Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-11-02 Transcription#2 Page 1 ITEM 2. OUTSTANDING STUDENT CITIZENSHIP AWARDS -Mark Twain Elementary Bailey: Will the students from Mark Twain Elementary please come forward. Hi, thanks for being here! We really enjoy this part of the meeting because we get to hear about your contributions to the community, and we know that you've done pretty incredible things because you're up here getting an award. So who's going to start? Are you going to start? Okay. Conrad: Hi, my name is Georgia Conrad and I'm in sixth grade. I got this award because I've been a conflict manager for three years and I'm a patrol captain. I try to follow adult directions and I try to make new kids feel welcome. Thank you for this award. (applause) Rodriguez: Hi, my name is Ahtsiri Rodriguez. I am in sixth grade. When I was in fourth grade I was a student council. I think I got this award because I try to be nice, share, help others. Thanks to all my teachers that help me a lot in math, reading, writing, social studies, science. I've learned a lot in these six years in Mark Twain. I also try to follow our model (mumbled) responsible, respectful, and caring community. Thank you Miss (mumbled) for giving me this award. (applause) Herdliska: Hello, my name is Makayla Herdliska and I'm in sixth grade at Mark Twain Elementary. I believe I received this award because I am and have been a conflict manager for four years in a row. I'm also a member of the student council and safety patrol. I believe I'm a good, responsible role model in class. I try to follow the model. We are responsible, respectful, and caring community. Thank you for this award. (applause) Bailey: Nice job! It sounds like you're all very busy at school, and...right now I'm going to read one of these certificates. They all have your own name (mumbled). So, for her outstanding qualities of leadership within Mark Twain Elementary, as well as in the community, and for her sense of responsibility and helpfulness to others, we recognize you as an outstanding student citizen. Your community is proud of you. And this is presented by the Iowa City City Council. (mumbled) (applause) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #4 Page 2 ITEM 4. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED. Champion: Move adoption. O'Donnell: Second. Bailey: Moved by Champion, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Cohen: I'm Leah Cohen with the Downtown Association. Champion: No, not yet! Cohen: Can you hear me okay? Bailey: Yes. Cohen: Okay. Um, and I'm just here in regards to the letter that we submitted to the Council this time in your packet, and concerns, um, we've been working with retailers quite a bit downtown and these concerns basically are retailer concerns. Um...um...some things are behavioral problems, and we know it's hard to regulate behavior problems, and um, we spent a lot of time and energy putting this together, um, I will say that, um, as you can see here it's pretty thorough, the letter is, thank you to Mr. Moen for what a good job he did in going through all this, but basically we're talking a little bit about the aggressive behavior that's going on downtown with panhandling or not panhandling. Um, the...we talked about the 25-feet here rather than 10-feet does not seem to be sufficient is what we're hearing from retailers now. Um, we also have talked about some other things that are going on, for instance, obscene, profane, and abusive language that are on signs at night. I don't know if you've, any of you've been down there late night, but some of these signs are really awful, and during the day sometimes they're not fun to read either. Um, so we ask for some limitations on those sorts of things. Um, we asked for also to look at a smoke-free ordinance fpr the ped mall. We came up with the 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. just so you know how we came up with that, is realizing that, um, the bars that are in the ped mall it would be impossible to enforce, uh, late at night is what we figured, and um, I think with looking at sidewalk cafes and those sorts of things, we figured they went until easily 10:00 at night and that that would be sufficient for that. It appears that, um, you know, from what we can see that smoking in the ped mall is a big issue, and um, we certainly felt that as, um, citizens ourself, um, we would like to see it used more by our citizens and our people that come to this community, and we're continuing to hear from people that do come in that they have a fear, and whether that's a perceived fear or real, it is there. So we're hoping that the Council will put it on your agenda so that you can talk about it, and possibly look at a few more things added to the ordinances. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #4 Page 3 Bailey: We talked about this at our work session, and uh, Dale is going to get together a staff committee. Our Legal is going to, um, we're going to have a discussion and give some directions to our Legal staff, and we will be discussing this in a work session after the first of the year. Cohen: Great! Thank you! Bailey: Thanks for your letter! Any further discussion on the Consent Calendar? Okay. Roll call. (several talking) Oh! Go ahead. No, that's fine! I move quickly, I'm sorry! Jain: Um, I am a downtown business owner. I'm right on the ped mall. I've had my store there... Bailey: Do you just want to give your name...for the record? Jain: Oh, I'm sorry! Ritu Jain, I own Textiles on the ped mall. Champion: I'm Catherine Champion, uh, Cheap & Chic and Catherine's. Jain: And I've had this store on the ped mall for 17 years now, and I've seen the behavior change over these years and as Leah said, the 10-foot ordinance for smoking is just not efficient, or sufficient at this point. I think every day I have somebody smoking right next to my door. I call the police all the time. It just doesn't make any difference. There's always people smoking right outside, and it's just hard to enforce, even around the playground structure and the Library. There's just no enforcement, so we were thinking if there was a blanket non- smoking ordinance for the ped mall, it would be much more enforceable. Champion: I think what we're looking is to edit behaviors that create other behaviors, and I think what we see, those of us who own businesses on the ped mall, is we see millions of different people using it every day, which is what we love, but we're also seeing the actions of a few affecting the traffic patterns of many. So, those...that's something that we would like to change. I mean, we're seeing groups of people gathered together and in menacing ways, and it's affecting our business and also our employees' lives. Bailey: Thank you. Any further discussion on the Consent Calendar? Mondanaro: Hi, I'm Jim Mondanaro and I have two businesses...four businesses on the ped mall. But one of the things that I want to talk about is that the panhandling thing...I don't think that we're about eliminating help to people that need help, but what we want to do is take a more constructive look at how we give these people aid, and...if like in Denver we put meters that, I think the City has parking meters that they're not using, and if they're not using them, I'm sure they'd like to use This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #4 Page 4 them, so let's put those parking meters out there and let people put money in the parking meters and have that go to helping those people that are panhandling. As far as the smoking thing goes, I have with Giovanni's, the Bread Garden, and the Saloon, both with outdoor eating areas, when people sit out there and someone sits somewhere in that ped mall and lights up and smokes a cigarette, the smoke travels. So when we look at an 8 to 10, we think that that encompasses the restaurants; let's the people that are frequenting the restaurants, along with the businesses, had that comfort within that zone, and at the same time let the other businesses that are existing, that are bar-related, uh, not alienate that clientele. So it's just trying to work through to make everybody happy and take care of all the different extremes. (mumbled) Bailey: Thank you. Any other further discussion? Okay. Sure! Correia: (mumbled) parking meter. I know I think this is something that I'm familiar with that they've done in Denver, sort of a public art, public service type of...interactive, um, way to discourage, you know, the folks that are walking through the ped mall who might be inclined to give might give to, um, a parking meter that then would go into a charitable giving process where agencies that serve, um, persons who are homeless, hungry, otherwise in need, money would be given that way. I don't know if that's going to be...I think part of the discussion during our work session was staff looking at some of the policy issues. I don't know if you all were going to talk as well about the parking meter, fundraiser idea, but um, I think that that should be something worth considering and... Wright: We did discuss that briefly a couple of years ago. Helling: Yeah, we did. Correia: Couple years ago we did, yeah, and...I would like that (several talking) to move forward as well. Helling: Certainly it's something we would talk about. It is a specific, uh, recommendation or suggestion from the...in Leah's letter so...and that concept may go broader than that, beyond parking meters, but who knows what. Champion: Just to let you know, in Ohio they just instituted something similar in August where panhandling ordinance was 50-feet from any intersection, but then they put boxes at designated giving to ten different charities in town, and already within two weeks after doing that, they had collected, you know, a significant sum of money. So I'll be glad to forward that to Eleanor too, that article. Bailey: Any other discussion about the Consent Calendar? Hayek: Other than it's important for those who are here on this issue to understand that you had submitted to us a letter with great detail, which is of great help to us, and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #4 Page 5 we can't get into a discussion here on that. Instead we're going to have staff provide some initial reaction to that, and then we will pick it up, uh, in the not so distant future and discuss, um, the letter and what our options are. Cohen: One more thing on it, just so you know, we did, um, we did talk to certain staff and I believe each department did meet on this once, just so that you know, um, we had submitted our suggestions to them, and they did meet and talk about it - the Chief and several different areas talked about it once, so we've done a lot of homework on it. We've gotten a lot of ideas from different people and...and this was kind of the final product that we came up with that we felt was pretty fair across the board and was workable. Thank you. Bailey: Thank you. Further discussion? Okay, roll call. Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #5 Page 6 ITEM 5. COMMUNITY COMMENT (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA). Bailey: This is a time for members of the public to approach Council to comment on items that are not on tonight's agenda. If you wish to make a comment, please approach the podium, state your name for the record, and limit your comments to five minutes or less. Cohen: Here I am again! (laughter) Leah with DTA. Since I'm here tonight, I thought I would give you just a brief on DTA and kind of what we're doing. Lots of exciting things are happening downtown. We are not sitting around doing nothing, that's for sure. (laughter) We're all on the move! Um, so I just wanted to let you know, um, number one, December 5th is going to be downtown is where happening's going to be. It's going to be our'celebrate the season.' This year we have it in one day. Um, we're going to have free horse and buggy rides and Santa and lots of fun things going on downtown at the Library and in the, um, mall downtown. Um, so we want everybody to know to be there (laughter). We do have also gingerbread houses that are going to be made at the schools and we'll have the judging going on on those that day also. So we're hoping that lots of people will come out. Um, the City, I believe, is going to be putting up the lights this year. We thank the City for that, and um, I think they're going up the 16th to the 20th of November, that week, and will be up for a long time. We think the downtown being lit up is great excitement, so we're all ready for it. Um, the retailers have a big open house that's going on on December 5th where they've invited all their customers to come down and have a little treat and join them also. So, we think it'll be lots going on in downtown that day. Um, the other thing that we've done and worked very hard on this fall is our new web site. Um, we're doing a new web site for downtown, um, it will be debuting, we believe, January 1, um, it's going to be very exciting. We have been working on a new branding logo that we will get out to everybody. That's pretty exciting for downtown, and hopefully we'll be working on new banners in accordance with that, and those sorts of things. So, we're real excited for the web site. We have sponsorship opportunities with it that are getting sold out very quickly, and hope to maintain it very well in the future, is what our plan is. The other one was too complicated! (laughter) This one won't be quite so complicated. It'll be a good one! So, just so that you know we also did come out and support the Hancher-Vossman-Clapp, um, being downtown. We sent a letter to that committee, um, when they were asking for correspondence on it, and um, have had conversations since that time. So, we would be very excited to see something like that come downtown. Um, we got out the new ramp ticket, um, things are going now. It's individual tickets for the ramps, just so that you know, everyone knows, and a lot more retailers are using them now than were using the others, so that also was going on. And the other thing that, um, we've done is we've raised money through the downtown restaurants and bars and we're hoping to...what we're going to do is use that for additional programming next summer. So we'll have new, exciting things going This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #5 Page 7 on with that. So just to let you know, we are moving downtown! (laughter) Thank you. Bailey: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to address Council on items that are not on tonight's agenda? Mastain: Hi, I'm Brandi Mastain. I'm sure you're all familiar with me. Um, I'm here after receiving several dozen phone calls and emails with residents of the Grand Wood neighborhood, feeling abandoned, uh, feeling helpless after the delay of the, uh, the curfew issue. I understand you want to have this group that doesn't reside in our neighborhood try to get something together. After three years of dealing with this, you know, now they're jumping in? That's really unfair to the neighbors, and for people like us who are going to try to sell our house. It's really unfair to keep stretching this out longer. I've made a chart showing...the...in the two and a half block radius the relationship of how many homeowners, um, how many, um, Iowa City Housing...Greater Iowa City Housing Habitat owners, and the homeowners are only a third of this. There's only 33 homeowners in the two and a half block radius where between the low-income and Habitat houses, it's a total of 78. What you've done is destroyed our neighborhood, our property value, as a homeowner. Now we're having another ten houses built by Habitat and we're getting another couple dozen a few blocks down from us. I have nothing against...I wish I would have known as a single mom that, uh, affordable housing was an option. I didn't know that. But in a million years, I would have never disrespected my neighbors the way that a lot of the homeowners have been disrespected. A lot of the residents have been disrespected. Just Friday night, I...my turn...see, we can't afford a fence right now because we're making two house payments. I lost my business last year, so money is tight. Just Friday night it was my night to spend the night, cause we have our dogs and I'm not going to throw my dogs to the pound, you know, it's just not fair to them. There was 11 teenagers. I started, I'm thinking oh my God there's a...and I'm thinking, okay, should I start ducking, is the gun fire going to happen? You know? And I'm thinking they're screaming so loud, my dogs are leaping against the door, and I'm like my God, it's cold out. Why aren't they home? And I'm thinking, oh, this started I think it was like ten minutes to 12 and by the time it all rolled out it was almost 2:00. That is disrespectful. That is rude, and that is unfair. My neighbor next door, I mean, and let's add into the music that's so extremely loud, I mean, if you think vulgar talking is loud (both talking) Bailey: Brandi. Address the Council, please. Mastain: Okay, vulgar music, vulgar words are present at all times, I mean, you just...you hear this cussing and you've had enough. Friday night I had enough, cause at first I kept telling my neighbors, well, let's see, let's see. After Friday night when I had to let my dogs out then I got cussed out because my dogs are leaping against the door. They didn't attack. All they did was bark. I get cussed out. I get called names you wouldn't believe. That's unfair! I didn't jump on anybody, I didn't This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #5 Page 8 even say anything, cause I give up! I have given up saying can you please keep it down. I've always used please and thank you. And I'm disgusted that the neighbors in our... in our, in the Grant Wood neighborhood can't say hey, we're upset over the crime. We're fearful. There's a lady who lives in Iowa City housing that said I don't open my blinds. She lives as a shut-in with her children out of the fear of, you know, the nighttime activities, and she's a tenant to homeowner. Wonderful lady! We've met many wonderful tenants, but adding all this in, and having all these kinds roam, what have you asked for? In two and a half years...on one street, two and a half years, there's been eight assaults and four breaking and entering or burglaries. How many other streets in Iowa City can say that? In these three block radius, I think we had a total of...18 assaults in a little over, not even two and a half years, and eight burglaries. Okay? And there was, um, teens arrested in the burglaries. Teens! And if they would have been at home, another bad choice wouldn't have been happening. What's happening in our neighborhood is the fact that we've losing our trust, you know, for the Councilors that get it, that understand that, you know, people are afraid, people are fearful, people just want to sit and relax and not have to worry whether gunfire's coming through their...their doors. Bailey: Brandi, you need to conclude. Mastain: I will. Okay. What I conclude is, instead of having a coalition to entertain the kids, you know, up until I don't know....12:00, why not get some sort of counseling, because a lot of kids I've dealt with and I've had hundreds of kids that used to hang out at my house, throughout the 14 years, why not get counseling available? Why not get counseling available for the parents that, you know, are having difficulties with their kids? Cause I don't think they're taking advantage of what could possibly be helpful for them, but adding more housing in this neighborhood that's already completely saturated, according to, uh, George Gallister, Urban Affairs Wayne State University, four vouchers in a radius of 1,000 feet has typically a negative effect on the neighborhood. It's destroyed property values. I bet you we can't even sell our house, what it's assessed for. So I would ask the City Council to reconsider waiting it out till next summer till really everything happens next summer to get the curfew rolling, and if you have to make it easy, make it a 12:00 curfew up until, you know, 17 years old. That way you can't have people arguing about, you know, junior high, high school, whether they're (mumbled) because there's nothing to do after midnight. And if there is, I'd like to know. Bailey: Thank you. And we will be considering that... it was deferred until December 1st. That's our next...our December meeting. Thank you. Correia: I'd just like to, um, say that the key members of that coalition do live in the neighborhood, they live in the...in southeast Iowa City, and I think that should be clear. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #5 Page 9 Bailey: Anybody else, uh, we're not getting into a discussion here. Anybody else wishing to address Council? On items that are not on tonight's agenda? Okay. We're going to move along. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 10 ITEM 9. AMENDING TITLE 12, ENTITLED "FRANCHISES", OF THE CITY CODE TO ADD A CHAPTER IMPOSING A FRANCHISE FEE ON THE GROSS REVENUE OF FRANCHISEE MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY DERIVED FROM THE DISTRIBUTION AND RETAIL SALE OF ELECTRICITY AND THE DISTRIBUTION, DELIVERY AND RETAIL SALE OF NATURAL GAS BY MIDAMERICAN, OR OTHER NATURAL GAS PROVIDERS UTILIZING THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM OF MIDAMERICAN, TO CUSTOMERS WITHIN THE CURRENT OR FUTURE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, AND ON A REVENUE PURPOSE STATEMENT SPECIFYING THE PURPOSE OR PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE REVENUE COLLECTED FROM THE FRANCHISE FEE WILL BE EXPENDED. a) PUBLIC HEARING Bailey: This is a public hearing. (bangs gavel) Public hearing is open. I know that there are people wishing to speak to the franchise fee. Shipley: Uh, hello, my name is Jeff Shipley. I'm currently serving as a Student Government Liaison of the Council. Um, esteemed Councilors, Mayor, thank you for finally allowing, uh, public comment. Um, turnout for the comment doesn't look too good tonight -that's kind of surprising. Um, you know, we'll have three hours of comments on, uh, historic zoning, but when it comes to money and something I think is very important as a franchise fee, uh, I'm a little bit surprised there's not more people here. Um, I've been, uh, opposing this policy since...since July when it first came up. Um, you know, I'm sure you guys...I've talked to you many times, and nothing I say will surprise any of you. Uh, pretty much it boils down to a couple points, um, from my viewing this debate and this progressing, I really do think there's been a lack of critical discussion, um, on Council about this issue. It seemed pretty apparent, um, that using this new revenue source is kind of a foregone conclusion and there wasn't really any...any discussion on whether, uh, we needed to do this. It was really just, uh, when and how much are we going to tax, and unfortunately I think the same mentality kind of, um, even permeated the City Council candidate forums where it was seen as a foregone conclusion, there really wasn't any question about it. It was seen as...as absolutely necessary, uh, done with and there wasn't really much discussion on it. Um, I think this is very unfortunate because to me it's been fairly obvious that this tax will have a very detrimental affect on our town. Uh, for instance, the industrial backbone of our town, the manufacturers, those industrials, those who actually make things and provide jobs for this community, they're going to be the ones most hurt by this tax increase. Um, you know, we live in very interesting times. The 21st century is very, very different from, you know, the early 1990s and...and uh, unipolar moment of American (coughing, unable to hear) we were This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 11 the financial center of the world. Uh, we live in a very global, competitive, uh, market economy where every single penny...penny matters, and I mean once a company boards up its factory and leaves for whatever reason, you know, that's...they're very, very unlikely to come back, so I mean once...once a firm does close down, lays off people, um, I mean, that's devastating, and that is very hard to reverse. Also, uh, individuals are going to be hurt by this, this new tax, as we have people from Michigan and all over, people who are devastated, lost their jobs, coming to Iowa City seeking some sort of, uh, you know, future...future career or something to do with their life, and I...I mean, in these rough times people do need as much money as possible. There's people who are hurting, struggling to make ends meet. Um, I mean, we have no shortage of panhandler bums in this community, and you're taking more money away from people who desperately need it. So I mean while the desire to enact this, uh, tax increase certainly does exist. I understand the intentions are very honorable, um, you know it's very hard to argue against, uh, money for public safety, but I really do think that the result and the unintended consequences of enacting and adapting such a policy could be very harmful, and even permanent, even if repealed. Like I said, I think we should be catering to our industrial background. We should not be giving them excuses to leave, um, and again, I think there's a lot of interesting points in the ICAD report that all you guys got about how a lot of people do feel the industries are operating on very thin bottom lines and I mean like I said, I guess it just seems that this very idea is...is, you know, you're forcing more money from people that wouldn't otherwise give it to you, and I think morally there is kind of a sentiment that that's wrong. If I tried to do this, if I went to someone and said I'm taking 2% from your energy bill, and even sell it as a great idea -I'll protect you for it - I mean, that'd be illegal. I couldn't do that. You guys are privileged governments, you guys have this power. Um, and I...I guess just, please, you know consider the recommendations from ICAD, debate this a little bit more, um, try and find some time, and really I guess just be cognizant of...of these...of these realities and I mean be prepared to deal with them if you guys do proceed to pass this. Thank you very much for your time. Bailey: Thank you. Others wishing to comment at the public hearing? Thornton: Yes, thank you very much. Deborah Thornton, east side of Iowa City. I'm here informally representing the Ax the Tax group, which was active last spring when we had the sales tax increase discussion. As you might expect, we are also strongly opposed to this tax increase. It's a misnomer to call it a franchise fee. It is a tax increase. It is a tax increase on our low-income families, on our working parents, on our homeowners. We support funding police and fire departments. We support funding them from the taxes that you already collect. That's a primary responsibility of city government, along with roads. That's where the funding should come from, as a primary funding source, not from an additional tax on our working families when we are looking at 10% unemployment and still going up. Today, and I don't know if you've all had a chance to see it or not, the Iowa leading indicators index came out again. It's put out by the State This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 12 Department of Management. 18 months...18 months of a straight decline, from 107 to 94. The indicators are not going up. The economy is not turning around tomorrow, and if we think we are...it is, we're kidding ourselves. I added up the tax increases that we've had in the last three years in this county. The PEBL increase, the SILO increase, the sales tax increase, which we did almost defeat. We're probably going to have a School Board property tax increase. When I added up the numbers of each of these, oh, and don't leave out the land, the $20 million for the vacant land. When I added up each of these, $25 here, $50 there, oh, it's only 25, only it's a cup of coffee. I added the dollar amounts up and that amounts to seven pairs of tennis shoes for my son. Seven pairs, and that's one little boy! And he goes through tennis shoes about a pair every other month, because he's growing. Seven pairs of tennis shoes that you're taking away from our children, when you pass this tax increase. Um, and I appreciate...particularly appreciate in addition the comments that were in the Corridor Business Journal, last week's addition I believe, um, made that this will pass. That comment was made before a public hearing, before any real public input. This will pass! I think that's arrogant and I think it's inappropriate to make those sorts of comments publicly before there's a public hearing, before there's public input. As Jeff said, this will hurt our businesses, in addition...to our families, because MidAmerican, yes, they've stated they'll pass it on to the families and to the businesses, and when we're in Iowa City and we're looking at a higher, significantly... starting to be significantly higher tax structure than Coralville, than North Liberty, than the surround communities, Jeff is right - we will lose business. And we will continue to lose jobs, and this will not help the low-income working families and the working parents that this City Council supposedly has at the top of their interests. So I recommend and encourage you to fund the fire and the police from the tax funds that you already have. That's where that money should be going. It should not be going to our work. It should not be going to any of the other wants that we have out there. It should be going to the needs first, and leave the taxpayers money in their pockets. Thank you. Bailey: Thank you. Raso: Good evening everyone. Um, my name is Joe Raso. I'm President of Iowa City Area Development Group. I did provide to the Council late this afternoon, uh, some correspondence in writing from the organization, uh, after our leadership met, um, late last week. I want to just read a few comments, uh, from that correspondence, uh, for those who are, uh, listening at home or for those here in the audience. Um, the...the economic development group is in full support of the City's investment and critical infrastructure to support interstate commerce activities, uh, we commend the City Council, the staff for their decisions to fund the new fire station, as well as the considerable investment in the new wind energy supply chain campus that we've worked closely with many of you, uh, to help market over the past several months, and as we continue to collect data, um, regarding the community from our existing industry interviews that we do on behalf of, uh, all of our clients and our communities each year we'll be certain to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 13 share that with you, in fact I believe I'm on the Council agenda December 1st to talk a little bit more in detail, uh, about the broad results that we received from that. But in our recent survey to our interstate commerce companies here in Iowa City, uh, last count we served 29, uh, businesses, 11 of those companies responded back to us, uh, 12 actually responded, but 11 responded, uh, and they represent over 4,300 employees, basic sector employees, here in Iowa City, and they responded immediately with their opposition to the increased tax, many noting serious concerns with any increase in expenses at a time when corporate decision makers are weighing consolidation, and we hear that often, of their operations and significant cost-cutting measures. Also shared with us was the continued concern that our industrial and commercial facilities already pay a higher percentage of property tax than residential and agricultural properties. Uh, and I mentioned one employer representing about 2% of the interstate commerce businesses here in the community. It indicated support for this, uh, tax. Much of their, uh, much of their comments was based on feeling that this would support some initiatives, help support other interstate commerce companies, uh, but in fact many of those interstate commerce companies themselves that we talked to said they weren't in support, uh, of this particular, uh, franchise fee. Now, uh, responses from these local manufacturers, uh, we asked them to estimate what the franchise fee would be to them on an annual basis, uh, these 11 companies indicated that the utility bills would increase by more than $350,000 or nearly 72% of the total estimated amount of industrial-billed utility expenses, uh, based on information we received back from MidAmerican Energy. It's also important to note that the average annual wage and benefits paid by these companies is approximately $58,000 a year, um, and we know through out own interviews just in the past several months that, uh, if everything goes well, they plan to hire about 175 more people here in Iowa City over the next few years. So when you look at their current annual payroll, uh, to not only Iowa City but to a broader regions, about $185 million annually, uh, just for these 11 companies that have indicated a concern with this tax. So at this time, Iowa City Area Development would respectfully recommend that the Council delay their vote on a franchise fee until all alternative measures are researched, and we recognize this is difficult times for City governments, also for businesses, and we really welcome the opportunity to continue working with all of you to find ways to meet the critical city functions that support our interstate commerce companies here in Iowa City. Thanks. Bailey: Thank you. Correia: I have a question, can I (mumbled) a question? Bailey: Um, certainly. Correia: Just so I understand the figure in your letter, the...$350,000, so you're saying...all of the businesses that you've contacted, their collective amount, not each (both talking) obviously because they're... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 14 Raso: It's my understanding that the, uh, the industrial taxes paid by industrial users in Iowa City, as it currently is today, um, is around $488,000 which is very similar for commercial, I believe residential....many of you may know all these numbers already, around $700,000. So...um, but that's...that's what the tax, if a 2% tax would be on top of their existing (both talking) that's correct. Correia: Companies that you talked with. Raso: Right. And I think it's important to note, besides the one business that responded back to us, I mean, everybody has responded with significant concerns, and we did share with them, uh, the comments that have been made and been public about how those dollars would be used, so it wasn't a question of do you want to be taxed more. Most people, the obvious answer there is no, but weighing that against the benefits, uh, to...to their business and the competition that they face, within their own organizations is they compete for capital dollars on an international level. Bailey: Thank you. Others wishing to comment? Tallon: Hi, my name is Dan Tallon. Um, I know a lot of people have commented on the commercial, uh, ramifications of it. I just wanted to talk about my own experience, uh, with energy costs, uh, growing up we lived, my mother and I and my twin brother after my parents divorced lived in, uh, assisted housing in Davenport. Uh, in addition to that we also received, um, help in the winter time to pay our energy costs. So my biggest concern, uh, well, a huge concern is, is companies moving away, but my... one thing that I wanted people to recognize and people to talk about before they pass any extra fee on this is that there are people who can't pay their costs already, and they're helped out by people who donate voluntarily on their MidAmerican bill. There's a little spot that you can add extra to it, and my concern is that that money will dry up faster when...when their own bill is higher and then also the people in need goes higher, so people already can't...can't afford to pay their bill in the first place, and I don't want to see them have to be responsible for more, especially in the winter, especially with young kids and things like that. That's all I'd like you to consider. Bailey: Thank you. Others wishing to comment? Neades: Good evening, I'm Rebecca Neades with the Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce, and I'm here to relay a message from our members, and their concern about the proposed franchise fee. We believe that raising taxes at any time, but especially in a time of economic stress, really should be a last resort, and the franchise fee is a tax. We believe that attending to public safety needs should be prioritized above all other Council priorities. We encourage the Council to explore alternatives, and um, to the franchise fee, and one of those would be to prioritize the City's budget. We understand that you have done some prioritization and some budget cuts already, but a franchise fee is not the answer This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 15 to an ailing budget. So we encourage you to please vote no and against the franchise fee. Thank you. Bailey: Thank you. Others wishing to comment at the public hearing? I don't want to close this prematurely, cause once closed we move on. Anything else? Shipley: Uh, I suppose, uh, Jeff Shipley, I suppose I'll make a few more comments. Uh, one big concern that hasn't been addressed yet is a lot of the money taken from this fee that's supposed to go to public safety is actually going to be eaten up in administrative costs, actually enacting the tax, um, so that seems kind of counterproductive. Um, and just another concern, I mean, I would absolutely, I guess with the personal aspects, I know a lot of... in referring to the economic uncertainty that everyone is facing, personally I know a lot of people after college are really struggling, uh, to find jobs. A lot of people are moving, um, moving in with their parents or delaying their job search until grad school. Being somebody who's going to graduate college, uh, you know, hopefully next spring, um, I'm really concerned. I would love, absolutely love to live in Iowa City and find a job and work here, you know, and start a family here, um, but I mean as far as the $365,000 that's going to be collected from industrial employers and going to the City, I mean, I'd much rather have that money go to me, in exchange for work that I'm doing for a company. Um, so yeah, I guess that's all. Thanks! Bailey: Thank you. Anybody else wishing to comment? Public hearing is closed. (bangs gavel) b) CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. Champion: So moved. Wright: So moved. Bailey: Moved by Champion, seconded by Wright, or vice versa. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed say nay. Motion carries. Moving on, do we have a motion to consider...for first consideration? Wright: Move first consideration. Bailey: Moved by Wright. Hayek: Second. Bailey: Seconded by Hayek. Discussion? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 16 Champion: Well, I have been totally for this franchise fee, uh, until the Economic Development meeting last week, which was the first time I had heard with any certainty that there was real concern among some of our manufacturers about this...about this fee, um...I find that very frightening when I read in the paper last week too that Electrolux moved to Mexico or wherever they moved to, but out of the country, and people had moved there to get jobs and now they're without jobs again. Um, I find this very frightening, uh, that we're going to lose some of the industry we have that is a mainstay of our economy and the property tax they pay now. If we lost that, and we have these people unemployed, um, I mean, I'm willing to defer this, um, I'm willing to look at...I tried to figure it out and I might be wrong, but I think I figured out that we could get almost the same amount of funding by a 7% budget cut. I'm not sure that's right. That's just what I was figuring out in my head. I know we've made budget cuts and I don't look forward to it. We'll cut what a lot of people in town, uh, feel are crucial services, although they're not as crucial as police and fire, um, we have to fund this fire station and we have to have more policemen, but I...I'm not sure that we've made the really difficult cuts to get this done in a different way. Bailey: Well, as you know I've always been supportive of this. I've been supportive since we lobbied with the Metro Coalition about alternative revenues, and one of the reasons, and I'm not sure everybody realizes that a third of our property in Iowa City is tax-exempt property. Franchise fees enable us to get fees from those property owners that don't currently pay any property tax whatsoever to support any of the services in our community. Um, yes, the University does pay fees, um, with the fire contract, but that's it! The University also benefits and the University's a wonderful partner. I'm not...I'm pointing out the University because they are the largest property owner of property... exempt, tax-exempt property in Iowa City, um, about 29% of our property tax base is owned by the University. So...the advantage of a franchise fee versus a budget cut or versus a tax increase of our emergency levy or something else is it actually involves more people in supporting this, and I know some people don't agree with taxes fundamentally. They don't believe the government is a good, which I fundamentally do believe, and the services that we provide are a good. I recognize that we've done a lot of cuts that may or may not be visible to the community, but that was the interest in Des Moines and in Iowa City in passing a franchise fee, because we have an inordinate amount of property that is not currently property taxed, and so I'm...I'm going to continue to support this franchise fee because it gets at funds from a third of our property tax base, so I think it's a... it's an appropriate way to go. Unfortunately we cannot exempt commercial property, which is one of the first questions I asked. But unfortunately we cannot exempt, um, classes of property from this, the legislation doesn't allow for that. Other discussion? Hayek: Eleanor, would you refresh us on, uh, on the discussion we held about exemptions and classes and distinguishing between them in terms of rebates or...avoidance of the fee. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 17 Dilkes: The, uh, legislation authorizing this form of a franchise fee does not specifically provide for, um, either differences in, uh, rates for different classes of customers, or for exemptions. Um...we have no law saying whether you could do that or you couldn't, I mean, the issue is going to be a preemption issue, it's going to be an issue of whether in that...let's say you decided to do different rates or you decided to do exemptions, and the issue in front of the court would be...whether in that silence the state left to cities the ability to make home rule...make home rule decisions about exemptions and different rates. Um...I've talked to a number of other municipal attorneys in the state and there is considerable concern that cities would not win that argument, uh, in front of the Supreme Court. Um...doesn't mean that you couldn't try it, but um...that's a...that's a very big unknown, and the...the risk is big, um, look at the situation Des Moines finds itself in today having collected franchise fees before there was specific state legislation authorizing a franchise fee in this form. They're looking at refunding, unless the Supreme Court reverses millions of dollars, uh, in franchise fees. So I would...I just, you know, you need to go into a decision like that with your eyes wide open. Bailey: Thank you. Other discussion? Wright: I am going to go on record as supporting the franchise fee and it's not to belittle some of the comments that we've heard this evening, but I've talked to quite a few folks in the community, uh, most of whom are not people of means, and I've talked to individual business owners who, uh, at least in a couple cases I know their businesses are not doing particularly well, uh, who did support the franchise fee, because it is, uh, specifically targeted to public safety, uh, and because of the...the depth of cuts that they understood might have to be made in order to staff another fire station and add police positions, um, these are...these folks all agreed that they didn't particularly want to pay the franchise fee, but they understood it, and they felt it would be in the best interest of the city overall, and I'm inclined to agree that it is in the best interest of the city overall. Wilburn: I think... another aspect to this is a historical aspect as to how we arrived at the franchise fee as a way to generate revenue. Historically, um, and Connie you mentioned, we've taken a look at...at, uh, some cuts that we've made. We also had the results of...funding, um, aid to cities from the state that was cut, and while some of our revenue...well, some of our revenue, the City revenue was...sources were cut, uh, certain costs as a business would face continue to go up, uh, the inability to, um, negotiate locally related to some of the health care costs that continue to rise. It's something that we have to generate revenue from, and historically Iowa City, uh, the concerns related to, uh, we'll stick with Iowa, other communities in Iowa, where they have sources of money, of funding, other than the property tax. Iowa City has relied heavily on the property tax. Other communities have gambling franchise, and sales tax to pay for some of the...for some of the services, and that's really what it's all about -services. There has been, uh, mention, uh, of things that we could do without, and um, public safety This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 18 is...is by most, as well it should be, at the top of a list, and we will continue as a Council to discuss wants versus needs, and it's kind of what are you willing to give to get. Uh, we pay out of our property taxes that we collect, uh, several fees that people benefit from the services. Some of the money that we, well, the money that we give for economic development. Um, comes from property tax. The money that we use to fund some of the aid...well, some comes from, the money we use for, um, ICAD, uh, I believe comes from property tax. And, um, the Convention and Visitors Bureau, that's uh, that's...that's not, but uh, some of the community events, um, the Summer of the Arts, um, you know, these are things that the Council has continued to banter back. We've held certain amounts flat. We held property tax flat, your city portion of your bill flat for a couple years and...and some slight increases other years within the...within the past, uh, five to seven years. Um, the concern that has been expressed for people of low to moderate income, an ability to pay for it, uh, certainly a valid concern, and one the Council shares. But Iowa City is a community relative to some of the other communities, uh, that we use property tax to pay, uh, some of those agencies that provide support services. So, um...you know, if...it's...it's always a challenge. It's not a simple matter, but when it gets to what are we willing to give to get, that's going to be a conversation that each year gets tougher, but, um, you know, I doubt that, um, some of the organizations that, uh, receive some of the funding will come forward to say, um, you know, don't... don't do that. So, um, I'm going to continue to support this, again, with that historical notion that Iowa City's been limited in its ability to generate revenue, uh, to pay for those services, those community events, the human services, the funding for economic development that we've done, um, and will continue to look at, uh, some other cuts that, uh, that we have to...some uh, value type things I guess that I'll be willing to look at as we get into this next budget cycle. Hayek: Um, I will support this. I...I, um, I've historically over the many months we've talked about this been supportive of some sort of, uh, exemption to...to minimize the impact, but uh, I'm, you know, when our Legal department tells us we cannot create classes in terms of that location or this fee, and that if we do we're walking into a potential, uh, landmine, um, I...I take that department at its word, um, here's how I come down on this. I'm a reluctant supporter, but uh, the fact is that this year's budget we made substantial cuts. In next year's budget, we, uh, intend to make even more substantial cuts, um, there's a defacto hiring freeze, uh, in the City, despite the fact that we are growing as a population and the services required, requested by the citizenry increases with time. Um if you add to that, uh, the current economy has resulted in the City's, um, property valuations for tax purposes flatlining, versus historic trends upward, um, the loss of interest income, uh, that the City relied on, still relies on, um, the combination of that is a... a multi-million dollar impact to our budget, um, the General Fund, which is the only place we can carve up to...to fund, uh, new positions is a $50 million fund. If you assume we're not going to touch, uh, public safety, uh, but in fact expand it, that takes a third of that $50 million fund off the table, um, so it is simply not realistic to cut back as the City is doing presently, uh, whether the City or This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 19 economic downturn, as the City is doing presently, and then expect us to add 15 public safety jobs, which are demanded by the citizenry, for obvious reasons, um, without...without some new revenue source as a means for paying for some of it, and I view it as a balanced approach in that we are, uh, both cutting from our budget and uh, expanding atax -- it is a tax -- there's no doubt about it, um, but this is something that cities, uh, in Iowa have lobbied for for decades, um, as they attempt to, um, convince state government of the need to allow local municipalities to diversify the revenue sources and decrease their reliance on property taxes, um, many of the bigger cities in Iowa presently have a franchise fee. Council Bluffs, Sioux City, Des Moines, uh, Dubuque, Cedar Rapids, uh, and uh, the point here is to strike a balance and to minimize the impact to property taxes, um, and... and I think this gets at it. Um, you know, we have been talking about this actively for many, many years. We have been talking about this particular fee since June, and...and I have not yet heard from a single entity that is, uh, impacted by this, um, and despite some requests I've made, I've not received a single dollar amount as to the impact a single entity, uh, would...would feel from this. We had some broad numbers that...that are anonymous and...and uh, but nothing more than that, and...and so...and here we are, you know, in the 11th hour talking about this and...and now we're hearing about it, and it just...it's not effective advocacy and... and it doesn't change my position on it, because I feel we need it, and even if I...I had heard from some of these entities, um, I don't...my position would not change, um...but...but it's a source of frustration for me. Um, we...we need to do this. It is a balanced approach, um, we are, uh, tightening the belt within the City operations as it is, and...and plenty more pains in store and we know that for FY11. Bailey: Further discussion? Correia: (mumbled) Bailey: Any further discussion? Wilburn: I think...just as too as we look forward, I mean, continue to look for when we do have conversations on...conversations with the state, federal government in terms of the balance and our ability to, um, fund, uh, through some alternatives, um, and we'll continue to look for that type of assistance and support, but um, you know, it's...hasn't been easy doing budgets the last few years and it's not going to get any easier. Bailey: Right. O'Donnell: Anybody who's sat in our budget sessions and watched how we struggle with...with what may be down the line and uh, I will not be there for the next budget session, but I know that's not going to be a fun time, and we do have a heavy dependence on taxes, um...this is...I believe that at this time absolutely This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 20 necessary.. I am not willing to compromise on public safety. I will not do that. Um, so I will support this. Bailey: Okay, any other comments? Champion: Well, I just wanted to comment that we do have two more, um...two more meetings and I'm going to vote no because I'm hoping we'll hear from some of these, um, industries at the next public hearing. I agree with everything that's been said. I've supported this all along. I don't look forward to making any more budget cuts, even though I know we're going to have to make 'em. I might not be here either, but um...I'd like to hear from these companies that...how they're going to be impacted. I also want to ask Eleanor is...if we go ahead with this franchise fee, is there any way we could use part of it for property tax relief for these industries? Dilkes: Yes. Property tax is one of the purposes that, uh, I think as you discussed when we were putting the revenue purpose statement together. Champion: Could we use that for specific things though, or would it have to be general? Dilkes: I think you could probably craft it more specifically. I think the Council's decision was not to use it for property tax relief. Property tax relief is the one purpose allowed by the legislature where you have to specify a certain amount that will go to property tax relief. Um... it doesn't...I'd have to look at the issue of being more specific, as to who would get that property tax relief, but I don't think there's a prohibition against that. Hayek: Connie, we talked about that and... Bailey: Right. Hayek: ... and I pushed that a little bit, and I don't think there was sufficient interest, but if, you know, if we're talking about property tax relief, um...it would be good to know, uh, how that could be applied. If it could be directed at entities most hit by a franchise fee, or if it would just be, uh, we are going to relieve property taxes in the commercial sector. Um, because if we do...if it's simply just, you know, property tax relief for the commercial sector, then that's a mixed bag, because I think for a number of commercial entities the imposition of a franchise fee is a better deal than the imposition of an increase in the commercial tax rate. So in a sense, uh, they're...they're better off with a franchise fee. For example, a commercial entity that does not use, uh, a large level of utilities might actually be better off with a fee than a tax increase. So whether we could direct the property tax relief at the entities hit hardest with a utility franchise fee increase would be... Dilkes: I don't...just, you know, I'd have to take a look at this. If the...a majority of Council is interested, but my kind of initial response is, you're This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 21 required...remember how this works, is you have to specify the purposes...purpose for which you might use it, um, you might never use it. You can say property tax, I mean, you might never use it for that purpose, but property tax relief, but if... and I don't think there would probably be any constraints on how you would do that, um, as long as it was property tax relief. Just like you've listed public safety as a purpose, um, there's no restrictions on how a future Council uses...chooses to use that for public safety. Hayek: And I can't imagine we could say we will provide property tax relief for the commercial and industrial, the top ten, you know, the ten biggest energy users in Iowa City. They and only they will get property tax relief. Champion: (both talking) Dilkes: You're talking about specific entities, as opposed to specific classes? Hayek: I can't imagine that, but... Dilkes: I don't know, I mean, I don't know the answer to that. But... Bailey: Regarding our purpose statement too, a little bit with t his, I mean, this is a franchise fee enacted, potentially enacted, with a particular, um, purpose statement right now, but that can change over time. Right? We would do a... Dilkes: You'd have to do...you'd have to publish new purpose statement, do a revised ordinance, yeah. Bailey: So if... if the needs change, or we also have the opportunity that we don't have to have this, I mean, although we are supportive of alternative revenues, we don't have to have this forever, I mean, this can also go away at some point. Champion: The other thing, I mean, if we could do some property tax relief to some of these, um, what...what do you call these industries...there's...manufacturers, let's just say manufacturers. Um, we actually...the money used for (several talking) Dilkes: Okay! Maybe we just need to table the whole property tax relief, cause we're starting to hypothesis in ways that (both talking) Bailey: ...the statement... Dilkes: ...are available to you. When I think of property tax relief, I think of...of different property tax rates in various levies. Um, if you're talking about saying I'd like to give property tax relief to company A and B, and not company C and D, that's another ball of wax. Both legally and politically, I would say. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 22 Bailey: And I believe this is why this isn't in our purpose statement, because that was...that was the interest was be more, very much more specific with property tax relief, and I think that's where our discussion went... initially, is that we couldn't be that specific. Champion: Can I just bring up one more thing? Um...the administration fee, um... Bailey: The franchise administration fee? Champion: ...yes. Bailey: That we had a memo on in here? Champion: Yeah, the memo, I mean, we're already paying that. Uh, that's not a new bill to pay. We're already paying it. Bailey: The $343,000? Champion: Right, right, that Dale estimated. Um, so that is actually going to free up, if we go with this franchise fee how it's written down now we'll actually free up that much money in our General Fund. Isn't that right, Dale? Helling: Uh...not exactly. Some of it would be freed up, but um...the portion of it is now comes through, uh, the project budgets for instance, some of that may come from grants or federal or state money that goes into that project. Some of it, uh, depending on the project, will wind up coming out of the General Fund in terms of paying off GO bonds, but it... it's very hard to quantify, but I think the important thing is that the...the state statute requires that that element be part of the purpose statement and that we specify those dollars and so that's why that's there. Bailey: Okay, any further discussion? Hayek: Well, I mean, I guess...I would...if the answer we get is you can't tailor property tax relief in a way we've talked about hypothetically here, um, which I think is going to be the answer, then I would...I would support moving ahead anyway. So you know one thing we could maybe...we could do with Legal's permission is to proceed with first reading, get that memo, and if for some reason we're surprised.. . Dilkes: Okay, I need you to tell me what...how it is you would like to be able to structure that property tax relief. Hayek: Well, uh.... This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #9 Page 23 Bailey: More specific than classes is what I've heard. It's more specific than commercial classes. Hayek: Could... could you structure property tax relief by class? Commercial, industrial, residential. Could you go beyond that and target specific...industries or sub-parts within those classes? Including, but not limited to... Bailey: Basic sector. Hayek: No, businesses hardest hit by a proposed fee. I think the answer's going to be no, but.. . Wright: Even if the answer were yes, I would have some serious reservations about (several talking) Dilkes: Let's look at it this way -are there four Members of the Council who want that question answered? (several responding) Bailey: Yes. O'Donnell: No. Bailey: I would like to know. That was not...that was three. Okay? Amy, your question was related to that? Correia: Well, but now that it's... Bailey: Okay! (laughter) That's what I wanted to check, was it related to that. Correia: Yes! Bailey: Okay. Any other discussion, not related to the previous discussion, but moving on this, uh, first consideration? Okay, then we're going to do roll call. First consideration carries 6-l, Champion voting in the negative. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #10 ITEM 10 Bailey: AMENDING THE FY2010 OPERATING BUDGET. a) PUBLIC HEARING Page 24 This is a public hearing. (bangs gavel) Public hearing is open. And I see our Finance Director. O'Malley: Good evening, Mayor and esteemed Council. I'm here to recommend that you adopt this budget amendment, and as you may recall, most of the, uh, financial implications that are in this budget amendment are issues that you approved either last year in 09, or have come up through grants that are available for flood relief, um, state law requires us to amend our budget for those types of reasons, uh, carryovers, uh, new grant money to use, and...and the unexpended, unencumbered funds. If we don't amend our budget, the state then, uh, does not allow for any of the state agencies to provide us some funding. So...that's the risk and reward. We had 58 amendments of about 5601ine entries. We summarized them on state forms, which I know are not easily readable, so if you have any questions, I'll try to answer them for you. Bailey: Questions for Kevin? Wright: When I was going through that it looked to me like the vast majority of changes were from grants and (both talking) O'Malley: Yes, they were either I-Job grants or FEMA grants or uh, JumpStart grants. Bailey: Okay. Hayek: I just think for the public's consumption it's good to know this is a regular and periodic function of your department. O'Malley: Yes. Hayek: And that we're essentially accounting and reporting on decisions the Council has already made to...to keep the state apprised of the status of our budget. O'Malley: You're correct, Matt. We usually have two amendments a year. This is the first amendment which includes carry-overs, CIP activity. I also want to mention that we haven't used any of our contingency funds. That's usually done with the second amendment, so there is no extra...we haven't dipped into our reserves for any of these amendments to date. Bailey: All right. Anybody else wishing to speak at the public hearing? Public hearing is closed. (bangs gavel) Should we consider this resolution? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #10 b) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION Wright: Move adoption. Correia: Second. Page 25 Bailey: Moved by Wright, seconded by Correia. Further discussion? All right, roll call. Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #14 Page 26 ITEM 14. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST TO A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH SHELTER HOUSE COMMUNITY SHELTER AND TRANSITION SERVICES, INC. FOR RENTAL OF THE MAIN LEVEL OF THE OLD ST. PATRICK'S PARISH HALL OWNED BY THE CITY AND LOCATED AT 435 S. LINN STREET FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING SPACE FOR THE OVERFLOW PROJECT DURING THE WINTER MONTHS. Wilburn: Move adoption. Correia: Move adoption. Bailey: Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Correia. Discussion? I see Linda is here. Do you have any questions for her? Correia: This is a great use of the City's property. Bailey: Nice solution! Wright: Takes care of a lot of problems that we were going to have this winter without it. Bailey: Further discussion? Okay, roll call. Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #16 Page 27 ITEM 16. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN AGREEMENT FOR A FEDERAL HIGHWAY STIMULUS PROGRAM PROJECT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE IOWA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF IOWA CITY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NORTH DODGE STREET PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER I80 PROJECT (ESIM-080-6(285)243--05-52). Wilburn: Move adoption. Hayek: Second. Bailey: Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Hayek. Discussion? Correia: Since we have Rick here...there will actually be a sidewalk...going up to the highway (mumbled) sidewalk and then going across and then hooking... Fosse: Yes, actually Ron's here tonight to give us the details on that. Correia: Okay, Ron's here, okay, so there will be uninterrupted, I mean, it's a very tricky intersection there going through the, you know, on-ramp or... Knoche: Correct. The sidewalk will continue from where it does today, in front of the Travelodge, um, through the signalized intersection on the south side of the interstate. Correia: Okay. Knoche: Across the pedestrian bridge that will be constructed, the north interchange area will be signalized with this project. Correia: Okay. Knoche: And the, um, trail will extend up to the Northgate Drive intersection. Correia: Okay. Wonderful. Thank you. Bailey: Any other discussion? Well, I'm glad to see that this is finally moving ahead. We've been talking about this for years! So, roll call. Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009. #24 Page 28 ITEM 24. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION. Bailey: Let's start with Mr. Wright. Wright: Just want to remind everybody tomorrow is election day in Iowa City and (mumbled) it would be terrific if we had a high turnout, and we often don't for these off-year elections. Just reserve a little time. The polls are open till 9:00 tomorrow night. Champion: Oh, I thought they were open till 8:00. Wright: Is it 8:00? Bailey: I think it is 8:00. Wright: 8:00 tomorrow night. (several talking) I stand corrected. Bailey: He was confused (laughter) okay. Champion: Nothing new. Bailey: Okay. Um... anything? O'Donnell: I wanted to second what Michael said, uh, get out and vote, um, it's very important. Bailey: Okay. Mr. Wilburn? Wilburn: Nothing tonight. Bailey: Mr. Hayek? Hayek: Uh, November 11 is the annual Veteran's Day banquet hosted by the Johnson County Military Affairs Association. It's a very good event. It'll be held at the Riverside Casino (noise on mic) represented there and I encourage people to contact that group for tickets. Bailey: (mumbled) okay, I want to echo what my colleagues have said about voting. If you haven't voted already. And then I just want to note that it's getting darker earlier and, um, so be careful out there. I noticed a lot of people aren't quite used to this shift and headlights are very helpful and bike lights are really, really important, and I think now by law required in Iowa City. So, get your lights on, bikes or, um, vehicles. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the special formal Iowa City City Council meeting of November 2, 2009.