
FY97 Proposed
$465,685
639,885
141,134
$1,246,704
FY98 Pr~ection
$493,293
659,081
145,361
$1,297,735
-FY99 Projection
$522,621
678,853
149.717
$1,351,191
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Capital Outlay
Total Exp.
FY97 Proposed
$62,939
74,171
482,984
15,500
$635,594
FY98 Pr~ection
$66,676
76,396
497,476
0
$640,548
FY99 Projection
$70,645
78,687
512,404
15,500
$677,236
Personnel
Commodities
Services/Charges
Total Exp.
FY97 Proposed
$506,648
25,013
3,604,007
$4,135,668
FY98 Pr~ection
$536,932
25,764
3,712,127
$4,274,823
FY99 Pr~ection
$569,108
26,536
3,823,488
$4,419,132
-35-
"No'N-OPERATiONAL'
ADMN... :. .:-.. -
FY97 Proposed FY98 Projection FY99 Projection
Personnel t~O $0 $0
Commodities 85 88 91
Services/Charges 403,450 415,554 428,O21
Transfers 2,311,353 2,442,961 2,357,370
Contingency 290,000 300,000 31 O,O00
Total Exp. 83,004,888 $3,158,603 $3,095,482
TRANSFER TO:
River TrailSBike Trail
Streetscape-near Southside
Intra City Trails
Transit Levy
JCCOG Administration
Airport Subsidy
Transit Subsidy
JCCOG-Rural Planning
JCCOG-Human Services
Reserve for Future Empl. Compensation
18,192
50,000
30,000
1,489,661
30,500
123,000
315,000
9,500
45,500
200,000
$2,311,353,
-36-
FY97 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Melrose Avenue Bridge Reconstruction ......................
Melrose Avenue - Byington to Hawkins - Street Reconstruction . ..
Traffic Signal - Old Dubuque Road/ACT to Hwy 1 ............
First Avenue - Muscatine to Bradford ~ Street Reconstruction ....
Willow Street - Muscatine to Brookside - Street Reconstruction . ..
Traffic Calming ...................................
Traffic Signals ....................................
Asphalt Resurface and Chip Seal .......................
Scott Boulevard Extension - Phase .......................
Southgate Avenue - New Street .......................
.... $1,764,000
..... 600,000
..... 500,000
..... 540,000
..... 200,000
.... 50,000
...... 50,000
....... 285,715
..... 2,015,000
........ 324,000
Iowa River Trail - Burlington to Hwy 6 .............................. 450,000
Willow Creek Trail ............................................ 150,000
Curb Ramps ................................................ 100,000
Intra-City Bike Trails ............................................ 30,000
Napelean Park Lift Station ..................................... 5,458,000
Scott Boulevard Trunk Sewer .................................. 3,355,000
Bjaysville Lane Sanitary Sewer ................................... 110,000
Iowa Interstate Railroad - 7th to 1 st - Storm Sewer .................... 350,000
Napelean Park Renovation ................................... 700,000
Mercer Park Aquatic Center Expansion ......................... 1,410,000
South Soccer Field Complex ................................. 700,000
Benton Street (Ned Ashton) Park ............................... 40,000
Kiwanis Park ............................................. 75,000
Parks and Recreation Annual Maintenance Projects .................. 65,000
Future Parkland Development ................................... 50,000
Open Space - Land Acquisition ................................. 50,000
Industrial Park .............................................. ?
Southside Parking Ramp ...................................... 4,000,000
Southside Streetscape ....................................... 700,000
Iowa Avenue Streetscape ................................... ?
Total ................................................. $24,121,715
- 37 -
t// January 3, 199
*HOURS OF SERVICE AND FARES FOR IOWA TRANSIT SYSTEMS
Iowa City
Mason City
Sioux City
Fort Dodge
Marshalltown
Waterloo
Dubuque
Bettendorf
Clinton
Davenport
Muscatine
Cedar Rapids
Coralville
Cambus
Ames
Des Moines
Council Bluffs
Ottumwa
Hours of
Service
6:00 a,m,-'11:00 p,m, M-F
6:00 a,m,-7:00 p,m, 6at,
6:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m. M-F
6:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. M-F
7:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. Sat.
7:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m.M.F
10:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. Sat.
7:00 a.m.-5:30 p.m. M-F
5:45 a.m-6:00 p.m. M-F
9:45 a.m.-5:15 p.m. Sat.
6:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m.M.F
8:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. Sat.
6:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. M-F
8:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m. Sat.
6:00 a.m.-6;00 p.m. M-F
7:30 a.m.-6:00 p.m. Sat.
5:15 a.m.-7:15 p.m. M-F
5:40 a.m.-7:00 p.m. Sat.
6:00 a.m.-5:45 p.m. M-F
8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m. Sat.
Present Proposed
F,a~ Fare Increase
S0¢ 75¢
26¢ elderly off-peak 28¢ elderly off-peak
Free dlsabled off-peak Free disabled off-peak
$'18 monthly paee $26 monthly pass
50¢
85¢ adult $1.00 adult
student 65¢ $.75 student
75¢ adult
50¢ student
75¢
$1.00 adult
75¢ student
80¢ adult $1.00 adult
45¢ student $.55 student
50¢ 60¢
50¢ Adult
35¢ student
50¢ adult
25¢ student
65¢
5:30 a.m.-7:15 p.m. M-F 10¢ transfer fee
7:50-12 1:00-5:30 p.m. Sat. 50¢ adult
25¢ elderly/disabled
30¢ students
6:00 a.m.-6:30 p.m. (1 route to 12:00) 50¢ adult
M-F 25¢ youth (5-15)
6:16 a.m.-6:30 p.m. (1 route) Sat.
5:45 a.m.-12:30 a.m. M-F
11:30 a.m-12:00 a.m. Sat. & Sun.
6:19 a.m.-12:45 a.m. M-F
7:21 a.m.-11:00 p.m. Sat.
8:58 a.m..11:00 p.m. Sun.
6:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m.M.-SaL
4:52 a.m.-9:40 p.m. M-S
6:20 a.m.-6:00 p.m. M-F
9:40 a.m.-4:00 p.m. Sat.
No Fare
90¢ adult
40¢ student
$1.00 adult
75¢ student
monthly pass $29
$1.00
$1.00 adult
75¢ student
monthly pass $22
Thinking about increas-
ing fares to $.75
proposing doing away
with transfer and student
fare increase base fare
to $.75
Thinking about increas-
ing fare to $.75
July 97
$1.00 adult
50¢ student
TRANSIT FUND FARE REVENUE
Compared to Total Transit Expenses
Transit Dept. Fare Percent Fare
Fiscal Year Total Exp. Revenue to Exp.
1984 1,876,298 785,341 41.86%
1985 1,973,244 729,291 36.96%
1986 2,162,197 801,734 37.08%
1987 1,894,871 725,692 38.30%
1988 1,928,871 639,111 33.13%
1989 1,917,875 623,111 32.49%
1990 2,265,496 630,097 27.80%
1991 2,158,707 654,784 30.33%
1992 2,607,050 629,146 24.12%
1993 2,713,661 639,597 23.570/o
1994 2,721,545 672,453 24.71%
1995 2,891,274 652,327 22.56%
1996 3,254,969 645,000 19.81%
1997 3,133,306 736,500 23.50%
1998 3,223,767 831,500 25.79%
1999 3,335,424 831,500 24.92%
mgr~budget\trnsffnd
g
SEATS RIDERSHIP/COST FY87-97
not include suplemental cab contract.
YEAR FY87 FY88 FY$9 FY90 FYSl FY92 FY93 FY94
RIDERSHIP 32,547 35,185 41,755 52,741 56,609 47,873 49.025 49,137
CONTRACT $95,000 $99,850 $143,000 $175,081 $228,225 $252,000 $269,580 $291
COST/RIDE $2.92 $2.84 $3.42 $3.32 $4.03 $5.26 $5.50 $5.92
FY97 F~gures are bases on the proposal from SEATS arid estimated ridership figures.
FY95 FY96 FY97~
55,959 58,800 60,000
00 $468,420 $468,420 $603,000
$8.37 $7.97 $10.05
CITY OF IOWA CITY
SELECTED OPERATING EXPENSES AND
PERCENTAGE CHANGE FROM THE
PPJOR FqSCAL YEAR
Transit Operations
FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97
ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJ
Personal Services 1,309,529
Gasoline 99,013
165,611
Buses (Parts)
227,970
Aid To Agencies
(Seats I Taxi)
60,845
Capital Outlay
115/96
Tota!Opemting 2,158,707
FY98 FY99
PROJ PROJ
1,538,083 1,645,952 1,706,879 1,765,462 1,938,839 1,866,494 1,977,295 2,095,006
17.45% 7.01% 3.70% 3.43% 9.82% -3.73% 5.94% 5.95%
77,231 54,308 86,323 95,535 100,107 99,356 102,337 105,407
-22.00% -29.68% 58.95% 10.67% 4.79% -0.75% 3.00% 3.00%
235,185 259,399 253,448 203,519 210,000 225,000 225,000 225,000
42.01% 10.30% -2.29% -19.70% 3.18% 7.14% 0.00% 0.00%
237,540 279,421 299,282 491,076 476,000 641,000 659,140 678,914
4.20% 17.63% 7.11% 64.08% -3.07% 34.66% 2.83% 3.00%
252,088 189,254 81,659 84,852 170,060 84,573 35,573
314.31% -24.93% -56.85% 3.91% 100.42% -50.27% ~57.94% -100.00%
2,607,050 2,713,661 2,721,546 2,891,274 3,254,969 3,288,306 3,383,327 3,500,141
20.77% 4.08% 0.28% 6.24% 12.58% 1.02% 2.89% 3.45%
g7BUD~TRANAPRP,X LS
Cha~t 1
Total Operating Expenses
Bus Fares
Transit Levy
General Levy Subsidy
State Grants
Federal Grants
TrapPer from Parking Fund
TRANSIT FUND
Selected Revenues as % of Operating Expenses
FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96
ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET
2,158.707
654,784
30.3%
651,316
30.2%
420.000
19.5%
195,635
9.1%
188.360
8.7%
2,607,050
529,146
24.1%
665.787
25.5%
678,674
26.0%
233,814
9.0%
301,862
11.6%
11,908
0.5%
2,809
0.1%
A B C D
- Fare Incr. - Fare Incr. - No Fare Incr. '- No Fare lncr.
- Service - No Service - Service - No Service
Reduction Reduction Reduction Reduction
FY97 FY97 FY97 FY97
BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET
2,713,661 2,721.546 2,891,274 3,254,969 3,288,306 3,380,290 3,288,306 3,380,290
639,597 672,453 652,327 645,000 736,500 736,500 645,000 645,000
23.6% 24.7% 22.6% 19.8% 22.4% 21.8% 19.6% 19.1%
1.233,038 1,263,240 1,338,844 1,407,146 1,489,661 1.489.661 1,489.661 1,489,661
45.4% 46.4% 46.3% 43.2% 45.3% 44.1% 45.3% 44.1%
213,894 213,500 317.633 469,000 470,000 560,000 553,000 651,500
7.9% 7.8% 11.0% 14.4% 14.3% 16.6% 16.8% 19.3%
197,559 228,372 257,141 220.000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000
7.3% 8.4% 8.9% 6.8% 7.6% 7.4% 7.6% 7.4%
285,604 260,168 296,978 350,260 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000
10.5% 9.6% 10.3% 10.8% 7.6% 7.4% 7.6% 7.4%
90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000
3.1% 2.8% 2.7% 2.7%
90,000 90,000
2,7% 2.7%
97Bud~TRANAPRP XLS
Year
1995
FY 1996
FY 1997
FY 1998
FY 19991
;Y 2000~
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2OO4
RNANCE ENTIRELY
FROM BONDS
WATER. PHASE IN
PROJECTS:
'~995-e 6,316,250
1997 $11,4~0,000;
200~$36o600,000;
TOTAt. COST OF
PROJECTS e4~.962,850,
WITH iNTEREST AND
ONE YEARS DEBT-
$116.3015o393. BONDS
TOTALING $54~215,250
Average
Monthly
Estimated Residential
Annual Cost
Rate Ad~ Water
Sample Optlops-Large User
i Average
Mon~y Cost
Commercial for Water
FY .. 1995 40% 3,150
Pt' 1996 25% 3,938
FY 1997 15% 4,529
FY 1999 ~0% 5,480
FY 200~ 10% 6,631
F'Y 2003 10% 8,023
FY 20O6 0% 8,424
Industrial
FY 1995 40% 16,800
I:Y 1996 28% 21,000
FY 1997 15% 24,150
FY 1999 10% 29,222
WATER PROJECTS - PHASE iN AND ACCUMULATE CASH
5%. 10%, ~5%, 20% 25% BY THE YEAR 2001
6% CASH IN 2001
PROJECTS:
TOTAL COST OF
PROJECTS ~4~,562,850,
8112.921.938. BONDS
TOTAUNG (~51
Annual Cost for
10% 26.68
40% 3,150
0% 7,959
PROJECTS: t~OJECTS:
199B.e 6,316~50 19~5-~ 6,315,2~
1997 ~11~,~; 1~7
TOT~ ~ST OF TOT~ ~ 0F
~OJ~TS ~,~850, ~S ~,~,
~1~,019~3E. ~NDS ~105~,0~. ~S
~1 Co~ f~ ~1 C~ for
~e ~ Wat~ ~e ~j~ Wat~
~% !4.05 ~% 14.05
15% 27.86 15% 29.07
10% ~.65 15% 33.~
10% 33.72 10% 36.77
0% 33.72 0% 36.77
0% ~.72 t 0% 36.77
A~ A~
M~y Co~ Mo~ C~
for W~ f~ W~
~% 3,150 ~% 3,150
25% 3,938 26% 3,~
20% 4,726 ~% 4,726
15~ 6,250 15% 6,522
0% 7,~3 0% 8,250
0% 7.563 0% 8,250
PROJECTS:
199E-8 6.315,250
1997 911.400,000;
2000-~,500.O00;
TOTAL COST
~0JECTS ~49.56Z85~
~,44~ ,109. BO~D$
TOTAMNG ~9.730.2~3
CASH
SAV~IGS-~I 7.864.285
Av~mg~
Annu~ Co=t fo;
PROJECTS:
199S-~ 6.315,250
2000-$36°500.900;
TOTAL COST OF
PROJECTS e49,562..85~
WITH INTEREST AND
ONE YEARS DEBT°
8101.923.809.
TOTALLY3
CASH 810,642..900,
SAVI~GS-$14,381,585.
E~ma~d
~ Cost for
T 14.05 14.05
18.27 I' ~0% 18.27
21.92 25% 22.84
3-;~.ss 20% 32.as
$-~'~ ' 20% 39.47
9-~--~ /~ o% 3~.47
0% 36.29 ~' 0% 39.47
0% 99.29
40%
3O%
20~
20%
0%
40% 16,800
25% 21,000
40% 16,800 40% 16,800 · 40%
28% 21,000 25% 21,000 30%
20% 25,200 20% ' 251200 .: ' 20%.
15% 33,327 16%, · "34..776~ ,
-Oe~~- "~ '~O¢326, -0~, ~ ,.'' ~,'~i1' ;. ~. 0~"-'
0% . .~.',40,326. 0% 43.991 ~
CI~Y OF IOWA CiTY
SCHEDULE OF AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL MONTHLY WATER ONLY BiLL AND
HOW MUCH IS APPLICABLE TO OPERATING AND DEBT SERVICE EXPENSES FOR FY
1995 THRU FY2006
Average Amount Amount % % Applicable
Residential Aplicable to Applicable to Aplicable toto Debt
Monthly CostOperating Debt Service Operating Service
of Water Expenses Expenses Expenses Expenses
FY 1995 $14.98 $13.07 $1.91 87% 13%
FY 1996 $19.47 $14.47 $5.00 74% 26%
FY 1997 $24.34 $16.21 $8.13 67% 33%
FY 1998 $29.69 $17.79 $11.90 60% 40%
FY 1999 $35.63 $19.58 $16.05 55% 45%
FY 2000 $42.76 $20.01 $22.75 47% 53%
FY 2001 $49.17 $11.83 $37.34 24% 76%
FY 2002 $41.79 $22.95 $18.84 55% 45%
FY 2003 $39.70 $22.50 $17.20 57% 43%
FY 2004 $39.70 $22.94 $16.76 58% 42%
FY 2005 $37.72 $22.53 $15.19 60% 40%
FY 2006 $37.72 $22.93 $14.79 61% 39%
C:tWATSEW~ WATRt t95.XLSt OEC$ RAY OP¥ 1/8/96
TRANSIT FUND PROPOSED 8UOGET TO CI~ COUNCIL FOR ~97 THRU ~99
ELiMiNATE EVENING SERVICE.
Loc~ Gov=mmentat A.9~__~i~ 23,22_5 30,386 25,762 .... 28.552 26,973 27.090 26,5~
S~te G~en~ 236..2.1.0 195,635 .... ~..~,8 1..4_ 197,559 228,372 257,141 220,~
FEM~FHWA Rood Grant . · 17,078 1,837
Federal Gra.ts 185,023 188,3~- ...... ~0~.8_6.~' -. 295.6~ * '~,~,169 296.978 350.2~
M~ c~la~o~_Re.v.~.u_e ...... 2.508 7.409
ACTUAL ACTUAL "/-- '~0~[' -- !"~CTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL E~IMATE
I 296.447 ~ 298.131 ' ' ..... ~.4_6_~1.4.._~-' ~2~,~---.--..2_.T_2,_~.~_~ ~"' '~I'.~'~6'
~ . 303.791 ............. 253,349
736,509
26.509
250.~
BUDGET PROJECTION
499 4.548 ~96 460 -- ....J -
211.381
420,000I 678.674
3.8o9,[ ......~.~.~
831.509
250.~
65,0~
I. --i FYgg
PROJECT/ON
....
213,894
831.5~
26.500
'~60.000
1.519.711 ' ½.688.370
213,500 ----31--'"~.~5~ ...... ~-$~:~Ob' 315,000 -.rE.."' ~60~ . 487.000
363.974 370,105 399.819 4OS,D67
3.279.370
2,095,006
410,470
829,9~'8 J.
877,910 775,865 782,420 605.832
~TAL REC[~ .............. I 2.248,150 2.170,390 2,562.268 ~ 2.614,825 2.689,621
......... ........
Personal ~ices J 1,052,1~ 1.~4.569 1,273,581 [ 1 ,~6~'- 1,418,807
Se~c~ A~ ~arg~ 956.954 996,677 1,075.27~ 1.148.601 1,211.463
~81~ ..... : ~ ' ' 9.747 ~25L . ~ .~ 4,682
Tr~sf~ 245.0~ 50.~ 192,19~ --. ~5~,~?[ 76.882
T.0. T.AL_EX?_E.N.D_~.U_~ES .... 2._~6.5:498 ___3,1.58.707
ENDING~,LANCE [ 286,~5 298,130
2,~7,050~i- 2,713,66I
253.349j 154,513
18,928 110,050
65.000r 60.000
2,721,546 2.891,2741 3.254,969
122,589! 222,089i 161.o36i
84,673 ' 35,573
3,133.306 -..3,.2..2~3:7~_7 3,335.424
211,381 228,3251 172,271
....... 'Tote e~6n9 G; Tra~e~-;/.--~'T' ' , , ......... 1,254.~
GAg78UD~DY ~ TRANSIT XLS ~BU~ET.CURRENT
1/6/96
CITY OF IOWA CiTY
TRANSIT FUND - FY 97 TO FY99
ADJUSTED SEATS CONTRACT TO $603,000 FROM $448,000.
RATE INCREASE 111197; SERVICE CUTS.
-- _u~r~l L 303.791
Bus Far.e.s. ............. -t 630,097
L°?[ Gpvem me~t el A- 9?-cie-s - I 23,225
'"-~'T0~L' ..... ~J~L- ACTUAL ~- ACTUAL ACTUAL ESTIMATE BUDGET --' P-~J~16~ ' I
654.784 [ 629.146 639.597 672,453 652.: 645,0~ 736.5~ 831.5~ 831,~0
~386 ~5.782 28.552 26.973 27,~ 26.5~ 26.5~ 26.5~ ~
195,635
Expend~ures
188,360 [ 301.862 285,604 I 260,168 296,978 350,260 -' ' 250,000
~:1]~.390 ~ 2.562,265 j 2.614.825 2.689,621 2,9~,77~ 3.213,9~ 3.163.661
3.os~ .... ~ 7s.ss~ ss.~o so.~
1,977.295
1,568.370
3,279,970
2,095,006
405,067 410.470
965.392 994,665
35,573
....... ::: ...... :--t'-
56,381 (86,235)
G:'~979UD\DY~, TRANSIT XLS ',EUDGET.CC SEATS 603
1/6/96
CITY OF IOWA CITY
TRANSIT FUND · FY 97 TO FY99
ADJUSTED SEATS CONTRACT TO $603,000 FROM $448,000.
INCREASED TRANSFER FROM GF BY $155,O00. 160,000 AND 5180.000.
INCLUDES RATE INCREASE 111197 AND ELIMINATING EVENING SERVICE
SCHEDULE A
................. A~'r ~.[ I ACTUAL [ ACTUAL ACTUAL I ACTUAL ACTUAL I ESTIMATE BUDGET "
Locsl Governmental Agencies 23,225 30.386 25.782 28,552 26,973 27.060 26,800.] 26,500-- J .. J 26.500 26,500
rvli$cell~neou$ Revenue 2,508 7 409 499 4,548 296 480 · · I - .
T_r.ar~__fer~f[_0~n__Par_.k_mg Fund 47.891 2,809 11.908 · I - 90.000 lq. 0_,~O0~_ ...... _9.0..00.__0. J . .90,~0 9.070.0~_
[ FY99
228.765
j ~ 3.459.370
.___2._,6._89,621 2.997..7_.7_4. _.:~,.21~3.906 -.. 3__z3_~I.8..__~1 ..... 3..4.0~.,7~ ! t .....
._I..418_.z.8_07I_.. .'1...765,.462 ..... 1.,93.8.,83.9_ _ . ~1.~6.,.49..4. L--[ 1,977,2g~ 2.095,006
9,712 363,974 370.105t 399.819 ~ 405.067 410,470
............................ 7'-~,~ ..... --937,4~27~ ........ Te~. ~'~:~ 994,665
1,211,463 677,910
4.682 ~8,928 ~'~0,'-'~"~ .... ~E. ..... -'~.~'7'§ .....
TOTAL EXPEND TURES .... I 2.265.496 2,158,707 2.607 050 ,~ 2,713.661 2,721.546 2 891 274 3 254,969 3,288,306 ' 3,383,327 3.500.141 I
......................................... r ......... I
'~6,'~'~"~AL"'~'~-~ ..... ; 266,,'~5: 296,130 253,349 I 154,513 122,589 I 222,089 ! 181,026 ~ 211,381 J ~ 228,765 ~ ~ 182,994 ~_
1.254,0~
.................. J ................... ~ ..................... L ............................... i ......
I tO Cover SEATS Increase-..... > 155,0~ 1 160~0 2 i '~,~
J [ S~d ?o~[ [nc.8~ .........> I I ~{,~- '
· G:',FYgT~,D¥\ TRANSIT XLS \BUDGET.CC SEATS 603 GF INCR
L
CITY OF IOWA CITY
TRANSIT FUND - FY 97 TO FY99
ADJUSTED SEATS CONTRACT TO $603,000 FROM $448,000.
INCREASED TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND BY $245.000, 230,000 AND $320,000,
FARE INCREASE 1/'1/97; EXISTING SERVICE LEVEL,
SCHEDUL~B
.Lo~I Go~mmente] A~i~ ~" ' ~.210 30.386
21.409 19.~_
tnter~t tncome . ~' ~' 7,409
ACTUAL ACTUAL I ACT[~AL ~ ACTUA~
~s~ j FYSS -t FYS6 -L ._.~w97
ACTUAL I ACTUAL I ESTIMATE. I BUDGET
629,1,~.__. 639.597 , "672.453 -
652,327 645.000 , 736,500
25,782 ..... 28.5~'~- .... ~.~73 27,060' - ' ~.500 26,500
1.95.63.__5._ _ 2~33,814 . - 1.__9.7..55,_9. - 228.372 257,141. 220.000 250~)00
14.796 ..-- 1.2,033 7,541
655,767 1.233.038 1.263,;~4~
213.894 213.500
2.614,825. 2.6_89.521 2,990,774 3,213.906 3.408,661
Tt,nsfe,; General Levy I 470,078 678,674
TOTAL REC~S - j
................... 2.~e,~so ~,~ ~,~__
296,978 r 350,26~ { 250,00~
8.674 6.0~0 6.000
317.633 ~69,000 $60.000
90,'0~ 90,000 90,000
FY98 FY99 I
PROJECTION '
· - "~)O9.39~ ! .1~..~.~
_83_1.5 ,O.0. 831.800
26.5oo .'
25q~ooo .~.~o._._ooo
65,000
6,000 6,000
I .........:.
1.519.711 - i .588.370
9o,ooo
3,599,370
--::: ........... I ' --" ....... . ......................... , ........... : ..........
.." -~-:.-.-__-_-' ..-: ~ .....r- ......i ............ t ........................ :--:::":'"iT' - '*' - j .; ', '--'.
~_.N. DING.~A_L_..AND~ .... , 266.44~ , 2BB.,3O , 2,3.34~1 154.513 t 1~2.589 ~22.08~ , 181.0~61 208.397 I t 199.370 I I 1B6.343
~ I I
................ , ' ....... [ ................._1_ .........b .............. l .....
............ .L .........,_ ........r .__, ........5 ...................t .... .....
::..-:-.:-:- _-_-_~1_-:- : ......................- .........
I / ' '/Gt-';"~nd~r~iill~"::T"">-- i -'1 .......... i' i ' / I 796,OOO|
G:~978UDtD¥~ TRANSIT XLS \SUDGET-CC SEATS 603.NO SERV
I/6/96
CITY OF iOWA CITY
TRANSIT FUND - FY 97 TO FY99
ADJUSTED SEATS CONTRACT TO $603,000 FROM $42,8.000.
INCREASED TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND BY $24.5,000, 330,000 AND $410,000,
NO FARE INCREASE BUT ELIMINATING EVENING SERVICE
SCHEDULECI
~ e~linnin~ ~~~s~ ~alarl¢e
FY90 [ -. ~.1
303,791 28~,¢47 --
'Local Governme~_~.l__Agencles I -- 23,226
St~:e Grits [ 236,210
FEMAfFHW~ Flood Grant
'~TAL RECEIPTS
~rvice$ And Cha.~$es 95----~--~4'
Outlay ~l 3.081
· 6. 2._g.. 145 -- - - 63.__9_, _59_ 7 ...... _6.73_. 4_5_3 __ .~S 6~2 ~3_2__7
28,552 t 26.973 27.060 26,500
30,386 25,782 [ "I§~;,~ ..... -- .......
'-- 1~s,6T3~'I .....=_~3_.~1,~ j ........ ==6,3~2 297,1,~1 ==o,ooo
17,076 1.637
166.360 ~;6~2' 265,604 I ---~5,~r~8-; ...... 2~-6V9~' -----~'so"~(~
· 77~i I ~',~f'~7 6,ooo j
'i9,691 14,796 12,033
7,409 -' I 296
651,316 ~,~.~ .... ~'~3 .'-~'~' 1,263,240 1.336.844 1,407,146
~.2.0.000 213.994 317.633 469,000
2,.809 11,908 j 90.000
=,170.,3.s0 ~,962._~6s. _ =..___914.s=s ....~,_s_s?,_s~_~ .....A,_9.90_.ZZ~_~..3,213,90~
' 1,0.94.569 1,273,561 1~:~8,29~ ' 1.416,807 1,765.462 ;. 1.938,839
7.714 '~172' 7.63_8~ 6,712 363,974 ~ '370~;i 0-5
.... ~6,~i~ '3~o3 .... ~.~'~ ~6,929 J 116.~'~ ..... :"-
. __ 9.7~7 .......1~.¥~i"_-_-~.~2 -' ~.~,: .'-~_.~&_~:.~_:~2! .....
97 ~96 ; .99
~4~_~. ..... ~,3~ ........ ~_?~,~5
84,573: 35.573
[
I -
TOTAL EXPENDITU'RE~- ' 2,265,496 I 2,158.707_~ 2,607,050 .. 2,713,661
....... ._.-"_' - ~-- Y; '..:~L?'L--.'. :~
ENDING BALANCE -- 5 I 298,130 j 253,3¢9 I 15¢,513
-:::.:::--:::'::::::4-- ..........:_-L:.- -:-:
G ~,97BUD~,DY~, TRANSIT XLS tBUDGET.CC SEATS 603.NO RATE
1/6Ig6
CITY OF IOWA CITY
TRANSIT FUND - FY 97 TO FY99
ADJUSTED SEATS CONTRACT TO $603,000 FROM $448.000,
INCREASED TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND BY $336.500. 410,000 AND $515,000,
NO FARE INCREASE; EXISTING SERVICE LEVEL,
SCHEDULE D
FY90
ACTU~L__t FY91
ACTUAL
~us ~a~es 630,097
Local Governmental _A~enci~S 23.225
State Grants 236,210
FY92 FY93
-"ACTUAL ACTUAL
303,791 286.447
654,784
195.63~
FE MA/~.H_~_WA _F!o.od_ ~a~t_ ~. : -_
.Fed.___?~[ _~?.n~ .......... I ~E,;.023 188,350
Inta~ef;t In.me i .._ _2 I_.409 19.~91_
M~celtaneous Revenue 2,508 .[ 7,409
'Trans4et: Tr~ns~ Levy 631,712 t 651,316
'f,a;~;t~'~,o-A-~,~,,,9-~i,'~' 477~91' --2,9o9
.... ~98.131 253,349
233,814I' 197,659!
301,862 285,604
FY94 J FY9§ F-Y96 FY97 FY98 - ~R0~J~ f}(~ '
-- X~TUAL t A~UAL, ESTIMATE BU~ET ~R ~J~TO ~ '
154,514 122.589 222,089 ~ 181.026 - 2~39~' 192,870
26,973 27,~0 26,500 26.5~ 26,5~
2~853~ 257.141 220.~ 250,0~ 250,~ 250.~
260,168 296.978 350.260 250,0~
14.796 12,033 7,541 8.674 6.0~ 6,~ .. ~,.~ .... 6~
499 4,548 296 480
~ ~,9~ 90,~ 90.~ ~0 90,~ ' 90.~
TOTAL RECEIPTS
2,248,150 2?70.390 2,562..26.8 2.614,825 2,689,621 2,990.774 3,213,906 3.408,661 3,464,211 _ _3...60.7,870
~emona~ Ser~ces
Cal~t el Outlay
ENDING 8ALANC~
1,052.104 1,094,569 1,273.58~-~'-' ~6~,__~9.--~-- 1,416,607 1,765,462 1,936.839 1,958,47R '~,~.~' 2.199,262
8,357 7,714 9,172 7,638 9,712 363,974 370.105 399.819 .... 405,067 410.470
~,211,463 677,910 775.965 937.420 965,392 994.665
4,692 19,928 110.060 35,573
76,882 %%70~. 60,000--
966,954 996,6 1,o 6,2741.145,6Ol
3.091~- 9.747 $~,g~5-' 31,003
245,0~ ~ 50,000 192.198 158,126
286.4451 258,130 253.349 t 154.513
2.721,546 2,691,274 3,254,969
i"
122.589 j 222.089I 181,026
-- SEATS Increase a Exlst,~'~e~'[~'v~....->
· I Grand Total ~ncrease ......... ·
3,380,290 3.480,738 3,803,397
209,397 192,870 197,343
]{~,'00~ 462.000 '~X~36'
. 1,254.000
__336.500 I{. 410.000 515.000
GAg76UD~D~ TRANSIT XLS \SEATS 603.N0 SERV.NO FARE INCR
/6/96
Court Hill/
Manville
January February
March
April
May
June
July
August September
October
1993 620 784 772 688 537 563 508 525 688 732
1994 765 816 801 676 583 558 614 764 903 1017
1995 663 753 865 672 637 732 585 611 561 538
North Dodge/ 1993 1465 1926 2096 1990 1274 1200 1177 1368 1568
Broadway 1994 1523 1979 2138 1503 1279 1307 1162 1295 1554
1995 1497 1883 1838 1507 1369 1210 1210 1352 1549
Towncrest/
Oakcrest
1451
1543
1630
Lakeside/ 1993 1708 2152 2220 2221 1478 1614 1711 1833 2278 2293
Rochester/ 1994 2271 2491 2472 1883 1905 1904 1677 2123 2208 2361
Westwinds 1995 2041 2620 2681 2362 1983 1754 1642 1918 2016 2209
1993 1770 2733 2667 2499 1387 1321 1299 1386 2108 2354
1994 2237 3008 2868 2089 1375 1255 1161 1457 1801 1950
1995 1583 2290 2243 1887 1380 1072 1140 1458 1531 1893
Januaw Februaw March April May June July
620 784 772 688 537 563 508
765 816 801 676 583 558 614
663 753 865 672 637 732 585
August September
October
November
December
525 688 732 894 618
764 903 1017 87U 693
811 561 536 589 213
1465 1926 2096 1990 1274 1200 1177 1368 1568
1523 1979 2138 1503 1279 1307 1162 1295 1554
1497 1883 1838 1507 1369 1210 1210 1352 1549
1451
1543
1630
1544
1500
1464
1286
1538
565
1770 2733 2667 2499 1387 1321 1299 1386 2108 2354 2388 1894
2237 3008 2868 2089 1375 1255 1161 1457 1801 1950 1922 1872
1583 2290 2243 1887 1380 1072 1140 1458 1531 1893 1854 686
1708 2152 2220 2221 1478 1614 1711 1833 2278 2293 1958 1848
2271 2491 2472 1883 1905 1904 1677 2123 2208 2361 1946 1912
2041 2620 2681 2362 1983 1754 1642 1918 2016 2209 1987 708
City Cost/Ride
Iowa City $9.90
estimated
FY97
Des Moines $7.50
Ames $15.25
Dubuque $7.53
F Cedar Rapids $4.95
Marion/
Hiawatha
Sioux City
Davenporf.
$6.00 door to
door
$8.00 curb to
$9.20
PAPATRANSIT (SEATS) SERVICE INFOF[MATION FOR IOWA TPANSiT SYSTEMS
Infonmation provided by corresponding transit manager.
FY97 Prop. $641,000 24 hr cab for
$603,000 proposed FY 97 work trips $2.00
$38,000 Cab Sunday 8am-2
FY 96 no
$1,400,000
$168,817
Total Do You Provide Cities Annual Service Beyond
Budget Subsidized Paretransit Cost Fixed Route
Service To His
Social Sen~ce
Agencies?
Yes, Systems
contributes
$24,640
no,$1,246,000 $178,000
paid by county
and DHS for
no, social $210,000
service agencies
provide their
own transport.
no, social $168,817
service agencies
provide their
own transport.
FY96 no, social $197,000 city pays half of
$197,000 service agencies cab faro for after
provide their hour work trips
own transport. for disabled
FY96 no, social $150,000 no
$150,000 service agencies
FYg6
$230,O00
provide their
own transport
no,County senior $212,000
center contribute
$18,000, Social
Service. provide
own transport
no
no
no
In .louse or Fare Fare Effect of ADA
ntmct Waiver?
ntract $1.00 yes, free Social service
dropped contr~
SEATS inctea=
In -louse $,?..00 - $5.50 no Required more
depending on decreases effi(
distance; less coordinatl~
contracts:free
In douse $1.50 no Must provide s
hours a day 7 ¢
match fixed m~
ttmct $.80 no Inch'eased ame
~tract $.85 no Had to put mol
during the micl~
contract $6.00 door to no Brought bound
door enforce 3/4 mil
$2.00 curb to under ADA.
contract $1.00 no Had to incteas
3 vehicles to 5
'/'q/y<
'ARATRANSIT (SEATS} SERVICE INFORMATION FOR iOWA TRANSIT SYSTEMS
Information provided by corresponding transit manager.
Total Do You Provide Cities Annual
Budget Subsidized Paratransi~ Cost
$e~ice To
Social Service
Agencies?
FY97 Prop. Yes, Systems $641,000
$603,000 contributes proposed FY 97
$38,000 Cab $24,640
FY 96 n0,$1,248,000 $178,000
$1,400,000 paid by county
and DHS for
FY 96 no, social $210,000
$210,000 service agencies
provide their
· own transport.
FY96 no, social $168,817
$168,817 service agencies
provide their
own transport.
FY96 no, social $197,000
: $197,000 service agencies
provide their
own transport.
FY96 no, social $150,000
$I 50,000 service agencies
provide their
own transpor~
FY96 no. County senior $212,000
$230,000 center contribute
$18,000, Social
Service. provide
own transport
Service ~eyond ~n House or Fare F;~re
Fixed Routs Contract Waiver?
Hrs
Effect of ADA
24 hr cab for Contract $1.00 yes, frae
work tripa $2.00
Sunday 8am-2
no In House $2.00 - $5.50 no
depending on
distance;
contracts:free
no In House $1.50 no
no contract $.80 no
Social service agencies
dropped contracts with
SEATS increasing cost
Required more vehicles and
decreases efficiency due to
less coordination of trips.
Must provide service 18
hours a day 7 days a week to
match fixed mute.
Increased amount of sewice.
city pays half of
cab fare for after
hour work tdps
for disabled
no
no
contract $.85 no
contract $6.00 door to no
door
$2.00 curb to
contract $1.00 no
Had to put more sen/ice on
during the middle of the day.
8taught boundaries in to
enforce 3/4 mile service limit
under ADA.
Had to increase service from
3 vehicles to 5 vehicles.
CITY OF IOWA cFrY
SCHEDL~LE OF PARKING SYSTEM INFORMATION - FY90-FY95
Hours of Paid Parking"
Total Revenue
Total Operating Expense
FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95
4,791,983 4,593,000 4,668,979 4,466,142 4,691,578 4,558,763
$2,286,432 $2,366,172 $2,601,714 $2,820,412 $3,039,009 $3,467,978
92,056,466 $2,117,407 $2,197,376 $2,484,532 $3,160,111 $3,060,610
*Meters and ramps (permits not included).
Rate Increase History
FY83 ramps increased 9.20 to 9.35
FY85 meters increased CBD $.20 to 9.30, outlying $.10 to 9.20
FY86 meters increased CBD $.30 to 9.40, outlving $.20 to 9.30, ramps increased 9.35 to $.40
FY92 meters increased CBD 9.40 to 9.50, Dubuque increased $.40 to 9.45, Capital increased 9.40 to $.50
Hours of paid parking does not include permit holder hours.
i .
Beginning Balance
Parking Fines
Interest Income
Building Rentals
Ramp Revenue
Other Parking Revenue
Miscellaneous Revenue
St. Center Transfer
Miscellaneous Transfer
Total Receipts
PARKING OPERATIONS
PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FY97 - FY99
FY95 FY96
Actual Estimate
$1,254,352 $1,661,720
472,676 400,000
252,871 120,000
14,400 15,000
1,610,869 1,559,000
828,209 815,500
840 0
6,000 6,000
282,113 10,351
3,467,978 2,925,851
-- F~97 Budget -
Dept.
Request
City IVIgr. FY98 FY99
Proposed Projection Projection
$983,945 9811,928 $565,978
440,000 440,000 440,000
125,000 120,000 115,000
14,400 14,400 14,400
1,597,500 1,597,500 1,597,500
779,500 779,500 779,500
0 0 0
6,000 6,000 6,000
0 0 0
2,962,400 2,957,400 2,952,400
Personal Services
Commodities
Services & Charges
Capital Outlay
Transfers*
Total ExpenGitures
Ending Balance
907,330 943,729 $ 957,232 957,232 1,015,105 1,076,616
15,922 30,249 33,194 33,194 34,188 35,213
415,331 513,392 514,918 514,393 529,754 545,578
5,746 46,059 O O 0 O
1,716,281 2,070,197 1,629,598 1,629,598 1,624,303 1,637,033
3,O60,610 3,603,626 93,134,942 3,134,417 3,203,350 3,294,440
.9I ,661,720. 9983,945 $811,928 $565,978 9223,938
*Transfer To:
1992 Capital Loan Notes
1992 Revenue Refunding 86 GO
1995 Taxable Revenue Bonds
Improve/Replacement Reserve
Transit Subsidy
Fines to General Fund
331,818 (through 6-1-2007)
168,425 (through 7-1-2001 )
429,355 (through 7-1-2003)
170,000
90,000
440,000
,629,598
Beginning Balance
Transfer from Parking Fund
Total Receipts
Services & Charges
Transfers°
Total Expenditures
Ending Balance
PARKING RENEWAL & iMPROVEMENT RESERVE
PROPOSED E~UDGET FOR FY97 - FY99
- FY97 Budget --
FY95 FY96 Dept. City Mgr.
Actuai Estimate Request Proposed
$1,423,619 $1,366,113 91,877,157
170,000 620,000 170,000
170,000 620,000 170,000
FY98
Pr~e~ion
$1,797,157
170,000
170,000
I 0 $0 0 0
227,505 108,955 250,000 250,000 0
227,506 108,956 4250,000 250,000 0
41,366,113 91,877,157 41,797,157 41,967,15Z
*Transfer To:
cIP Ramp Repairs 9250,000
.4250,000
FY99
Pr~e~ion
41,967,157
170,000
170,000
0
250,000
250,000
41 887 157
Pending Policy/Fiscal issues in Parking
New ramp plans
and/or or land purchase.
(Use impact fees $144,000.)
Library
Lot closing
(-75 spaces)
$250,000 est.
Ramp Repairs
New ramp near
south side
$3-5 rail.?
1986/92 Revenue
Ramp bond paid off.
+$424,000 revenue
1985/95 Revenue
Ramp bond paid off.
+$164,000 revenue
$250,000 est.
Ramp Repairs
$250,000 est. $250,000 est.
Ramp Repairs Ramp Repairs
2-3 year revenue shortfall(?)
*Increase outlying meters $.30 to $.40/hr. = $90,000/yr
*Increase monthly permits in outlying areas $35 to $40/mo. = $22,500/yr
*Increase monthly permits in outlying areas $35 to $45/mo. = $45,000/yr
New Ramp South of
Burlington Street
NO
I
Return Impact Fee
Do you want to raise
rates to improve ending
cash balance?
No Yes
1
Which ones?
How much?
YES
I
When?
After bonds are
paid - Return Impact
fees
Before time limit
on impact fees
expires
I
Financing New Ramp
Raise Delay Reduce
fees maintenance Transfers
I I
Which ones? Which ones?
How much?
parklng~ampfiow.cdr
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
January 12, 1996
City Council
City Manager
Material in Information Packet
Memoranda from Mayor Novick:
a. Fringe Area Agreement
b. Public Hearing on Transit Changes
Memoranda from the City Manager:
a. Economic Development Incentives
b. Pending Development Issues
Memorandum from the Director of Planning and Community Development ~'/
regardi. ng Parcel 64-1a.
% ~- ~. ~. ,~
Memoranda from the City Attorney:
a. Update on Assistant City Attorney Recruitment
b. Permits Issues for Awning/Signs at Pizza Hut
c. Purchases from Iowa Book and Supply Company ~-~,~
Memorandum from the Economic Development Coordinator regarding the ~,-~l
Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee.
Copy of letter sent to downtown and/or near southside property owners and~,~
first floor business owners.
Memorandum from the Senior Building Inspector regarding construction
activities for 1995.
Agenda for the January 11, 1996, formal meeting of the Johnson County
Board of Supervisors.
Memo from City Mgr. regarding 1995 {summary nf major Council activities)
Memo from City Mgr. regarding presentation of Budget - City Council.
Agenda for the 1/16 informal meeting of the Board of Supervisnrs. ~7
Memo from PCD Director regarding Near Southside Design Plan.
(final version of the plan attached)
Memo from City Clerk regarding procedure for Worksession Minutes.
Information regarding the Melrose Ave. Reconstruction Pro~ect
PreDesign meeting on 1/17.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
January 11, 1996
To:
From:
City Council
Naomi Novick
Re:
Fringe Area Agreement
This Wednesday, Ernie Lehman and I met for an hour or so with Don Sehr, Steve Lacina, Karin
Franklin, Rick Dvorak and R. J. Moore. We discussed the City Council's response to the
County's previous proposals and some potential changes in the County's Comprehensive Plan.
The only new thought was, "Could we set up a joint board to review appeals to zoning
changes within the fringe area?" The County Attorney will have to research state law to
know if a board such as this is allowed. This board would meet when the County and the
City disagreed on a zoning.
We asked the County to write a new 28E agreement that they will support and that takes into
consideration the Council's previous response. When it arrives, Karin will put it on the agenda
for discussion by the full City Council.
bj~agreemnt
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
January 11, 1996
To: City Council
From: Naomi Novick ~, '~,
Re:
Public Hearing on Transit Changes
The current date for this hearing, February 12, will have to be changed. It is the same date
as the caucuses. Please think about this so we can decide on a new date at our January 15
work session.
February 5'or 6? This would be an extra meeting. If we want to modify the staff proposal
and have public comments on the Council's proposal, does this date give us enough time?
We can choose to listen to the public tell us their view of the staff proposal, and then make
some changes if we want them. Does this require another hearing?
February 13? This is a regular meeting date. If we also cancel the work session on February
12 and hold it on the same day as the formal meeting, this could be a very long meeting.
February 19 or 20? This would be an extra meeting also. If this is the date chosen, there
would be little time to make any changes before the full budget public hearing on February 27,
I am assuming that we will discuss the comments from the public on the same night as the
heanng because this was the plan for February 12. However, we may want this discussion
on another day if the hearing is on February 13.
b~tr~it
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
January 12, 1996
City Council
City Manager
Economic Development Incentives
Although a little long winded, this article provides some interesting
observations by the private sector concerning. state/local economic
development incentives.
cc: Karin Franklin
David Schoon
Last November, the Democratic-controlled
Massachusetts state legislature closed
out its 1995 session in dramatic fashion. As its
midnight deadline neared, the legislature passed an extraordinary piece of state-
craft: a bill granting tax relief to
defense contractors by changing
the formula by which state cor-
porate taxes are calculated. Instead of paying taxes based on total sales, defense
contractors would henceforth pay
taxes solely on sales made in Mas-
sachusetts. The bill, which was
signed into law by Gov. William Weld, a Republican, further provided that
other manufacturers based in '~,,,, , .. . .... _. cheap electricity, low-cost
the state once known as Tax- -- ' '. ' . · 7' : health care. and other fac-
- · '~)"~:" ." tots--has caused us to take
achusetts would receive simi- ..:/. . .. '. .,~ .-:
lar relief within the next five . . - · : drastic actions to remain com-
years. - · .'-- · .. ~',/ . · ~ petRive in defense manufactur-
The legislation may as well ' ' :, · ing here in Massachusetts.*
have been called the Raytheon: . -..., ,... ' ' ','. : .. according to CFO Peter
Retention Act. Last February,; ' ..- ...} _ - · ~'~-"' D'Angelo, who told the Joint
Raytheon Co., the state's ~ .;' '-' '..'. ",..i.:'"; " : House and Senate Committee
largest private-sector employ- :' on Taxation last October. with-
er. threw down the gauntlet: :: '. ": ' ~,'7 i.,~ ~.~.,~1 ' °ut the single sales fact°r' he
the defense contractor would i .: i . ~ - ~, ,,.~' said, "Raytheon will be forced
move some 17,000 of its to do something we don't want
~9.~oo ~obs out of the ~ayHo~; companiesto do. We w~, be forced to
State unless it received 540 move our defense manufactur-
million in tax and utdity rate ing lobs out of state."
Ishing in The BayState's rapid b,par-
healthy 8 8 percent increase in:
sales in 1994. to $10 I billion . ' ...........; ................turn highlights the length~ to
from ~02 billion io 100,. by staying put. which ~tates wi, go ,o keep
Raytheon was losing ground ' - ...................businesses anchored to their
to such competitors as Hughes . electricIt3' bill. which reflectedroots In a strategic sea
Aftcraft Co. and Loral Corp. power rates nearly twice the change. govermnents are
which had moved some of national average. backing away from the h~ghly
their elivisions f[om high-cost -The one-two punch of a publicized business attracttoo
California to lower-cost Art- ' dramatically smaller defense deals of the late 1980s and
zona and Texas In addition. budget and our competition early 1990s (see ~The Skv's the
the company was bleeding moving to lower-cost states-- Limit.' CFO. July 199-}) Gone
from its 522 million annoal complete wtth tax holidays. are the days when such :,rates
24
JANUARY 1996 * CFO
MICROFILMED
BY
C ES-
· ~NFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES
;~-._..,.~-..~ .......................
C - 84
? H E G l~ E A 7 S · A ~ w G I V E A W A
opened for incoming businesses,. in-
state compante~ are asking, 'What
about us?' And while most don't use
the strong-arm tactics that worked so
well tbr Raytheon. many aggre~ively
make it known that lowering w
ment--wah programs specifically Irbr what's un the books when faced with
in-state rompames. Indiana. for exam-: a defecting business. Take Indiana
pie. will equalize operating savings and Americ~m Trans Air. In November
companies may achieve by relocating.
And other states have simply made it
the cost of doing business
often takes precedence over - '' ' -'
home-state attractions. As ' 'i/.i[.~( ~, x?./~ ....
American Trans Air (estimat- .'..' ~;7' . % ' · ' · - .' ' ' ,
lion), which recently received
a :550 million incentive offer
explains, "We were born here . ,-~;.. · · . . ' · ·
1994. the IndianapoLis-based carrier
received an intriguing offer from St.
Petersburg, Florida, where
many of ATA's flights touch
down. If ATA would relocate
in Indianapolis, raised here. ,-'
But when presented with a - ..... ).;..:.;. (.-.... ( - '"..... :~.... ',
package of that size, you · - :.
have to think about it. You '2:, ) i )':..:f.~ .'..-......~: .¥...i: ~...: '~;'. '..' ,a:
owe it to your employees - ~. '.. -- ~- --. ' ' -
and stockholders to do :~':' '~' ~':' '' ""5.- ' )~.-: · . or seven sites in FIofida, plus
what's best for the company." . : '77 · . '" ' · ' · ' '" sites in other states, nar-
Eroo~t~' Is "'':" ")~'i'~ (' I::~) -K I:'~f'~,q,t;'L t: i:: ' ' .... rowed it down to three, and
· ended up with interesting
Negotiable ' ' .'- -: '. .. '.'..--'.;'.. -~
-' '' '- .; · "': "-" ' ' ' ' ' ~ offers from at least two. So
easier for locals to get incentives. To
qualify for Michigan's job-creation tax
credits, in-state companies must create
75 new jobs Out-of-state companies
must hire 150 Michiganders before the
credit kicks in
As most companies know. howev-
er. states often go above and beyond
to Florida's Gulf Coast, the
city Would offer a raft of eco-
nomic incentives. including
rent-free use of a former
Department of Defense facili-
ty for offices and operational
space
To find out whether St.
Peter3burg's unsolicited offer
was worthwhile, ATA execu-
bye vice president and CFO
Ken Wolff checked out other
possible locations. mcludmg
\Vest Palm Beach and Orlan-
do. ~We probably wsited s~x
While retention incentives
generally don't approach the size of
headfine-grabbing attraction packages,
they have grown m substance, variety,
scale. and frequency. States, in fact,
are augmenting their standard roster
of tncentives-~ax credits for new jobs
created, property-tax abatements,
grants for infrastructure improve-
we then had a bogey against which
we could measure staying,' Wolff
When Indiana officials learned ATA
was talking to St. Petersburg. they
iumped into action Indianapolis May-
or Stephen Goldsmith v~sited Mikel-
sons. Gov. Evan Bayh called upon his
a~aeon CO.'s tlit~m~tum to ~m
Rur we'~ l~ng--~ hold, ~afi~ ~d v~, ve~ pub~
~ & Y0mg ~. ~ ~ done q~e~Y S~ ~t ~ am~ md
~ jo~ he ~ but ~ don't ~t ~e ~ pubB~ ~r one
~ ff o~ar ~m~ ~d out about ~e
~ff tt b pub~d~. stat~ m ~e ~k of ~ola~g
mm~ne'$ ~fi~fion~ ~m You ha~ to
~ ~. 0~ ~u ~d ~d ~
one *hi~g not
adds David Devonshire, CFO of Ovams-Coming l~'beegha Corp, "The
first step should always be to benchmark, to lind out what others have
done," he says.
The next moVe is to find some outside expertise. Retention roeget
firms often hire law firms, auditors, finaerial advisers, and real estate
agents to evaluate and advise on incentive packages for two reasons,,
First, senior executives often know local political officials personally
and don't .want to get involved in dhzct negotiations
humerilately. Second. conducting the research end
negotiations is a time-consuming ~deavar that can
Instead, once senior executives make the decision to mover
Soriously think about it--they must proceed cacefitlly. "The one thing
not to do is m play R'_,sdu n roulette or poker with a sinration like this,"
says .aa'nert~am Trims Air CEO George Mtkdsons. "ffyou are shopping
for a place to go, or to move your company for a price, you have to be
prepaced to execute [your plan]."
Gathering as much competitive information as possible is vital,: can definitely show you are moving out."--D.G.
drag executivce away from their day-to-day rules.
The outcome. says Zemaky, depends on several
factors: how fair or tough the reigning political
administration is in a particular state; the flexibility of the state laws;
the strength of the company's advfsors; the number of people
employed; and the company's potential for growth- From stm't to fla-.
ish, he says, the process takes anywhere from six months to two ~
Of course, the deck is stacked in your favor, he adds, if, like Raytheon,
'~ou a~e a big player, have top representation and political dour, and
JANUARY 1996 * CFO
Who can blame companies for seriously examining
1 ' fie ?Afte ' gtheg dyb g p dfo i
re ocatlon o rs rseem oo a o ene r ncom-
ing businesses, in-state companies are asking, "What about us?"
return from a trip abroad. and economic
development officials formulated an incen-
tive package to match St. Petersburg's.
In early July, local news media picked up
the unfolding drama. "There were T~ cam-
eras in our office every day," says Mikelsons,
who announced the company would make a
decision within a month. ATA hired Arthur
Andersen LiP and the Indianapolis law firm
Baker & Daniels to evaluate the rival offers.
'We outsourced the actual modeling for it
because the nature of a low-cost airline is
that we simply don't have a lot of people
whom we can pull
off to take on a
project of this size.~
says Wolff "The
model that we built
v, as reasonably com-
plex. and we utilized
Arthur Andersen to
manipulate the mod-
el and be sure that it
included all the {nec-
essaryl variables.
[such as the effect
changing locations
would have on labor . i
costs and sapply
time}"
On August 8. ATA
announced it would stay in Indianapolis.
Without moving an inch. the airline received
an incentive package worth about 540 mil-
lion. Provisions included utilization of pro-
grams that were on the books: a tax refund
for every new employee hired (worth up to
:518 7 million}.
But the state went even furtheL The Indi-
anapolis Airport Authority agreed to buy
ATA's headquarters and lease a back to the
company t$5.' mdlion in savings) and the
state and city. agreed to kick in 5'7 million in
infrastructure improvements in return. ATA
pledged to keep its 2.000 enlployees in Indi-
anapolis. and add at least 1.000 over the next
,,evetel years
The final decision. :,ays Mikelsons. was
based on "the sum total of all the financial
incentives. The single b~ggest piece. which
was tire EDGE {Economic Development for a
Growing Economy] tax credit. ';','as very
instrumental."
Some S~rlnsjs A~tec~hed
As ATA found out, however, there is a price
to be paid for striking a mother lode of
incentives these days. Stung by criticism of
cash-based awards to attract companies, pub-
lic entities now conduct more due diligence
before doling out tax breaks and financial
aid. And they increasingly tie the incentives
to expansion. "There's a growing trend with-
in municipalities to be sure that people fulfill
the promise [to create jobs]," says ATA's
Wolff. "Our incentive is really based upon
our continued growth. There is very little
gratis." No new jobs,
no tax breaks.
In addition. more
and more deals have
so-called clawback
provisions, which
reqmre companies to
pay back the incen-
tives if they don't ful-
fill their end of the
bargain "A malority
of the agreements
today have a recap-
ture clause," says Ker-
stin Nemec, associate
director of KPMG's
Business Incentives
Group 'Companies
do have leverage. but there's more expected
of them."
Owens-Coming Fiberglas Corp. is a case
in point In 1994. its lease on the Fiberglas
Tower--a 28-story.. 350,000-square-foot build-
ing in downtown Toledo that had housed the
company's headquarters since 1969--was
slated to run out. The company faced the
choice of staying put or moving its 900
employees to another local site, or out of
town altogether
'There was a feeling in the community
that this was Toledo's real test in the market-
place. It was our line in the sand. so to
speak,~ says Rick Weddie. president and CEO
of the Toledo Regional Growth Partnership
Quite aside from the psychological blow of
losing one of Toledo's two Fortune 500 com-
panies. the city feared the loss of Owens-
Corning would sap revenues and hamper
efforts to revitalize the downtown.
Working with Owens-Cormng's financml
Percent change fn t~tal
non~arm employment,
Oct. IS90-Oct. 1995
NATION
CFO * JANUARY 1996
27
'r I! E O R E A 'r S ? A T E G ! V E A V; A
adviser, Goldman Sachs & Co.. the
c~ty and the Toledo-Lucas County Port
Authority quickly put together a deal
under which they would acquire and
develop a 45-acre tract of privately
held land along the Maumee River in
downtown Toledo and finance con-
struction of a three-story, 400,000-
square-foot steel-and-glass headquar-
ters complex. (The city even bought
out and demolished a 15-unit condo-
miniurn project on the site.) The deal
was made possible by an $85 million
revenue bond issuance by the port
authority.
When negotiating, Owens-Coming
didn't operate in a vacuum. "What
was important, from my perspective,
was benchmarking. We pulled in
Goldman Sachs, and they pulled in a
lot of information,' says Owens-Corn-
mg CFO David Devonshire. -We had a
database against which we could
compare our incentives, to make sure
we were getting at least as much as
what other states were providing oth-
er firms."
For all the benefits it received,
however, Owens-Coming, which got a
20-year abatement on the tax on the
building, incurred some major obliga-
tions as well. The tax abatement
erodes if Owens-Corning's employ-
ment falls below 900, and the 20-year
contract still obtains ff Owens-Coming
merges with another firm. ~We have
also pledged to work with other inter-
ests to revitalize downtown Toledo,"
says Brad Oeiman, vice president for
corporate relations at Owens-Coming.
The new reci13rocal calculus has
yet to take hold everywhere, though.
"In some parts of the country, there's
been a pattern of companies ordering
a relocatton study and then con-
fronting the mayor with the options,"
says Dan Malachuk. director of busi-
ness location services at Arthur Ander-
sen. New York City has been especial-
ly plagued by such threats, since it
has both what everybody else
wants-d~at is. jobs--and what every-
body else doesn't want--h~gh buM-
hess cosIs
Accordingly. New York has bid
high to keep businesses in Manhattan.
In its first 18 months, Mayor Rudolph
Gmliani's administration cut 11 deals
worth about $350 rodlion in long-term
tax breaks. rompames ranging from
28
WHERE THm
13OW-LARS 430
*Percentage of economic
development spending aimed at
i:~panslons rather than attraction.
STATE 1992 1994
Colorado ' ' ~ '60 '60
Florida 50 63
Georgia S 10
l~{aho 95 95
Indiana 91 70
Louisiana 67 50
Nevada 24 16
New Mexico 6S 60
North Carolina 40 50
North Dakota 84 81
South Carolina 20 0
Tennessee 40 40
Texas 10 25
The Depository Trust Co. ($18.5 mil-
lion for keeping 2,799 jobs) to CS
First Boston (S50.5 million for keep-
ing 3,704 jobs) received financial
indulgences for simply doing noth-
ing. And last October, the Coffee,
Sugar, and Cocoa Exchange and the
New York Cotton Exchange man-
aged to secure an $80 million pack-
age that included $30 million in cash
from New York City and New York
State after announcing they would
leave the World Trade Center and
WHO S
To companies receiving trice--
fives, the follo~fing breaks ~e
the most commonly granted:
Total
i Propert/tax
:: rebate 51% :}6% .$4%
Income/franchise
tax credit 48% 48% 49%
Sales tax rebate 35% 44% :}2%
Job training 11% 16% 11%
finand~g 11% 8% 11%
Employment or
payroll tax credit 9% 8% 10%
utility rebates 8% 8% 8%
Other 14% 20% 14%
take their 5.000 employees across the
Hudson River to New Jersey.
Bld~ln~, Wm
Of course. openly bidding with tax-
payers' money is increasingly rare.
because it's both bad policy and bad
public relations. In fact, the emerging
gospel holds. that successful retention
has little to do with money 'It
behooves {locations] to take care of
and create the best environment for
businesses. Otherwise, it's an open
invitation for people outside the area
to come in and try to recruit those
companies out of that area," said Katie
Burdorf, managing director at site
consultant Wadley-Donovan Group
Ltd., in Morristown, New Jersey.
Consequently. in addition to broad
efforts to reduce corporate taxes, cut
workers' compensation costs. and
streamline environmental-permitting
processes, many states now approach
business retention from a case-man-
agement perspective. The Michigan
Jobs Commission runs a program
under which 25 account managers
operating in distinct geographic areas,
armed with personal letters from Go','.
John Eaglet to top executives, make
annual calls on every company with
more than 100 employees. "We do a
diagnostic interview that basically asks
open-ended questions so we can get a
sense of the company's positton in the
market,' says Doug Rothwell, CEO
and department director of the blichi-
gan Jobs Commission. "Then we put
the results m writing and follow up on
those issues to make sure the compa-
ny is sansfied."
Other states take more bastc steps
to let businesses know they're valued.
Every year. the Greater Des Moines
Chamber of Commerce Federation. in
conjunction with the Des Moines Busi.
hess Record. holds an awards banquet
for companies that have made an eco-
nomic impact on the communi,y
~Many of these companies are getting
sales literature from other states. and
we want to let them knox,,- that theft
presence here ~s appreciated." says
David Maahs. v~ce president of the
Federation.
-EConomic development groups
also provide other services. like being
sure that companies get quick. effi-
cient one-stop service." says Smith-
JANUARY 1996 · CFO
vcick That's. heen enough to entice
Bernard C Harris Publishing Co. Inc.,
which ntoved to Norfolk in 1987, to
expand its facdity several times.
have not gotten any direct financial
incentives per se,' said Bill Harris.
president and CEO of the company.
-Where they have really assisted us is
in the soft support--helping us reach
the best people. helping us locate res!
estate. helping us access the labor
market."
The guiding phdosophy of reten-
tion is that when companies are
essentially happy· monetary issues
take a backseat to other concerns.
Lennox Industries Inc.. for example.
the Dallas-based air-conditioning and
heating-equipment company. last
summer chose to construct a $14 mil-
lion. 350.000-square-foot facility just
across the highway from its existing
budding in Urbandale. iowa The
incentives were not exorbitant: a new
access road. a 5254.000 forgivabie
loan from the state, and a five-year tax
abatement from Urbandate. But the
baubles weren't the determimng fac-
tor. qowa didn't rise shouldera above
the rest." explains general manager
End Lewis Rather. Iowa's yeagraph<
centralit-/ and the quality of the local
work force pushed the choice.
have a very. high level of employee
reliabdity, with turnover of less than
one percent.' says Lewis. "And we
had iu',t recently :,igned a :,ix-year . romance and prostitution."
labor agreement with the work farce" :: Sure. business retention intuitively
i makes more sense than attraction as
Who Holds the Ca~ds?
AS we've seen, companies willing to
move generally hold the upper hand
in retention scenarios. But firms that
muster the courage to make public
· · 'H A ~t }~ t s- i, .U it t.) s rt:t ~ t; '.s
.. 'B I I.L-,'I! A Ril I s "~ . - '
: .,~:j,~ _ , . · s~.
. ]...~ "i ' :. ..
: an economic development strategy.
: But as retention scenarios pan out.
: tales and states may come to question
: the wisdom of their actions. OIn some
' cases. nobody ever analyzes what the
cost of retaining a lob is.' says Jeffrey
Finkle. executive director of the
National Council for Urban Economic
Development, in Washington. D.C.
'My guess is that evep..- day that one of
those highly subsidized jobs is there
it's costing [taxpayers]." By granting tax
breaks to corporations. municipalities
and states ultimately undermine their
· ~ tax base, he explains. rendering them
:.:. ' '2~:'.'." ' : " · '. ', : less able to provide the kind of chmate
'".' : In the meantime. however. the
~ :'" '"-: ", "'-"'"- i~ ~":! retention war between the states
: " ' ' ~ ' ' .... ' shov`'s no sign of cooling Each state's
-............ · .
,~' ',....;-.. / ~-..~.',.~
demands from the governments ruling
their home states should act with care.
economic development agency no*,'
has a new. eager class of professional
soldiers: busmess-minded executives
charged w~th attracting and retaining
companies -Ever}' time one comma-
ot everyone is happy with the number of incentives being
N offered to retain businesses. In North Carolina, in fact, a
Corporations demanding benefits . airy creates something relaw,'ely new.
fueled by taxpayer dollars mn the risk :- everybody else has to get something
of stirring up a backlash. In addnton. sireday so that they're not at a camper-
it puts senior executives in the Live disadvantage.'· says Mark Water-
uncomfortable position of dangling: house. a prmopal at Garnet Consult-
the:rcompanies' jobs in front of pohh- 'mg Services Inc.. an economic
clans and bureaucrats As ATA's Slikel- :. development consultancy in Pleasant
sons says. 'There's a fine line be~'een ' Valley. Connecticut. 'And that contro-
l ues to fuel the ratchetrag up of incen-
~ tires."
E ~ {~ U ~ H The dirty. little secret about reten-
' tiaa recentives is that they work "We
. feel that we have virtually stopped the
gadfly is threatening to torpedo the entire practice.
Wliltam Marearly, a lawyer in Winstan-Salem, ~ upset after
the dry and county gave $~,00,000 toward building a $1 million
parl0ng garage for P,.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. end Wachovia Corp.
"In my view, the expendtim-as were not for a public purpose, as
required by the constitution," he explains.
So last February, he filed suit, claiming the North Carolina law
enabling communities to give money to companies to lure them to
their areas was unconstitutional. After a trl~, in which the veteran
litigator argued ht~ own case, a state superior court in September
agreed. A North Carolina appellate court is now revievcin8 the ruling. "I ,.van motivated
equally by constitutional and economic considerations," says Marearly. "The contention
that this helps the economy when we have 4 percent unemployment i~ absurd."
Wintie the ultimate disposition of the ca~e could immediately affect retention efforts
in North Carolina, its bigger impact may be limited, since Mcenfives are largdy a state
issue. The federal government laths the power to impose a uniform policy regarding
what states end cities can and cennot do. And given the rising tide of Federalism, it's
hardly likely this Congress will act to expand federal powe~ in this regard.--D.G.
i flow of businesses leaving Michigan.'
says Doug Rothv`-ell of the Michigan
· Jobs Commission. \%'hals more, the
' state is winning a larger share of in-
state company expansions. Hav`'or~h
Inc.. based to Holland Michigan. took
advantage of the state s new lob-cre-
ation tax credit to produce 300 new
. lobs at home. rather than in Indiana
Newly emboldened Micfugan. the
perennial sick man of the Slidwest. ~s
going on the offensive. Says Rothv`eil
'\% re nov,' finding ourselves in the
third phase. v,h~ch ~s anmctmg bust-
net,sea :nto the state ~ n
CFO cont;Tbrttt;tg editor Daniel Groxs
is tcritt.g a book on the histo0' of
CFO · JANUARY 1996
29
C 0 V E R S T 0 R Y , P A R T 2
Ask state economic development officials about business
Bet one go~. A~er all. who would admit to pu~osely
ignoring in.s~te companies? · But, in re, iF. retention m a ~irly new pfiori~: It hm eme~ed for ~veral r~ns:
· e ne~ to stop bmin~ ~m moving to sm~ offering e~m~gant incentive, the pure ~turation some ~at~ are
experiencing due to ~eir auraetlon succor. and ~e
outc~ ~om bmin~ sick of taking a back ~t to
atuaction eftarm. · Some smt~ are doing a ~uer job
at it than othem however. ~e there is no ~y to ~ientific~ly mk ~e q~iw of retention eftam, ~e followNg 10
smt~ b~ on inte~ie~ wi~ t~ ~r~. stand out for ~eir diligent eftam to cater to home-b~d cornpanic.
complete. but che states
share a common trait:
They simply t~ h~der at retention. ~rfl. such m ~nneaicut ~d ~lifornia, were stag by huge ~m in defen~
spending m well m by m exod~ of compani~ relo~ng to lower-cost smt~. Others. such ~ N~ York. are wor~ng
overtime to quell ~ an~-bmin~ image. ~d many are ~ing hel~d by n~ pro-
bmin~ adminmmtio~ ~at have placed retention at ~e top of their ompaign plat-
foetus. ~ Of coup. ~ w~ illmtrated in 'The Gr~t State Giv~y" (see page 24).
· ere's a big difference be~ecn what smt~ ~y they are doing to retain busin~ ~d what ~u can get m a company
bent on leaving. But even finaheM o~cen at firms that wish to stay put would benefit ~om mv~tigating what's
available. According to Robert S. Pete~. national director of the Busin~ Incentives Group at KPMG P~t Manrick
LLR OMost camproles a~ simply not a~re of what ~ qufli~ for? The trend wodt lint forever, he ad&. advising
that "now ~ the ~ght time to pmh for b~in~-retention incentive?
0HIO: Whore Jobs A~e Number One
In the business retention race, Ohio is a winner.
Thanks to a rigorous in-state marketing campaign.
more than 95 percent of state incentive programs are
being used by existing firms rather than by companies
relocating to Ohio. says Donald lakeway. director of the
Ohio Department of Development. The result: "No
company coming in can get anything that our existing
companies can't get: he says.
The cornerstone of Ohio's retention effort is a three-
part jobs bill mirJared by Gay. George Voinovich. The
1993 lobs Bill includes tax credits and rebates for bust-
nesses that add employees. introduce or expand export
activity. or make R&D investments
lobs Bill 2, passed m 1994, features a !~ ' . ' ' ...:
. response to attraction programs m neighbonng Ken-
tucky and Indiana. "Ohio felt the need to increase its
competitiveness." says Betty Mcintosh· associate director
of KPMG Peat Marwick's Business Incentives Group.
But its success. says Donald fannone. director of the
Economic Development Program at Cleveland State
University, means Ohio has "transcended its reputation
as a Rust Belt state:' s
CAliFORNIA: Out of ~he Red
Gay. Pete Wilson's new Red Teams--state and pri-
Cyate-sector executives trained to guide firms
through permitting procedures.got
· :.- ' !" ..- their name because they cut through
corporate franchise and personal
income tax credit to help small and
midsized firms invest in equipment.
And lobs Bill 3. a portion of which
went into effect last summer. creates
an investment ~x credit encouraging
manufacturers to purchase new
machinery.
One of the mamr beneficiaries is
Procter & Gamble Co.. which recent-
ly opened a $280 million health care
research center in Warren County,
choosing it over a site in Kentucky.
Ohio hterally paved the way for P&G.
offering about 58 million m low-
interest loans for road. sewer. and
water improvements.
To a certain degree. Ohio's efforts have been m
red tape. But red is also appropriate
because the teams were an emergency
tactic California developed to stem a
hemorrhage of exiting companies.
From 1987 to 1994. around 700
companies. including computer chip
giant Intel Corp.--which chose to
build a $1 billion. l.$00-mb semicon-
ductor plant in New
Mexico rather than pay
580 million in Califor-
nia sales tax--left.
according to Southern
Ca[iforma Edison Co.
Part of the problem
was that. fi)r a long
time. California considered itself invinci-
ble. A~ the world~. seventh-largest econo-
Y !. A U g N J 0 gi
Briefly Stated
Taxed to the Max
Top corporate in~rae
tax rates:
I. Iowa: 6,0%-12.0~ "~
2. Conaecttca~ 11R%
3. Peam, yl,~,nh-. 10.9996
,~ Mbmesota:9,8% '.
$. Mausacbutatts: 9.5%
...and where that's
non~ blevada, South
Dakota, Texas, W~l~g-
tOO, W)'omtng ~
Win Some, Lose Some
$tat~ that decremed
corporate inane taxes
from 199~u-95:
1. ,aa4zona
3. Peu va
4. West Vix~nI~
...and those that
raised therig
1. New mmlnhire
2. Ohto
3. Montana
V/here the llv~g ts e~syr
Utah, Kans~
In, Iown, Nebr~lm
...where to irack ~ar
b~,~. Loutsim~
SUtr~ Me
Top entrepreneurial
horrors.'
1. Utah
2. Nevada
3. Arizona
4.
& Georgia
6. Tennessee
7. Colorexto
8. North Carolina
9. Florida
10. Merylmd
SECURITY E~E?AIg. S
Righaut O. Lower $tat~ Vlorkars' ~
CFO * JANUARY 1996
ILLUSTRATIONS BY STEPHEN WEBSTER
31
Crime Capltala
Where you have the
greatest chance of
being murdered,
raped, or robbed:
1, Callfesta
2. Texas
3. ~1orlda
4. Nr~,Yotk
5. ~inols
Where you can leave
your doors unlocked...
1. North Dakota
2, Wyoming
3. South Dakota
Sick Bay
whkh g. ates pay
bulk of the total
health care payrnent~
per capita:
2. New York
4. Com~ecficut
5. New
1. Mako
3. Mlssi~ippt
3. Utah
4. Nevada
S. South Camltna
Plugged In
The highest average
electricity cost per
kilowatt hour.
New York---S0.1016
...andtheM. we.ca
yamtude/--S0.0386
Private Domains
~ed to ~otea the
results o/corporate envi-
renmmtal audits from
disclomre in 1995:. 34
Number that passed
audit pri~lege bil~ 9
my. California had been sleeping on the job when it
came to business retention.
Now it's wide awake. In 1993. for example. the state
legislature created a permanent 8 percent R&D tax cred-
it. established new tax credits for the purchase of manu-
facturing equipment, doubled the sales factor when
determining income tax, and reduced workers' comp
rates by 7 percent. And this year. Wilson has proposed
phasing in a IS percent cut in both corporate and per-
sooal income taxes.
As a result, the state is bleeding fewer companies.
Edison officials say 40 companies left the state in 1994,
compared w~th I05 in 1993. And even Intel. encouraged
by the new tax credits, opened a $52.6 million R&D cen-
ter near Sacramento.
"Two years ago, most projectS we worked on were
true retention projectS," says Barry Sedkik. Edison's
. manager of economic and business development, "keep'
ing companies from leaving the state entireIF- Now the
focus is expansion within ~e state." a
NEW YORK: A New Attitude
for the first nine months of 1995· the Department
of Labor reports that New York State gained 81,000
private-sector jobs--a large turnaround from 1990 to
1994. when it lost more than 500,000. .
The reason, say' economists, is the ~l .-:' .
aggressive deal making of New York ~
example, offers real estate tax breaks to developers who
renovate office buildings in lower Manhattan.
Meanwhile, upstate, Pataki is making good on his vow
to cut both taxes and rebelalien. For one thing, the state
corporate income tax surcharge has been reduced from 7.5
percent in 1995 to 2.5 percent this year and will be alimi-
noted in '97, say~ Raymond Paolino, director of business
research for the Department of Economic DevelopmenL
The Governor has also personally intervened in
meetings to prevent r, vo of the states larger employers--
Eastman Kodak Co. and IBM Corp.--from leaving. And
while property tax incentives persuaded IBM to stay in
Armonk, Kodak decided to invest more than $300 mil-
lion at its Rochester headquarters simply on the state's
commitment to continue cutting taxes. This year, in fact,
Pataid will push for a reduction of the personal income
tax by 25 percent over four yenrs. u
KENTUCKY: On a l~lission
when Kentucky decided to upgrade its economic
development program, it did what many large
companies do--it hired an outside adviser. In late 1993.
consultants from Arthur D. Little Inc. traveled around
the state for three months interviewing executives.
The result: a mission statement--complere with "five
,. goals, 26 strategies. and 76 tactics:'
' ~ :: ' ' ... ' says Gene Strong, Secretary of Ken-
· ' · '- ' ." tucky's Cabinet for Economic De~el-
City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and
newly elected Gov. George Pataid.
It used to be that New York com-
panies would simply move without
ever talking to economic develop-
ment officials, says KPMG's Betty
Mcintosh. "Now, there s a perception
that those same officials will listen
and at least try to address a compa-
ny's needs;'
In New York City, Giuliani is
doing a lot more than listening. Take
the $184 million package that con-
vinced the New York Mercantile
- .' .... · · .: -'. · . opment. And high up on the list
"- - ' ' ' ' ..... were ways to retain existing business-
~ · . . ..' :-. es, such as programs to expedite
environmental permitting; new
worker retraining programs; and
development seminars for commu-
nity leaders.
Strong estimates that it will rake
from 5 to 10 years to roll out all the
measures. But, he adds, the imple-
mentation will transcend whatever
political party happens to be in power
at the ume. "~& run the cabinet as a
business." says Strong, who h~mself
Exchange to stay put. Or one of the was selected by an executive search
latest beneficmries. the Equitable Life Assurance Society.: firm. ~With eight private-sector leaders on the board of
which received $4.5 million from New York City and i directors commstted for the long term. we have a good
about $5 million from the state for keeping its headqnar - ' chance of seeing these measures through;'
For at least the nex't four yenrs they ha'.: ihe fi~ll sup-
ters there.
Extravagant? Maybe. But the deals saved roughly :. port of newly elected Governor Paul patton--credited
10,000 jobs, according to the New York ' by many as the father of Kentucky bosmess incentives.
i City Economic Development Corp And. ' Patton helped draft gentucky's first major business
THE ~I~!g, ITV ~ recentives have enabled the city to retain ' development legislauon--the 988 Kentucky R~u'al Eco-
I nomic Development Act (KREDAJ--wh<h gives corpo-
~T
Ou~lt~o/ti~fiua,nrh~tStt~ntm~ i about 50,000 jobs since G~uliani was
elected.
Most~o$iteSelt,~onDexigmaMu:~ ] Stdl. Giuliam is aware of the cent rover-
Crime ~ito .................. T/%
~n of laTtag ................ ~S% Sy such deals stir up- Thus. many business
lhalth cazt .................. TA 't leaders were pieused by his latest offering: .
I,ullte Sohooh ................ I~ acros~-the-board financial incenttves ued
C,nms~ .................. SS~ ~ to cwic improvements. A new law passed
~ by the state legislature last October. for
32
rate and personal income tax credits to new and expand-
mg manufacturing projects that create jobs m counnes
w~th h~gh unemployment.
KREDA ~s credited w~th attracting close to 200 indus-
trial proleas r~presenting about 54 billion m private
investments and with encouraging two malor erapin' -
ers--lnrernational Paper Co. and lames River Corp --to
JANUARY 1996 * CFO
'n U ~ ! rd l~ S S R E 'F E N ? ! O N
expand in Bowling Green. On a smaller scale. KREDA
helped American Bag Corp., an air-bag maker in Sterns.
expand twice and eventually hire more than double the
140 new workers it planned to. The beauV] of the deal.
was that it was done 'in an expeditiouS manner:' says
president I.C. Egnew. 'We had one meeting in the fall of:
1992 and began expanding in the spring of 1993f he says. :
Despite a series of suCeaSsful coups. Kentucky recent'
ly suffered a high-profile [os$ when giant heakh-care
company Columbia/HCA abandoned Kentucky for
Nashville, Tennessee. One reason it left, sources say, was
the state's new 2.5 percent tax on net revenues of health-
care providers--a tactic many stateS are now uSing to get
matching federal funding for their Medicaid programs.
Here. however. it was a case of clashing incentives. For
despite the millions Kentucky spent to retain
Columbia/HCA, the new law cost the company $13 mil-
lion in 1994. and was due to cost it millions more after
an upcoming merger wi(h HealthTrust Inc
The next legislature may reexamine the tax. says
Strong. as well as a proposal for corporate income tax
credits for worker-training programs. n
~I.~IU~tA: Baok in the Driver's Seat
Alabama learned the benefits of business rerenhon
the hard way. After estabhshing itself as an incco-
state has numerous other attributes to convince compa-
nies to stay. however. For example. Alabama has a one-
stop permitting process. Its employee-training pro-
gram--the Alabama Industrial Development Training
program--has worked with more than 600 firms over the
past 20 years training some 65,000 workers. In addition.
he says. the corporate income tax rate is at a competitive 5
percent, and state and local taxes per capita equal $1.363, .
compared with a national average of $2.083.
But when apparel manufacturer Russell Corp·
' announced expansions in four Alabama cities. creating
more than 2,000 jobs. incentives had nothing to do with
it. says Fred Braswell, Russell's vice president of external
affairs. "We benefit from state and local programs. but
have neither asked for nor received unusual incentiveS,"
he says. "We've stayed because this ~s where the bulk of
our operations are. from cotton bale to retail." m
ILLINOIS: Closing ~ks
over the past 20 years. Illinois has had something of
an opea-wallet policy concermng retention.
in 1993, for example. Gov. lames Edgar doled out $20
million in loans, $1.4 million in state and local tax
exemptions. and $200.000 in jobs-traimng
funds to entice Tootsie Roll Indusroes [no.
to stay. And in 1994. he kept Motorola inc.
tires high-roller in 1993 when it offered Mercedes-Benz; from ~pening a new plant in Wisconsin by
N.A- Inc. a $253.3 million package to locate an auto plant: offering .$30 million in labor- training
near Tuscaloosa. the state was severely criticized by in-: incentiVeS and pushing through a legisla-
state companies that thought the money could have been: tire act that permitted the Illinois Com-
betterspent on infrastcocture and education- ' roeroe Commission to approve special
The result: now the state legislature is starting to rec-: rates that kept energy costs down.
ognize that "80 percent of the state's growth will come :. Those deals, however, were actually
from within" says Neal Wade president of the Econore. : "low key;' say~ Don Harder of the Kellogg
ic Development Partnership of Alabama. And this Year it ' Graduate Schoul of Management at North'
overhauled its economic development program in order western Unr,'ersiv/, compared with the incentives offered
to "reverse white-collar flight and maintain blue-collar: by Edgar's predecessor. lames Thompson. Between 1989
· and 1992. Thompson paid 'over $100 million to keep
expansion?
Specifically. the revised incentive package allows new Chrysler. over SI20 mdhon for the retention of a Sears
and expanding companies to write off 5 percent of their ~ Roebuck retail center. and $150 million to keep the
capttal investment cosu each year for 20 years up to the White $ox from going to St Petersburg;' he says.
These days. however, Illinois is
level of their state income taxes. To
qualify. businesses with more than
100 employees must invest at least $2
million. hire 20 people, and pay their
employees ,58 per hour on average or
$10 per hour including benefits,
Those with fewer than 100 emp[oyees
must create 15 new jobs and inve~t $1
million- In contrast. under the
that apphed to the Mercedes deal.
credtrs that exceeded a firm's state
income tax could be utilized through
wage assessments from employees
directly related to the protect
Robert Sutton. manager of tb.e
Economic Research and Commumca-
tinns Division of the Alabama Devel-
opment Office· points out that the
Fre~ Rein
States
V~ont, Wm
CFO * JANI~AR¥ 1996
OnYourOwn
$M~ that do not
offerfinancing a/d
for existing p~ant
~qaansio.:
'2. Idaho
4. North Cardina
6.~hington
following something of an austerity
poliq w~th regard to retention incen-
tives. Says 1ohn Hamalton. an
economist for the Illinois Depart-
merit of Commerce and Commumty
Aftarts. "binst of the stare's recentives
are not discretionary lanvmore~--
with the big exceptions being funds
· :' ~' ':'~ '" I for jobs training and infrastructure;'
[n fact. two of the state's most
: i:i wrttren into the state's constitution.
· · , which was revamped in 1970. he says
i. , 'i i First, graduated tax rates are probib-
'" -' '~ ited; Illinois personal and corporate
income taxes are flat-rate taxes. Sec-
ond, the corporate income tax ~s
Labor Lost
States that don't offer
tax incentives for job
Alaska, Michigan,
New Mexico, Oregon,
Vermont, W,/omi~g
Stats that don't
~r i~dustrb:! im, est-
Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii,
Iowa, Minnesota,
Nevada, North Carolina,
Pennsylvania,
Utah,¥ermont'
Wyo~ng
33
iS U S I N E S S R E ? E ~ T I O N
linked to the personal income tax rate .- _
as insurance against arbaraq' iocreas-
es in its rate.
Now. the Edgar administration is
working to shape busines~ develop-
ment incentives that will benefit a
cross section of existing businesses,
says Hamilton. In 1995, a manufac-
mreff purchase credit was phased in,
building on already existing sales tax
exemptions for the purchase of man-
ufacturing and farm machinery. as
well as replacement parts and com-
puten used to control manufacturing
machinery. Purchasers of manufac-
turing machinery receive a credit
equal to 25 percent of what the taxes
would have been if the machinery was taxable. making it
po~ible for the manufacturers to use this credit to offset
any other equipment ~es tax liability they incur.
And going forward, the 1995 legislature focused on
tort and workars' compensation reform, earning kudos
from libnots Manufacturers' Association president
Gregory Baise. "The legislature gets a strong A this year?
he says. ·
CONI~IECTICUTt The Focus Is on R~D
Back in 1993. reeling from cuts in defense spending
that resulted in a loss of more than 20,000 jobs,
Connecticut offered aircraft engine manufacturer Pratt
& Whimey a 532 million incentive package to stay put,
rather than move to cheaper sites in Georgia or Maine.
The package. which became known as the "Pratt Whit-
ney" research and development tax bill. allows up to 6
percent in tax credits for spending beyond 5200 million.
While the targeted nature of the incchores caused
controveny among some state economists and manufac-
turers. Kevin ComYay. vice president of taxes at Pratt &
Whimey's parent. United Technologies Corp., defends
the decision, saying that the tax credits will be earned
only "to the extent that the company mvasts in R&D in
Connecticut;' In addition, he says. the bill has become
the basis of federal legislation for an R&D tax
credit--legislation that wdl benefit all companies.
Not that other Connecticut companies have been
overlooked in the staffs business retentton efforts. Th~s
year. for example. the state legtslature lowered corporate
income tax from 11.25 to I 1 percent. and plans to scale
it back to 7.5 percent by the year 2000. In addition. Con-
necticut has focused on hnnging down workers' comp
· : ' ' '-' · ' than 50 people. such commitment
..,
has always been key, says Deidrick.
One satisfied customer is Robert
Ohm~ CFO of Marine Management
Systems Inc. (MMS), a 5tam ford firm
that was considering moving its oper-
ations south. But last fall. MMS,
which employs 40 people. received
half a million dollars in Ioaus from
Connecticut Innovations Inc.. a non-
profit state agency that serves as its
venture capital arm. Not to mention
that MMS will be moving to an
enterprise zone, which will result in a
reduction of up to 80 percent in real
estate taxes. and significant personal
property tax abatements. That, and
a wefi-trmned, well-educated work force. were enough
to keep MMS docked in Connecticut. Ohmes says. ·
Location, loftion, l~atinn. That is ~e major broi-
l n~ antaction for compani~ in Georgia~spe-
dMly ~nse cente~d aro~d AUanta.
"A~anta is and h~ histuri~lly ~n a t~nsponation
hub, offering a state-of-the-art a:rport and a strong
airfoil distribution ne~ork~ ~ Chiles Gatlin, of the
Georgia Department of Indite, Trade. and Tourism.
PI~, ~e stateg ~o deap-~ter ports in Sav~nah and
B~swick, and a highly ~stem considered ~e b~t in
· e nation, m~e ~t a gate~y to the huge Florida market
and the ~t of~e Sought, he
But while AUanta w~ G~rgigs gr~t~t streng~ in
aR~cting new b~in~ in the 19705 and '80s, the r~t of
the state la~ed behind. In an aaempt to even the
Gov. Zell Mdler introduced the Business Expansion
Support Act in 199~a three-tiered sliding scale of
investment. }oh-retraining. and job-creation tax cred-
itwhich often ~e largest t~ br~ to busm~s~ ~at
cr~te jobs in ~e state's poorer counties. Bns~n~ can
u~ th~ tax crediu to reduce their corporate income
t=o by up to 50 percent·
Among ~o~ t~ng advanmge of th~ new la~
~te~illar Inc.. which ~s building a fuel systems paru
plant in lackson County. and Sony Corp. which
expanding iu ~r~llton plant by 375 workers In addi-
tion. Lockheed Aeronautical Systems. m Marietta. has
uken ad~nuge of ~ crediu to retain
' iu work force of 4,500. ~lt's a g~d-fatth
. effort [by fie statel to k~p skdls up ~ new
costs. Iowenng them by 26 percent m 1995 "This is the i technologies arrive m the plant." says
fourth year in a row that these costs have been decreased - Dorothea Mahan. director of orgamzanon
by 20 percent.' says Arthur D~edrick. chairman of the and employee development.
Development Office of the Governor. Right now. the b~ggest drawback to
But while himging in and retaining large employers . development remains the state'sedusaUon
has been a ma~or goal· the state has also been looking system. said executives polled last spnng
out for tts start-ups and entrepreneurs. creating a variety by the Governor's Development Couned
of public/private partnerships to rase cap, tat. With 90 . But it ~s also the area in which the state ~s
percent o f all bnsinasses m Connecticut employing fewer ' making inroads.
CFO ° JANUARY 1996
Top average hourly
earnings in mtmqac-
mfing:
3. Delaware $13.96 :
4-Ifidlana:S13.gs; .'
5. LOuLeh~ S15.76 . '
...mu/the/oms~' :
1. South Dakota: ~9.49
~. South Carolina: $10.19
4- Florida: $1024 -.
s. Adausas: $~0..30
School Days ' ' '
States with ~:ha .
hlghest percent o[
thelr population'
graduming pone
l, Utah--90% o
2. ~9.2
1. Colorado-30.2%
...andthe/owe. st
College:West
ff You Btdld It
States that had the
most new antl expand-
ed facilities built
b e~een 1992-94:
1. Ohio: 1,958
2. North Carolina: 13t4
3. Tex~ 1~23
4. Florida: 817
5. Calfforni~ 605
& KentuckT:.
8, W'~r.o nsin: 476
9. V'lr~'nla: 431
10. Indiana: 448
35
WHAT INCENTIVES
(~OUNT MOST
Squeeze Play
$tat~ that have the
highest general salas
1. ML~issippi: 7.O%
2. Rhode Island: 7.0%
3. Nevada: 6.5%
4. Washington: 6.5%
5. Illinois: 6.25%
6. Texas: 6.25%
...and those with none:
Alaska, Delaware,
Montana, New Hamp-
shire, Oregon
Grow or Go
P~entage
mdng firms planning to
build or relo~ a ~
d~on fa~ in the
In current $tat~ 38%
In another state with no
current presence: 25%
In another state with
current presenc~ 18% ·
And FInally
Whereyou have the
best chance o/seeing
the sum Arizona: 86%
· ..and the lowera.
Alaska: 30%
Whe~ you have the
best chance of dying
(rates per 1,000)...
West Virginia: 11
...and the lowest
Alaska: 3.8
Compiled by C£Ostalf
writer lan Sprinlgteel
and editorial assistant
DeAnn Christinat
S I 1~ E S S R E ? E N T I O N
Alphatetra-based Siemens Energy and
Automation Inc., for example. plans to
take advantage of the state's new Quick
Start program to train up to I$0 new
employees. The program, which is avail-
able to companies at no cost, has an
added feedback feature that allows them
to help the state make improvements.
In addition. the Miller administration
has initiated Project H.O.P.E. (Helping
Outstanding Pupils Educationally}, a col-
lege scholarship program funded by the
state's lottery system. It offers full tuition at a public col-
lege to any Georgia high school student maintaining a B
average throughout high school and college. It will take
at least five years. however, before the state's companies
begin to seriously reap its rewards. ·
TEXAS: Reeling without Dealing
exas legislators will tell you straight out that large
T inceotn.e packages are not business-as-usual there.
For starters, Texas has no corporate or personal income
tax. which means there's not a lot of room for negotia-
tion. In addition. because it has a rich
storehouse of raw materials. as well a~
proximity to blexico and Latin Amer-
ica in th~s North American Free Trade
Agreement era. such lures are unnec-
essary, they say.
Thus. wheo Gov. George W. Bush
was sworn into office last year. he
vowed to support state busineases
without giving away the ranch. He
started with "deanup" hills in tort
reform and workers' comp.
Texas used to be known as "the .~;.) .
sue-me state;' But last spring, the
state legislature passed a sweeping
tort retbrm agenda that hmited large
punitive damage awards and put lim-
its on venue shopping (finding the
most advantageous county within the state to try a case).
At the same time. the state eliminated intrustate truck-
ing fees. And it increased funding for job.training pro-
grams. allocating more than :529 million to the Smart Jobs
Fund. which helps pay for work-force training for both
existing and new businesses. One :smart Jobs applicant is
Nokla Corp. a Finnish telecommunications equipment
maker that has been expanding throughout Texas. The
firm's latest expansion. a new state-of-the-art cellular
phone manufacturing plant. is scheduled to open this
year in Ft. Worth. and wdl employ 2,000 people. each eli-
gible for up to $2,000 in training funds.
What ~s needed next are improvements in the educa-
tional system. says Waco economrst Ray Perryman.
"We've had a school- funding crisis going on for [0 years
now;' he ~ays And, he adds, considering all the oppor-
turnties note being created by NAFTA. quahty issues like
training and education will be key. B
NE!!RASHA:
'l~e Incentives Bridesmaid
Over the past four years, Nebraska has bid aggres.
sive]y to attract out-of-state manufacturers, only to
suffer three big-time losses. First it lost a BMW N.A. Inc.
plant to South Carolina. Then Mercedes-Benz N.A. put
its facility in Alabama. And most recently, a $1.3 billion
Micron Technology Inc. computer chip plant it hoped to
attract headed west to Utah.
There is a silver lining, though. Last spring, in its
futile attempt to win Micron, the Nebraska legislature
rushed through three bills--informally called the
Micron bills--that are now benefiting the state's home-
based employers.
One of them is food-processing giant Cargill Inc.,
which will qualify for incentives vnthin fi~'e years under
the Quality lobs Act--the centerpiece of the new legisla-
tion. Passed last February. this act givas tax credits to com-
penies that either invest $50 mdlioo and create 500 new
jobs or invest S100 million and add 250 nov workers with-
in five years. Under one provisinn, Cargdl will be able to
retain the state income tax withholding of employees and
use the money for worker training end benefits.
In return, the Minnesota firm broke ground last sum-
mer on a $100 million plant expan-
sion in Blair.~choosing the site over
bids from neighboring states. "No
one incentive oun~,eigbed the rest;'
says Pat Bowe, plant general manager.
"The single biggest factor is corn.
Then there's electric, gas, and water
costs, quality of work force. and avail-
able transportation"' Nebraska, he
says, offered the best combmatinn.
The blicron bills also authorized
the state's power companies and
municipal utilities to offer malor dis-
counts to new or expanded mdustnal
customers That translates into major
savings. says Stu Miller. deputy direc-
tor of the Nebraska Department of
Economic Development, because
Nebraska is the only state that uses all public power.
While larger companies stand to benefit most from
the Micron legislation. the state also passed a bill last
spring that gave a break to a wide range of manul:~ctur-
ers with out-of-state markets It did this by phasing out
the "throwback ta~x"--a portton of the state's business
income tax previously levied on products shipped fi-om
Nebraska but sold in other states.
Now. many executives hope that the state wdl stay
focused on retention. [n fact. some, like Matt Gates,
COO of :SITEL Corp. o{ Omaha, were not all that
thrilled about Micron coming to town in the first place.
"[ learned that the average pay at .Micron wasn't even as
h~gh as what we are paying our workers now." says
Gates. Micron~s presence would have created a labor
shortage, and pushed wages even higher. he ~a}~. u
Lauren Iohn rs a Boston-based freelance wrrter
36
JANUARY 1996 * CFO
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
OATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
January 8, 1996
City Council
City Manager
Pending Development Zssues
An application for preliminary plat approval of the preliminary
plat of Galway Hills, Parts Three and Four, a.27.77 acre, 78-1ot
subdivision located south of Galway Drive, east of Highway 218.
Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow model homes and temporary
real estate sales centers in residential zones.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
Stephen Atkins, City Manager - - ~ -,
Karin Franklin, Director, Planning & Community Develop~,,,~
Parcel 64~1 a
In May of 1994, the City Council passed a resolution reserving Parcel 64-1 a for CenterSpace
(see attached). Parcel 64-1a is the lot next to the Holiday Inn across from the Iowa City
Public Library. CenterSpace was a proposed cultural/conference center, advocated by
members of the Iowa City arts community, members of the Arts Committee of the Iowa City
Area Chamber of Commerce, and others. The resolution reserving this parcel expired on
January 1, 1996.
There are a number of decisions which are needed from the Council regarding this parcel.
Initially, we need to know whether they wish to extend the resolution reserving this space for
CenterSpace to some point in time. Secondly, if the Council does not wish to extend the
resolution, whether the staff should begin to actively market the property or not.
Parcel 64-1 a was one of many properties purchased by the City for redevelopment during the
downtown urban renewal project. It is a 37,000 square foot parcel that is currently used for
surface parking and generates approximately $53,000 per year in parking revenues. The site
provides an opportunity to enhance Iowa City's downtown and add to the vitality of City
Plaza. Obviously, private development of the property could contribute significantly to our tax
base.
A Council decision to market 64-1 a would lead to the question of the appropriate use of the
site. There are two approaches we could take to that question: 1 ) Decide on the types of
uses that are desirable there and undertake a market study to determine if those desirable
uses are practical; or 2) undertake a more general market analysis to evaluate how best to use
the site in today's market. The first option would involve the Council in envisioning what they
would like to have on the site; this could include some or all of the features of CenterSpace.
After a market analysis was completed for that defined project, a determination could be
made as to whether the time was right to actively market the site or not. The second option
would be used if the Council felt it imperative to redevelop the parcel in the short-term. Any
market analysis will require assistance from a consultant.
At the meeting of January 15, answers to the following questions would be useful:
Should the resolution reserving Parcel 64-1a for a cultural/conference center be
extended and, if so, to what point in time?
2
If the parcel is not reserved, should the City actively market this parcel for some type
of redevelopment?
If marketing the parcel is selected, does the Council wish to define the project to
achieve some community goal, or is the redevelopment of the site focused on an
immediate enhancement of the downtown and the generation of new tax revenue7
If the Council chooses to market the property for a defined project, the staff can develop
some project options for discussion at a subsequent Council meeting.
cc: Shirley Wyrick, CenterSpace Steering Committee
Attachment
bf~,64-1 a
RESOLUTION NO. 94-138
RESOLUTION OF ENDORSEMENT FOR THE CENTERSPACE CONCEPT AND
FOR THE RESERVATION OF URBAN RENEWAL PARCEL 64~1 (A}
WHEREAS, on January 31, 1994, Camiros Ltd. presented to the Iowa City City Council a
cultural conference center feasibility study entitled, CenterSpace: A Feasibility Study, and
WHEREAS, the Steering Committee of the CenterSpace project requests the City Council's
consideration of a resolution of endorsement of the CenterSpace concept and for reservation
of Urban Renewal Parcel 64-1{a}, and
WHEREAS, the mxed use facility propose.d in the cultural conference center feasibility study
is an ideal use of the City's last urban renewal parcel, and
WHEREAS, a cultural conference center furthers the cultural, social, and economic well-being
of the community.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY,
IOWA, THAT:
The Iowa City Council endorses the cultural conference center concept as outlined in
CenterSpace: A FeasibtllW Study,
The Iowa City City Council commits, until January 1, 1996, to reserving Urban
Renewal Parcel 64-1 (a) as the appropriate site for a cultural conference center.
Passed and approved this loth day of May
, 1994.
ATTEST: ~
CITY CLERK
It was moved by Kubby and seconded by
adopted, and upon roll call there were:
ThroJ~morton the Resolution be
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
X
X
X
X
X
Baker
Horowitz
Kubby
Lehman
Novick
Pigott
Throgmorton
ecodov~centersp.re$
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 12, 1996
To: The Honorable Mayor Naomi J. Novick and Members of the City Council
From: Linda Newman Woito, City Attorney ~
Re: Update on Assistant City Attorney recruitment
As you recall, the fourth attorney position was vacated November 6, 1995. Based on
discussions with Personnel Administrator Sylvia Mejia, First Assistant City Attorney Anne
Burnside and I chose to advertise before as {Nell as after the holidays. We ha~e advertised
in the local newspapers together with the Des Moines Re.~ister, and also placed an ad in the
Iowa League of Cities Ma(~azine.
Time for applications will close at 5 pm on Friday, January 26, 1996. Anne and I will then
review the applications that weekend, and set up interviews the last week of January and the
first week of February, 1996.
Please call if you have questions.
CC:
City Clerk
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
First Assistant City Attorney Anne Burnside
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
January 12, 1996
To:
From:
The Honorable Mayor Naomi J. Novick and Members of the City Council
Linda Newman Woito, City Attorney
Anne G. Burnside, First Assistant City Attorn
Permits Issued for Awning/Signs at Pizza Hut
In response to a recent request from the City Council, Anne and I revisited the question
whether the' permits issued by Housing and Inspection Services (HIS) for the awning/signs
were issued in error and can be revoked. We have verified relevant dates and events with HIS
staff, reviewed an opinion by Patricia Cone-Fisher, and considered the opinions of the Iowa
Supreme Court. We now report the following:
CONCLUSION: The decisions of the Housing and Inspection Services staff to issue one
building permit and three sign permits in October, 1993 were not issued in error, as was the
case in Lamoni, see discussion below. Rather, HIS changed its interpretation of City
ordinances. Thus, our facts fall squarely within the arebit of the Crow case - meaning there
was room for interpretation as to whether the awning was an "awning" or a "sign." As a
result, Pizza Hut has vested rights in the signs, and the Citv has no authority to revoke the
permits.
DISCUSSION:
Facts. The following dates and events are relevant to the issue presented:
October 22, 1993 City Awning Division ("CAD") applied for building permit for "new
exterior awnings" at 127 Iowa Avenue,
October 28, 1993 CAD applied for "awning sign" permit. HIS staff processed the request
as applications for three permits.
October 29, 1993 HIS issued three sign permits based on HIS opinion that the proposed
lettering met awning requirements,
November 8, 1993 HIS issued a building permit to construct signs, per application of
10/22/93.
November 29, 1993
Boothroy issued an opinion letter finding the structures constructed by
CAD pursuant to the permits at 127 Iowa Avenue were not in violation
of the rezoning ordinance.
May 4,1994
Boothroy issued an opinion memorandum reconsidering his opinion of
11/19/93, and finding the structures were signs, not awnings, and that
the sign and building permits were issued in error.
October 14, 1994
Boothroy stated in conversation with Asst. City Attorney that the
definition of awning in the City Code was not clear and interpretation
was required.
Analysis,
The critical cases to apply to the foregoing facts are Crow v. Board of Adjustment, 227 Iowa
324, 288 N.W. 145 (1939) and City of Lamoni v. Livincmton, 392 N.W.2d 506 (Iowa 1986).
The cases reach different results on the issues presented of whether a permit issued by a
municipal inspector may be revoked thereby stopping any construction carried out in reliance
on the permit, However, the Court applied the same logic and analysis to the facts presented,
and different facts resulted in two different conclusions.
For example, in the Lamoni case, a permit was issued for a sawmill, even though a sawmill
was not a permitted use in the zoning code. The Iowa Supreme Court reasoned that since the
permit's issuance was "plain error," the builder could not reasonably have relied on the permit
and the city could revoke the permit without paying for the construction work already done.
In contrast, the Crow case involved a request for a permit to construct a veterinary clinic in
a residential district, After consulting with the city's attorney, the inspector stated to Dr.
Crow he would issue a building permit. Dr. Crow tore down a building and proceeded to make
application for the building permit. The city attorney again reviewed the application, and
issued a formal opinion that a vet clinic was appropriate because a "hospital" included animals
- human and otherwise; and a building permit should be issued. After neighbors appealed,
the Board of Adjustment ordered the permit revoked and the Crow lawsuit resulted.
The Iowa Supreme Court found that since the meaning of "hospital" could be interpreted to
mean only treating humans, not all animals, the question of whether to issue a permit was
"doubtful and fairly debatable" - which is the opposite of plainly erroneous. Thus, Dr. Crow's
building permit could not be revoked under such an ambiguous zoning ordinance where the
term "hospital" did not clearly set out whether a veterinary hospital could be located in a
residential zoning district.
It is clear from the facts outlined above that Iowa City's ordinances are just as ambiguous as
to the meaning of "awning" as was the definition of "hospital" in the Crow decision.
Therefore, interpretation of the ordinance was required. Boothroy first interpreted the
ordinance in November 29, 1993, and found the permits were properly issued. His
interpretation does not appear, on later examination, to be clearly erroneous, but as he stated
later and as demonstrated by his series of opinions on the topic, the meaning of the word
"awning" in the Iowa City zoning ordinance is "doubtful and fairly debatable," see attached.
We conclude the permits may have been valid on the dates they were issued. There is some
lack of clarity as to whether Julie Tallman was authorized to issue a permit under Terry
Goerdt's signature, or whether Bogaard, Tallman or Goerdt did the requisite inquiry or
examination to support the permits. Ultimately, it does not matter because Boothroy affirmed
the permits' validity on November 29, 1993 but later said there was room for doubt.
In sum, under the Crow case, a "vested interest" in the already-erected sign/awning attached
at the moment Boothroy issued the second opinion. This means the sign and building permits
cannot be revoked because the City itself has acknowledged the City ordinances are subject
to interpretation. In e word, HIS's second opinion relinquished any power the City previously
had to revoke the permits as originally issued.
Attachments
CC:
City Clerk
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
Doug Boothroy, HIS Director
Julie Tallman, Code Enforcement Assistant
City Attorney Opinion File
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
To: Ron Boose, Sen~or Building Official / !
Ter. ry Goerdt, Building Inspector /X
Juhe Tallman, Code Enforcement Asalstan
·
Re: Pl~ Hut A~ning .
Since its ere~lon, the Pi~a ~ut "awning" ~o~?d at ~e inter~ec~ ~f iowa Avenue and '
Dubuque Street has been a zomng inte~re~tlon ~ssue. ~e ques~on
an awning (a roof-like stmc~re intended to provide shelter) or whe~er it is a building sign. At the
time of ~e ini~al re.w, this depa~ment was of ~e opinion that the PI~ Hut st~cture met the
definition of awning (see a~ach~ le~er) and the sign petit was properly issued based upon this
inte~retation.
After further research and consultation about awning design and regulation, I now conclude that
the Pizza Hut structure is not an awning due to its design. The structure is designed to provide
maximum signage and not to function as an awning (a roof-like structure intended to provide
shelter). Therefore, the sign and building permits were issued incorrectly to Pizza Hut.
The next step is to send Pizza Hut a letter indicating the error in issuing the permits. They will
be informed that the "sign" is in non-compliance with City regulations but that the City does not
intend to require its removal at this time. The letter must also advise Pizza Hut that any alteration
to the "awning° will result In the City requiring full compliance with the Code (i.e. the present
"awning" will have to be removed).
The Pizza Hut sign is one example of the interpretation difficulties caused by the Increasingly
popular "awning"-type signs. Please be advised that all awnings must be reviewed in terms of
whether or not they comply with the design standard of a roof-like cover intended to provide
shelter. If a proposed awning does not meet this standard, it cannot be considered an awning
and erected as such.
29 November 1993
Jim Harris
Prairie Lights Books
15 South Dubuque Street
Iowa CiW, Iowa 52240
Dear Mr. Harris:
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
This letter is in regard to the new Pizza Hut awning, which has created some debate as to the
precise meaning of the word "awning" because of its non-traditional design.
The Zoning Ordinance does not define what composes an awning, specifically, so we refer
to Webster°s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, which states that an awning is "A rooflike
cover extending over or in front of a place (as over the deck or in front of a door or window)
as a shelter." According to the 1991 Uniform Building Code, Section 4506, page 748, an
awning is "... a shelter supported entirely from the exterior wall of a building." While it may
be questionable exactly how much shelter this particular awning provides, it is supported
entirely'by the exterior wall, it is located immediately above the window, and it extends 28
inches in front of the building (18 inches if.the curved, outside portion of the awning is
excluded). Other awnings in the downtown area provide little practical shelter, similar to the
Pizza Hut awning.
The permit was issued based on information provided to us by City Awning of South Bend.
A copy of their proposal to Pizza Hut is attached. In essence, it describes two awnings which
project ~8 inches over the sidewalk, with the edges.and corners of the projection curving back
in toward the building at a radius of 10 Inches. Signage on an awning is limited to 25% of
the surface of the awning which, in this case, amounted to an allowable total of 187.5 square
feet. The total square footage of sig. nage requested by City Awning on behalf of Pizza Hut
amounted to slightly over 106 square feet, and was therefore well within the guidelines of the
Ordinance.
Perhaps what is needed is an amendment to the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance to define the
term "awning". It would also be necessary to more specifically define "shelter". At this time,
however, the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance were met by both City Awning and Pizza
Hut.
I will be bringing this matter to the attention of the Iowa City Planning and Zoning
Commission, and will let y~u know when it is scheduled for discussion.
Da\jt
Enclosure
CO:
Stephen Arkins, City Manager
City Council
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
January 10, 1996
To:
From:
Re:
The Honorable Mayor Naomi J. Novick and Members of the City Council
Linda Newman Woito, City Attorney ~
Amended Legal Opinion: Conflict of Interest regarding City Purchases from
Iowa Book & Supply Company
Background
bn November 16, 1995, I prepared a memorandum to Dee Vanderhoef concerning potential
conflicts of interest, since Dee Vanderhoef was then a partial owner of Iowa Book & Supply
Company - from which the City and the Public Library purchased a number of items. Having
discussed the matter with Dee and Peter Vanderhoef, I suggested in the November memo that
Dee and the City avoid a conflict of interest by limiting acquisition of purchases to no more
than $1,500 in any one fiscal year, see attached.
Since that November 1995 memo, the facts have changed. As seen in the attached letter to
me, Dee Vanderhoef has completely divested herself of any and all ownership in Iowa Book
& Supply Company, effective December 20, 1995. This means Dee no longer has any
ownership interests in Iowa Book & Supply Company.
Summary of Conclusion
My prior legal opinion dated November 16, 1995, is hereby rescinded as inappropriate
because based on facts which are no longer correct. That is, Dee Vanderhoef no longer owns
any interest in Iowa Book & Supply Company, so she no longer has a "direct interest in any
contract" with the City to purchase goods. Thus, no conflict of interest arises under §362.5,
Code of Iowa (1995). Moreover, based on Iowa Attorney General's Opinions, Dee
Vanderhoef's marriage to the owner of Iowa Book & Supply Company, namely Pete
Vanderhoef, does not create an "indirect interest in a contract" as contemplated under Iowa
law.
In sum, the City's continued purchases of books and supplies from Iowa Book & Supply
Company does not create an unlawful conflict of interest, and City staff and the Public Library
are free to purchase goods from Iowa Book & Supply Company as they have done in the past,
without any dollar or other limitations as previously discussed.
2
Amended Analysis
The statutory provision which bars contracts between city officers or city employees and their
city reads as follows:
"A city officer or employee shall not have an interest, direct or indirect, in any
contract or job of work or material where the profits thereof or services to be
furnished or performed for the officer's or employee's city. The contract
entered into in violation of this section is void...."
§362.5, Code of Iowa (1995)
It is the conclusion of this Office, as amended herein, that because Dee Venderhoer no Iol~ger
owns any portion of Iowa Book and Supply Company, Dee no longer has a statutory conflict
of interest under the above-cited law. However, a question may be raised whether Dee
Vanderhoef's marriage to the owner of Iowa Book & Supply, by virtue of marital status,
constitutes an "indirect contract" with the City, thereby violating Iowa's conflict of interest
rules. I think the clear answer to this question is "no."
In reviewing prior City Attorney Opinions issued by this Office, I found three Iowa Attorney
General Opinions which state, quite clearly, that a marital relationship does not, in and of
itself, create an "indirect contract" where the city employee's or city official's spouse is the
one entering into a contract with the city. In these State Opinions, the Attorney General was
asked whether, for example, a city council member's marriage to the owner of a car
dealership created an illegal "conflict of interest" when the city purchased cars from the
husband. In each instance, the Attorney General answered this question in the negative,
noting that the relationship between the council member and the contracting party, such as
father, father-in-law, brother, husband or the like, does not constitute a conflict of interest
under Iowa law. See e.g. 1966 Attorney General Opinion, March 23, 1966, p. 3874; see also
Attorney General Opinions, January 20, 1972 and May 16, 1973.
The Attorney General first noted that being married to the contracting party (e.g. Iowa Book
and Supply owned by Dee's husband) is very different from the city contracting with its own
employee or official (e.g. Dee Venderhoer). The Attorney General then concluded that family
relationships simply do not disqualify a city from dealing with the city official's spouse,
reasoning that the debts, rights, contracts and liabilities of husbands and wives, under Iowa
marriage law, are deemed separate and independent:
"Chapter 597, 1962 Code of Iowa, indicates that the contracts, debts, rights
and liabilities of each husband and wife are to be considered as separate and
independent. Therefore, since the wife-alderman has no ownership in the
company of legal interest in the contracts, other than the fact that the contract
is between a municipality and her husband, I am of the opinion that such a
relationship does not constitute an indirect interest in violation of Chapter 326,
acts of the 61st General Assembly,"
1966 A.G. Op., pp. 3875-76 [emphasis added].
3
In addition to the three Attorney General Opinions cited herein, this Office has consistently
found, over the years, that marital status alone does not create an unlawful conflict of interest
where a city employee's spouse enters into a contract with the City, e..q., City Attorney
Opinion 6/22/92 {employee spouse can get rental rehab funds); Opinion 11/2/87 (employee's
spouse entitled to rental rehab monies where spouse owns house, not employee); 4/18/85
(family relationship does not disqualify mayor's brother from contracting with city); 5/9/84
{em¢)loyee's spouse who is employee of audit company does not disqualify company from
bidding on city audit because competitively bid).
Based on the state and local Opinions, it is the conclusion of this Office that Dee Vanderhoef
does not have an indirect interest in a contract between Iowa Book & Supply and Iowa
simply by virtue of her mart)age to Pete Vanderhoef, owner of Iowa Book & Supply. Nor will
she have any direct interest in a city purchase. Therefore, City staff, together with Public
Library staff, are free to contract with Iowa Book & Supply Company - and may do so
without running afoul of Iowa's conflict of interest rules.
Please call me if you have further questions.
CC:
City Clerk
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
Susan Craig, Public Library
Department & Division Heads
Cathy Eisenhofer, Purchasing Agent
Pete Vanderhoef, FYI
Attachments
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
November 16, 1995
To:
From:
Re:
Dee Vanderhoef, City Council Member-elect ~
Linda Newman Woito, City Attorney
Legal Opinion Request: Conflict of Interest regarding City Purchases from Iowa
Book & Supply Company
Issue
You have asked whether the City's continuing purchase of goods from Iowa Book & Supply
Company would present a conflict of interest problem, once you take office as an official City
Council member. As I understand it, you own shares in a privately held corporation known
as Iowa Book & Supply Company, located at 8 South Clinton Street in Iowa City, Iowa. The
City of Iowa City purchases goods and supplies from Iowa Book & Supply, ranging from
approximately $600 per year up to $11,000 per year.
Analysis
The general statutory provision which bars contracts between city officers or city employees
and their city reads as follows:
"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 officeds or employee's city. The contract
entered into in violation of this section is void...."
§362.5, Code of Iowa (1995).
The statute goes on to include several exceptions, including:
Contracts not otherwise permitted by this section, for the purchase of
goods or services by a city having a population of more than two
thousand five hundred which benefit a city officer or employee, if the
purchases benefitting that officer or employee do not exceed a
cumulative total purchase price of one thousand five hundred dollars in
a fiscal year."
§362.5(10), Code [emphasis added].
Since the City's purchase of goods and services from Iowa Book & Supply have ranged from
$600 to t~ 11,000, it seems practical to limit the City's purchases from Iowa Book & Supply
to no more than $1 ,BOO in any one fiscal year. I would suggest that someone in the Finance
Department, such as Jeanne Soresky or Cathv Eisenhofer, be designated as the person to
monitor the City's purchases from Iowa Book & Supply, and thereby avoid an unlawful
conflict of interest.
2
I trust this will be helpful to you, but please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any
further questions or concerns.
CC:
City Council
City Clark
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
Cathy Eisenhofer
Jeanne Somsky
Don Yucuis, FYI
Iowa Book & Supply Co.
RECEIVED
J;;'f ATTORNE;"80~c~
servin9 iowa City Area and the University of Iowa
8 SOUTH CLINTON ~ BOX 2030 · IOWA (:FRY. IOWA 52244 · 319/337-4188
FAX 319/337-2045
1-02-96
Linda N. Woito
City Attorney
Civic Center
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Ms Woito,
Dec. 14, 1995 you recommended that the easiest way to avoid any conflict
of interest on sales to Iowa City from Iowa Book & Supply was to remove Dee
from an ownership position.
On Dec. 20, 1995 Dee Vanderhoef divested herself of all ownership in
Iowa Book & Supply Co.
Sincerely,
Peter C. Vanderhoef
100% Owner of Iowa Book & Supply Go.
cc Susan Craig
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 22, 1992
To: Linda Newman Gentry, City Attorney
From: Anne G. Burnside, Asst. City Attorney ~
Re: Potential Conflict of Interest: Mark Moen's
application for rental rehabilitation funds
You asked that I review a prior legal opinion concerning the
recurring issue of Mr. Mark Moen applying to participate in the
City's rental rehabilitation program. I reviewed the opinion of
Mr. Richard J. Boyle dated November 2, 1987; researched the issue
of conflict of interest for municipal agents; and spoke with Pam
Barnes to learn the functional structure of the Planning
Department, where Mr. Moen's wife, Monica, is employed as a senior
planner.
Conclusion:
Mr. Moen's participation in City administered rental rehabilitation
programs while his wife is employed by the City as a senior planner
does not constitute a conflict of interest, and he should not be
precluded from participation on this basis.
~acts:
The Department of Planing and Community Development provides
planning services to the City and City Council in a number of
subspecialities. Rental assistance and rehabilitation programs
such as the upcomiqg HOME project are administered through the
Community Development division of the Department.
Ms. Moen is the Senior Planner in the division of Urban Planning.
Her work centers on review of proposals which require approval by
the Planning and Zoning Commission and/or City Council. Generally,
there are no points of overlap between the work of the Urban
Planning division and the Community Development division.
An application for rental rehabilitation funds is first reviewed by
the Community Development staff to determine if it meets minimal
requirements. Work lists are prepared and bids for the work are
obtained. An application which succeeds at this level of
examination is then referred to the Historic Preservation
Commission for review. Staff support to the Historic Preservation
Commission is provided by Robert Miklo, a Planner supervised by Ms.
Moen.
After review by the Historic Preservation Commission, an
appIication is considered by the Rehabilitation Review team,
composed of Marianne Milkman, Coordinator of Community Development;
Pam Barnes, Rehabilitation Officer; Marcia Klingaman, a Planner in
the Neighborhood Services division; and Ron Boose, Senior Building
Inspector of the Housing and Inspection Services. None of these
people are supervised by Ms. Moen or are employed in her division.
Analysis:
As Mr. Boyle pointed out, Section 362.5, Code of Iowa, provides
that no city officer or employee shall have an interest, direct or
indirect, in any contract or agreement with the city. Mr. Boyle
concluded that because Ms. Moen was not an owner of the rental
property at issue, she did not have a direct interest. He found no
cases discussing the nature of an impermissible indirect interest
and concluded that Ms. Moen's status as wife of the applicant was
insufficient to create an objectionable conflict of interest.
A review of the caselaw suggests that the more cogent question is
whether Ms. Moen faces a potential conflict of interest. Actual
wrongdoing or dereliction of duty is not required to create a
conflict of interest. Rather, the test is whether an employee is
"called upon to serve two masters". James v. City of Hamburg, 174
Iowa 301,309, 156 N.W. 394 (Iowa 1916). The potential for conflict
of interest must be avoided. Wilson v. Iowa City, 165 N.W.2d
813,822 (Iowa 1969); Borlin v. council Bluffs, 338 N.W.2d 146 (Iowa
1983).
Ms. Moen has a dower interest in her husband's property° It cannot
be categorically stated she has no financial interest in the
advancement of his application for rehabilitation funds. To so
state would unrealistic and legalistic. This is n~t to say she
~ould abuse her position to advance this interest° ~The true issue
is whether her position creates the tension that sMe must choose
between her interest and the City's. The analysis must turn not on
her marital status but on the structure of the Planning Department~
As set out above, the initial review of applications is performed
by employees of a separate division: Community Development. None
of them are supervised by Ms. Moen and their projects do not
overlap. The next stage of review does present a potential
conflict in that Mr. Miklo, who is supervised by Ms. Moen, is
charged with presenting the application to the Historic
Preservation Commission for approval. If an application from Mr.
Moen is involved, Mr. Miklo is potentially placed in the position
of criticizing or supporting an application from his supervisor,s
spouse. In an ideal world he would make such assessments without
concern for the security of his employment and advancement. In the
real world, he should be free of such pressures. This potential
for conflict can be resolved by having an employee other than MSo
Moen's present Mr. Moen's applications for review.
An application which successfully passes review by the Historic
Preservation Commission proceeds to the Rehabilitation Review team.
Again, the members of this team function ~ndependent of Ms. Moen.
Even if an application was tainted by favoritism at an earlier
level, the independence of this body should cure the defect.
I conclude that with the one exception noted above, Ms. Moen's
position in the Planning and Community Development department of
the City does not create an actual or potential conflict of
interest sufficient to deny her husband's applicati'on for rental
rehabilitation funds.
CITY
CrwC '
OWA C fY
WASHINGTON ST IOWA Cfi'Y OWA 52240356-5GCO
November 2, 1987
Ms. Marianne Milkman
Dept. of Planning and
Program Development
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
Re: Rental Rehabilitation Loan Application - 914 Iowa Avenue -
Frank Wagner and Marc Moen
Dear Ms. Milkman:
You have asked for our opinion with respect to application of State and
local conflict-of-interest laws or regulations to the following situation:
You have informed me that Frank Wagner and Marc Moen have jointly pur-
chased a duplex property at 914 Iowa Avenue in Iowa City. That property
was constructed some time prior to 1940. The purchasers have applied to
the City for a rental rehabilitation loan on the property. Mr. Wagner's
wife, Barbara, serves as a member of the City's Historic Preservation
Commission, and Mr. Moen's wife, Monica, is employed in the City's
Department of Planning and Program Development. However, her work does
not involve the rental rehabilitation program. Neither of the wives has a
direct ownership interest in the building.
You have also informed me that, as part of the application process, rental
rehabilitation loan applications involving structures built before 1940
are referred to the Historic Preservation Commission for review of the
proposed exterior work. The Commission then advises the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) whether or not it finds the proposed exterior
rehabilitation work is in keeping with the historic nature of the property
and/or district in which it is located. The Co~ission's function is
merely advisory. SHPO then determines whether or not the proposed work is
or is not appropriate. It is my understanding that Mrs. Wagner abstained
from Commission deliberations regarding the property at 914 Iowa Avenue,
after publicly disclosing her husband's ownership interest in the proper-
ty.
Iowa Code {1987) Section 362.5 is the general conflict-of-interest
provision applicable to city officers and employees. lhat section
Harianne Milkman
November 2, 1987
Page 2
provides, among other things, that no city officer or employee shall have
an interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or agreement with his or
her city. The purpose of such provisions is to protect the public from
officials who would profit personally from their place of advantage in
government. Leffingwell v. Lake City, 257 Iowa 1022, 135 N.W.2d 536
(1965).
Because the Historic Preservation Commission is empowered to act on
applications for certificates of appropriateness with respect to exterior
modifications of properties located tn historic districts, the Commission
city, members are officers
now exercises a portion of the power of the so
within the meaning of Code chapter 362, specifically Section 362.2(8).
Mrs. Moen, as an employee, and Mrs. Wagner, as a City officer, would not
be allowed to enter into rental rehabilitation agreements with the City,
since that would be a direc% interest in a contract. However, neither
Mrs. Moen nor Mrs. Wagner is an owner of the property, nor will either
sign the loan agreement, they have no direct interest in a city contract.
lherefore, the question is whether either of them has an indirect interest
in the rental rehabilitation loan agreement or contract with the City.
That is, does the marital relationship create an indirect interest in the
contracts of one's spouse?
There are no Iowa cases on this issue. However, the general rule appears
to be that the husband-wife relationship does not create a disqualifying
interest for purposes of conflict-of-interest statutes. 63A Am. Jur.2d,
Public Officers and EmDlovees, Sec. 341. That general rule has been the
position of the Iowa Attorney General in opinions issued with respect to
the Code section in question. Op. A.G. 3-23-66; Op. A.G. 4-20-76.
Based upon the foregoing, it is our opinion that the proposed transaction
does not violate Iowa Code (1987) Section 362.5.
One other Code provision appears to apply to this transaction, namely Code
Sec. 403A.22. That section provides, in part, that -
"No public official or employee of a municipality or board or
commission thereof. · · shall voluntarily acquire any personal
interest, as hereinafter defined, in any municipal housing project,
or in any property included or planned to be included in any munici-
pal housing project of such municipality, or in any contract or
proposed contract in connection with such municipal housing project.
That section also provides that, where the acquisition is not voluntary,
the interest is to be immediately disclosed and the official or employee
shall not participate in any action affecting the property. The term
Marianne Hilkman
November 2, 1987
Page 3
"action" does not include advisory resolutions. Code Sec.403A.22(6).
The first question under that section is whether the rental rehabilitation
project is a "municipal housing project". We read the definition of
"municipal housing project" (Sec. 403A.2(g)) broadly to include any
project or undertaking whereby decent, safe and sanitary housing may be
made available to low-, lower-, or very low-income families in the
community. City regulations provide that property benefitting from rental
rehabilitation loans be made available to persons participating in City
Public Housing programs, so this undertaking would appear to be a munici~
pal housing project.
The next question then is whether the husband-wife relationship creates a
personal interest in the property. On this question, the Attorney General
has opined (Op. A.G. 78-11-16) that, under Iowa law, one spouse has an
interest, albeit indirect, in property owned by the other spouse, but that
if the interest is disclosed, and the official does not participate in any
action affecting the property, the potential conflict is neutralized and
does not offend under Code Section 403A.22.
Since it is our understanding that Mrs. Wagner did, in fact, disclose the
interest in the property in question, and that she did not participate in
the Commission deliberations concerning the property, her interest is not
disqualifying under Code Sec. 403A.22.
In summary, it is our opinion that the proposed transaction does not
violate any State or local regulation dealing with conflicts-of-interest.
Sincerely,
Richard J. B6yle
First Assistant City Attorney
bc5
MEMORANDUM
Date: April 18, 1985
To:
From:
Re:
Cathy Eisenhofer, Purchasing Agent
Richard J. Boyle, First Assistant City Attorney
Possible Conflict of Interest (McDonald)
My memorandum dated April 9, 1985, you have posed a question involving City
dealings with a company which employs a sibling of a City Councilmember.
Specifically, Wallace Computer Services {Wallace), a corporation engaged in
the business of selling business forms and other paper goods, employs Randall
J. McDonald as a sales representative. Randall McDonald is a brother of John
McDonald, the City's Mayor. I am informed that Randall McDonald is not an
officer of Wallace, nor does he own any of its capital stock. I am further
informed that Mayor McDonald is also not a shareholder of the corporation,
nor is he an officer or employee of the corporation.
Wallace has asked to be placed on the City's list of bidders for the types of
goods it sells. The company's application Shows that Randall McDonald is a
person authorized to sign bids and quotations on the corporation's behalf.
Further, this week the City intends to seek bids on approximately $5,000
worth of data mailers, and Wallace wishes to submit a bid.
QUESTION PRESENTED
Will there be a conflict of interest if the City deals with Wallace while it
employs the Mayor's brother?
CONCLUSION
No disqualifying conflict of interest arises from the mere fact of family re-
lationship.
DISCUSSION
The City has no ordinances, resolutions or policies dealing with conflicts of
interest in contracting for goods or services, so reliance must be based upon
Iowa Code (1983) Section 362.5, which provides, in part, as follows:
"A city officer or employee shall not have an interest, direct or indi-
rect, in any contract or job of work or material or the profits thereof or
services to be furnished or performed for the officer's or employee's
city. A contract entered into in violation of this section is void. The
provisions of this section shall not apply to:
2
9. A contract with a corporation in which a city officer or employee has
an interest by reason of stockholdings when less than five percent of the
outstanding stock of the corporation ~ owned or cont?lle? directly or
indirectly by the officer or employee the spouse or Immediate family of
such officer or employee."
The subsection 9 exception does not apply here because the possible disquali-
fying interest is the relationship between the McDonalds, not an ownership
interest in Wallace.
The key words in Section 362.5 are "interest, direct or indirect, in any
contract". Note first that the person whose activities are reviewed is the
city officer or employee. Based upon the information ! have, there is no
direct interest involved since the Mayor does not own any stock in Wallace,
nor would he pro~it personally from a contract.
The question then becomes whether the family relationship constitutes an
indirect interest. !n 63A Am. Juro
2d, Publi? Offi?r? and EmployeeS, sec.
341, it is said that "relationship is not a disqualifying interest within a
statute making it unlawful for an officer to be interested in a public
contract".
In a 1966 pinion (Op. Atty. Gen., Marc~3, 1966) th? Iowa Attorney General'
0 '
discussed a similar problem and noted t,~(~cases stating that mere relation-
ship does not give rise to an interest within the meaning of conflict of
interest statutes. The Attorney General opined that a wife-alderwoman had no
relationship constituting an indirect interest within the meaning of the Code
where she had no legal interest in an automobile dealership of which her
husband was a manager and principal stockholder and which dealership sold and
repaired automobiles on competitive bids to the city. (The Sec. 362.5(9)
exception appears to have been added as a result of this opinion.)
In a 1972 opinion (Op. Arty. Gen., #72-12-13) no conflict of interest was
found for a husband-councilman where the wife was a director and part-time
employee of a non-profit corporation that wished to make a competitive bid on
city urban renewal property.
In an opinion dated May 16, 1973 {Op. Arty. Gen., #73-5o11) the Attorney
General opined that there is no conflict of interest where the husband was
the City Clerk and the wife wished to submit an open, competitive bid on city
property.
More recently, in a 1976 opinion (Op. Atty. Gert., #76-4-10) the Attorney
General opined that a contract with a city is void if it is with a company,
and a councilmember's spouse owns more than five percent of the stock, and
the spouse's remuneration will be directly affected by the contract. The
exception found in Code Section 364.5{g) would not apply in that case°
While these opinions are not easily reconciled, it does seem clear that the
mere fact that a family relationship is involved does not create a conflict
of interest within the meaning of Code Section 364.5.
Since the instant matter involves only the family relationship, not a
financial interest, the statute does not apply.
tp2/12
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re.
May 9, 1984
Monica Bieri, Controller ~.~ ~
Robert Jansen, City Attorney ~ ~-~'
You have requested a formal opinion regarding whether a conflict of interest
situation may exist where a company which is bidding to perform audit
services for the City employs a non-professional whose wife is an accountant
employed by the City. It is our understanding that the City employee will be
directly involved in preparing work papers for the audit and has already
participated in the evaluation of the several bid proposals although she will
not be involved in the process of selecting the winning bidder. The city
accountant owns no financial or legal interest in the subject company. It is
our further understanding that her husband is an office manager on a salary
basis for the bidding company and that he would not be involved in conducting
the audit.
Section 362.5, Code of Iowa, provides that no city officer or employee shall
have an interest, direct or indirect, in any contract, jobs work, or services
performed for the municipality. There are ten exceptions to this rule, one
of which excepts contracts with a firm or corporation where the City em-
ployee's interest is solely by reason of employment or stock interest less
than five percent, if made by competitive bidding that is publicly invited
and open. Section 363.5(5).
We are of the opinion that a conflict of interest would not exist here based
upon the above-described fact situation. A husband-wife relationship does
not constitute a conflict of interest where the City employee has no finan-
cial interest in her spouse's company and her spouse's remuneration of
employment from the bidding company will not be directly affected as a result
of the contract. This opinion is consistent with opinions from the office of
the Attorney General of Iowa regarding this subject matter. (See attached.)
cc: Neal Berlin, City Manager
bj3/6
An Official Opin~o~'
Fzom the Office of
RICHAI~D C. TURNEIL
Attozne¥ General of Iowa
May 16. 1973
CITIES AND TOWNS: Conflict of Interest -- §368A.22, Code ~.f Iowa,
1973. A mere husband and wife reletionship does not constitute a con-
flict of interest where the husband is city clerk and the wife wishes
to bid on city property, which bids are competitive, public and open.
(Blumberg to Harvey. State Representative, 5/16/?3) #73.5.11
Ilovo,'oble LaVe~ n R. lla,'~,e~..State R*'presc~ttative: We are in receipt
of your opinion request of blay 9, 1973, regarding a conflict of in.rest
prohlem. You s~cifically asked:
"Is it a confhct of interest as defined by Iowa Code Section 368A.22
for the x¥1fe of a City Clerk to submit a bid for the purchase of ~ resi-
dentrol l,~t owaed by the City where the City has determined it has no
need for the lot and bas put ~t up for sale pursuant to compettti~ hid?"
Section 3~8A.2212) provides that no municipal officer or employee shall
have an ,nterest. direct or iodirect. i~t any co~tract, job, work or services
for the municipality. There are te~t exceptiones to this general rule inclad-
ing contracts made hy municipalities of less than three thousand popu-
lation .pun comp~.tith'c biddb~g ~hat is p.h/icl~ invited aml opeu: and,
contract~ with a firm or eorporat~ot~ where the city employee's interest
is solely by reason of emoloyment or stock in.rest less than five per-
cent, if made upon c~q~elitwc biddi.~ that is p~bliclU i~ted nnd ope..
In two previou~ opinion~ we have discussed the husl~and.wife relationship
with ~espect to ~cction 3~A.22. In an opini-n f,,uml in 1966 O.A.G. 38,
we held that a wife.alderman, who owned no p,~rt or had no legal interest
in an automobile dealership of which he~ btls1~and was manager and
principal srockholder, which dealership did ~¥ork for the cry up,,n com-
petitive b~ds, had no relationship constituting a direct m' redirect in~rest
barred hy s~tion 368A.22. In a more recent opinion, January 20, 1972, ~
held that a husbaad~otmcih~mn who had no legal interest in a non-profit
corporation of which his wife wa~ a director sad employee, had no
coeflict of interest ~hen that non-profit corporation made a competitive
bid on city re'ban renewal property. Copies of ~th opinions are enclosed.
The reasoning of the prior opinion~ is applicable her~ If the only
in.rest levelred is the husband-wife relationship. the rulings of the
prior opinions control. However. if the interest is more than that of
husband and wife, a different result may ensue. Accordingly. we are of
the opinion that a mere husband-wife relationship would not constitute
a ~nflict of interest tn your fact situation where the bidding is cornperi.
tire, public and open.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 11, 1995
To: City Council
From: David Schoon, Economic Development Coo;dinato]~'~
Re: Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee
Attached is a list of the community members that have agreed to serve on the Economic
Development Ad Hoc Committee. The first meeting of the committee is being scheduled for
the week of February 5. As the facilitator of the group, I will keep you apprised of the
committee's progress. If you have any questions or comments regarding the committee's
activities, please call me st 356-5236.
Econor~ic Develoament Ad Hoc Committee Members
Jeff Cox
112 $. Dodge Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
John Buchanan
301 WooIf Avenue
Iowa City, IA 52246
Tom Bullington
127 S. Westminster St
Iowa City, IA 52245
Pain Ehrhardt
1029 E. Court
Iowa City, IA 52240
Bob Elliot
1108 Dover Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
William Gerhard
1109 Prairie Du Chien Rd
Iowa City, IA 52245
Carolyn Gross
820 Kirkwood Avenue
Iowa City, IA 52240
Kathryn Kurth
55 Gleason Dr.
Iowa City, IA 52240
Vicki Lensing
2408 Mayfield Rd
Iowa City, IA 52245
Derek Maurer
328 $. Governor
Iowa City, IA 52240
Bob Sierk
2043 Glendale Rd
Iowa City, IA 52245
George Starr
830 E. Davenport
Iowa City, IA 52245
Cheryl Whitney
325 Ferson Ave.
Iowa City, IA 52246
Also mailed to Near Southside first
floor business owners.
January 9, 1996
CITY OF I0 WA CITY
Dear Downtown and/or Near Southside Property Owner:
The Iowa City Design Review Committee invites all downtown and/or Near Southside property
end business owners to attend a public forum to discuss the benefits of establishing a design
review process for downtown Iowa City and the Near Southside Neighborhood. The public
forum will be held on Tuesday, January 23, 1996, at 1:00 p.m. in Room A of the Iowa City
Public Library. We hope this is a convenient time for your schedule and you will plan to
at&end.
The forum will begin with a brief slide presentation on what design review is and a summary
of the proposed design review overlay zone ordinance. Enclosed you will find two brochures
that briefly provide information regarding these two topics. We suggest reading the brochure
entitled "What is Design Review?" first followed by the brochure entitled "Proposed Design
Review Overlay Zone Ordinance".
If you have any questions regarding the forum or the enclosed brochures, please contact me
at 354-9440 or David Schoon, Iowa City Planning Department, 356-5236. The Committee
looks forward to meeting with you on January 23 to discuss the need for a comprehensive
design review process for downtown Iowa City.
Sincerely,
Clara Swan
Design Review Committee
eric.
cc:
City Council
Design Review Committee
Community members participate in the
design review process by volunteering tn
serve on the Design Review Committee for
three years. The Committee consists of
design professionals and citizens with varied
backgrounds.
The Committee uses a set of design
guidelines when reviewing the design of
development projects. The guidelines are
based on principles which include scale.
materials. color, and texture. These
guidelines. not individual taste of
Committee members, guide the review
process. o
Beginning with Urban Renewal the Iowa
City community has made an effort to
participate in the design of the central
downtown district. in 1974,, the City
established the Design Review Committee to
assist the City Council in reviewing the
design of urban renewal parcels and
improvements in public areas. With the
recent adoption of the urban revitalization
plans for the Near Southside Neighborhood,
the Design Review Committee will continue
I". '7. '"..'~. : ':. '-" "' ' ' :" ." ' '
· '..' '~ W:JqA~'.l'S- T-'NE " · '....
".i':':h.i'S: T.O: 'RY',
i.' .o:F'.D k_ ~:i::G'bf. i~, ~- V 1 E ':~)' i'N '-" .': I,
l.' WA "' .....' "
· ..C.I TY.'$ D'O.W N.TO w N.?
to play a key role in downtown development.
Developers applying for property tax
abatement must have their plans reviewed
by the Design Review Committee and
approved by the City Council.
The community has successfully moved
toward achieving some of its goals for the
downtown by enabling the Design Review
Committee to assist in the process. Changes
continue to occur. however. that do not meet
the community's design goals. l'br this
reason the Design Review Committee
proposes a design review process fox' all
property in the downtown area and the Near
Southside Neighborhood. The details of this
process are summarized in the brochure
"Proposed Design Review Overlay Zone
Ordinance." o
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEMBERS
JULY 1, 1995 - JUNe 1, 1996
NANCY FOOTN E R
LAURA A, HAWKS
MARTIN HAYNES
KARYL LARSON
GARY NAGLE
WILLIA~ NOWYSZ
PHILIP REISETTER
RANDY ROHOVIT
CLARA SWAN
338-2674
338-3867
339-1282
358-8224
351-0000
337"9934
338-2363
351-0182
338-5352
O
aest
I,
)r
ried
Beginning with Urban Renewal the Iowa
City community has made an effort to
participate in the design of the central
downtown district. In 1974, the City
established the Design Review Committee to
assist the City Council in reviewing the
design of urban renewal parcels and
improvements in public areas. With the
recent adoption of the urban revitalization
plans for the Near Southside Neighborhood.
the Design Review Committee will continue
to play a key role in downtown development.
Developers applying for property tax
abatement must have their plans reviewed
by the Design Review Committee and
approved by the City Council.
The community has successfully moved
toward achieving some of its goals for the
downtown by enabling the Design Review
Committee to assist in the process. Changes
continue to occur. however. that do not meet
the community's design goals. ?br this
reason the Design Review Committee
proposes a design review process for all
property in the downtown area and the Near
Southside Neighborhood. The details of this
process are summarized in the brochure
"Proposed Design Review Overlay Zone
Ordinance." ~
DESIGN
JULY 1,
REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEMBERS
1995 - JUNE 1, 1
NANCY FOOTNER
LAURA A. HAWKS
MARTIN HAYNES
KARYL LARSON
GARY NAGLE
WILLIAM NOWYSZ
PHILIP REISETTER
RANDY
CLARA SWAN
338-2674
338-3867
339-1282
358-8224
35~-0000
337-9934
338-2363
351-0~82
338-5352
INFORMATIONAL BROCHURE
.'V: ii:E'W?
Design review is a process in
which citizens have an
opportunity to review the
aesthetic changes in downtown
Iowa City. These changes
affect buildings and their
facades, !he streetscape, and
public spaces.
To ;;!NHANCE THE
EXISTIN; CHARACT;:R OF'
IOWA CI~TY'$ DOWNTOWN
rI~his unique place we call Iowa City is
symbolized by its'downtown, which is a
product of the natural environment, the
people who have built there, and time.
When one visualizes Iowa Gity one ofteu
sees downtown in conjunction with the
University of Iowa campus. Through the
yeats, it is here where people have come
together.
The downtown consists of a wide variety of
styles of architecture and special streetscape
features. Its composition blends the
architecture of historical buildings with
those of more modern designs. Buildings
which have no relationship to downtown
Iowa City, its setting, people, or past, ca n
disrupt the harmony of downtown..
TO PROI~OTE THE
DEVELOPM ~"NT OF
DIVERSITY AND AREAS OF
SPECIAL CHARACTER
W;THIN THE DOWNTOWN
~owa Cit~ is a rich bleM o[ peo~]e, activi-
ties aM places. From la~e s~le facilities
such as Old ~pito] Mall to s~11er indivi-
dual s~[roa~ that line ~e ~des~ian
mall, downtown Iowa City promotes diversity ~'.C
in the design and uses of those structures.
The downtown provides a place for retail and ~',~.
office activity, dining and entertainment.
recreation and learning, and housing.
TO PROVIDE FOR A
PLEASANT~ ]:~11CH AND
DIVERSE PEDESTRIAN
E~PERIENC~
Creating an interesting and diverse
pedestrian experience requires connecting
the activities occurring within buildings to
adjacent public spaces. This interconnec-
t. ion draws people downtown. People are
attracted downtown because they can shop
at retail stores. work in office buildings. eat
and drink at restaurants. and relax and
gather as a community in parks and public
spaces. The true experience of downtown is
human activity. Thoughtful design of public
1
Dow~
AND
The do'
and hum
While F
downtow
culture.
built em
our hum
of the ar
stimulat,
Given that the design of downtown buildings '4 spaces and streetscapes provides a
and their functions constantly change. de- stimulating gathering place to shop. meet,
sign guidelines a,e needed to preserve the and eat.
uniqueness that characterizes downtown Iowa, ---]
ely.
[' -~ I% * % ~' ' -
.
~ THE:
~CTER O~
INNTOWN
)wa City is
, which is a
~nment, the
and time.
ty one often
n with the
I'hrough the
~'ide variety of
~cial streetscape
ads the
Idings with
s. Buildings
) downtown
or past, caa
~town..
To PROMOTE THe:
DEVELOPMENT "
DiVERSiTY AND ARE:AS OF
SPECIAL CHARACTER .:
WBTHIN THE DOWNTOWN
Iowa City is a rich blend of people. activi-
ties and places. From large scale facilities .:
such as Old Capitol Mall to smaller indivi-
dual storefronts that line the pedestrian ..,,
mall. downtown Iowa City promotes diversity..-,:
in the design and uses of those structures. -
The downtown provides a place for retail and ','~.
office activity dining and entertainment
recreation and learning. and housing. :'
Given that the design of downtown buildings
and their functions constantly change. de-
sign guidelines are needed to preserve the
uniqueness that characterizes downtown Iowa
City.
' / "/ ' ' Tf ' '
TO PROVIDE FOR A
PLEASANT, I~!CH .I~ND
DIVERSE PEDESTRIAN
EXPERIENCE
To HUMANIZE THE
DOWNTOWN BY PROMOTING
THE ARTS
AND DESIGN EXCELLENCE:
Creating an interesting and diverse
pedestrian experience requires connecting
the activities occurring within buildings to
adjacent public spaces. This interconnec-
tion draws people downtown. People are
attracted downtown because they can shop
at retail stores, work in office buildings, eat
and drink at restaurants. and relax and
gather as a community in parks and public
spaces. The true experience of downtown is
human activity. Thoughtful design of public
spaces and streetscapes provides a
stimulating gathering place to shop, meet.
and eat.
The downtown provides a rich, exciting
and human setting for urban activities.
While primarily a center for commerce.
downtown is also a center for arts and
culture. Incorporating works of art into the
built environment keeps us in touch with
our humanity. Along with the architecture
of the area, art in public spaces can
stimulate our intellect and satisfy our
The proposed Design
Review Overlay Zone
(ODR) Ordinance would
allow the City Council to
establish design review
districts in the central
business district and the
Near Southside Neighbor-
hood. The proposed
ordinance would not apply
to areas of the city
consisting of single-family
homes.
The proposed ODR
Ordinance outlines the
procedures for designating
a design review overlay
district, the application
process for design review
approval, and the
application submittal
requirements.
p~iadmin\drc2 bre
Des
0
Iowa City D~
410 E. Wash!
Iowa City, I~
Tel: (319) 35
FAX: (319) 3
THE AR~A FOR DESIGNATION
p?~m~n\dr¢2.brc
olNFORMAT[ONAL. E3ROCHUREO
Proposed
Design Review
Overlay Zone
Ordinance
Iowa City Design Review Committee
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Tel: (319) ~556-5256
FAX: (}19) 3f>6-5009 August 1, 1995
DESIGNATION OF
DESIGN REVIEW
OVERLAY DISTRICTS
The process of designating a specific design
review district begins with the Design Review
Committee preparing a report on the proposed
design review district which:
1. describes the existing characteristic or the
desired characteristics of the proposed
design review district;
2. describes boundaries of the district;
$. identifies, quantifies and characterizes the
prevalence of existing architectural featu~s
or the creation of defining architectural fea-
tures; and
4. defines the design guidelines to be used m
the review of projects.
The Planning and Zoning Commission, prop-
erty owners in the proposed district, and the
general pubhc are involved in this process of
designating a district. The officmI designation
of a district would occur when City Council
adopts an ordinance designating the district.
APPLICATION
APPROVAL PROCESS
The design review process is separate from the
building permit approval process. The design
review process consists of two certificates.
¢e~iflc~tes of No M~te~ial Effect would be
issued by the Building Official for an exterior
change in appearance to a building or site,
which requires a building or sign permit and
consists of ordinary maintenance or repair that
does not involve changes in the exterior
architecture and general design.
Ce~ti~cate$ of Appropriateness would be
issued by the Design Review Committee
documenting approval of a proposal to make
an exterior change in appearance to a building
or site, which requires a building or sign
permit and consists of changes in the exterior
architecture and general design. The
Commircee's decision will be based on a set of
design guidelines for the specific district in
which the development project is located. The
Committee's decision must be made within 21
days of the application's submission. If an
applicant does not agree with the Committee's
decision, the applicant has the abiliw to appeal
to the Board of Applicants.
CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS
SUBMITTAL
REQUIREMENTS
Depending upon the type of change or
alteration, an application for a certificate of
appropriateness would include a combination
of the following documents:
· Site Plan
· Site and Neighboring Environment
Photographs
· Landscaping Plan
· Building Elevations
-Sectional Drawings
· Signage Plan
o Lighting Plan
DE
COMI
The
review all p
appropriate
ordinance.
twice a mot
which 2 wo
be either de
in the build
members of
design of a
based on th
district in w
guidelines
which inclu,
texture. Th,
would guid~
F
r the
s the
~dture$
~I fe~-
~roI>
the
~ation
APPLICATION
APPROVAL PROCESS
The design review process is separate from the
building permit approval process. The design
review process consists of two certificates.
Certi.,Ftcates of No Mate-~aJ £.~ect would be
issued by the Building Official for an exterior
change in appearance to a building or site,
which requires a building or sign permit and
consists of ordinary maintenance or repair that
does not involve changes in the exterior
architecture and general design.
Certi4~cates of Appropriater~ess would be
issued by the Design Review Comrmttee
documenting approval of a proposal to make
an exterior change in appearance to a building
or site, which requires a building or sign
permit and consists of changes in the exterior
architecture and general design. The
Committee's decision will be based on a set of
design g~idelines for the specific district in
which the deveIopment project is located. The
Committee's decision must be made within 21
day's of the application's submission. If an
applicant does not agree with the Corrumttee's
decision, the applicant has the ability to appeal
to the Board of Applicants.
CERTIFICATE Of
APPROPRIATENESS
S U BM ITTAL
REQUIREMENTS
Depending upon the type of change or
alteration, an application for a certificate of
appropriateness would include a combination
of the following documents:
· Site Plan
· Site and Neighboring Environment
Photographs
· Landscaping Plan
· Building Elevations
-Sectional Drawings
· Signage Plan
Lighting Plan
DESIGN REVIEW
COMMITTEE AND ITS
GUIDELINES
The Desig~ Review Co~,i~,~ttee (DRC) would
review all projects requiring a certificate of
appropriateness under the proposed ODR
ordinance. As proposed, the DRC would meet
twice a month and consist of 7 members, of
which 2 would be licensed architects; 3 would
be either design professionals and/or involved
in the building trades; and 2 would be at-large
members of the community.
The des'~gn gu/.de//ne$ used to review the
design of a development project would be
based on the characteristics of the specific
district in which the project is located. The
guidelines would be based on principles
which include scale, materials, color, and
texture. These guidelines, not individual taste,
would guide the review process.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To:
From:
Re:
January 9, 1996
Steve Atkins, City Manager
Ron Boose, Senior Building Inspector
Construction Activities for 1995
New housing starts decreased throughout the state in 1995 and Iowa City was no exception.
According'to figures from the Iowa Department of Economic Development, the total value of
new housing starts (single-family and multi-family) issued through November was down 9%
from 1994 for the entire state, and down 35% for Iowa City. Most cities which had experienced
large growth for the past few years suffered from decreases similar to Iowa City's. For
example, Ankeny is down 33%, Cedar Falls down 45%, Coralville down 20%, Des Moines
down 13%, Marion down 26%, and Urbandale down 33%. Other cities such as Ames, Cedar
Rapids, Dubuque, and West Des Moines were able to maintain a rate of growth close to that
of 1994. Large increases in activity were experienced in Council Bluffs, Fort Dodge, and
Waterloo.
The number of housing units constructed break down as follows:
Single-family houses
Multi-family units
1994 1995 % change
206 149 -28
335 166 -50
To get more of a long-range perspective on these numbers it is helpful to compare some
averages.
10-year % change 5-year % change
average for 1995 average for 1995
Single-family dwellings 143
+4% 184 -19%
Multi-family units
176 ~% 245 -32%
The number of building permits processed is also down but not as dramatically. As is usually
the case when new construction slows down, remodeling and additions tend to pick up. Total
permits include residential new construction, remodeling, and repairs as well as non-residential
new construction, remodeling, and repairs.
Total building permits
1994 1995 % change
798 664 -17%
2
However, because many of these permits are for remodeling projects and the amount of non-
residential construction is also down, the total value of building permits is down substantially.
Total value of all
construction
1994 1995 % change
$70,756,090 $44,834,661 -37%
To'- I0~ CNY CL£Rg
From ~o hogarty
Don Sehr, Chairporson
Joc Bolk~om
Charlos D. Duffy
Stophen P. Lacina
Sally Stutsman
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
January 11, 1996
FORMAL MEETING
1. Call to order 9:00 a.m.
Agenda
2. Action re: claims
3. Action re: formal minutes of January 2nd and January 4th.
Action re: payroll authorizations
9:00 a.m. - Public Hearing for Road Vacation 03-95. All that portion of
the platted alley whose fight-of-way lies West of Lots 7 and 8 in Block 7, #1
in the Plat of Moffordsville as said plat is recorded in Deed Record 13, Page
22.
6. Business fi~om the Zoning Administrator.
a) Motion setting public hearing.
b) Other
913 SOLITH DUBUQUE ST. P.O. BOX 1350 IOWACITY, IOWA 5224a-1350 TEL: (319) 356-6000 FAX: (319) 356-60861[~3~.~
To: IO~ CITY CLERK From: jo booarty 1-18-98 8:4~am p. 3 of 8
Agenda 1-11-96
Page 2
7. 9:30 a.m. - Public Hearing for Conditional Use Permit.
Application CU9503 of Karen Hanis, Iowa City, reque'ffmg ~
Conditional Use Permit to operate a Home Business as provided in
Chapter 8:1.34, Conditional Use Perufits. The property to be
considered is described as being in the SW 1/4 of the. SW 1/4 of
Section 3; Township 78 North; Range 6 West of the 5th P.M. in
Johnson County, Iowa (The property is located on the east side of
Oak Crest Hill Road 8E, approximately 1/4 of a mile north of its
intersection with 480th Street $E in Liberty Twp.).
8. 9:30 a.m. - Public Hearing on Zoning and Platting Applications:
a) First and Second consideration of the following Zoning
applications:
Application Z9548 of Harold J. Fiala, Solon, requesting rezoning of
1.99 acres ~om AI Rural to RS Suburban Residential of certain
property described as being in the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section
6; Township 81 North; Range 5 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson
County, Iowa (This property is located on the north side of 110th
Street NE, approximately 1.0 mile east of Highway #1 in Cedar
Application Z9549 of Kurt and Lisa Neared, Swisher, requesting
rezoning of 3.0 acres from A1 Rural to CI Commercial of certain
property described as being in the SE I/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section
8; Township 81 North; Range 7 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson
County, Iowa O'his property is located on the east side of Oak
Avenue SE, approximately 3/8 of a mile south of Division Street in
Swisher, Iowa in Jefferson Twp.).
Agenda 1-11-96
Page
Application Z9550 of River Products Company, Iowa City, signed
by Thomas Scott, General Manager, requesting rezoning of 19.25
acres from A1 Rural to M2 Heavy Industrial of certain property
described as the Klein Quarry in the NE 1/4 of Section 2;
Township 79 North; Range 7 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson
County, Iowa (This property is located on the west side of Deer
Creek Road SW, approximately 1/4 of a mile south of its
intersection with Iowa Highway #6 in Clear Creek Twp.).
b) Discussion/action re: the following Platting applications:
Application 89584 of Richard Hmby, signed by Tom Anthony of
Landmark Surveying and Eng'meering, requesting preliminary and
final plat approval of Hmby's Second Addition, a subdivision
described as being located in the N-W 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section
8; Township 80 North; Range 7 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson
County, Iowa (This is a 1-lot, 1.168 acre, agricultural subdivision,
located on the south side of 240th Street N-W, 0.2 of a mile east of
Half Moon Avenue NW in Madison Twp.).
Application S9585 of Dean Phinney requesting preliminary and
final plat approval of Twin Hills Addition ( A Resubdivision of Lot
5 of Twin Ponds 3rd Addition), a subdivision described as being
located in the South 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of Section 2; Township 79
North; Range 7 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa
(This is a 1-lot with one outlot, 25.54 acre, residential subdivision,
located on the east side of Kansas Avenue SW, 1/2 mile north of
355th Street SW in Clear Creek Twp.).
Application S9586 of Gerald P. Lipsius requesting preliminary and
final plat approval of Lipsius First Subdivision, a subdivision
described as being located in the NW 1/4 of Section 27; Township
80 North; Range 8 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa
(This is a 2-1or, 39.79 acre, residential subdivision, located on the
north side of 310th Street NW, 1/2 mile west of Eagle Avenue. NW
in Oxford Twp.). ~': ~_
To: ~0'~ crl~ CLERI(
Agenda 1-11-96
Page 4
Application S9587 of Rich & Michelle Lindemann, signed by
Michelle Lindemann, requesting preliminary and final plat
approval of Lindemann First Subdivision, a subdivision described
as being located in the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 7;
Township 81 North; Range 7 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson
County, Iowa (This is a 2-lot, 4.49 acre, residential subdivision,
located on the west side Greencastle Avenue NW, approximately
1/4 of a mile south of 120th Street NW in Jefferson Twp.).
Application S9589 of James D. Stable requesting preliminary and
final plat approval of Stahle's First Subdivision, a subdivision
described as being located m the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section
30; Township 81 North; Range 5 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson
County, Iowa (This is a 1-lot, 3.00 acre, residential subdivision,
located on the south side of 180th Street NE, approximately 1/4 of
a mile east of Highway #1 NE in Cedar Twp.).
Application 89590 of Anna R. Petersen Estate, signed by Evelyn
A. Maher, executor, requesting preliminary and final plat approval
of Maher Subdivision, a subdivision described as being located in
the North 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of Section 33; Township 80 North;
Range 5 West of the 5th P.M. in Johnson County, Iowa (this is a
~4~t, 10.08 acre, farmstead split, located on the west side of Wapsi
Avenue NE, 3/4 of a mile north of its intersection with Fairview
Cemetery Road NE in Graham Twp.).
9. Business from the County Auditor.
10.
Action re: permits
b) Action re:reports
er :-
Business from the County Attorney.
a)
b)
Discussion/action re: agreement with Lone Tree Reporter settling
county's $7,968.17 claim for $4,434.09.
Report re: other items.
To: ]0~ CITY CLERI(
Fro-: jo hogarty 1-16--96 8:49aa p. 6 oF 8
Agenda 1-11-96
Pa~e 5
11. Business from the Board of Supervisors.
a) Action re: letter of support for Mid-Eastern Iowa Community Mental
Health Centers for (PATH) Projects for Assistance in Transition from
Homelesshess.
b) Discussion/action re: approval of belated homestead tax credit claims
signed between July 1, 1995 and December 31, 1995 as recommended
by City Assessor, Dan Hudson.
c) Discussion/action re: approval of belated homestead tax credit claims
signed between July 1, 1995 and December 31, 1995 as recommended
by County Assessor, Jerry Musser.
d) Other
12. Adjourn to informal meefin~
a) Inquiries and reports from the public.
b) Reports and inquiries from the members of the Board of Supervisors.
Report from the County Attorney.
d) Other
13. Adjournment.
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 8, 1996
To: City Council
From: City Manager
Re: 1995
The following represents a summary of major Council activity for 1995:
The Longfellow area storm sewer and sanitary sewer reconstruction project was
concluded. The project, at a cost of $600,000, involved over 1,400 feet of sanitary sewer
and 2,100 feet of storm sewer. This project was intended to relieve many of the sanitary
and stormwater collection problems in the Longfellow neighborhood. A similar project for
the High Street/Fairview area was also initiated. That project had a cost of $300,000.
The Council formally accepted the final work on the Whispering Meadows wetland park.
This was one of our more unique recreational areas. The subdivision and the wetland
were closely tied and created a unique recreational environment for both the neighborhood
and the community, as well as managing stormwater for the area.
The City secured a vacant lot at 1109 Fifth Avenue and through the efforts of our
Community Development Division were able to construct and have sold to a low income
family a new home at that site. The securing of such in-fill housing sites has been most
difficult.
The Senior Center received a major waterproofing/masonry restoration treatment. Due
to the age of the building, water was penetrating at many points and causing both external
and internal damage. The $100,000 project was completed in 1995.
The City concluded the purchase of the Peninsula property, approximately 208 acres
located immediately west and south of the Elks Country Club. The purchase price was
$2 million. This project was financed by way of a federal community develop-
ment/floodplain retention grant of $700,000 and the remaining $1.3 million from the City's
2
general fund reserves. The pumhase of the sits provided for the preservation of 100
acres in the floodplain and will serve as a potential source of water for our upcoming
water project. A development plan is being proposed for the upper portion of the
Peninsula final dlsposition/sale of the site.
Following a recommendation by the Mayor's Youth Employment Board of Directors, this
youth employment program was formally separated from the City. They now have greater
latitude in seeking funds for their operations. Previously, as an extension of a local
government, they were restricted in many of their fundraising initiatives. The split was
mutual and both parties agreed it was in everyone's respective interests.
The City Council awarded a proposal for the construction of tattletale chains along Iowa
Avenue. With the frequency of vehicles rum;ing into the Iowa Avenue railroad bddge, this
is believed to be at least one effort at warning drivers. This project was approved,
although installation will not occur until the spring of 1996.
The City Council saw the creation of a new Housing and Community Development
Commission, which is a combination of the Committee on Community Needs and the City
Housing Commission. This new commission will provide recommendations on many of
the activities formerly split between the two commissions.
The Council awarded the construction of a $500,000 landfill leachate lift station
construction project. This will provide for improved capacity to pump leachate from the
landfill to our wastewater treatment plant. Thls helps reduce the environmental
degradation that can occur due to landfill leachate.
10.
The Council formally approved amendments to the Human Rights Ordinance. The
amendments provide for the Commission to have authority to issue subpoenas and order
discovery in cases alleging discrimination. A second amendment provides for language
concerning a new protected class: gender identity.
11.
The requirement by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development to
prepare a disposition plan was approved with respect to the sale of 18 three-bedroom
units at 1926-1946 Broadway. HACAP has purchased this property through the use of
CDBG monies, as well as other funds, and will provide transitional housing. The $750,000
will be directed to our Assisted Housing Program and replacement housing secured at a
later date.
12.
The City was notified that the federal HUD would provide $133,000 in additional funding
to our Assisted Housing Program. These funds are for the improvement/maintenance of
the City's public housing units. Known as the Comprehensive Improvements Assistance
Program (CLAP), this successful grant application will be helpful in the maintenance of
public housing units owned by the City's housing authority.
13.
The City Council, in anticipation of the need to replace the Summit Street bridge over the
Iowa Interstate Railroad, has directed that design services be initiated for this bridge
reconstruction. Construction could begin as early as 1997.
14.
The City Council approved the construction of a new landfill cell as well as providing for
the final cover over an old landfill cell. This $1.2 million project was funded by landfill
revenues.
15.
Following the environmental assessment and extended debate, the City Council, by
resolution, approved the design parameters for Melrose Avenue street and bridge
reconstruction between Byington and the City of University Heights. The Federal Highway
Administration must give final approval of the environmental assessment and release the
funds for this project; however, they have been involved in all stages of design and their
approval is expected. Construction may begin as early as next fiscal year.
16.
Following public hearings and several years of negotiations, the City Council approved a
new cable television agreement with TCI. This is a renewal of a non-exclusive TV
franchise agreement and provides for funding for our cable TV/community programming
operations, public access channel, as well as providing for a number of upgrades to the
cable system.
4
17.
Following the recommendations of a citizens' committee concerning proposals for a
sensitive areas ordinance, the ordinance was adopted. This ordinance will provide for
development regulation of environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, stream
corridors, steep slopes, wooded areas, hydric soils, prairie remnants, and archaeological
sites. This ordinance was reviewed by the Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission, the
Planning and Zoning Commission, and finally, following public hearing with the City
Council, was adopted.
18.
A new joint agreement on communication and cooperation concerning the division of
property taxes for industrial jobs and their related training responsibilities at Kirkwood
Community College was approved.
19.
The City Council awarded contracts for the construction of production well in the Jordan
aquifer and silurian aquifers. This is part of the planned new water resources for the city.
The Council also approved the renovation of pumping systems at the three 2-million gallon
ground reservoir/booster stations in our community, This work will help improve the
pressure and flow throughout the city's water distribution system.
20. In January monthly billing for all City utilities was approved.
21.
The award of a $420,000 contract for continuing work along Dubuque Street/Terrell Mill
park for the repair of public property and right-of-way as a result of the 1993 flood. This
contract was funded approximately 80% by the Soil Conservation Service and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
22.
River Corridor Trail projects were initiated and funding secured from the Transportation
Enhancement funds. The projects were reviewed and approved by JCCOG. The
University shared in the design of the River Corridor Trail between the Iowa Memorial
Union bridge and Iowa Avenue. The University will maintain the trail thereafter.
23.
The Council authorized a bond issue in February 1995 for $8.2 million in General
Obligation debt for a variety of water and wastewater projects.
5
24,
The Council authorized the Airport Commission to proceed with the construction of a new
ten-unit aircraft hangar. The $250,000 project cost will be financed from City reserves and
repaid on a scheduled basis by the Airport Commission as a routine part of their annual
budget,
25.
At a special meeting in February, .the Council approved plans and specifications for the
Whispering Meadows housing development, The City's Department of Housing &
Inspection Services secured a $3+ million federal grant for the construction of 33 single-
family housing units to be constructed in the Whispering Meadows area, Two local
contractors, McComas-Lacina and Frantz Construction, were the successful bidders,
26.
The Council initiated a refinancing of $2.5 million in Parking System Revenue Bonds.
With the refinancing the City enjoyed a lower interest rate as well as a onetime savings
of $150,000.
27, The Council established regulations for sidewalk cafes in the downtown.
28.
The Charter Review Commission which was appointed in May 1994, prepared and
submitted to the Council recommendations for the City Charter. A public hearing was held
in February 1995 and no comment was received. The nine Commission members were
thanked by the Council for their work effort and the Charter Ordinance was approved as
recommended.
29.
A new historic district was established along Muscatine Avenue just north of Court. The
Moffitt Cottage Historic District recognized the work and architectural design of the unique
Moffitt Cottages in Iowa City.
30.
Phase II of the Rohret Road Reconstruction Project was approved and construction
completed in 1995, The $1.5 million cost was financed through General Obligation debt
and concluded the two phases of the reconstruction of Rohret Road and overpass over
Highway 218. Streb Construction of Iowa City was the contractor and completed the
project, two months ahead of schedule.
6
31,
The Council approved an agreement with the planning consulting firm of Gould Evans
Associates for $56,000 to design a Near Southside Development Plan. The plan was
reviewed and approved by Council following review by community interest groups.
32.
The $600,000+ asphalt resurfacing program continued. Road Use Tax monies were used
for various street projects throughout the community. The City allowed the City of
Coralville to share in this bidding process in order to secure a better price.
A public hearing was held in May to adopt the "Iowa City: Beyond 2000" recommenda-
tions, These were the result of a visionin. g process involving over 80 Iowa City citizens
on nine task forces. The task fome recommendations were reviewed by boards and
commissions prior to final recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission. This
work effort will now be used in futura Comprehensive Plan amendments.
34.
The condemnation process for the Water Plant site began in November 1994, and was
finally concluded with a settlement agreement in May 1995, The site was annexed,
35.
The Council awarded $25,000 in the new "Program for Improving Neighborhoods" (PIN)
grant program, The neighborhood associations submitted to the neighborhood council
various project applications, The neighborhood council reviewed and recommended, and
sought the approval of the City Council in this new grant program.
36.
The Council authorized two major annexations during 1995, those being the Water Plant
site of some 230 acres and the annexation of 115 acres near Highway 218/Highway 1
interchange for the new Winebrenner Ford location,
mg~lstsja
1995
Grant Fund Activity
Police traffic enforcement grant
Narcotics enforcement grant
Crime Bill (new officers)
Historic Preservation:
Survey N. Dubuque/N. Linn area
National Register nominations for
College Green historic area
State of Iowa Library recipmcel lending
Transit:
Federal operating assistance
State operating assistance
Capital grant (new buses)
Federal transportation planning funds
Iowa River Bank repairs (Soil Conservation Service)
Rohret Road pedestrian bridge
Airport master plan study (FAA}
Housing assistance - certificetes/vouchers
Public housing - new construction (33 units)
Acquisition of housing (10 units)
CDBG - HOME
January8, 1996
$24,000
57,000
(3 years) 900,000
9,000
2,500
52,000
260,000
240,000
650,000
66,000
340,000
481,000
93,000
4,071,000
3,237,000
931,000
2,163,000
$13,576,500
mg~grsnL~O5
PLATS:
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES - 1995
18 commercial lots on 49 acres in the Boyrum Subdivision (Hy-Vee - Hwy 6); Kennedy's
Waterfront (S. Gilbert Street); and D & L Subdivision (Meinard's).
92 residential lots on 41 acres in the East Hills; Oakes 5th; Galway Pt, 2; and Walden
Wood, Pt. 8 and 9,
REZONINGS:
MORMON TREK VILLAGE - 29 acres rezoned from RS-5 to OPDH-8 for 232 townhouse
and condominium units at Mormon Trek Boulevard and Rohret Road.
WINDSOR RIDGE - 34 acres rezoned from RS-5 to multi-family and neighborhood
commemial to create a new mixed-use and mixed-density neighborhood.
EAST SIDE INDUSTRIAL PARK - 68 acres in the County rezoned from RS to M-:I for
future expansion of the BDI industrial park.
ANNEXATIONS:
40 acres on. the west side near Highway 1/U.S. 218 intersection for commercial
development. (Winebrenner),
250 acres north of 1-80 for water plant site.
Defeated OPDH-8 rezonlng of 7 acres on Dubuque Road for low to moderate income housing
development proposed by Burns/GICHF.
APPOINTMENTS HA§E TO BOARDS/COI~XSSIONS DURI~$ 1995
Board/Commissions
Animal Control Advisory Board
Board of Adjustment
Board of Appeals
Board of Appeals
Board of Library Trustees
Board of Library Trustees
Board of Library Trustees
Board of Library Trustees
Broadband Telecommunications Commission
Design Review Committee
Design Review Committee
Design Review Committee
Design Review Committee
Design Review Committee
Design Review Committee
Historic Preservation Commission
Housing and Community Develo
Housing and Community Develo
Housing and Community Develo
Housing and Community Develo
Housing and Community Develo
Housing and Community Develo
Housing and Community Develo
Housing and Community Develo
Housing and Community Develo
Human Rights Commission
Human Rights Commission
Human Rights Commission
Human Rights Commission
Human Rights Commission
Parks and Recreation Commission
Parks and Recreation Commission
Planning and Zoning Commission
Planning and Zoning Commission
Planning and Zoning Commission
Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission
Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission
Senior Center Commission
Senior Center Commission
~ent Commission
)merit Commission
)ment Commission
)ment Commission
)ment Commission
)ment Commission
)merit Commission
~ent Commission
)ment Commission
Julie Seal
Lowell Brandt
C. Wayne Maas (reappointment)
John Staska
Mark W. Martin
Charles T. Traw (reappointment)
Mary McMurray
Jim Swaim
Betty McKray
Karyl Larson (reappointment)
Gary Nagie (reappointment)
Martin K. Haynes
Clara Swan (reappointment)
Randy Rohovit
Philip M. Reisetter
Ruedi Kuenzli
Linda Murray
James Harris
Elizabeth Swenson
Christina Randall
Charles Eastham
Ann M. Donovan
John R. Falb
Tim Ruxton
Gretchen Schmuch
Patricia A. Harvey (reappointment)
Tom Dickerson
Ann K. Shires (reappointment)
Osha Gray Davidson
Diane Martin
Ross Wilburn
Allen Stroh
Lea Supple
Ann Bovbjerg (reappointment)
Eric L. Engh
Jessica Neary (reappointment)
Richard A. Hoppin (reappointment)
Philip Zell
Kenneth Mobily
Approved appointments to Boards/Commissions as
Board of Supervisors:
Riverfront and Natural Areas Commission
recommended by Johnson County
Nancy F. English (reappointment)
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
To;
From:
Re:
January10, 1996
Boards and Commissions and Community Interest Groups
City Manager
Presentation of Budget - City Council
On Tuesday, January 23, beginning at approximately 6:30 p.m. you are invited to appear
before and present to the City Council any issues that you believe are pertinent to the budget
request made by you and/or the organization you represent. This meeting will be held in the
Council Chambers. There is no formal schedule of appearance. We would appreciate your
letting us know if you plan to attend and we could give you some ideas as to a schedule.
If you wish the Council to have any written information concerning a budget proposal, we
would appreciate receiving that information no later than mid-afternoon Thursday, January
18. We will photocopy and distribute the information to the City Council.
If you have any other questions concerning this presentation opportunity or need any other
assistance, please feel free to contact my office or that of the Director of Finance, Don
Yucuis, at 356-5050,
cc: Department Directors
bl~bUdget
To: IO~ CITY CLERK From: jo hogarty 1-12-98 3:46pm p, Z of 3
John=on CmunD'
Don Sehr, Chairperson
Jo~ Bolkcom
Charlos D. Du~
Stophen P. Lac~a
SaHy S~
1. Call to order 9:00 ram.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
January 16, 1996
INFORMAL MEETING
Agenda
2. Review of the formal minutes of January 1 lth.
3. Business from Mary Kathryn Wallace re: Senior Center
update/discussion.
4. Business from the Director of Department of Publ/c Health re: Adult
Day Program/discussion.
5. Business from the County Engineer.
a) Discussion re:
35-2.
b) Other
right-of-way for Johnson County Bridge Project L-U-
6. Business from the Board of Supervisors.
a) Discussion m: appointments to East Central Iowa Council of
Governments ISTEA Policy and Technical Advisory Committees.
b) Discussion re: appointments of Supervisors to various Committees,
Boards and Commissions.
c) Discussion re: appointments to the Historical Preservation
Commission and Compensation Commission.
d) Reports
e) Other
913 SOIYrH DUBUQUE ST. P.O. BOX 1350 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52244-1350 TEL: (319) 356-6000
To: IO~CITYCL£R~
Fro~: b hogar~¥ HZ-98 3:~p~ p. 3 o~ 3
Agenda 1-16-96
Page 2
7. Business from the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Grant Committee
to discuss and update of the grant programs.
8. Discussion t~om the public.
9. Recess.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 12, 1996
-
From: Karin Franklin, Director, Planning & Community Develop
Re: Near Southside Design Plan
Attached is the final version of the Near Southside Design Plan. The consultants are in the
process of printing posters which will be used for broad distribution of the plan concepts. The
staff is developing a work program for FY97 to begin implementation of the plan. This work
program will be forwarded to the Council within the next month.
Attachment
CfTY OF IOW,4 CITY
Near Southside Design Plan
Iowa City,
il
Gould Evans Associates, PoC.
Plam~ing and Ltmd.~'('ape Ar('hitt, cture Group
NEAR SOUTHSIDE DESIGN PLAN
December 1995
Prepared For:
The C~ty of Iowa City, Iowa
Planning and Community Development Department
Prepared By:
Gould Evans Associates~ P.C.
Economic and Development Consultant:
Hammer Siler George Associates
RESOLUTION NO. 95-353
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE NEAR SOUTHSIDE DESIGN PLAN
WHEREAS. the City Councfi of :he City of lowa City. lows has adopted :he Near Souths~de
Neighbo:hood Redevelopment Plan. the Near Southslde Commercial Urban Rev~tsiization Plano
and :he Neat Southside Residential Urban Revitelization Plan; and
WHEREAS. to ensure :hat the design of development proacts within the Neat Southside
Neighborhood comply wft~ a design concept envisioned for the Near Southaide Neighborhoed.
the City Council hired a ccnsuttant to develop the Near ~outhside Design Plan ['Design Plan')
for said Neighborhood; and
WHEREAS. to assist the consultant with the development of the Design Plan the City Councd
established the Near ~outh~da Design Plan Advisory Committee; and
~HEREAS. the City Council has concluded :hat :he Design Plan compl[es w[:h the Near
Souths~de Redevelol~ment Plas~ and will complement the investment Iowa City has made in
the Downtown and wiU genera[ly enhance the community; and
VVHEREAS. this conclusion .~as been reached after due deliberation and ol~ortumty for public
NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF iOWA CITY.
IOWA THAT
The Near Southside Design Plan is adopted for use as a design guide to implement the Near
Southaide Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan.
Passed and aDt~'oved tl~s ~i_.th day of n,,,,~o. . 1995.
It was moved by Th~o2~n and seconded by
adopted. and upon rotl call there were:
AYES: NAYS:
the Resolution be
ASSENT:
Baker
Horowitz
Kubbv
Lehman
Novick
Pigoft
Throgmorton
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
The Nest Southside Design Plan Advisory Committee
Development of the Near Southside Design Plan was assisted by the Near Southside Design Plan Advisory Committee. The Committee
was made up of individuals from groups the City Council stated should be represented in the development of the design plan. Discussion
occurred at four meetings of the Design Plan Advisory Committee, where input was received at various stages of the plan development
process.
The Near Southside Design Plan Advisory Committee meetings were also an opportunity for property owners in the Near Southside area
and other interested persons to provide comments on development of the design plan. The design plan reflects input received from all
persons who participated in the plan development process. It does not necessarily represent the consensus of all organizations
represented on the Design Plan Advisory Committee.
The Advisory Committee recognizes the design plan was prepared according to an open, interactive process which attempted to hear all
voices with a stake in the area. The committee did not attempt to reach unanimous agreement on each element of the design plan.
However, committee members agree that the Near Southside Design Plan provides a vaiuable guide for future decision making to occur in
the Near Southside.
Dianne Kaufman, representing the Iowa City-Johnson County Arts Council
Bruce Greiner, representing the Iowa City Community School District
Tom Cowen, representing Environmental Advocates
Pat Boutelle, representing Project GREEN
Grant Crowell, representing the UI Student Association
Larry Wilson, representing the UI Department of Planning & Administrative Services
Jane Jakobsen, representing the Iowa City Planning & Zoning Commission
Laura Hawks, representing the iowa City Design Review Committee
Craig Willis, representing the Iowa City Ares Chamber of Commerce
Madam Ramey, representing Near Southside Senior Citizens
Kevin Hanick~ representing Near Southside Business Owners
Haywood Belle, representing Near Southside Property Ownera
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................1
Ii. EXISTING CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................2
Issues ...............................................................................................................................................................................................2
Urban Form ......................................................................................................................................................................................3
Land Use ..........................................................................................................................................................................................3
Circulation .......................................................................................................................................................................................S
Field Survey .....................................................................................................................................................................................6
Market Conditions ...........................................................................................................................................................................6
Existing Plans .................................................................................................................................................................................8
Redevelopment Tools .....................................................................................................................................................................8
~. DESIGN PLAN ..........................................................................................................................................9
Area Wide Cohesiveness .............................................................................................................................................................10
Uniform Streetscape ....................................................................................................................................................................10
Parking Features .........................................................................................................................................................................15
Green Links .................................................................................................................................................................................15
District ! Enclave Identity .............................................................................................................................................................20
Government Center .....................................................................................................................................................................20
Downtown Extension Distdct .......................................................................................................................................................23
Ralston Creek Mixed-Use District ...............................................................................................................................................26
Rock Isrand Square .....................................................................................................................................................................28
University of Iowa District ............................................................................................................................................................29
iV. COST AND IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................................31
Estimated Costs ............................................................................................................................................................................31
Implementation Strategy ..............................................................................................................................................................33
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
I. introduction
The Near Southside Design Plan is intended to provide vision
and implementation guidance for urban design elements
associated with future redevelopment. Furthermore, the plan
recommends improvements in the Near Southside which will
complement downtown and provide overall enhancements to the
Central Business District of Iowa City, which is a hub for
employment, education and retail activity. As revealed in the
plan, some recommended elements and actions will take place in
the short-term, (first two years) while others will take 5 or more
years to implement.
The framework for developing the design plan comes from an
assessment and understanding of the issues and conditions in
the area, as well as known plans and proposals, the generation
of alternative scenarios and the development of a plan vision and
strategy for implementation. In order to guide the planning effort
and develop the design vision, the plan incorporates the following
eight principles:
[] The design plan provides for public spaces that are well-
placed and well-designed s;"tes for public gathering.
· 1 The design plan includes recommended improvements
to encourage safe pedestrian and bicycle use of streets
and walkways in the Near Southside redevelopment
area, including elements to make public areas more
accessible to people with disabilities, and to make
Burlington Street a safer and more attractive street for
pedestrians to cross.
[] The design plan may lead to revisions to the Iowa C~ty
zoning regulations that will prescribe design elements
that create a "unifying sense of place" through
architectural design and public improvement projects,
The design plan anticipates mixed use redevelopment for
the area south of Court Street at an appropriate scale,
including residential development and small scale
commercial enterprises such as restaurants, outdoor
cafes and/or small shops. The plan also indicates
techniques by which public improvement projects can
promote and encourage such redevelopment.
The design plan defines suitable locations for public art
that reinforces a sense of place and public gathering
areas.
The design plan promotes continuity between the Near
Southside redevelopment area and the Central Business
District.
! The design plan emphasizes security and safety through
appropriate application of elements w~thin the Near
Southside Neighborhood.
[] The design plan also emphasizes environmentally
sensitive and cost effective design concepts.
Iowa City Near Southside Design
IL Existing Context
Iowa City is a wbrant community with a strong identity. Places
like the Old Capitol area on the University of Iowa campus and
the pedestrian mall in the Central Business District (CBD) provide
a "sense of place" for the community. Areas such as these have
incorporated many design elements that soften hard edges and
lend a comfortable and safe feeling to the individuals who utilize
these "places". Tree lined streets, informational kiosks. well-
designed p~aza areas, sensitive signage, and historic flavor, as
well as other elements within these environments, serve to
enhance the social and physical fabric. Iowa City, through these
places has shown how pdvate, public and institutional forces can
come together to enhance the environmental quality of the
community.
In order to develop a realistic yet visionary design plan for the
Near Southside, which captures the qualities of other attractive
places, the specific issues and physical context driving
development in the area requires investigation.
~ssues
it is critical that all the issues that may impact the
conceptualization of the design plan, be considered. Therefore,
public participation built into the planning process through the
Design Plan Advisory Committee was used to build a foundation
for the plan.
2
In order to identify pertinent issues and concerns regarding the
Near Southside, an initial public workshop was held in May,
1995. This interactive workshop provided an opportumty to
capture the perceptions and opinions of the people who live,
work or otherwise have a connection to the Near Southside.
Participants were asked to identify and prioritize issues that they
felt impacted the Near Southside. Overall. the issues generated
by way of citizen, Advisory Committee and City Council
interaction revealed eight general issue areas:
al Future development: quality, type, mixture of uses.
[] Identi~: aesthetic, historic, architectural, natural
features.
I Circulation: traffic / parking framework, pedestrian,
railroad impacts.
m Adjacencies: Downtown / CBD expansion, University
impacts.
m Regulatory: zoning, design review, code enforcement.
I Financial: public role, private role, budgetary impacts.
! Livability: security, accessibility, beautification, public
spaces.
[] Miscellaneous: school plans, demographics.
Urban Form
Although a unique area in Iowa City, overriding physical, social,
political and market forces, which have created environments
such as the Downtown Pedestrian Mall, will be factors in the
redevelopment and design of the Near Southside Area.
Historically and currently, the Near Southside has struggled to
find an identity of its own.
Strong institutional elements (governmental and educational)
exist within and immediately adjacent to the area. Commercial
development is present along Burlington and Gilbert Streets.
The residential market has created new housing opportunities
that are increasing densities. Newer apartment buildings tend to
be Iarge, sometimes architecturally austere and, in some
instances, minimally landscaped. Automobile parking and
overhead utilities impact the visual and physical image of the
area. Railroad embankments, topographic changes, and major
roadways create barriers and edges within and around the Near
Southside. Older structures often require repair, rehabilitation, or
removal. Street furnishings do not [end themselves to an overall
cohesive visual environment.
External pressures and opportunities are also impacting the area.
Pedestrians not only use sidewalks, but also use alleys and other
informal pathways to move through the Near Southside from one
area to another. These individuals are primarily headed to the
University. Automobile traffic patterns are somewhat predictable
because of the governmental destinations, although the pattern
sometimes becomes haphazard when parking is at a premium.
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
Several roadways serve as through streets either by design or
because of convenience. These external pressures, the lack of
a cohesive identity, and the need for stronger external and
internal linkages serve as an impetus for the Near Southside
Design Plan.
PerceptuaIly, the environmental quality of the area reflects a
feeling of disconnectedness with the remainder of Iowa City. In
a conceptual sense, the redevelopment area is ringed by nstural
and man-made barriers, and by more identifiable areas of the
community. Figure 1 provides a broad contextual view of the
Near Southside within iowa City.
Land Use
The Near Southside consists of twenty square blocks located
adjacent to the iowa City Central Business Distdct (CBD) and the
University of Iowa campus. The area is bounded by Gilbert
Street to the east, railroad tracks to the south, Madison Street to
the west, and Eludington Street to the north. Once primarily a
single family residential area, the Near Southside in recent years
has been experiencing a greater mixture of land uses. The
existing land uses in the area are single family to high density
residential, office, commercial, warehouse / light industrial, and
government / institutional.
3
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
Views o1 Iowa River ,from
Near Southside Screened
by Vegetation and Fencing --
University of Iowa ~ '
Physical Plant ~ ~t
Views of Facilities Plant
Railroad Tracks Act as Physical
and Perceptual Barrier
Figure 1
Area Context
Near Southside
4
Old Capitol a~d ~he
University of Iowa
Cer,~al Core/Downtown:
Pedestrian Mail, Commercial canter
Civi~ Plaza Area
Governmental Center:.
Courthouse/Federal IBIdgJ
School District Offices
Burlington St.
Commercial Corridor
Gilbert SL
Distinctive Commercial Uses
Pocket Park/Open Space
New Pedestrian Bridge Unks
Near Southside to Residential
Areas East of Maiden Lane
Adaptive Re-Use of Railroad
Depot: Mixed-Use Commercial
Node
Residentia
A vadety of residential land uses (single family, garden
apartment, multi-story structures) are located throughout the
Near Southside. Few single family homes are still being used as
originally intended. Instead they have been converted for
multiple unit residential purposes and small office or business
ventures. Newer residential uses in the area reflect a greater
intensity of development than the traditional single family
structure. High density multi-story apartment structures, with
associated off-street parking facilities, are now providing an array
of living experiences for residents ranging from students to the
elderly.
Office / Commercial
Most commercial and office uses in the area can be found within
one block south of Burlington Street and one block west of
Gilbert Street. These uses include a mixture of service and retail
activities. A smaller commercial node exists in the vicinity of
Wright and Dubuque Streets. This area includes the former
Rock Island Depot, two small strip centers, and several
converted residential structures. Several other small offices and
businesses are a!so scattered within the Near Southside.
Warehouse / Industria!
These uses are pdmadly found in the southeast and southwest
corners of the study area and are associated with both private
and institutional operations. To the southwest warehousing is
associated with University functions, while in the southeast
corner warehousing supports the distribution of supplies for
commercial activities.
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
Government / Institutional
The County Courthouse, County Jail, Federal Building, and
School District. Administration Building provide a government
center in the core of the Near Southside. In addition to this
government activity, university car pool and physical plant
operations are located along Madison Street. Also of note is St.
Patrick's Church ~ocated on Court Street.
Circulation
The current circulation network for both automobiles and
pedestrians is based on a grid system of streets, alleys and
sidewalks. While the movement of motorized traffic is ~imited by
the formal street network, pedestrian and other nonmotorized
modes of transportation, such as bicycles. have created informal
pathways through parking lots, apartment complexes and alleys,
which serve as shortcuts through the area. For the most part,
nonmotorized traffic is focused primarily on ardving at or
departing from the University of Iowa campus, and secondari~y
on the CBD. For many people, the Near Southside is merely a
place to cut through or to park a car and walk to a final
destination.
Field observations have revealed that vehicular patterns fluctuate
given the time and events of the day, Burlington and Gilbert
Streets function as arterial roadways throughout the day. The
traffic votume and speed along these two roadways define edges
for the Near Southside, Clinton Street operates as primarily a
collector, but also serves as a through street for people driving to
and from the government buildings, as well as the CBD. Transit
routes utilize Clinton Street and Court Street. Through traffic also
5
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
is present along Capitol Street from the rai[rcad tracks north to
Prentiss Street, west to Madison Street, and north to the
University. The impact of this traffic appears to be most
noticeable dudrig the morning and evening rush hours. Also,
Madison Street is utilized frequently by university motor pool
vehicles and as a staging area for CAMBUS vehicles as they
return to the msintenance and parking area.
The volume and pattern of internal traffic within the Near
Southside is impacted by postal vehicles, Sheriff's Department
vehicles and the cimulation of vehicles seeking parking spaces.
Also, the vacation of portions of Harrison and Capitol Streets,
and Maiden Lane, as well as several alleys in the Near
Southside, has influenced traffic circulation and created
development, parking and public open space opportunities,
Both motorized and nonmotorized traffic movement is impacted
by the presence of the railroad activity along the southern
boundary of the area. Also, conflict between motorized and
nonmotorized traffic occurs in many places in the area, as
informal paths cress the street system.
Field Survey
Notable characteristics from field observations of the Near
Southside are summarized graphically in Figure 2. This figure
provides some details concerning the existing elements, such as
significant structures. potential views and functional areas, that
influence the quality and image of the Near Southside urban
environment in which people reside and conduct daily activities.
6
Market Conditions
In addition to the consideration of existing spatial and functional
relationships, design elements, and the configuration of public
and private land uses in the Near Southside, several existing and
anticipated market conditions must be taken into consideration.
These base market considerations include:
Proximity of the Near Southside to already existing
commercial activities in the CBD and surrounding area
indicates that commercial retail in the Near Southside is
likely to be specialty oriented and/or draw on a
community-wide market base.
· The amount of land associated with stable institutional
uses (such as the University, Federal Building, County
Courthouse, and School Administration Building) limits
the ultimate residential and commercial redevelopment
capacity of the Near Southside.
· The anticipated incremental redevelopment pattern,
which is most likely to occur in the Near Southside, will
favor smaller infill and partial block redevelopment rather
than the redevelopment of large multi-block tracts ot
land.
.. Existing institutional uses are destinations within the
Near Southside that draw people from throughout the
community into the area.
M The residential population, plus the existence of
destination points in the Near Southside, provides a base
for a mixture of activities throughout the day.
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA. __
~ FAClHT1ES SUPPORT AND ,~;:~ VISUAL lINK'
MOTOR POOL
[--~ V~EWS INTO RIVER -
mEW AND LINK · AN
VIEW AND LINK = VIEW AND MNK ~ *~n-t~ rv~v~-rt~ INTO DOWNTOWN
INTO OLD CAPITOL; .............. ' '~ ' i ~, VIEW AND UNK -
INTO CAMPUS ~ ~ - ~ . ~_
AND CAMPUS .~ Pl~ VIEIN AND UNK ;---;:] _ INTO C~/IC CENTER- ~' ll~' ~ ~ ~$11~
_ _ ~ < I I INTO HOUDAY INN [ i = AND CITY HALL
-- PLAZA -- ~
~ R~L E.C~VES
~ ~ OVE..~.OW~.--,.ES
w~v~ ~ u.~v~.s~
POW~a PLANT, ~^cLLm~s
SUPPORT. AND MOTOR POOL
BRIDGE
SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURE
;~ ~ AREAS OF
~'~.,.'~ SIGNIRCANT SLOPE
Creek as Natural Resource
Figure 2
Area Analysis
Near Southside
7
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
[] Continued use of strategically located parking ramps will
enhance pedestrian activity and create greater walk-by
exposure for new and existing uses in the Near
Southside.
[] Employment within and adjacent to the Near Southside
provides a "captive daytime population."
[] Proximity to downtown employment and the University
will continue to support high and medium density housing
alternatives similar to the existing densities in the Near
Southside.
[] Directed redevelopment efforts are likely to be residential
in nature, with commercial redevelopment following
market forces.
Commercial uses will have a greater opportunity for
success if they are focused into clusters or onto streets
with greater traffic exposure instead of being allowed
throughout the Near Southside.
Existing Plans
Plans for redevelopment and proposed development projects will
have an impact on the future urban form, land use and circulation
characteristics ol the Near Southside,
The pdmary document guiding future land use and
redevelopment in the area is the Near Southside Redevelopment
Plan adopted by Iowa City in 1992. This plan indicates the
desired land use pattern for the area as redevelopment
opportunities present themselves. It also outlines goals and
strategies for implementation of the plan.
8
Besides the redevelopment plan, the University of Iowa Campus
Planning Framework identifies approximately four square blocks
or future University use. Within this area, several potential future
building sites have been identified by the plan.
in addition to these plans, two development proposals are in
preliminary review and implementation stages. First, is the
Hieronymus Square concept for mixed office and commercial
uses on the southeast corner of Burlington and Clinton Streets.
Second, is a concept for a public parking ramp with mixed uses
on the first floor on the southwest comer of L.inn and Court
Streets. Both of these concepts appear to be consistent with the
Redevelopment Plan.
Redevelopment Tools
Generally, redevelopment plans are implemented through an
array of regulatory and incentive tools. Such tools may include
land use / building regulations, design and site review processes,
special district requirements, public improvements, tax increment
financing, land write downs, and administrative support (i.e.,
grant administration ass[stance) for project development.
Currently, Iowa City has several strategies for implementing the
Near Southside Redevelopment Plan. First, a tax abatement
program based upon achieving the goals of the designated
commercial and residential revitaiization areas. Second, is a
parking facility impact fee that is utilized to ensure adequate
centrally located public parking. Third, is the reinvestment of
public funds into the Near Southside. It is intended that a
minimum of 75% of the tax revenue collected on the increased
value of projects in the tax abatement program be invested as
public improvements in the Near Southside. These existing
efforts, as well as other ordinances and policies, which are
currently applied citywide, impact the amount and type of
redevelopment that takes place.
III. Design Plan
It is recognized that the design p~an must address the issues and
conditions cited above in a manner that the City is willing to
advocate and the citizenry is willing to support. Therefore,
alternative design scenarios were developed to test different
types of approaches and treatments for addressing vadous
elements of the Near Southside, The alternative scenarios
considered were "Status-Quo," "Own Identity" and "Downtown
Expansion" (1 & 2).
"Status Quo," reflects the continued implementation of current
policies and strategies. The concept recognized that as
redevelopment occurs, policies and strategies would be
implemented on a case-by-case basis. The "Own Identity"
concept focused on the redevelopment of the Near Southside as
a highly identifiable "place" pemeptually separated from the
Central Business District. In both versions of the "Downtown
Expansion" concept the theme was to create "unity through
diversity". In the first alternative, diverse enclaves with distinctive
design qualities and elements were tied together with other
unifying design elements. In the second alternative, diverse land
uses were unified through the downtown design theme.
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
The objective of these scenarios was to provide an awareness of
the possibilities, define a future design direction for the area and
form a foundation for the design plan that would address the
eight principles and issues identified previously. Each alternative
scenario was assessed based upon identified strengths and
weaknesses. The Advisory Committee provided direction,
stating that the design plan would be similar to Downtown
Expansion Alternative 1 (plus or minus some elements) as a goal
for the future. Specifically, the Advisory Committee's desire was
that the design plan recognize:
Strong linkages tothe CBD.
Area strengths and enclave character.
· Fiscal responsibility / Public and Pdvate parallel activity.
Burlington Boulevard with State DOT involvement.
Open space needs (generally).
!Overell strategy for parking ramps.
No additional street closures near Buffington.
Ralston Creek as an asset and amenity.
· The need to get government entities to cooperate if a
strong government center is to emerge.
· Housing / Residential character and linkages to activity
areas.
· Long range vision and an incremental strategy to
achieve that vision.
9
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
The Advisory Committee also indicated that the design plan
consider the following priorities:
· Integration of the University with the Near Southside area
- High pdority.
[] Burlington Street treatment / enhancement - High priority.
Ralston Creek enhancements - High priority.
Street level pedestrian activity - High pdodty.
Public open space provision - High to medium priority.
[] Unified streetscape within enclaves - High to medium
pdodty.
· Additional parking opportunities - High to low priority
depending on location and the generation of additional
parking demand.
la Placement of utilities underground - High to low pdodty
depending on the enclave.
· Provision of gateways - Low priority.
In addition to the priorities identified above, design review,
without arbitrary rules, was recommended.
The ovemding purpose of the design plan, Figure 3, is to
promote a "sense of place." This "sense" has been created by
blending existing and proposed features together to create a
unique identity. The identity is further strengthened not by the
uniform application of all design elements, but through
enhancement of existing qualities, strengths, and the unification
of the diverse built and natural environments within and adjacent
to the Near Southside.
10
While the overall design is intended to encourage area wide
cohesivenees, it also responds to the differing strengths of
enclaves within the Near Southside and the relationships among
the Near Southside, the CBD and the University of Iowa.
Therefore, the description of the design plan is broken into two
sections: Area Wide Cohesivehess and District / Enclave
Identity.
Area Wide Cohesiveness
Area wide cohesiveness is promoted through the incorporation of
three design considerations: a uniform streetscape element,
parking features, and a "green links" concept. These items within
the total design plan provide an enhanced public environment by
promoting public gathering and visual attractiveness, as well as
reducing pedestrian, automobile and bicycle conflicts.
Uniform Streetscape
The term "streetscape" generally refers to elements of the public
domain such as streets, medians, sidewalks, lighting. and
landscaping. Cohesive streetscapes contribute visual appeal,
desirability, and marketability to an area. As part of this plan, the
streetscape character will change with specific elements within
the general streetscape (Figures 4.5, and 6) of each enclave or
district, but the implementation of uniform plantings of trees along
streets and pedestrian walks throughout the area will assist to
promote cohesivehess within the Near Southside. Further
studies and inventories of existing tree locations, types, and
conditions will need to be undertaken as design improvements
are initiated. Healthy, mature specimens should be preserved
and incorporated with new plantings whenever possible.
t
................... h~'a £¥ty Near Soulh,;ide De:~'i~ '~)~a~
Oown~own ~o~va C~t¥
F~gure 3
De~.ign Plan
Near Souths~de
11
} ·
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
II!ustrations are not recommendations for specific light fixtures. Illustrations intended to communicate conceptual variations of
elements.
Burlington Street Downtown Extension, Ralston Creek,
University of iowa
Banners on existing
street lights
Event banners
Pedestrian scale
lighting
To represent adopted
downtown standards
Government Center
To represent the
implementation of a
traditional or formal
element
Rock Island Square
To represent identifiable
change of element from
other enclaves
· Enclave banner
Figure 4
Conceptual Streetscape Elements
Lighting
12
City Near Southside Design Plan
Illustrations are not recommendations for specific paving treatments. Illustrations intended to communicate conceptual
variations of elements.
Budington Street
Extension of existing
brick accent pavers
Enhanced paving
treatments at
pedestrian landing
zones (Madison,
Clinton, Gilbert Street
intersections)
Downtown Extension
Brick accent pavers
incorporated with existing
sidewalk framework
Extend "plaza quality"
treatment from downtown
along Clinton Street
Government Center Rock island Square
Preserve existing
sidewalk framework
with enhanced paving
treatment at key
intersections
Brick paving enhancement
along commercial streets
Preserve existing sidewalk
framework in residential
areas
Note: Preserve existing sidewalk framework in Ralston Creek and University of Iowa Enclaves
Figure 5
Conceptual Streetscape Elements
Pawng
13
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
Illustrations intended to communicate conceptual variations of elements, A deteiied traffic and engineering evaluation will
determine specific angles and dimensions on a street by street basis.
Existing Condition ~
· Traditional on-street parldng environment
Government Center
· Provide additional parallel parking
Area-Wide
Provide parking lane by cutting into existing curb line;
and/or
Provide parldng lane by curb extension or "ear" into existing street
Figure 6
Conceptual Streetscape Elements
On-Street Parking
14
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
Parking Features
In addition to the presence of traditional streetscape elements,
on-street parking is prevalent throughout the Near Southside.
The design plan proposes that on-street parking be visually
enhanced by extending the curb, generally at the corners of
intersections, to help better define the parking lanes or bays, or
by cutting into the existing curb line. Further detailed study will
enable the Public Works and Planning and Community
Development Departments to determine specific parking
considerations for each street. The design plan, for illustrative
and conceptual purposes, shows parallel parking throughout the
area, with the exception of areas with existing angled parking and
[n the Government Center, where angled parking is
recommended.
Off-street surface parking lots, if developed within the Near
Southside, should meet requirements for landscaping that
enhances buffering and visual impact. This plan considers
surface parking lots, when located behind structures, as "cars
within a park" concept rather than "cars in a lot" concept.
Additionally, off-street parking is still required to be located within
or behind new buildings.
Grccn Links
Another area wide feature is a strong "green links" concept
(Figure 7) intended to unite the enclaves / districts identified in
the Near Southside, as well as enhance the relationship between
Downtown and the Near Southside. Primary links are located
along Harrison, Clinton and Burlington Streets. Pedestrian
movement is promoted through a series of public "green spaces,"
landmark features and destinations.
15
Along Harrison Street, moving west from Gilbert Street, the
"green link" features a creek side park adjacent to Ralston Creek,
continuing through Harrison Hill Park, into the Government
Center civic park, through a small park at Capitol Street, and onto
the University of Iowa Campus to a green terminus near the Iowa
River. This green space is shown on property owned by the
University and CRANDIC Railroad. The Un[versity's plans for the
area west of Capitol Street have not been fully developed, so it is
too eady to determine how the green space and link might fit into
this area. As University plans for the area emerge, an ongoing
dialogue between the City and the University should take place to
promote development of this feature and determine how the
green space would be compatible with University development.
Ultimately, the park should reflect an image appropriate to the
University and campus development. The water features of
Ralston Creek and the Iowa River strengthen this link.
On Clinton Street, the "green link" is anchored by the Downtown
to the north and Rock Island Square to the south. Between these
two areas, the "green link" passes between the Federal Building
and the County Courthouse and near the proposed civic park.
Visual landmarks such as architecturally significant structures,
public art, environmentally appealing enhancements, and
provisions for a variety of community activities are incorporated
in these "green links".
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
Downtown Iowa City
Potential Potential
Unh~s[ty University
Residential
Han'lson St~
P. oc~ ~nd
Figure 7
Green Links Concept
Near Southside
16
City Near Southside Design lan
The public right-of-way along Hardson Street, as well as the
public park areas along these "green links" provide abundant
opportunity for the placement of public art. Key locations for
such art would be the park along Ralston Creek, Harrison Hill
park, the new civic park, the park existing at the Harrison Street
closure (next to the County Jail) and the green terminus near the
Iowa River. Public art in these locations would assist in
establishing an identity and visually strengthening the links within
the Near Southside.
Burlington Street (Figure 8) continues to function as a major
roadway, but raceryes a "boulevard" treatment which "links" the
Near Southside with downtown Iowa City. While pedestrian
crossings remain at all ~ntersections, enhanced crossings (Figure
9) channel pedestrian movement at Madison, Clinton, and Gilbert
Streets. The Madison and Gilbert intersections are highlighted
because of their role in defining the east and west odgin /
terminus of the Near Southside along Burlington Street. The
Clinton intersection is prominent because of the link between the
CBD, Government Center and Rock Island Square destinations.
Special paving treatments such as bdck or pre-cast concrete
pavers are utilized for crosswalk, sidewalk and pedestrian
landing areas at each corner. Detailed scodng of concrete within
the intersection, crosswalk, and sidewalk enhances the identity
and importance of the pedestrian areas associated with the
Burlington boulevard concept. In addition to these
enhancements to help decrease vehicular turning speeds,
consideration is given to reducing curb radii, while maintaining
acceptable standards at the three intersections identified above.
17
A 10 foot landscaped median replaces the existing continuous
left turn lane on Burlington Street. This median incorporates
hardy street trees and low maintenance ground cover. Each
median provides a 100 to 150 foot left turn lane at each
intersection. Streetscape details include new paving treatment,
new pedestrian lighting with event banners, and existing
vehicular street lighting with modifications for banners. These
details differ in character from those of the CBD or the enctaves
in the Near Southside. Street trees would line each side of
Burlington to the extent possible and a more detailed streetscape
concept must be prepared to determine the exact type, size and
location of these trees.
It is desirable that Burlington Street become more visually
attractive through these improvements without reducing the
capacity of the street. The boulevard treatment would need to be
established with adequate capacity for left turn movements at
intersections and landscape materials must consist of hardy
varieties.
[ggure 8
Boulevard Concept
Burhnglop Street - Wew looking east ~rom Chnton Street ~ntersec~on
18
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan -
F-_3(IST~NG DEVELOPMENT
BURLINd'S'ON ST. '
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING:
Treatment at Madison, Clinton, and
Gilbert Strccts
PEDESTRIAN LANDING ZONES:
DOWNTOWN EXTF_NS~ON STREETSCAPF ,-~
TREATMENT: ':
Figure 9
Pedestrian Crossing Concept
Intersection of Burlington Street & Clinton Street
19
POTENTIAL NEW
DEVELOPMENT
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
Disb'ic / den i /
in addition to promoting area wide cohesiveness, it is important to
recognize the inherent qualities and strengths within the Near Southside.
These assets are prominent features that are highlighted through a
district or "enclave" approach.
Five districts or enclaves (Figure 10) have been identified and are
described below. These sub-areas of the Near Southside are orgamzed
around several characteristics: proximity to Downtown, existing and
anticipated future use, unique landmarks and environmental features,
and defined functional roles within the context of the Near Southside and
Iowa City.
Government Center
The Government Center is defined by the presence of government uses
in a four and one-half square block area that mcorporates the County
Courthouse and Jail, Federal Building and School Administration
Building. These uses and the associated structures form a strong core
serving a community-wide clientele and establishing an employment base
within the Near Southside.
Through proposed improvements, the Government Center becomes a
highly identifiable enclave in the Near Southside (Figure 11). Additional
parking on Clinton between the Federal Building and the County
Courthouse is provided through angle parking, as well as along Court and
Hardson Streets. Harrison Street from Capitol to Dubuque, and Clinton
Street between Court and Prentiss Streets incorporates brick street
materials.
A landscaped median along Clinton Street from Court
Street to Prentiss Street defines the Government Center
as an enclave.
Streetscape treatments consist of existing concrete
sidewalks, with special paving treatments (precast color
concrete or brick pavers) at key intersections, as well as
enhanced pedestrian crossings. Lighting and street
furniture elements within the Government Center are
more formal and traditional in character reflecting the
civic importance of this enclave. Entry markers located
at the intersection of Clinton Street with Court, Harrison.
and Prentiss Streets are most likely constructed of bdck
and stone to enhance the sense of arrival and identity at
primary entrance points to the Government Center.
20
Iowa City Near Southside Design. Plan
Downtown Iowa C~ty
: Burlington Street: Boulev, ar~l Treatment
· Parking Ramp , ' [~_P..a. rklng__Ra_m_.p._ ·
..... ....
·
Power Plant
_.lalleglailmlimliaaallOlliOlllalfil!Ulllilallg~lllallnllll_!~
~' ~ ...... Potential '~ ' ~ ~ :'*';~'Fe~era ~'' '~' ~ ......
m u.~vers~
Figure 10
Districts / Enclaves
Near Southside
21
Near S~z~lh.s'~de Dc,s'ig.
F~guro 11
Streetscape Concept
Governmerit Center - V~ow looking northeast from rotorscohen of Chrltor~ & Harnson Sireors
22
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
The existing Federal Building surface parking lot and the
residential uses on the west side of this same block are
redeveloped to create a multi-use parking ramp and civic park
amenities. The multi-use facility could incorporate office or
commercial uses that support the daily functions within the
Government Center, but these uses may be in direct competition
with efforts to focus such uses within the Rock Island Square and
Downtown Extension areas. Creative adaptations to the parking
ramp should be explored in order to generate public activity
around the ramp. For instance, the possibility of placing the
Cultural / Conference Center, or other public uses. within the
proposed parking ramp in the Government Center enclave are
worthy of further investigation. Along the north side of a new
parking ramp, opportunities exist for substantial open space.
Within this space. the incorporation of public amenities is
explored. The example shown as part of the plan (Figure 12)
represents one of many concepts that may prove beneficial to
the Near Southside and the community at-large. Further
research and development planning ultimately determines the
best uses within the park. The plan illustrates the potential for
seasonat activities. Green space provides leisure and informal
activities in temperate weather. The oval play area provides for
activities such as rollerblade hockey, skateboarding, basketball,
and other events. In the winter, it is converted into a civic ice
skating rink. On the north wall of the parking ramp, a pavilion
provides informal seating, shade in the summer, and, perhaps,
incorporates heaters during special events in the winter.
Development within this enclave promotes civic and community
uses to further strengthen the enclave concept.
23
Downtown Extension District
The Downtown Extension Distdct is bounded by Burlington
Street, Gilbert Street, Court Street and the railroad tracks to the
west. This is an area consisting of primarily residential and
commercial uses that act independently of one another. A
unifying theme and character is impodant to future
redevelopment efforts, as well as the future use of existing
vacant parcels and buildings. Such efforts will complement both
the current OBD and the Near Southside.
The northern most blocks of the Near Southside, between
Burlington and Court Streets, would become an extension of the
existing downtown area, reflecting a similar density and scale of
most existing buildings in downtown. CB-5 would remain the
preferred zoning in this district. The extension incorporates all
standard streetscape elements of the downtown and all future
design features that may be implemented within th~ downtown
area. For illustrative purposes the concept reflects the existing
materials and elements currently in the CBD, Existing sidewalks
incorporate earth-toned brick that extends from the building
setbacks to the curb along Clinton Street (Figure 13) and is used
as an accent along other streets in the district. Landscaped
planting areas and where possible, street furniture and
pedestrian lighting, are of similar design standards as those of
Downtown.
Iowa £itv ?year ,Southxtd~ Dc.~'~. t~la:t
F,gu~e 12
C~wc Park
V~ow !ook[~g ~r'~to pubhc m'non~ty & rnulbpio-u$O parking ramp
24
F~gure 1 3
Streetscape Concept
Downtown Extension - V~ew I(~okmg east along Chnton Street
25
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
Redevelopment efforts architecturally mirror the existing Downtown area.
New structures in th~s district and along Burlington Street reflect the
scale, proportion, facade repetition, setbacks, materials, roof lines, color,
s~gnage, awnings, and equipment screening elements of the adjacent
Downtown and initially the CB-5 design standards. This character can be
further enhancect through the implementation of design guidelines and
review processes to address each of these design elements w~thin the
Downtown Extension. In addition, all on-site parking is ideally within
buildings and screened from the street or provided to the rear of
buildings.
Ralston Creek Nlixed-Use District
The Ralston Creek Mixed-Use Distnct is defined by its predominately
residential character between Maiden Lane and Dubuque Street; and
commemial uses along Gilbert Street and south of Ralston Creek and
Prentiss Street. The creek itself serves as the major natural feature in
the area.
The objective within the Ralston Creek Mixed-Use Distdct is to visually
unity this area with the downtown, yet not as formally as the blocks north
of Court Street. Areas dehneated by this distdct concept utilize the
existing system of concrete sidewalks, but incorporate some streetscape
elements from the Downtown. The element recommended to have the
most significant visual impact is pedestrian lighting.
In the Ralston Creek Mixed-Use D~strict, primarily south
of Court Street and east of Dubuque Street, a high
density residential character is maintained. Ralston
Creek is enhanced visually and aesthetically to take
advantage of this water feature. This is done through
general clean-up, vegetation trimming, selective
regrading and enhancement of the water feature near
Gilbert Street at the proposed creek adented park.
Long-term efforts investigate the possible physical
enhancement of the creek through water retention
features. Commercial uses and structures along Gilbert
Street and in the area southeast of Ralston Creek are
retained and enhanced through streetscape
improvements. Redevelopment occurs in accord with
the Near Southside Redevelopment Plan.
In the Ralston Creek Mixed-Use District, opportunities for
new, higher density residential development exists. The
scanado anticipates the development of structures at a
more "human scale" (Figure 14), which retain similar or
slightly lower density characteristics as exist in the area.
New structures and residential units incorporate
.variations to setbacks and provide courtyards / garden
patios, with low walls or fencing that preserve existing
setback lines. Individual apartments are clustered
together and individual entrances to each unit or unit
cluster are provided. This helps alleviate the sense of
massive scale that is exemplified by existing high density
apartments in the Near Southside.
26
.H..!gh ~rT~t¥ Ras,dent,al
27
_Io va City Near Southside Design Plan
High Density Residential Concept:
Variations in setbacks and unit clustering begins to "humanize"
the scale of the development. Low walls and fencing provides
courtyards/garden patios while preserving a consistent edge to
the street.
Rock Island Square
Bounded by Prentiss Street, the railroad tracks to the south,
Capitol Street and approximately one-half block east of Dubuque
Street the core of this enclave is made up of existing small scale
commercial and office uses. Such uses are operating from small
single-family structures, existing strip commercial buildings and
the Rock Island Depot. These resources set a basis for future
development of a distinctive commercial district that is unique.
Proposed improvements will serve to enhance both residential
and commercial opportunities within the area.
The creation of a distinct retail and service cluster is an
appropriate use for this area given the market considerations
identified, the existing uses in the area and the scale of current
structures. New and small businesses with alternative themes,
and specialized goods and services are encouraged to locate in
this district through small business development assistance
provided by the private or public sector. This enclave will draw
people into the Near Southside to conduct business and retail
activities.
New development reflects the scale (1 to 2 story) and creative
spirit of the area. Additional policies, such as a special review
overlay zoning district for determining acceptable awnings,
facades, and architectural elements are implemented. The
design review commitlee in this district may include Rock Island
Square merchants, as well as City staff.
28
Iowa City Near Southside Design Pgan
The streetscape treatment within this enclave will reflect and
enhance the disbnctive architectural character that currently
exists. Particularly notable is the Rock Island Depot that is
currently used for office activities. The architectural qualities of
this structure lend historic character to the enclave. On Dubuque
Street (Figure 15), special paving treatments are incorporated to
enhance the pedestrian expedenca of a retail odented cluster.
Pedestrian lighting m this district is distinct from other enclaves or
districts, but complimentary to other streetscape elements within
the enclave. Along streets other than Dubuque, but within the
district, the existing concrete sidewalk system is preserved.
The residential block located east of Capitol Street and south of
Prentiss Street reflects existing and approved high density
apartment structures similar to those found in other areas of the
Near Southside. The northeastern portion of this block
experiences a slight lowering of density by way of the residential
structure concept described in the Ralston Creek discussion.
That concept anticipates the development of structures at a more
"human scale". New structures and residential units incorporate
variations to setbacks and provide courtyards / garden patios,
with low walls or fencing that preserve existing setback lines.
Individual apartments are clustered together and individual
entrances to each unit or unit cluster are provided. This helps
alleviate the sense of massive scale that is exemplified by
existing high density apartments. This change in character a~o
assists the transition between the University District and Rock
Island Square.
29
University of iowa District
This district encompasses property owned by the University of
Iowa. Currently, this area serves primarily as the motor pool and
physical plant facilities for the campus. In the future the
University of Iowa campus is developed in accordance with the
University's Campus Planning Framework in the Near Southside.
While the University retains its campus flavor through distinct
architectural and open space elements, its character is
influenced by incorporating a select streetscape element, such
as street lighting from the Downtown Extension District. This is
done in order to assist in more effectively integrating the
University with the Near Southside. A visual and physical link
between the Near Southside and the Iowa River is maintained
along Hardson Street to strengthen the east-west connection.
Such development requires an ongoing dialogue between the
City and the University of Iowa to ensure a compatible blending
of the Near Southside and the campus environment.
Iowa City Near Southxide Dcx(,,4n Plan
F~gure 1.5
Streetscap? Cp n.__c.e.~
Rock I,%13nd Squ4ur2 - VIr2w Iooknlg Soulh a[Ong DLIbLJquo S(reo[
3O
zrowa City Near Southside Design Plan -
~¥. Cost and ~mplementation
By accentuating existing area strengths, incorporating anticipated
redevelopment patterns, and observing market dynamics, the
recommended design provides a "vision". In the Near
Southside's future it becomes a "place" that fosters public
activities, public safety, diversity of uses and functions,
enwronmental sensitivity, and commumty continuity through
commitment to implementation.
This section of the plan outlines recommendations and
implementation actions. As alluded to throughout the plan. these
recommendations involve land development policies, capital
improvements. financial considerations and "partnership"
opportunities.
31
Estimated Costs
Design plan implementation should emphasize an incremental
approach to improving the Near Southside over a period of
years. Potenttal costs associated with the design program are
reflected in Table 1. These costs are broken down into district or
"enclave" areas. A cost range has been provided based upon a
range of low and h~gh costs for recommended imprcvements.
It is antmipated that the City of Iowa City and other public entities
will focus most of their efforts on improvements associated with
Burlington Street, the Government Center, the University of Iowa,
and some area wide improvements. In the Downtown Extension,
Ralston Creek and Rock Island Square areas, varying levels of
direct public sector involvement would occur. Some
improvements would occur through public / private partnerships,
regulatory requirements and incentive programs.
Iowa City Near Sout__hside Design Plan
Burlington Street
· Landscape Median
· Streetscape
Downtown Extension
,, On-Street Parking Modifications
e Streetscape
Government Center
· On-Street Parking Modifications
· Streetscape
Civic Park
Parking Ramp
Ralston Creek Mixed-Use
· Park (Gilbert and Ralston Creek)
Ralston Creek Improvements
Harrison Hill Park Modifications
Streetscape
Rock Island Square
,~ On-Street Parking Modifications
· Streetscape
Area Wide Improvements
· ADA Modifications at comero
· Safety Signage Allowance
TABLE 1: ESTIMA TED IMPLEMENTATiON COSTS
$1.100,000
$900,000
$11,400,000
$900,000
$400,000
$150,000
High
$1.600.000
$1,400,000
$15.000,000
$1,700,000
$600,000
$200.000
TOTAL $14.850.000 $20,500,000 ,
'Based on 1995 estimate cost of probable construction, excluding professional fees (architecture, engineering, etc.) or utility relocation costs.
32
Iowa City Near Southside Design
It is initially assumed that development in the Rock Island Square
Enclave and Downtown Extension District should be able to
generate revenue for specific improvements through an
improvement distdct concept. Other areas such as the Ralston
Creek Mixed-Use Distdct may better benefit from combining tax
abatement to encourage redevelopment with regulatory
requirements that influence the quality of development on pdvate
property and the adjacent right-of-way.
Areas such as Burlington Street, the University of Iowa Campus
and the Government Center will require various levels of
commitment by the City and the other governmental entities
(University, County, State and Federal) if the design plan is to be
implemented successfully. It is possible that substantial public
investment through these entities will be necessary initially in
order to encourage private investment that may reduce the City's
cost over time.
Implementation Strategy
The implementation strategy for the Near Southside Design Plan
should take place over an extended time frame through a series
of incremental steps. Initially the program should be undertaken
through public sector leadership. Ultimately, over time and by
way of partnership opportunities, as well as program and
regulatory enhancements, the private sector will play a greater
role in the implementation of the plan.
33
The Implementation Matrix, Table 2, provides an outline of
actions and recommendations that need to occur in order for the
vision portion of this plan to become a reality. The actions are
divided into three phases:
Short Range (0-2 years): Organization and Early Action
[] Middle Range (2-5 years): Development Catalysts
[] Long Range (5+ years): Enhancements and Sustainable
Improvements
In the Short Range phase, the actions are primarily publicly
ddven with an emphasis on organization, study and policy
development. These steps set the stage for the method(s) by
which improvements should take place. Also, some "quick win"
physical improvements are suggested. These items will help to
build confidence in the improvement process.
Middle Range phase actions are focused upon physical
development catalysts. Recommended improvements include
higher pdority public improvements that are affordable and can
serve as physical and visual proof as to the commitment of the
public sector. Also, some pdvate redevelopment will probably
take place during this time that utilizes developed regulatory and
financial programs, thus providing examples for future
redevelopment efforts.
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
In the Long Range phase, as greater redevelopment occurs, the
public will be committed to on-going maintenance efforts and
development of the large scale projects such as the parking ramp
and civic park in the Government Center. Throughout all of the
phases, the City would be active in code enforcement and
general maintenance and improvement activities that create and
enhance the sustainable characteristics of the Near Southside.
While physical development initiatives (streetscape, parks,
parking ramps) are highly identifiable, the groundwork for such
action will be laid by the implementation of sound regulatory and
financial policies. This design plan recommends the
development and use of zoning overlay districts and design
review processes to foster creative design solutions that will
establish desirable characteristics for residential development
and create attractive and unique commercial clusters, such as
the Rock Island Square Enclave.
In addition to these oreday districts, the City should encourage
retail uses associated with future residential or other
development (such as parking ramps) to be focused within
enclaves or districts. Instead of scattering and, thus, diluting the
impact of retail, these uses should initially be clustered within
identified enclaves and on specific retail-oriented streets.
Residential structures and other facilities on retail-oriented
streets should be designed and built to be readily adaptable for
ground floor commercial uses as market conditions in the Near
Southside warrant through future development.
One important decision will be the future implementation of
financial policies to pay for the costs associated with this plan.
Each financial policy impacts how funding may be generated for
improvements to the Near Southside. The application of tax
abatement, tax increment financing (TIF), Self-Supporting
Municipal Improvement Districts and/or general funds (through
the CIP) within the Near Southside is multi-faceted, based upon
the type of improvement and distdct or enclave in which the
improvement occurs.
It is recommended that the current parking impact fee program
and tax abatement policy, which includes a minimum of 75'/0 of
the tax revenue collected on the increased value of projects in
the tax abatement program be invested in public improvements in
the Near Southside, continue to be utilized throughout the area.
These policies can be utilized to fund general streetscape and
other appropriate public improvements to the area. General
funds through the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) have
greatest applicability to the Burlington Street improvements, area
wide improvements, and improvements to the Government
Center as outlined in Table 1. Other Government entities should
be approached to contribute toward the payment of
improvements in the Government Center. Finally, it is initially
recommended that improvements within the Downtown
Extension and Rock Island Square areas be accomplished
through Self-Supporting Municipal Improvement Districts in
combination with the tax abatement policy.
Each of these policy discussions will require further detailed
investigation and cdtical strategic decisions will need to be made
that establish the framework for future physical development.
Obviously, this planning and implementation process should be
dynamic in nature and incorporate an effective public
involvement program. City government may initiate and maintain
the eady phases of implementation, but pdvate interests and
commitment will be required for long term success.
34
Iowa Ci j Near Southside Design Plan
TABLE 2: IMPLEMENTATION MA TRIX
AREA - WIDE · CREATE IMPLEMENTATION · CONTINUED MARKETING EFFORTS · COMPLETE GREEN
ADVISORY COMMI'i-fEE TO FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT LINKAGES CONCEPT
WORK WITH CiTY
REPRESENTATIVES AND STAFF , COMPLETE STREET
TREE PLANTINGS
o DESIGNATE RETAIL STREETS · IMPLEMENT STREET TREES
AND AREAS TO PROMOTE WHERE NECESSARY
RETAIL DEVELOPMENT IN
CLUSTERS
CONSTRUCT ON-
STREETPARKING
MODIFICATIONS
· DETERMINE POLICIES ON · BEGIN ADA UPGRADES TO
INCENTIVES AND FINANCE INTERSECTIONS AND OTHER
PUBLIC FACILITIES
CONTiNUEADA
UPGRADES
BURLINGTON STREET
IMPLEMENT POLICIES ON ·
"HUMAN SCALE" HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL AND ·
LANDSCAPE INVENTORY
(STREET TREES)
CONTINUE DIALOGUE WITH
DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION ON MEDIAN
IMPLEMENTATION
DEVELOP AND ADOPT DETAILED
STREETSCAPE STANDARDS
DETERMINE LANDSCAPE
MATERIALS FOR MEDIAN
IMPLEMENTINFRASTRUCTURE, · ONGOING
STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE
LANDSCAPE MEDIAN
IMPLEMENT STREET TREES
WHERE NECESSARY
IMPLEMENTINFRASTRUCTURE, · ONGOING
STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE
LANDSCAPE MEDIAN
· IMPLEMENT STREETTREES
WHERE APPLICABLE
35
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
Table 2 Implementation Matrix con 't.
DOWNTOWN · DETERMINE FUTURE · IMPLDVIENT STREETSCAPE AND · ONGOING DESIGN
EXTENSION STREETSCAPE DETAI'LS FOR LANDSCAPE DETAILS AS REVIEW
EXISTING DOWNTOWN AREA DEVELOPMENT OCCURS
AND EXTENSION
UTILIZE PLANNED ·
DEVELOPMENT (HIERONYMUS
SQUARE) AS CATALYST FOR
DEVELOPMENT AND
IMPROVEMENTS ALONG EAST
SIDE OF CLINTON STREET
(OPPORTUNITY FOR TEST
CASE)
DETERMINE ON-STREET
PARKING CRITERIA
GOVERNMENT CENTER
· ENHANCE CI~5 DESIGN
STANDARDS AND REVIEW TO
MORE COMPREHENSIVELY
ADDRESS DESIGN ELEMENTS
· DEVELOP AND ADOPT
DETAILED STREETSCAPE
STANDARDS
· CREATE GOVERNMENT
CENTER COMMITTEE
COMPRISED OF GOVERNMENT
ENTITIES (FEDERAL COUNTY.
MUNICIPAL. SCHOOL
DISTRICT} AND PROPERTY
OWNERS
· CONFIRM GOVERNMENT
CENTER CONCEPT
IMPLEMENT ON-STREET PARKING
IMPROVEMENTS AS
DEVELOPMENT OCCURS
INITIATE MARKETING EFFORTS
FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT
ONGOING DESIGN REVIEW
BEGIN LAND ASSEMBLY AND
ACQUISITION FOR PARKING RAMP,
CIVIC PARK. AND SCHOOL BOARD
PARKING
BEGIN NEEDS ASSESSMENTFOR
COMMUNITY ORIENTEDFACILITY
TO BELOCATED WITHIN PARKING
RAMP
IMPLEMENT STREETSCAPE AND
LANDSCAPE DETAILS
· COMPLETE
STREETSCAPE
IMPLEMENTATION
· CONTINUE MARKETING
EFFORTS FOR NEW
DEVELOPMENT
· CONSTRUCT PARKING
RAMP AND PARK
· CONSTRUCTPARKING
LOT EXPANSION FOR
SCHOOLBOARD
36
Iowa City Near Southside Design Plan
Table 2 Implementation Matrix con'L
GOVERNMENT CENTER · CREATE LAND ACQUISITION * IMPLEMENT ON-STREET PARKING
CONT. STRATEGY FOR PARKING IMPROVEMENTS
RAMP, PARK AND SCHOOL
BOARD PARKING EXPANSION
o DETERMINE ON-STREET
PARKING CRITERIA
RALSTON CREEK * IMPROVE LINKAGE WITHIN e IMPLEMENT STREETSCAPE AND e DEVELOP PARK
MIXED-USE HARRISON HILL PARK LANDSCAPE DETAILS
CLEAN UP OF RALSTON
CREEK
o BEGIN LAND ACQUISITION FOR
PARK
DEVELOP RALSTON
CREEK AS AMENITY
DETERMINE ON-STREET
PARKING CRITERIA
DEVELOP DETAILED
STREETSCAPE STANDARDS
INVESTIGATE PHYSICAL
ENHANCEMENTS TO RALSTON
CREEK
ROCK ISLAND SQUARE · PROMOTE ACTIVE
MERCHANTS ORGANIZATION
o IMPLEMENT STREETSCAPE AND · ONGOING DESIGN
LANDSCAPE DETAILS REVIEW
CREATE SPECIAL DESIGN
REVIE3~V ZONING OVERLAY
DISTRICT
IMPLEMENT ON-STREET PARKING
IMPROVEMENTS
CONTINUE MARKETING
EFFORTS
DEVELOP DETAILED
STREETSCAPE STANDARDS
INITIATE MARKETING EFFORTS
· DETERMINE ON-STREET
PARKING CRITERIA
ONGOING DESIGN REVIEW
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA
PROMOTE ONGOING GOOD
NEIGHBOR RELATIONSHIP
WITH GOAL TO WORK JOINTLY
ON ENHANCEMENTS, USES
AND LINKAGES
PROMOTE ONGOING GOOD
NEIGHBOR RELATIONSHIP WITH
GOAL TO WORK JOINTLY ON
ENHANCEMENTS, USES AND
LINKAGES
PROMOTE ONGOING
GOOD NEIGHBOR
RELATIONSHIP WITH
GOAL TO WORK JOINTLY
ON ENHANCEMENTS,
USES AND LINKAGES
37
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 12, 1996
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Marian K. Karr, City
Re: Procedure for Work Session Minutes
As a follow up to Council's January 4, 1996 organizational meeting, I wish to clarify staff direction
on trenscriptions and minutes. At that meeting you directed staff to prepare detailed minutes and
not do transcriptions for council work sessions, You also directed staff to keep work session
cassettes seven years for retrieval purposes.
As per your direction, work sessions will no longer transcribed. Subsequently, no hard copy
transcriptions will be microfilmed. In lieu of "Direction only" minutes, detailed minutes will be
prepared.
Those decisions impact on minute preparation and use. There will be a time savings frem the
minute taking duties but it will result in more time spent by city staff. More detailed minutes will
require additional time for review of draft minutes on my part and more time spent by Document
Services for final copy. Currently retrieval requests take a minimum amount of time by my staff
to copy the transcriptions in response to staff or citizen requests. Without the transcriptions,
additional time will be spent cuing up cassettes tapes, sitting and re-listening to the tapes, to
obtain the information requested. City staff and citizens have become accustomed to using the
transcriptions and this change will be an adjustment.
The procedure for formal meetings and executive sessions will remain the same. Formal meeting
transcriptions will continue to be made available within five working days, and micrefilmed for
permanent retention. Minutes will be published in accordance with state law. Formal meeting
cassettes will be kept five years. Transcriptions of executive sessions will be prepared and
cassettes will be kept as required by law.
The Mayor has asked that this item be discussed Monday evening for further clarification. Both
I and minute taker Jill Smith will be available for discussion that evening.
¸.4
MELROSE AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION
PROJECT
PREDESIGN MEETING
Wextnesday, January 17, 1996
7:00 PM
First Mennonite Church
405 Myrtle Avenue
(entrance in rear of church)
City of Iowa City and NNW, Inc. s~ff would like to meet with neighbors of Melrose
Avenue to begin discussions on the specific design considerations of this improvement
project. The Concept Statement and Environmental Assessment ~Finding of No
Significant Impacff have been approved by the Iowa DOT and the Federal Highway
Administration. These approvals were only for general concepts and lane widths and
did not include specifics for the project.
Steve Jacobsen, NNW, Inc., project designer, Dennis Gannon, Assistant City Engineer
and/off Davidson, Transportation Planner for the City will present the concept plan
and answer questions. The meeting is the opportunity for the neighborhood to provide
input into s6me specific design considerations such as aesthetics, lighting and cross
walks. It is expected that the neighborhood may wish to meet again to determine their
final recommendation. In order to remain on schedule for this project, NNW would
like to start finalizing the detail plans by early February.
fithere are any questions regarding this meeting or process, please contact Steve
Jacobsen of NNW at 351-2166.