HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-08-01 Info PacketCity of iowa city
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 28, 1995
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
RE: Material in Information Packet
Memoranda from the City Manager:
a. Economic Development Policy
b. RAGBRAI
c. Pending Development Issues
Copy of letter from the City Manager to the Interim President of The University
of Iowa regarding capital project planning.
Agenda for the July 31, 1995, meeting of the Rules Committee with proposed~5?
bylaws of the Housing and Community Development Cqmmission;
Memorandum from the Cable TV Specialist and Assistant Finance Director _~.~
Fegarding Community Networking Group presentation.
Memorandum from the Parks and Recreation Director 'regarding property
acquisition/Wetherby Park,
Memorandum from the City Attorney regarding a conflict of interest question. J34/~
Memorandum from the Purchasing Agent regarding parking ramp spitter ticket
sponsorship
Memorandum from the City Clerk regarding Council work session of July 17,
1995.
Agenda and minutes for the Council on Disability Rights and Education.
Letter from the State Historical Society of Iowa regarding St. Mary's
Rectory,
Agenda fo~ the July 25, 1995, meeting of the Johnson County Board of
Supervisors.
Agenda for the ~/1/95 Informal meeting of the Board of Supervisors.
Information from Council Member Kubby regarding regulations on animal ~-~7
control issues..
Memo from City Atty. regarding Status report and preliminary legal
conclusion: Research on Water Impact fees/Water Connection fees.
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: July27, 1995
To: City Council
From: City Manager
Re: Economic .Development Policy
At an upcoming Work session, the Council will be discussing the City's economic development
policy. Attached is a copy of the draft policy along with comments received to date regarding the
policy. As Council requested, copies of the proposed economic development policy and the
sustainable economic development memo were sent to the following organizations. Those
organizations in bold lettering provided a response, and a copy of each response is attached.
Iowa City Area Development Group
Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce
Iowa City/Coralville Convention & Visitors Bureau
Downtown Association
Environmental Advocates
Johnson County Board of Supervisors
Johnson County Council of Governments
· City of Coralville
City of North Liberty
City of Solon
University of Iowa
Kirkwood Community College
Iowa City Community School District
Regina Schools
Homebuliders Association of Iowa Clty
Job Service of Iowa
Labor Center
Economic. ~elI-Being Task Force Members
Derek Mauer & Vicki Lensing responded.
Approval of this economic development policy will allow staff to begin working on the proposed
economic development activities for calendar year 1995, a copy of which is attached. A
resolution adopting this policy will be placed on your agend~ at a future meeting.
e~e~ceen.m~
· ·
DRAFT
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POLICIES, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS
CITY OF I'OWA CITY
POLICY 1:
DIVERSIFY AND INCREASE THE PROPERTY TAX BASE BY (1) ENCOURAGING THE
RETENTION AND EXPANSION OF F. XlSTING INDUSTRY AND (2) ATTRACTING INDUSTRIES
THAT HAVE GROWTH POTENTIAL AND ARE COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING BUSINESSES
AND INDUSTRIES. (Iowa City Comprehensive Plan, 1989 Update, page 31)
Strategy A: Identify industry groups that are compatible with the community and toward
which the community should target its economic development efforts,
Action 1:
Identify specific local businesses that fa I within these targeted industry
groups and adopt community policies that encourage capital investment
and growth in these industries,
Action 2:
Identify businesses within these targeted industry groups that are not
already in the community but that would complement local businesses
and establish a marketing plan to recruit them.
Action 3:
Further develop a data base of economic and demographic information '
and perform various economic analyses to assist businesses.
StrategyB: To the fullest extent practical promote awareness of the city's economic
development policies through public forums.
Action 1: Maintain a clear and consistent economic development policy.
Action 2:
Through community education efforts, increase public awareness of the
role of business in the community and the importance of a strong
economy.
Action 3:
Coordinate a community effort to. promote the attractiveness and
positive aspects of doing business in Iowa City,
2
POLICY 2:
INCREASE EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES CONSISTENT WITH THE AVAILABLE LABOR
FORCE (Comprehensive Plan, ~age 31}
Strategy A: Identify local labor force skills and the types of jobs compatible with the local
labor force.
Action 1:
Work with the local Work Force Center (Job Service) to identify the local
education and training background of the local labor force.
Action 2:
Work with local employers to determine their labor needs and the means
by which these can be met.
Action 3:
Develop a mechanism that would assist underemployed individuals find
more appropriate job opportunities within the community.
Action 4:
Continue to gather information about employment abilities and needs of
the local labor force with special needs (persons with disabilities,
welfare recipients, and other low-income individuals), provide the
necessary supportive programs and services that assist these individuals
and target employment opportunities -for these persons.
Strategy B:
Identify the work force skills required by the targeted industries and identify the
education and training needs of the local work force to meet the required job
skills.
Action 1:
Interview businesses within the target industry groups to determine their
work force education and training requirements.
Action 2:
Work with Kirkwood Community College and the University of Iowa to
provide the appropriate education and trainirlg necessary for work force
skills of the targeted industries.
Action 3:
The local community school systems (K-1 2) should work closely with
business to determine the skills and knowledge needed to perform in
today's work place.
Action 4:
Work with the local educational institutions to develop curricula at all
educational levels that encourages creative and innovative thinking to
prepare workers for the ever-changing work place.
3
POLICY 3:
PROVIDE AND PROTECT AREAS SUITABLE FOR FUTURE INDUSTRIAL AND COIVtN1ERClAI.
DEVELOPMENT (Comprehensive Plan, page 32)
Strategy A: Provide for the extension of infrastructure which will encourage development
in areas designated for industrial and commercial growth. (Comprehensive Plan,
page 32)
Action 1: Direct the extension of infrastructure so as to maintain and contain
industrial development on the edge of the community in industrial parks,
but not in a ring around the city.
Action 2: Construct and maintain a system of roads and bridges, telecommunica-
tions and fiber optics, sewer, water, and solid waste disposal facilities
that provides the necessary infrastructure for commercial and industrial
development.
Action 3: Through public, private, or public/private initiatives, ensure the availabili-
ty of an adequate amount of industrial and office research park land and
extend the necessary infrastructure.
Encourage commercial activity to take place in existing core 'areas or neighbor-
hood commercial centers and discourage the proliferation of new major
commercial areas. {Comprehensive Plan, page 32)
Action 1: Use zoning as a tool to prevent the proliferation of commercial develop-
ment outside of designated commercial cores.
Action 2: When necessary, use incentives to encourage development and
redevelopment within designated commercial core areas.
Action 3: Perform market analyses to determine the supply and demand of
commeroial land and commercial office/retail space.
Action 4: As the city grows, zone additional areas for neighborhood commercial
development.
Strategy C: Continue and enhance downtown revitalization (Comprehensive Plan, page 32)
Action 1: In a cooperative effort with the Downtown Association and the
University of Iowa, actively market the downtown.
Action 2: Continue to assist community efforts to expand cultural activities and
opportunities in downtown
Action 3: Survey downtown businesses and customers to work toward a
downtown that is accessible to persons with disabilities and persons
using alternative modes of transportation.
Action 4: Implement the Near Southside Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan.
· Strategy B:
4
Action 5:
Action 6:
Strategy D:
Action 1:
Action 2:
Continue to monitor the spatial arrangement and design of downtown
development to minimize conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles and
to add to the attractive appearance of downtown.
Continue to provide and promote the necessary public infrastructure,
including parking and public spaces, in order to maintain the economic
health of the downtown.
Provide opportunities for the Iowa City work force to live close to their place
of employment,
Through the use of land use regulations, provide the opportunTty for a
variety of housing types to locate near commercial and industrial areas.
When necessary, provide financial and other incentives for the provision
of low and/or moderate income housing in close proximity to employ-
ment opportunities.
5
POLICY
CONTINUE TO COOPERATE WITH EXISTING LOCAL AND REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS TO
PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITHIN IOWA CITY (Comprehensive Plan, p~ige 33) ·
Strategy A: Continue to use the Iowa City Area Development Group as the lead economic
development agency for the economic development activity of the area.
Action 1:
Individual marketing plans for targeted industry groups should be devel-
oped for the area.
Action 2:
Focus economic development marketing efforts on promoting the
attractiveness of Iowa City to facilitate expansion of existing business-
es, maintaining the mix of high-tech and production line jobs, and
encourage new businesses within the targeted industry grpups to locate
in Iowa City.
Action 3:
Continue to support ICAD's efforts to coordinate a regional eastern iowa
economic development effort.
Strategy B: Continue to coordinate economic development efforts with the University of
iowa.
Action 1:
Work with the University of Iowa to enhance and bstablish avenues for
technology transfer and to develop mutually beneficial programs for
encouraging economic development (Comprehensive Plan, page 33)
Action 2:
Through a joint working group, coordinate the growth and developme. nt
policies of the City and the University.
Strategy C: Develop new and enhance existing means of communication between and
amongst entrepreneurs, businesses, government, and educational institutions.
Action 1:
Continue to work with the business community through the activities of
the Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce.
Action 2:
Continue to encourage tourist and visitors to the area through the
activities of the Convention and Visitors Bureau.
Action 3:
Encourage the sharing of knowledge among industries through industry
networks and consortia, and between industries and the University of
Iowa and Kirkwood Community College.
Action 4:
Encourage the creation of a business development clearinghouse and
network that would assist individuals pursuing entrepreneurial opportuni-
ties.
Action 5:
Explore new technologies to facilitate communication between the
above organizations.
6
POLICY 5:
liVIPROVE THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC HEALTH OF THE COMMUNITY THROUGH
THE EFFICIENT USE OF RESOURCES
Strategy A: Establish programs that encourage businesses and individuals to more
efficiently use resources.
Action 1:
Action 2:
Action 3:
Action 4,:
Encourage energy and resource efficiency programs.
Encourage waste reduction, waste exchange, and recycling programs.
Encourage the creation and/or expansion of markets for recycled
materials.
Where possible, locate commercial and industrial activities in such a way
that energy resources are conserved by minimizing travel distance for
consumers, employees, and the transportation of raw materials and
finished products. (Comprehensive PI3n, page 4)
Encourage pollution prevention programs.
Action 5:
Strategy B: Provide an attractive environment to businesses involved in environmental
technology and services.
Action 1: Support businesses producing and marketing environmentally-sound
products.
Action 2: Support businesses developing renewable ~nergy resources.
POLICY 6:
CONSIDER FINANCIAL INCENTIVES AND PROGRAMS TO FACILITATE ACHIEVING THE
ABOVE OBJECTIVES Comprehensive Plan, page 33)
Strategy A: Focus incentives on infrastructure development, worker training and retraining,
and an efficient and equitable development review process.
Action 1:
Invest in infrastructure that will encourage business investments that
create jobs for a diverse workforce at a livable wage.
Action 2:
Assist local businesses to draw upon state programs, community college
programs, and other technical and financial assistance programs that
facilitate industry modernization and worker training and retraining.
Action 3:
Regularly review, 'with assistance from the community, the local
development review process and make changes to the process that
encourage business activity and reinvestment within the community.
Strategy B: Develop criteria and an analysis mechanism to use whenever considering the
use of f ~ancial incentives for economic development projects,
Action 1;
Using the Community Economic Betterment Account (CEBA) program
criteria as a base, develop, through a public process, criteria to be used
when the City considers granting or participating in the granting of any
financial incentives for economic development.
Action 2:
Before action is taken on any economic development matters being
considered by the City Council, its Commissions, Boards, or Commit-
tees, the potential impact u~on the social service needs of the people in
this community will be considered.
Action 3:
Identify the needs of low and moderate income households and target
the use of Community Development Block Grant funds toward economic
development projects that would assist them.
Strategy C: Local financial markets should meet the needs of local commercial and industrial
ventures.
Action 1:
With the assistance of the local financial institutions, identify shortfalls
in the local financial market that inhibit investment in commercial and
industrial enterprises.
Action 2:
Identify the financial needs of minority and women-owned businesses
and establish a program to assist with those needs.
Action 3:
Continually monitor local fi[~ancial institutions' compliance with the
Community Reinvestment Act.
CALENDAR YEAR 1995
PROPOSED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
Identify industry groups that are compatible with the community and toward which the
community should target its economic development efforts.
Work with the Local Work Fome Center to identify the local education and training
background of .the local labor force.
Work with selected local efnployere to determine their labor needs and means by which
these can be met.
Through public, private, or public/private initiatives, ensure the availability of an adequate
amount of industrial and office research park land and extend the necessary infrastructure.
Perform market analyses to determine the supply and demand of commercial land and
commercial office/retail space,
Implement the components of the Near Southside Plan.
Establish a joint working group to coordinate the growth and development policies of the
City and the University.
Establish criteria to be used when the City considers granting or participating in granting
any financial incentives for economic development.
Inform local and regional econ.omic development agencies of the City's economic
development policies, strategies, and related development interests.
ecodev'activity.95
~3~1 Kckwccd ,alvd. $W
P O ::3o.~
319
April 13, 1995
Mr. Stephen I. Atldns
City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Str~'t
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
Dear Steve:
Thanks for sharing your economic d~velop. ment strategies and action plan and policies for
the City of Iowa City. I really appreciated your mention of Kirkwood. You have really '
done some work, and it is well done.
Sincerely,
Norm Nielsen
May 5, 1995
G
R'O U P
Mr. Stephen $. Atkias, City Manager
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington St,
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Steve:
Thank you for sharing the revised economic development strategies and policies for the
City of Iowa City. The strategies and policies are a good tool to guide the city's economic
development activities.
A few comments on the strategies are as follows: Policy One, Strategy B is very
important to our future grovah. There is a perceptJori by some that Iowa City is not pro-
business. We need to .work together to dispel this notion as it hinders the work we do
with new and existing businesses. That is why a clear message needs to be sent by City
Government that it will facilitate and continue developing a strong and vital community
and work with industries and private developers to attain that goal.
Poli~j Two, Strategy A and B are both very good. Concerning these policies we need to
work towards further developing the strategy so we have a workforce that is better
prepared to meet the fiature.
Sustainable economic development would be very difficult to implement and ,still be
competitive. We must be able to compete with othex ¢iti-~ to attract companies seeking
expansion or relocation opportunities. ff we make it to hard for them to exist in Iowa
City, they will look elsewhere.
As a representative of ICAD we are glad to see the City of Iowa City taking such an
active role in economic development and look forward to being involved closely with .this
process. IfI can be of any flirther assistance, please call.
Sincerely,
IOWA CITY AREA DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC.
325 E. Washington, Suite 100, P.O. Box 2567, Iowa City, IA 52244
(319) 354-3939 Fax (319) 338-9958
RECEIVED
HOME E UILDERS ASSOCIATION OF IOWA CITY.
Box B ~88
Oil:y, Iowe 1522,4,4
;~hone:(318) 351-53~:3
(319) 3~]7-882B
May 10, 1995
Stephen J. Atkins
City Manager
City of Iowa City
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Re: Economic Development Strategies and
Supporting Action Plan and Policies
Dear Steve:
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on your draft
of ,sustainable economic development" and the resulting
development strategies, action plan and policies.
As a long-time investor in the Iowa City Area Development Group,
we have long recognized the advantage of a proactive approach to
economic development over a passive take-what-comes-our-way
attitude. The fact that the City of Iowa City was instrumental
in the formation and nurturing of ICAD demonstrates its
commitment to economic development; however, we are confused as
to what you are trying to accomplish with these documents.
In general, the public/privat? character of ICAD has worked to be
a successful model for economic development which other a~eas
have tried to emulate. It recognizes the regional nature of
economic development as a process which does not recognize
municipal boundaries. That ,,region" seems to be the
,,environment" in your model, not the corporate limits of Iowa
City.
Many of the goals are laudable and appropriate for city
government; however, others appear to be more properly a focus of
state or federal jurisdictions or best left in the private or
public/private sector. For example, surveying business owners
seems to be, at best, an awkward activity for city government and
one more likely to create confusion than yield productive
results. The relationship between city government and its
corporate citizens is one that is clearly defined and provides a
number of opportunities for communication and cooperation.
Assigning an additional function to the City seems counter-
productive.
affiliated with
NATIONALASSOCIA~ON OF HOME BUILDERS
& HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIAllON OF IOWA
Page 2.
Stephen Arkins
May 10, 199S
Concepts such as ,'].ivable wage" and ,,social service needs" are
undefined and therefore subject to varied interpretations by a
number of constituencies. We believe that market forces have
traditionally defined these economic terms. We also believe that
government should be looking at ways to narrow its focus rather
than trying to take on additional roles.
The concept of food = waste is admirable but questions come to
mind such as how does this relate ~o industries that do not fit
the stereotype? The success of CADSI and Neural Applications are
industries that generate no waste stream in the traditional
senses, using innovation and brainpower as their raw materials.
How are they addressed by this model? Even for traditional
industries, how do you establish the first generator so that
another industry can be brought in to utilize their by-products?
In summary, we believe that the principles advanced in this draft
can and should be presented and discussed in a regional setting.
Such a setting already exists through ICAD and we would suggest
that discussion of these and other concepts will only strengthen
current economic development efforts.
Again, thank ymu for the opportunity to comment on the economic
development strategies and supporting action plan and policies.
Sincerely,
Ernie Galer
President
Home Builders Association of
Iowa City
Mr. Stephen J. Atkins
City Manager
Iowa City Civic Center
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
Derek Maurer
328 S. Governor St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
(319) 351-0227
J. une 15, 1995
Dear Steve,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft document
"Economic Development Policies, Strategies, and Actions." I was also
pleased to receive a copy of David Schoon's March 14 memo regarding
sustainable econo~nic development as well as copies of comments directed
to you by Kirkwood Community College, ICAD, and the Homebuilders
Association of Iowa City.
I'd tike to begin with a few general comments reflecting my philosophical
approach to economic development.. First, although it is common to hear
our age refen'ed to as one of increasing globalization--of markets,
production, finance, and communication--still it is the local economy we
depend on for our livelihoods, for material goods, and indeed for most of the
satisfactions we associate with community life. It is crucial that we
maintain a resilient local economy that can withstand the inevitable, and
potentially catastrophic, downturns of national and supra-national
economies. This may seem too obvious to bear stating, yet every time we go
out of our way to accommodate a Wal.Mart or a Menards we make
ourselves that much more vulnerable to economic forces over which we
have no control; we also hurt locally owned businesses that provide the
same goods and services but cannot compete with the volume discounts
enjoyed by these chain outlets. In this regard I believe the discussion begun
last year by the task force on economic well being, David Schoon's memo on
sustainable development, and this (haft document all represent positive
steps toward injecting a healthier and more balanced approach into the
discussion of local economic development.
Second, in the broadest sense I believe we must consider that commerce
and industry exist to provide goods, services, and livelihoods to the
community; the community does not exist to provide labor and markets for
industry and commerce. Of course the two sides of the equation depend on
one another, but public policy must aim to achieve the greatest good for the
greatest number. In our society that means consumers and paid
employees. Whenever we hear that Iowa City must "compete with other
cities to attract companies seeking expansion or relocation opportunities,"
as ICAD's Martin J. Kelly wrote you May 5, 1995, what we are really
hearing is the argument that our community should distort its policies and
redirect its resources to serve the interests of those companies. I disagree
wholeheartedly. Let's not be confused: Economic development is the horse;
public policy is the carriage; and the consumers and residents of Iowa City
are the occupants of the carriage and drivers of the horse.
Which brings me around to my final point. The most appropriate public
policy for economic development will be the one arrived at through an open
and democratic process. That openly and democratically formulated policy
may not be the most efficient one or the one most effective in q~sntitative
terms, but it will be the most appropriate one for the community and the
one with the broadest public support. Organizations such as the Chamber
of Commerce and the Homebuilders Association will, of course, pursue
development policies based on theix perceptions of the community interest,
as is their right. But they are accountable to theft' members, not the public
at large. Likewise ICAD, though it receives a portion of its funding from
the City of Iowa City, is at best only indirectly accountable to the electorate
and identifies itself primarily with the business commamiry. That's fine,
but it should not be mistaken for public policy. No, if the citizens of Iowa
City are to have a meaningful voice in local economic development policy, it
can only be through their city govel~nrnent; city government, therefore,
should ensure the broadest possible participation in formulating its public
policy. Again, this draft document and the discussions leading up to it are
evidence of positive efforts on your part to foster such participation.
I hope the foregoing (long-winded!) remarks will be understood'as the
broader context for the specific comments which follow.
Policy 1:
All agree that the local commercial and industrial base should be as
diverse as possible. STRATEGY A contemplates assisting existing local
businesses "that are compatible with the community" and recruiting such
businesses that do not already exist here. This strategy should also include
efforts to foster and support local entrepreneurs seeking to fill niches in the
local economy. STRATEGY B seeks to "promote awareness of the city's
economic development policies through public forums" and "community
education efforts." This strategy should also specify a meaningful role for
the public in formulating economic development policies in the first place,
as well as mechanisms for continual public feedback to policy and decision
makers.
Of the two strategies, STRATEGY A is more compatible with the principle
that economic development should ~erve the needs of the comm~mity and
therefore represents a more appropriate role for local government.
Policy 3:
All of the strategies listed are consistent with progressive philosophies of
community design. With regard to STRATEGY A, however, Action 2 calls
for a massive public investment in infrastructure, the cost of which should
be borne largely by the industries that benefit from this investment.
Therefore a method of recouping these costs from beneficiaries of the
investment should be included. STRATEGY B merits particular emphasis;
I can.only observe that the type of commercial development this strategy
seeks to discourage usually depends on large parking facilities, and
suggest that regulation of such facilities Could be used as an additional
means of controlling undesirable development. Perhaps the city should
investigate the legality of a property surtax on paved or surfaced areas, a fee
that might be justified by the need to control stormwater runoff from such
areas. STRATEGY C should include efforts to assure affordable downtown
commercial space for small and start-up businesses. Within the Near
Southside area, this could include encouraging the adaptive re-use of
existing structures rather than wholesale reconstruction of the area. Such
adaptive re-use has been successful in the Broad Ripple area of
Indianapolis,' for example.
Policy 4:
City government should by all means maintain liaisons and relationships
with existing private economic development organizations. The city's
economic development policies must, however, reflect a broader range of
interests and participation than is the case with these organizations.
STRATEGY A, especially, should insist upon greater public accountability
for ICAD if that organization is to be considered "the lead economic
development agency for ... the area" and continue to receive public funding
from the City of Iowa City.
Policy5:
These strategies also merit particular emphasis. Full time city staff should
be assigned to carry out these provisions, and the city should consider
reestablishing the Resources Conservation Commission. Millions and
perhaps tens of m. illions of dollars can be saved if these actions are canied
out.
Policy 6:
I am very pleased to see the prominent role of public participation in
implementing these strategies. With regard to STRATEGY A, I can only
add that incentives should also reflect the priorities established in Policy ~.
I wholeheartedly endorse each of the actions listed under STRATEGIF_~ A,
B, andC.
Thanks again for allowing me to comment on this draft document. I
recognize and appreciate the efforts you, the Council, and city staff are
making to promote participation by all sectors in this process. I hope these
efforts will continue even after the Council has adopted new economic
development policies, and look forward to such an ongoing dialogue.
B~.~f~egards,
Member, Citizens Task Force
on Economic Well Being, 1994
Mr. Stephen J. Atkins
City oflowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826
Dear Steve:
Vicki Lensing
2408 Mayfield Road
Iowa City, Iowa 52245
July 5, 1995
Thank you for sharing the recently revised economic development strategies and
supporting action plan and policies for the City of Iowa City. I know the amount of work
that lies gone into creating such a plan and it looks as if it will be a good blueprint for the
future of our community.
There were several item that drew my attention and I would offer the following
comments:
lqrst,. under Policy 2, Strategy A, Action 4, I assume much of the information
gathered for Citysteps will be applicable for this action.
Under Policy 2, Strategy B, the idea of partnerships and internships between
businesses and educational institutions could be incorporated here besides providing the
knowledge and the skills.
Policy 3 seems confusing to me. While Strategy A states the "encouragement of
development in areas designated for industrial and commercial growth," Strategy B
"discourages the proliferation of new major commercial areas." I understood that the
City had pretty much exhausted current commercial areas for industrial developmeni. If
that is true, don't we need new commercial areas to accommodate future industrial
development and expansion?
I am also amused by Action 2 in Strategy D of Policy 3 about providing "low
and/or moderate income housing in close proximity to employment opportunities." It
seems to me that a proposal by the Wolfs to provide such housing was turned down by the
City Council.
In Policy 4, the"use of ICAD as the lead development agency for the economic
development agency of the area" and the supporting actions seem to imply that Iowa City
is only interested in big business. Perhaps it is not ICAD's job, but the promotion,
development and retention of small business in Iowa City are also very important.
Concepts such as working with small businesses to assess needs or create a clearinghouse
for entrepreneurial endeavors are excellent ways to keep the communication open as well
as draw the benefits of their experience and knowledge.
I also think that over the last couple of years, Coralville has become a more
accommodating area for development. Iowa City needs to be careful not to create the
perception that we are anti-business, ant6development, and anti-growth.
Page 2
In Policy 6, the terms "liv. able wage" and "sochl service needs" seem to need some
definition. They are abstract and often interpreted d~fferently by different groups.
Throughout the entire drY, the references to working with the businass
community in partnersMps or to obtain information is commendable. This exchange of'
infolTnation will be important to the future of'Iowa City. I also think that education and
dialogue between the publ/c and private sector is and will continue to be key in the
development of'the area.
While there are a number of`opportunities available for citizens to participate in
tbis process, I thfitk many people are unaware of how they can be involved or that by
participating on committees, task forces or commissions, they can make an impact. This is
something that certainly needs to be continuously reinforced to the public.
The paper prepared by the staff on sustainable economic development is certainly
addressed to some extent in the economic development policies. However, it appears that
i~'tial implementation might be di~cult and to establish such a sustainable economic
development system will take tL'ne and effort on the part of the community and the city
council. My perception of the current council is that they have not been extremely open to
commercial and hadustrial development and/or expansion and I do not see tlgs as a priority
in their thinking. Cartally they are concerned about the environment, as we all should be,
but I think that sometimes th/s'is to the detrfiuent of growth in our community. I will be
interested to see their approach to this concept.
Steve, I appreciate the opportunity to review this dra~. I know the amount of time
and energy it takes to create such a plan. IfI can be of'further assistance or if'you have
any questions about my comments, please feel free to contact me.
~d~rely' ' ,
Vicki Lensing
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 26, 1995
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
RE: RAGBEA!
We estimate the cost to the City for extra public safety/traffic control
for RAGBRAI will be $3,100. This does not include uncompensated super-
visors' time,
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: July 26, 1995
To: City Council
From: City Manager
Re: Pending Development Issues
An application submitted by Tom Lepic for final plat approval of Walden Wood, Part 9, a G-lot,
3.01 acre residentia. I subdivision located on Walden Road west of Mormon Trek Boulevard.
An application submitted by Oakes Construction for final plat approval of Oakes Fifth Addition,
a 6.25 acre, 14-1ot residential subdivision located at the end of Quincent Street, north of Dubuque
Road.
An application submitted by James R. Davis, on behalf of Florence E. Davis, for preliminary and
final plat approval of Britt's First Addition, a 36.73 acre, two-lot residential subdivision located in
Fringe'Area 7 on the west side of Kitty Lee Lane, approximately ~.mile nf)r~h of Highway 1.
An application submitted by Dave Ed Limited to rezone approximately 25,07 acres located south
of Melrose Avenue, east of Highway 218, from RS-5, Low Density Single-Family Residential, to
RS-8, Medium Density Single-Family Residential (20.63 acres), and CN-1, Neighborhood
Commercial (4.44 acres).
Administration of the Sensitive Areas Ordinance.
Amendments to the Grading Ordinance related to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance. ·
tp3-2
July 25, 1995
CITY OF I0 WA.CITY
Peter Nathan, Interim President
The University of Iowa
101 Jessup Hall
Iowa City, IA 52242
Dear Peter:
In a fqllow-up to our luncheon conversation concerning capital project planning and other
related University facilities, Karin Franklin, our Planning Director, reminded me of the proposed
project for a parking ramp at the southwest corner of Burlington and Madison. We understand
the University is proceeding with the plans for such a f,'.cility. Some time ago we mentioned
to University representatives the possibility of locating the bus station in the proposed parking
ramp. The current bus station is at the corner of Gilbert and College, and from your
observations I am sure you will quickly come to the conclusion is terribly inadequate. We felt
the possibility of inco?poratipg such a facility into the parking ramp might not only be an
appropriate use of the site, but also meet many of the student and UI Hospital transportation
demands. I can give you more information on lease arrangements, etc. if you wish.
We would appreciate being involved in the project planning.
Let me know how you wish to proceed, A copy of this letter is being sent to Doug True in
order to make him aware of obr interest.
Thanks again.
Sincerely,
Stephen J. Atkins
City Manager
cc:- Doug True
CIVIC CENTER e 410 E. WASHINGTON ST.
IOWA CITY IOWA f2240.11t26
PHONE (319} 256-S000
356-$00~
RULES COMMITTEE MEETING
JULY 31, 1995
8:45 AM
CITY MANAGER CONFERENCE ROOM
AGENDA
Housing and Community Development Commission By-laws
(Revised 7/21/95 per C.A.)
BY-LAWS
ARTICLE 1 - THE COMMISSION
Section A. The name of the Commission is the Housing and Community Development
Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, as established by Resolution No. 95-199 of the City
Council of Iowa City, Iowa, pursuant to Chapter 403A, Code of Iowa (1995).
ARTICLE 2 - PURPOSE
Section A. The purpose of the Commission is to assess Iowa City's community development
needs for housing, jobs, and services for low and moderate income residents, and to promote
public and private efforts to meet such needs.
ARTICLE 3 - DUTIES
Section A. Duties of the Commission shall include: 11 assess and review policies and
planning documents related to the provision of housing, jobs, and services, for low and
moderate income residents of Iowa City; 2) review policies and programs of the Public
Housing Authority and Community Development Division and make recommendations
regarding the same to the City Council; 3) review and make recommendations to the City
Council regarding the use of public funds to meet the needs of low and moderate income
residents; 4) actively publicize community development and housing policies and programs,
and seek public participation in assessing needs and identifying strategies to meet these
needs; 5) recommend to the City Council from time to time amendments, supplements,
changes, and modifications to the Iowa City Housing Code.
ARTICLE 4 - MEMBERSHIP
Section A. The Housing and Community Development Commission shall consist of nine (9)
members appointed by the City Council of Iowa City. All members shall be qualified electors
of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, and shall serve as such without compensation but shall be
entitled to the necessary expenses, including traveling expenses incurred in the discharge of
their duties.
Section B. In order to satisfy the purpose and intent of this citizen commission as required
by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, when possible, at least one
person shall be appointed to the Housing and Community Development Commission with
expertise in construction and at least one person with expertise in finance. In addition, when
possible, the Commission shall include one person who is a member of the Local Homeless
Coordinating Board, and one person who receives rental assistance.
Section C. The term of office for each member shall be for three (3) years. New members
shall be appointed to the Commission as vacancies occur. In order to ensure a staggered
turnover, initial appointments shall be of three (3) members for each of one, two, and three
years respectively.
Section D. The Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson will be elected annually (in September) from
the Commission membership. The Chairperson shall, when present, preside at all meetings,
appoint sub-committees with the approval of the Commission, call special meetings and in
general perform all duties included in the office of a Chairperson and such other duties as
maybe prescribed by the members from time to time, The Vice-Chairperson shall take over
the above duties of the Chairperson in the event of the Chairperson's absence.
Section E. Three (3) consecutive, unexplained absences of a member from regular meetings
will result in a recommendation to the City Council from the Commission to discharge said
member and appoint a new member.
Section F. If a position\appointment becomes vacant by reason of resignation or otherwise
and results in an unexpired term the Council may choose to fill the unexpired term in such a
manner that the appointee shall continue in the position not only through the unexpired term
but also through a subsequent regular term.
ARTICLE 5 - MEETINGS
Section A. Meetings of this Commission shall be on a regular monthly basis. An evening
meeting date and time will be established by the Commission. A regular meeting may be
cancelled if no urgent business requires a meeting.
Section B. Special meetings of the Commission may be called by the Chairperson and shall
be called by the Chairperson at the request of a majority of the membership.
Section C. Meetings shall be held in an accessible, public meeting place. Notices of meetings
(agenda) for all regular and special meetings shall be posted and distributed to members and
the media at least 24 hours before any meeting is held. All provisions of the State Open
Meeting Law shall be followed. The Chairperson or a designated representative, together with
appropriate members of the City staff shall prepare an agenda for all meetings. Agendas shall
be sent to Commission members and the City Council representative at least three (3) days
prior to the regular meetings.
Section D. A majority of the members of the Commission (five or more) shall constitute a
quorum of any meeting and the majority of votes cast at any meeting, at which a quorum is
present, shall be decisive of any motion or election.
Section E. There shall be no vote by proxy.
Section F. Time shall be made available during all regular meetings for open public discussion.
Section G. Minutes of all meetings shall be prepared and distributed to the City Council within
three (3) weeks of the meeting in the manner prescribed by the Council. Minutes of all regular
and special meetings will be mailed to all the Commission members during the week prior to
the next meeting. Specific recommendations for the Council shall be set off from the main
body of the minutes.
ARTICLE 6 - AMENDMENTS
Section A. The By-Laws of the Commission shall be amended only with the approval of at
least a majority of the Commission (at least five votes) at a regular meeting or a special
meeting.
Section B. Policy changes or By-Law changes may be adopted at the meeting following the
meeting at which open discussion was conducted on the specific changes.
ppdco-og~bvlaws.hcd
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: Jun~ 20, 1995
To: Iowa City City Council
Drew Shaffer, Cable TV Specialist~ ~' / _
From: Kevin O'Malley, Assistant Finance Directo~'~
Re: Community Networking Group (CNG) Presentation ~
Two years ago a group consisting of the major institutions in Iowa City and Johnson County
began meeting informally to discuss an electronic community and county-wide network. Attached
please find:
1. The CNG's mission statement.
2. The CNG's goals.
3. A memo outlining.the history and development of this group.
4. Minutes from the CNG meeting outlining a plan to present this group's concept to their
respective bodies of authority.
We are presenting to you at this time to inform you of our existence and progress, to get your
support for this concept, and for your permission to continue working on this project.
This is a long-term project and one which reflects many of the community's efforts nationwide.
We look forward to answering any questions you may have.
bCE-2DS
IOWA CITY
__-- IOWA CiTY COMMUNITY ~ ,~_ CHAMBE,~
SCHOOL DISTRICT -__. ~ o~
r r ~ ~'~ COM~.~c~
JCCOG
JOHNSON COUNTY
COMMUNITY NETWORKING GROUP
MISSION:
To establish and support an electronic information network that will
Universiiy
ouow~ benefit the citizens and organizations of our community through
increased access to information central to daily living.
GOALS:
Plan, design and implement a community network that inte-
grates existing institutional networks through a common
interface.
C117 O~ IOFA
4.
ICPL 6.
Assure reasonable network access to public and private groups .
and citizens of Johnson County from a broad range of commu-
nity locations.
Provide community wide information resources via the network.
Create potential for organizations, businesses and citizens to
establish interactive links between and among themselves as
well as entities outside Johnson County.
Develop the resources necessary to design, implement and
unity network
operate the comm ·
Evaluate the impact on organizations and the community
realized by the establishment of the network.
May, 1995
COMMUNITY NETWORKING GROUP COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Name
Kelly Hayworth
Mike Funke
John Beckord
Don Wood
Drew Shaffer
Gary Cohn
Kevin O'Mallay
Troy Wentzien
Mary Clam
Mary Jo Langhorne
Bill Dutton
Liz Nichols
Susan Craig
Linda Saverson
Jean Schultz
Bill Decker
Mike Noth
Chris Pruess
Ray Muston
Agency
City of Corelville
City of Coralville
Iowa City Chamber of Commerce
Iowa City Cable T~.
Iowa City Cable TV
Iowa City Finance Department
Iowa City Finance Department
Iowa City Community Schools
Iowa City Community Schools
Iowa City Community Schools
Iowa City Community Schools
Iowa City Public Library
Iowa CiW Public Library '
JCCOG Human Services Planning
Johnson County Information Services'
University of Iowa Office of Information Technology
University of Iowa Office of Information Technology
University of Iowa Office of Information Technology
University of Iowa Planning, Policy & Leadership Study
Johnson County
Community Networking Group
TO:
Iowa City City Council
FROM:
Community Networking Group
DATE: June 20, 1995
RE:
Establishment of a county-wide electronic network
Introduction
The Community Networking Group is seeking your endorsement of the attached mission and
goals and permission to proceed with planning. For the last six months a wide variety of
representatives have been involved in the creation of this proposal. Each is committed to
establishing an electronic information network to serve the information needs of our
community.
Background
In 1993 representatives from several entities in Johnson County were called together by the
Iowa City Community School District to write a grant sponsored by WSUI to fund an
electronic community network. A similar group submitted a grant in 1994 under the
sponsorship of the University of Iowa seeking federal funding for a broader, state-wide project
under the-TIIAP program. Neither of these efforts resulted in funding, but they. did serve to
bring together a group of local people interested in the concept of a community network. In
early 1995 the decision was made that, rather than write another grant, the time had come
to explore areas of common interest other than seeking money.
The parties represented in the planning group involved the Iowa City Community School
District, the cities of Iowa City and Coralville, Johnson County government, University of
Iowa, Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce, Iowa City Public Library and Johnson County
Council of Governments (a roster is attached).
The delivery of information electronically has become routine in our society. Internet is now
a common household term. Every child graduating from high school and college in our
community has made extensive use of automated information during their educational
experiences. Businesses use computers to communicate with customers and government
agencies receive frequent requests to deliver services electronically.
Goals
The Community Networking Group has developed a mission and goals that envision increased
access to information and improved communication bet. ween citizens, businesses, educational
institutions and governmental agencies. (Attached) The goals relate to the areas of
establishing physical connections, providing access, delivering information, linking interested
parties, developing resources needed to support the network and evaluating the impact of the
network on the community.
One of the most important elements of our concept is inclusion of all interested parties, but
with each entity choosing the level of participation most suited to their current situation. One
agency may have a high level of use by computers already, offering information electronically
and educating users. Another may be at a much different level and be interested in the
concept, but not in a position to participate fully. Everyone can learn. from each other and
share in the development of a community resource whatever their current level of computer
expertise.
Next Step
Explaining our mission and goals to the agencies with representatives involved in this planning
effort is the next step. We are asking for a commitment to the concept and approval to
proceed with planning. A steering committee will be formed with representatives from all
groups m~king this commitment. The charge to the steering committee will be to seek broad
community input, modify the proposal as needed, develop specific objectives and educate
themselves about community networks in Iowa and around the nation.
Planning and some experimentation can be conducted w. ith available resources. The scope
and growth of the network will be defined ultimately by our ability to support it, but we intend
to concentrate on linking the many resources already available in our community.
Community Networking Group
Minutes
May 2, 1995
Present: · Clem, Cob_n, Dutton, 0'Malley, Nichols, Pruess, Schultz,
Severson, Shaffer, Wentzie~, Wood.
niz Nichols, assistant director at the I0wa City Public Library,
has joined the group, as has Don Wood who replaces Ben Dunnington
for Iowa City Cable TV.
During discussion about a timetable and presentation of the
group's mission and goals to various aut~rities it was decided
that one more meeting should finalize the mission ahd goals and
that each member will be responsibile for seeking committment to
the concept of an electronic community network and approval to
proceed with planning from their "bosses" by July 1, 1995.
Participation by the business community and Coralville would be
nice and Dutton volunteered to call Jo~Beckord and Pruess will
contact the Coralville representatives u~ing them to attend the
next meeting.
During review of the mission/~oals/objectives Several changes
were made which are reflected in the attached draft. The biggest
change was the addition of a goal addressing evaluation.
Presentation of this document was discussed. It should be
visually appealing, possibly produced as a brochure with the
various logos of the entities involved on the cover. If you can
please get a copy of your logo to Craig before the next meeting.
A snappier, more appealing, name for the group might help with
presentation as well.
Recorded by Susan Craig
(usin9 Liz Nichol's notes and meeting with Chris Pruess)
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
CITY OF IOWA CITY
P~/AKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
MEMOl~D~]l~
City Council
Parks and Recreation Director
July 26, 1995
Property Acquisition/Wetherby Park
In May of 1994, at the request of the Parks and Recreation
Commission, and with the approval of the City Manager, I
initiated negotiations for the City to ~o~ibl¥ purchase
approximately ten acres of land adjacent to Wetherby Park
(McCollister Properties, owned by the Showers family).
Both the commission and the Neighborhood Open Space Committee
felt it would be prudent to pursue this acquisition. Growth
is occurring to the south of this area, and the Neighborhood
Open Space Plan indicates a deficit of 9.26 acres of parkland
· in this district. It was felt that an expanded Wetherby Park
could better serve the needs of the neighborhood, as growth
occurs around it.
We recently arrived at a verbal agreement with the property
owner to purchase this property at a cost of $9,000 per acre,
subject to Council approval. Funding would be provide~
through the existing Parkland Acquisition Fund.
Attached, for your review, is a small map indicating the
approximate proposed acquisition in relation to the existing
park. I have indicated to the property manager that we are
flexible to a degree, so the final configuration could change
as we work through the details, but I don't anticipate an
extensive change.
At this point, we are asking for an indication from Council
as to whether or not you support this proposal. If you are
supportive, we will proceed to iron out the details and
complete the required paperwork to bring back to you for
final approval.
I will be attending your work session on July 31st to answer
any questions you might have. ~
Attach.
REZ93 0014
,IDRS to RS, ~,5
,~ ~.cO--ll ~~,~,~ ,,,,,,.~,~,~,,, ~,
~~~~iil']J'[I I iJ_l~'1!111 I'll i' ~771
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
July 25, 1995
To:
From:
Re:
All D. epartment & Division Heads .,.__....~. ,
L~ii~t~iceW'r~iitn°~ ~i~Yo'r~l~clrno~Ylnterest" whee Br o~mission
Members vote on issues dealing with the members' own outside agency or.
business
Attached please find a memo which I recently prepared, in conjunction with Bev Ogren, for
the Planning and Community Development Department, Please bring this to your staff's
attention - especially those staff members who are assigned to work with specific City boards
and commissions.
Rathe? than forwarding this inf;3rmation to the board or commission, I would request that your
division or department take it upon themselves to work with your particular board or
commission on these questions. If you wish one of our attorneys to attend any meeting to
discuss "conflict of interest," please let me.know - and we will be more than happy to assist
you with such sessions, However, we would like some "fore-warning" so that we may
schedule ourselves accordingly,
CC:
City Council
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
City Clerk
City Attorney Office Staff
Attachment
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: July 24, 1995
To:
From:
Re:
Marianne Milkman, Community Development Coordinator, Planning and
Community Development Department ~
Linda Newman Woito, City Attorney
Beverly Ogren, Assistant City Attomey~,~,.._.
Questions concerning "conflict of interest" where Commission member votes on
issues dealing with member's outside agency
~ssues:
In light of the merger of the former Iowa Oity Housing Commission and the former Committee on
Oommunity Needs into a new "Housing and Community Development Commission," several
issues have been raised:
Is a Commission member who is employed by, or has some other relationship with, an
outside agency required to abstain from voting on the matter relating to their outside board
or agency?
If so, is a Commission member required to also abstain from voting on other matters, such
as funding requests that are not related to their outside agency,?
Summary of Conclusion:
The answer to your first question is "yes." A member of your newly-created Housing and
Community Development Commission who works for-- or is on the board of directors for -- an
outside agency requesting City funds must ahetaln not only from voting on the matter, but
also from discussion of the agency's request.
The answer to your second question is "no." Based on simple arithmetic, it would be nearly
impossible to "rig" the vote for their own agency-- because the Commission member would have
to change all the votes on all the other agency requests, and do so for each voting member. In
a word, the likelihood that the many combinations and permutations of the various Commission
members' votes resulting in the member's "engineering" their own agency's success over all
competing agencies is remote. Moreover, requiring the Commission member to abstain from
voting on any funding requests, regardless of whether the Commission member Is related
to the outside agency, simply "guts" the Commission member's authority and defeats the
purpose of their membership.
2
Analysis:
Statutorv Rules
A member of the newly-created Housing and Community Development Commission ("Commis-
sion") is deemed a "City officer" under Iowa's conflict of interes. t laws, see §364.5, Code of Iowa
(1995):
"A city officer or employee shall not have an interest, direct or indirect, in any
· contrac~ o[ job of work or material or the ~3rofits 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."
§362.5, Code·
There are a number of exceptions to this statutory requirement - none of which apply to your
questions. In "plain English," this statute means that a Commission member who works for an
outside agency, or is on the board of directors of an outside non-profit corporation or agency,
has a clear conflict of Interest which dlsqualifles them from voting on the matter. Moreover,
the Cpmmission member must publicly state the conflict and their intention to abstain:
"...the stat(~ment of an officer that the officer declines to vote by reason of conflict
of interest is conclusive and must be entered of record."
{362.6, Code of Iowa (1995) [emphasis added].
This means that if a Commission member does have a direct relationship with one of the outside
agencies who are seeking monies from the City, the Commission member must do the following:
Announce the relationship and their intention to abstain as a conflict of interest. Otherwise,
their vote may later be disqualified under Iowa law, and render the contract or funding void
--. meaning it does not exist. '
The announcement of a conflict of interest and the intention to abstain from voting must
be made publicly on the record, and entered into the minutes.
The person should not participate in the discussion concerning the application for funding
or potential contract between the City and the Commission member's own agency.
Common-law Rules
General legal principles of "conflict of interest" require that every public officer is bound to perform
the duties of the office
"...honestly, faithfully, and to the best of his ability, in such a manr~er as to be
above suspicion of irregularities, and to act primarily for the benefit of the
public....He is further bound to act impartially in matters pertaining to the
administration of his duties."
63A AM. JUR. 2d, "Public Officers and Employees," §319, pp. 896.97.
Long ago, the Iowa Supreme Court announced its concern over avoiding "conflicting
obligations" of public officials:
'"It is a well-established and salutary rule in equity that he who is intrusted with
the business of others [city commission business] cannot be allowed to make '
such business an object of pecuniary profit to himself. This rule does not
depend on reason technical in character and is not local in its application. It is
based upon principles of reason, of morality and of public policy. It has its
foundations in the very constitution of our nature, for it has authoritatively
been declared that a man cannot serve two masters,....'"
Bay v. Davidson, 133 Iowa 688, 691,111 N.W. 25 (1907) (emphasis added).
Clarification of Prior Legal Opinion:
As stated in a legal opinion by former Assistant City Attorney Patricia Cone-Fisher, the City
Attorney's Office found that a conflict of interest did, indeed, disqualify a Housing Commission
member from voting on issues which dealt with his agency's application to the Commission for
funds. This rule holds true whether or not the Commission member stands to gain personally
or monetarily from the City action. This means that a Commission member who acts only as
a board of directors member for a non-profit, charitable corporation and receives no salary, still
stands in what we call a '~duciary relationship" with the not-for-profit corporation - regardless
of whether the persons serves with or Without pay. Since "conflict of interest" rules dictate that
"one cannot serve two masters over the same matter," the Commission member is required
to abstain from voting on any matters relating to the member's outside board or agency.
However, in order to clarify pdor City Attorney opinions, this voting rule does not extend to
a requirement that the Commission member also abstain from voting on competihg
matters or monetary requests not related to the' outside agsncy unless the board
member's vote on those competing matters would be decisive, which is almost
mathematically impossible, §362.6, Code.
In the case where a Commission member's outside agency requests funding from the City and
the Commission must make a recommendation on which agencies will receive funding, the
Commission member must abstain from voting on their own agency request. However,
the likelihood of one Commission member swaying all the other Commission members'
votes on each and every one of the competing requests is slim indeed, It is therefore
our opinlon that the "conflict of Interest" rules do not disqualify the Commission
member from voting on matters unrelated to their agency.
For example, if there were ten (10) applications and a nine member Commission, the likelihood
that one Commission member could convince all of the other Commission members for each
and every vote on the other nine applications seems very remote. In a word, the numbers just
do not add up, and therefore do not require abstaining from voting on funding requests from
agencies unrelated to the Commission member.
As for whether the Commission member removes themselves from the room when the
Commission is discussing their own agency's request is a matter of discretion within the
Commission and the Commission chair -- although the "cleanest" way to avoid even the
"appearance of a conflict of interest" is to remove oneself from the room dudng discussion of
one's own agency request. However, we have seen it done both ways; and if you have
questions regarding this particular issue, please contact us in the City Attorney's Office at
356-5030.
Conclusion
These "conflict of interest" rules are rather strict. However, it is important that Commission
members avoid voting where conflicts of interest exist, because the vote may render
subsequent Commission action illegal, invalid and void. We should therefore take eve[y
precaution to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, see VVilson v. City of Iowa City, 165
N.W.2d 813, 822 (Iowa 1969).
In explaining these rules to persons who serve without compensation on many private agencies
in Iowa City, as well as serve without compensation on many of our City boards and commis-
sions, we realize these rules may seem harsh. However, the law is clear:
"It is the general and well-established rule that it is improper and illegal for a
member of a municipal c(~unci] or other similar body [the Commission] to
vote upon aay questions properly before such body In which he is
personally Interested, and where hls personal rights will be affected by the
vote [cites omitted]."
Security National Bank v. Ba(~lev, 202 Iowa 701,709, 49 ALR 705 (1926). [emphasis
added]
We are aware that we have not answered all of your questions, but we believe we have
answered the two specific questions you have recently presented. Since the law of conflict of
interest is a very fact-based inquiry, please do n~t hesitate to contact us if you have further
questions.
CC:
Cit~/Council, FYI
City Clerk
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
City Attorney Opinion File
City of Iowei City
MEMORANDUM
July 27, 1995
TO: Steve Atkins, City Manager
FROM: Cathy Eisenhofer, Purchasing Agent
RE: Parking Ramp Spitter Ticket Sponsorship
Currently the staff committee has reviewed the results of the Pilot
Project survey done by The Burken Marketing Group. The survey
concluded that their were several retailers interested in
discussing entering into an agreement for annual sponsorship of the
$12,000 printing cost of the tickets.
The committee directed The Burken Marketing Group to contact the
interested parties and pursue agreements for sponsorships of the
Spitter .Tickets so art work and printing can be completed by Fall
1995.
City of iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: J. uly 28, 1995
To: Mayor and City Council
From: City Clerk
Re: Council Work Session, July 17, 1995 - 6:30 p.m. in tile Council Chambers
Mayor Susan Horowitz presiding. Council present: Horowitz, Kubby, Lehman, Novick, Pigott,
Throgmorton. Absent: Baker. Staff present: Arkins, Helling, Ogren, Karr, Miklo, Franklin,
Davidson, Boothroy, Denney. Tapes: 95-85 all; 85-86, side one.
REVIEW ZONING MATTERS
Reel 95-85 Side 1'
Senior Planner Miklo presented the following Planning and Zoning items for discussion:
Setting a public hearing for August 1, 1995 on a resolution to annex an approximately
250 acre property located north of 1-80 and west of N. Dubuque Street. 0Nater
PlantIANN94-0009)
Settincl a public hearing on an ordinance amending the Zoninq Ordinanc~ by amending
the use regulations of an approximately 250 acre property located north of 1-80 and west
of N. Dubuque Street from Countv A1. Rural; RS, Suburban; and R3A, Suburban
Residential; to P, Public. (Water PlantJREZ94-0018)
Miklo noted the agenda item should include the date of August 1.
Setting a public headnq for Au(~ust 1, 1995, on an ordinance amending the Zoning
Ordinance by amending the use regulations of an approximate 7.8 acres located east
of Old Dubuque Road and north of Dodge Street from.RS-5, Low Density Single-Family
Residential, to OPDH-8, Planned Development Housing Ovedav, and RS-8, Medium
Density Single-Family. (Saratoga Spdncls-Burns/REZ95-0010)
PCD Director Franklin presented information regarding the consultation with P&Z should
the Council go against the P&Z recommendation.
Setting a public hearing for August 1, 1995 on an Ordinance amending Title 14, Chapter
4, "Land Control and Development," Article C, "Historic Preservation Regulations," and
Chapter 6, "Zoning," Adicle J, "Overlay Zones" to allow the City to designate histodc
landmark§ and conservation districts.
Public hearinq on a resolution to annex approximately 103.86 acres.which includes the
Highway 218/Highway 1 interchange and property located in the southwest quadrant of
the interchange. (WinebrennedANN95-0001)
In response to Kubby, Miklo stated he will check with the health department regarding
the septic systems and car dealerships,
City Council Work Session
July 17, .1995
Page 2
Public hearino on an ordinance amending the Zoninq Ordinance by amending the use
regulations of an approximate 103.86 acres, which includes the Hi(3hwav 218/Hiqhwav
1 interchanqe and oroperty located in the southwest Quadrant of the interchancle from
County RS, Suburban Residential, to C1-1, Intensive Commercial.
(Winebrenner/REZ95-0011)
Public headng on an ordinance amendina the Zonina Ordinance by amendinq the use
reaulations of an approximate 0.82 acre tract of land, the north portion of Lot 4,
Highlander First Addition, which is located on Northqate Ddve from RDP, Research
Development Park, to C0-1, Commercial Office. (REZ95-0008)
Public hearing on an ordinance amending the conditional zoning agreement for Lots
17, Highlander First Addition, revising the development standard pertaininq to roofiines
and parapet walls. (REZ95-0008)
Harry Wolf, representing the applicant, presented information. Miklo noted the applicant
has requested expedited consideration.
Public headn(~ on an ordinance vacatin(~ a 20-foot wide alley located east of Gilbert
Court and immediately north of Lot 4 of Block 3, Lyon's Addition. (MilderNAC95-0002)
Kubby requested that staff make a recommendation about the fair price of the i~roperty.
Public headng on an resolution vacating Fox Hollow Subdivision, a 31-1ot, 52.21 acre
subdivision Ioc3ted north of Herbert Hoover Hiqhway and west of Taft Avenue. (VAC95-
0003)
Public headnq on an ordinance amendincl City Code Title 14, Chapter 6, entitled
"Zonin(~," Adicle S, entitled "Performance Standards," Sections 10B and 10C, con-
cerninq the location of underground storage tanks.
In response to Novick, Miklo stated he will contact the Building Department and Fire
Department regarding distance requirements -for above-ground storage tanks. Novick
requested information about types of liquids to be stored in the tanks that have zero-
distance requirements.
Resolution vacating Oakes Foudh Addition, a 5.21 acre, 11-lot residential subdivision
located at the end of Quincent Street, north of Dubuque Road. (VAC95-0001)
Resolution approvinq the prelimina~ plat of Dean Oakes Fifth Addition, a 6.25 acre, 14
lot residential subdivision located at the end of Quincent Street, north of Dubuque Road.
(SUB95-0013)
Resolution approvinq the preliminaP/ plat of Walden Wood, Part 8, a 12 lot, 4.3 acre
subdivision located west of Mormon Trek Boulevard, nodh of Walden Court. (SUB95-
0014)
Miklo requested this item be deferred indefinitely because of the need to acquire an
easement across an existing pipeline easement for drainage.
City Council Work Session
July 17, 1995
Page 3
Resolution. aoprovina the final olat of Galway Hills Subdivision, Part Two, a 14.71 acre,
24-1ot residential subdivision located in the southeast ouadrant of the intersection of
Hiohway 218 and Melrose Avenue, at the end of Galway Drive. {SUB95-0017)
Larry Schnittjer, MMS Consultants, and HIS Director Boothroy provided information
about the tree protection plan. Kubby requested that the City's Inspector be directed
as to the importance of the enforcement aspect of the tree protection plan.
AMEND CONSENT CALENDAR/DELETE 3d {1~
Reel 95-85 Side 1
Karr noted that there is a request from staff to delete consent calendar item 3d(1) which is
setting a public hearing on the curb ramp project.
F,I,R.S.T. PRESENTATION -INTERCITY BIKEWAY
Reel 95-85 Side 2
Casey Cook, representing FIRST, presented information and a map o¢ Iowa City trails to
Council,
Kubby requested information regarding the City's trail plans, including the name of the project,
expenditures and proposed expenditures (CIP) and timetable.
Staff Action: Map bsing prepared presenting info[marion requested. (Denhey)
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HOUSING REPLACEMENT (Agenda Items #24 & #25)
Reel 95-85 Side 2
HIS Director Boothroy presented information about the application for public housing placement.
SALE OF 18 BROADWAY STREET UNITS TO HACAP (Agenda Items #24 & #25)
Reel 95-85 Side 2
HIS Director Boothroy presented information about the sale of 18 units to HACAP
CARNEGIE PLAZA DESIGN (Agenda Item #23) Reel 95-85 Side 2
Dick Pattschull, representing Webnor, Pattschull and Pfiffner, and New Pioneer Dire~or
Rochelle Prunty presented drawings and information about the proposed Carnegie Plaza and
New Pioneer,
Council stated they will consider the proposed Carnegie Plaza at their formal meeting on
Tuesday,
COUNCIL AGENDA/TIME
Reel 95-86 Side 1
Lehman noted that he will comment about the sales tax at Council's formal Council
meeting.
City Council Work Session
July 17, 1995
Page 4
(Agenda Item No. 12). In response to Novick, City Clerk Karr stated that same contract
will be used for the two different cab companies.. Kubby requested that the words
"disabled person" in the contract, first line of#3 on page 1 (General Terms), be changed
to "a person with a disability." ·
(Agenda item No. 22) Novick stated that the resolution for water construction should
list all four water supplies: Iowa River, Jordan Aquifer, Siluran Aquifer, and Alluvial
Aquifer as spelled out in the agreement.
Novick noted that she visited the City's modular house. I:-Ior(Jwitz noted that Ann
Bovbjerg has been filming the construction of the modular home for community
programming.
Throgmorton raised concerns about the graffiti in the downtown area. Atkins stated he
will contact Police Chief Winkelhake and report back to Council.
(Consent Calendar - ). Pigott noted that Council received a letter from Mildred Flynn
regarding disturbing street noises.
· Pigott raised safety concerns about the crosswalk located between the pedestrian mall
and Penney's. Lehman noted that there are a number of signs in the downtown area
that are obscured by trees. City Manager Atkins asked Council Members to contact him
when there are stop signs obscured by trees.
(Agen. da item #30) Kubby requested a map of the peninsula area for Council's formal
meeting.
Kubby inquired about transfer station issues and suggested referring issue to the
Council Legislative Committee. Horowitz stressed the importance of getting all
communities involved in a potential 28E agreement together. The City Manager will
prepare a letter.
10.
Horowitz discussed the following meeting schedule with Council Members: Joint
meeting with University Heights September 5 - first choice, August 21 - second choice.
A final decision will await a response from University Heights. Staff evaluations August
17 and 24.
11.
Horowitz urged Council Members to attend the League of Iowa City's meeting
scheduled October 5,'6, and 7. Anyone interested should contact Madan as soon as
possible.
12.
Novick noted that she has researched what is going on with reduction of property tax
and elderly service rates and distributed information for future discussion.
APPOINTMENTS
Reel 95-85 Side 2
Board of Adjustment - Lowell Brandt
Human Rights Commission - Osha Gray Davidson
City Council Work Session
July 17, 1995
Page 5
MEETING REMINDERS Reel 95-86 Side 1
Karr reminded Council Members of the scheduled Executive Seeslob July 18, 6:30 p.m., and
a special fomlal meeting scheduled July 27 at 7:30 a.m.
Meeting adjourned at 9 p.m.
Council .on Disability Rights and Education
MEETING AGENDA
AUGUST 1, 1995 - 10:00 A.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CIVIC CENTER - 410 E. WASHINGTON ST.
IOWA CITY, IA 52240
4.
5.
6.
7,
Introductions
Subcommittees/Reports
a, Housing
b. Transportation
c, Public Accommodations
d. Public Relations
Bylaws - Review CDRE Organizations and Structure
Other Reports
Other Business
Next Meeting Agenda - September 5, 1995
Adjourn
CC:
Iowa City City Council
Johnson County Board of Supervisors
mg~asstTcdteS-l,agd
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 ~ comprehensive, community-wide educat[~onal resource for
promoting disability awareness, to provide technical assistance and to encourage
complian(~e 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
MEETING MINUTES
JULY. 11, 1995
Members Present: Mace Braverman, John Harshfield, Linda Carter, Anne Rowland, Rita
Sandhagen, Kevin Burt, Mike Hoenig, Ann Shires and Nancy Ostragnai
The meetir~g was called to order by Mace Braverman.
Welcome of Anne Rowland, new representative from the Chamber of Commerce.
Discussion of proper terminology when referring to persons with disabilities. Decided that
inforrnation on this subject be distributed with next delivery of minutes.
Subcommittee Reports:
It was recognized that oaly the Transportation Subcommittee submitted its monthly report to
be distributed with the minutes.
Housing:
A letter and the audit checklist will be going out to land owners in an attempt to target
August 1 for the first audits. (Reported by Kevin Burt and Rita Sandhagen.)
Transportation:
Working with City, County and transit authorities on the paratransit contragt for SEATS.
(Linda Carter reporting.)
Public Accommodations:
Still moving forward with the survey of downtown restaurants, coffee houses, and bars. i~
was requested that they create ~ mechanism to work with the City Council to set sidewalk
cafe parameters. (Kevin Burt)
Public Relations:
No report.
Bylaws:
Bylaws were discussed and it was decided to regroup. The committee chosen was: Mace,
Anne and possibly Ethel Madison who was not present.
Meeting adjourned.
mgt,~sttcdre7-11 .rmn
LANGUAGE IS MORE THAN A TRIVIAL
CONCERNI
By June Isaacson Kailes
Disability Policy Consultant
Los Angeles, California
· L;%NGUAGE IS MORE THAN A TRIVIAL CONCERN!
By June Isaacson Kailes
Disability Policy Consultant
Los Angeles, California
our words affect our thoughts,
our thoughts affect our beliefs,
our beliefs affect our feelings,
our feelings affect our behavior,
and
our behavior affects the world!
Shirley Devol VanLieu, Ph.D.
NOTE: This article results from the author,s frustration related to
the lack of concern, under,tending and the slo~pi~es.s of the
language people use when t~lklng o? ~riting about disability..Some
people say that language is a trivial concern and the disability
rights movement has much more pressing problems to solve. Language
structures our reality. Comments from readers are encouraged and
welcomed!
Public attitudes about disability are much more disabling than
the actual disability. Attitudinal barriers are the most difficult
barriers to overcome. The challenge is to change attitudes on many
levels: legislation, regulation, integration, education, personal
relationships and LANGUAGE.
Disability advocates strive for equality, community
accessibility and acceptance, yet they are continually confronted
by language which perpetuates negative stereotypes of who they are.
People with disabilities, disability rights activists, writers,
reporters, editors, educators and supporters must become aware of
the power of.language. Are You perpetuating negative attitudes and
false stereotypes of people with disabilities with your language?
DISABILITY versus HANDICAPPED
Which to use? This is a continuing yet dwindling controversy
~mong ~eople wit}] disabilities. The 1 ' · .
n~ve .in the past ~ ...... ~ _ . egal and political sv
however.~~' ~.,~ n~s. changed durln the a~e ...... ~e word
· ith over . . g 1___
Nat'~-~ ...... ~ n~en= entitles and ~-=-~--~: .x years,
lonal
Council on the Handicapped and the President,s Committee on
Employment of People with Disabilities changing its name from the
President,s Committee on Employment of the Handicapped. Also, new
and reauthorized disability-related legislation has changed from
using the word "handicapped,, to using "people with disabilities.
"Handicapped,, connotes the miserable image of a person on the
street corner with a "handy cap,, in hand, begging for money. The
word d~sablllty may not be perfect, as it still implies a
negative: what a person cannot do, but it has become the most
widely used and accepted among people with disabilities.
Beatrice Wright, in her classic book Physical Disability, A
Psychological APProach (1960), differentiates the meaning of the
two words. She explains that a disability is a condition, either
emotional or physical. A handicap is the cumulative result of the
obstacles which a disab~-- ~ -
· . ~y ~n~er ose · . ·
their maximum functional ~l -~P ? between individuals a
. lev_.. w . . nd
are.really handicaps. A ~,~-~-~-' nere£o~e, not all dlsabllit'
environment where {~ere a~'~u~ user is not handicapped inl~
. ~ps. 9 person who is deaf is not
handicapped .when using a teletype devl '
telephone with a k u ce. for the deaf TD
~___~_ .~ e~board and messa-e ~-- · ( D a
~=u~ who are blind ar~ --- ~ -. ~ .u~sp~ay or print ou~
computers with vo' ~_~ handicapped in jobs where eh~,,
· ice output. -..~l
In other Words, a disability does not always.mean a handicap.
People are not handicapped by their disability all the time. A
disability can mean that a person may do something differently as
compared to a person who does not have a disability, but with equal
participation and equal results.
It is the built environment tha~ is often the
~h? b~lt ~nvironment limits artici . severe handicap.
Integration, lndeD nd~ .... ~ pation, ro ' ·
~: ...... _e ..... = ~nu eoual{~u ,~ P dUCtlvlty,
uxsaslllty is offered a ~ob the' 2----J~J x£ a person with a
~ u uann~ De.accepted because it is
located o~ the second floor of a buil
re~l handicap is that h~w, ' dln~ without an elevator.
attend school or a tra~-~2 ls no elevator. When a person c~n~2~
n,.,~ program because there are no ramps or
curb cuts, the real handicap is that there is no physical access to
an education. The real handicap is often the built environment!
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
In our use of language, both written and verbal, we can choose
to emphasize peoples, similarities or their differences. The term
"a disabled person,, is a'sloppy short-cut to the more involved and
sometimes more awkward, but psychologically sounder expression, "a
person with a disability.,, The latter is by far Preferred. It
depicts a person with a disability as a person first, with multi-
dimensional characteristics in addition to his or her particular
disability. "Disabled person" represents differentness and
separateness,
reducing a person,s identity to his or her
disability. This distorts and undermines who people with
4
disabilities are and how they want to be seen. We. don't refer to
people with broken legs as "broken-l~people!,, Similarly, the use
of "the disabled,, or "the blind" deni any sense of individuality.
A preferable term would be "people with disab~litles or "people
who are blind".
A woman who has a disability as a result of polio and uses a
wheelchair can also be a mother, a wife, an executive, a student,
a citizen, a Board member, a gifted public speaker, etc. A man who
is a quadriplegic and is paralyzed from the neck down is not, a
"vegetable.,, Although he has a severe physical disability, he ~ay
be extremely mentally able and a contributing, productive member'of
society.
People with d
lsabllltles should not be labeled as being
"special.,, Although the term is often used in descriptions such as
"special education,
d' ' "it is seen as patronizing, inappropriate and
lstanclng. It is not necessary. "Special,, has become a euphemism
for segregated.
WHEELCHAIR USER versus WHEELCHAIR BOUND/CONFINED TO A WHEELCHAIR
People are not bound to wheelchairs. People us6 wheelchairs
to increase their mobility, similar to the way people use cars.
Many people who use wheelchairs do walk but find wheelchair travel
faster and easier. Often, ability and speed of movement
are increased by wheelchair use. For.many, a wheelchair means
increased mobility -- freedom! People who use wheelchairs can
transfer to cars and'chairs. Thus, they are neither confined nor
bound to their chairs.
.... used with permission
form Tile Disabilit~y Raq, July 1985
"Patient,, is a person sitting or lying passively or
"patiently,, waiting for something to be done to or for h~r/him.
People with disabilities are not constant patients. Like others,
people with disabilities do periodioally seek medical attention.
They are, however, not chronically sick.
. The word "victim,, i- '
. ~ appropriate to use immediately after a
d~agnosls, ~n injury. or some form of se · ·
¥1olent crime, acclde ..~:- xual abuse (victim of a
CRIPPLED
"Crippled,, is derived from an old English word meaning "to
creep.,, Webster,s New World Dictionary gives a second meaning to
the word "c ' ,,
ripple which is "inferior.,, These are terrible images
which perpetuate negative stereotypes!
NORMAL-PERSON
One could argue about the definition of the word "normal,,
indefinitely. "Normal person,,, when used in contrast to "a person
with a disability,,, implies that people with disabilities are not
normal. If you are ~eferring to a person who does not ~ave an
apparent disability, it is more accurate and'less stereotypical
to
refer to the person as "~ person without a disability.,,
CONTINUING THE SEARCH FOR THE ACCEPTABLE TERM -
WHAT WE CHOOSE TO CALL OURSELVES
A significant element in the struggle for basic human rights
is what people call t~emsalves. For
"black, and ls now "Afrloan-American,,and example, "Negro,, became
"Indian,, became "Native
A~erican.,, People with disabilities, frustrated and dissatisfied
with the common negative terms used to describe disability, are
still"struggling to speak in unison about what we choose to call
ourselves. Terms such as "disabled,, and "handicapped,, have been
imposed from the outside, from definitions derived from social
services, medical institutions, governments and employers.
5
Disability culture is the commonality of the experience of
living with disability and language is one of the keys to
ack9owledging this culture. In an effort to choose our own terms,
various groups have coined Such words as nconven~enced,,, "able-
disabled,,, "differently-able,,, "handicapper,,, "handi-capable,, and
"physically challenged.,, These alternatives have not been
endorsed because they are ~e~n. a~ euphemistic -_ widely
reality of a disability, or trlvlallzing disability. denying the
The following list illustrates examples of both acceptable and
unacceptable terminology:
EXAMPLES OF PREFERRED TERMINOLOGY
~ehumaniz ing/Offensive/
nacceDtable
Acceptable
Disabled person ...... ...
......... A person with ~ disability
A blind person .............. ,...A person who is blind
A deaf person ................... A person who is deaf
A hunchback or humpback ........ A person who has a
spinal curvature
The disabled · ·
.................... People who are disabled
People with disabilities
Disability community
i rippled '
She s c ....
............. She has a disability
He is arthritic ................. He has arthritis
She is cerebral palsied ......... She has cerebral palsy
Dumb, deaf mu%e, du~,y .......... A person who has a speech
(Implies an intellectual or or hearing impa.irment, or is deaf
mental deficit occurs with
a hearing loss or a speech impairment)
Mute ............................ A person without speech or a
person who has a speech
impairment
She is chronically mentally
He is crazy .... ' ill
................. He is mentally ill
She has an emotional disability
He has a psychiatric disability
7
He was afflicted with, victim of,
stricken with or suffers
from polio '
...................... He had Polio
Retard, retardate,
retarded, fmebleminded .......... A person who is mentally
retarded
Birth defect .................... A person who has:
had a disability since birth,
a congenital disability
Fit ............................. Seizure
Sick .........
.................... Use only when a person i
actually ill
Patient ......................... Use only when a person is
actually being seen or
treated by medical
personnel
Midget, dwarf, little people .... People of short stature
."Normal person,, "able-bodied
to a disabled. person,, as compared
.................. A person without a disability
as compared to a person with
a disability
Confine~ to a wheelchair/
wheelchair bound'. .............. A person who uses a
wheelchair, a wheelchair user
She overcame her disability .... She lives with a ~isability
People don!t overcome
Psychological, disability. They overcome social, economic,
attitudinal, architectural,
educational and employment barriers. transportation,
Other words which should be avoided because they have negative
connotations and/or tend to evoke pity include:
Abnormal
Afflicted Disfigured Palsied
Invalid Poor unfortunate
Burden Imbecile
Defect Maimed Spastic
Deformed Spas
Deviant Misshapen
Moron Stricken with
Sufferer
Victim
Withered
8
It will take time to change old language habits, but if ~ou
are ¢or~mitted to increasing equal treatment, community awareness,
acceptance and access, then you must be concerned and take time%to
be vigilant about the language you use. Language does play an
important role in shaping ideas and attitudes.
Become consciously aware of the images and attitudes you
convey with Words. Discard negative labels and use accurate
language. By doing, so you will dispel the myths and enlighten
others about the meaning of disability.
Copyright, 1984: Revised 2/1988, 11/1990.
An earlier version of this article was published in:
JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION, 1-3/85, "Watch Your Language,
Please! ,,
The author grants permission for any portion of this article to be
reproduced as long as the following credit is given:
June Isaacson Kailes is a Disability Policy Consultant who can be
contacted by writing: 6201 Ocean Front Walk, Suite 2, Playa del
Rey, California 90293, or calling (213)'821-7080.
State Historical Society of Iowa
The Historical Division of the Department of Cultural Affairs
July 24, 1995
The Honorable Susan M. Horowitz
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
RE: St. Mary's Rectory, 610 E. Jefferson, 1owa City, Johnson County
Dear Mayor Horowitz:
We are pleased to inform you that the above named property, which is located within your
community, was listed in the National Register of Historic Places effective July 7, 1995.
Listing in the National Register provides. the following benefits:
--Consideration in the planning for Federal, federally licensed, and federally
assisted projects. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966 requires Federal agencies allow the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation an opportunity to comment on projects affecting historic
properties list.ed in the National Register. For further information please refer
to 36 CFR 800.
--Eligibility for Federal tax benefits. If a property is listed in the National
Register, certain Federal' tax provisions may apply. The Tax Reform Act of
1986 revises the historic preservation tax incentives authorized by Congress in
the Tax Reform Act of 1976, the Revenue Act of 1978, the Tax Treatmere
Extension Act of 1980, the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, and Tax
Reform Act of 1984, and as of January 1, 1987, provides for a 20 percent
invesanent tax credit with a full adjustment to basis for rehabilitating historic
commercial, industrial, and rental residential buildings. The former 15
percent and 20 percent investment Tax Credits (ITCs) for rehabilitations of
older commercial buildings am combined into a single 10 percem ITC for
commercial or industrial buildings built before 1936. This can be combined
with a 15-year cost recovery period for the adjusted basis of the building.
Certified structures with certified rehabilitations receive additional tax savings
because owners are allowed to reduce the basis by one half the amount of the
credit. The Tax Treatment Extension Act of 1980 provides Federal tax
deductions for charitable contributions for conservation purposes of partial
[] 402 Iowa Avenue
Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1806
(319) 335-3916
[] 600 E. Locust
Des Moines, Iowa 50319-0290
(515) 281-6412
[] Montauk
Box 372
Clermont, Iowa 52135-0372
(~1 ol 42~-7173
BOARD.OF SUPERVISORS
Charles D. Duffy, Chairporson
Joe Bolk~om
Stophen P. La¢ina
Don Solar
Sally Slutsman
July 25, 1995
INFORMAL MEETING
1. Call to order 9:00 a.m.
Agenda
2. Review of the informal minutes of July 18th recessed to July 20th and the
formal minutes of July 20th.
3. Business from Bob Kemp re: Senior Center update/discussion.
4. Business from the Director of S.E.A.T,S.
a) Discussion re: FY 96 S.E.A.T.S. contract between Systems Unlimited,
Inc. and Johnson County.
b) Discussionre: officespace.
e) Other
5. Business from the County Engineer.
a) Discmsion re: results from county-wide road oiling bid.
b) Other
913 $oLrrH DUBUQUE ST. P.O. BOX 1350 IOWA CITY, IOWA 52244-1350 TEL: (319) 356-6000
FAX: (319) 356.6O86
To= TOm CI:IY CL£R~( From: Bo4Pd of Supervisors 7-2~r'95 8:37aa p. 3 of 3
Agenda 7-25-95
Page 2
6. Business from the County Auditor.
a) Discussion re: resolution transferring from the General Basic Fund to
the General Supplemental Fund.
b) · Discussion re: resolution transferring from General Basic and Rural
Services Basic to Secondary Roads.
c) Discussion re:User Fees for acquisition of GIS photos and graphics.
d) Other
7. Business from the County Attorney.
9) ' Executive Session to discuss pending litigation for the following:
1. Yeltatzie v. Johnson County.
2. Hagen v. Iowa City and Johnson County.
3. Oakes v. Johnson County.
b) Discussion re: resolution abating suspended real estate taxes taxed to
Mildred L. Jennings on Lot 6, Block 9, Chautauqua Heights Addition,
Iowa City (parcel #57665000).
c) O ther
8. Business from the Board of Supervisors.
a) Discussion re: letter from Melody Rockwell, Associate Planner £or
City of Iowa City re: voluntarily annex an approximate 3.05 acre tract
of land located north of American Legion Road within the Windsor
Ridge Subdivision.
b) Reports
c) Other
9. Discussion from the public.
10. Recess.
To: IO~ CITY CLERI( From: Boord oF '~pervi~or~ 7-31-95 8:36oa p. 2 oF 3
Johnson Counh.'
IIOWA ~
Charles D. Duffy, Chairperson
Joe Bolk¢om
Stephen P. Lacina
Don Sehr
Sally Stu(sman
1. Call to order 9:00 a.m.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
August 1,199S
INFORMAL MEETING
Agenda
Review of the informal minutes of July 25th recessed to July 27th and the
formal minutes of July 27th.
Business from Melo_dy Rockwell, Associate Planner for City of Iowa City
re: voluntarily annex an approximate 3.05 acre tract of land located north of
American Legion Road within the Windsor Ridge Subdivision/discussion.
4. Business from the County Engineer.
a) Discussion re: road improvement agreement on Dingleberry Road.
b) Other
Business from Linda Severson, Human Services Coordinator for
Johnson County Council of Governments re: letter of support for a grant
proposal from Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County/discussion.
6. Business from the Board of Supervisors.
a) Discussion re: Juvenile Detention Center (this item is to explore
detention needs for Johnson County and how to address them).
b) Discussion re: times for public heatings.
Reports
d) Other
913 SOUTH DUBUQUE ST.
P.O. BOX 1350 IOWA crrY, IOWA 522,M-1350 TEL: (319) 356-6000
Agenda 8-1-95 Page 2
7. Discussion from the public.
8. Recess.
July 31, 1995
It has recently come to my attention that some
changes were made to our animal control ordinances
during the recodification process. I than read
Title 8 which outlines our regulations on animal
control issues. I found a few items that I would
like to ask council to direct the Animal Control
Advisory Committee and our Animal Control Officer
to review.
Pet At-Large
This definition was changed during recodification.
It is now unlawful to have your own dog, cat,
iguana, etc., in your own yard unless it is on a
leash or in an enclosure. I think this is
ridiculous and want to go back to the old
definition. (Pet at-large definitions are found in
Title 8, Sections 3-4 and 4-6.
Pets in motor vehicle
It is now unlawful to have a dog in the back of
your truck or hanging with its head out the window
unless it is tethered. This also seems a little
bit of overkill and would like some discussion on
this issue. This is part of Title 8, Section 4-6-
C.
Assisstive Animals
Currently, only seeing eye dogs are mentioned as
exceptions in the code. There are various species
of creatures being trained to aid persons with
disabilities. There are two places that I saw in
the code that mentions this: Title 8, Section 4-6-G
(animals in food establishments) and Title 10,
Section 7-?-A (cemetery rules). Maybe we could
change the language to something like, "Animals
that are trained to assist persons with
disabilities".
Ke~nel~
There is another place, Title 8, Section 4-3-I,
where exceptions are outlined. This is where
breeders are mentioned° This sections says if you
are licensed by the state that you don't have to
have the animals for sale individually licensed
with the local government, only the breeders. Only
dogs are specifically named in the ordinance. It
seems reasonable to include other animals that are
breed and licensed by the State of Iowa (cats).
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
July 31, 1995
To:
From:
Re:
The Honorable Mayor Susan M. Horowitz and Members of the City Council
Linda Newman Woito, City Attorney lusion' R~~/ -
Status Report and Preliminary Legal Conc ater Impact
Fees/Water Connection Fees
My research is not yet complete on this complex research assignment, but I have made
substantial progress. While the "bad news" is that the City may have to spend some money on
the formula for such legislation, the "good news" is that I have proliminarily concluded the City
of Iowa City can adopt a "water connection fee" - if fashioned as discussed below.
Available Information
There are no Iowa cases specifically "on point" concerning City utility water impact fees. However,
the general statute which gives cities authority to set City utility "rates and charges" was recently
amended in 1994 by the Iowa Legislature to specifically permit a charge "for connection to a city
utility or combined utility system." This new provision was adopted by the 1994 General
Assembly, so it just went into effect July 1, 1995. Since this language is so new, there are no
Iowa Supreme Court cases interpreting same. In other words, the Issue presented to me for
research Is a case of "first impression" under Iowa law.
This means that I must look to other Iowa cases for guldance by analogy, as well as to secondary
sources, professional water association guidelines, and state and federal court decisions -
including the U.S. Supreme Court. Having completed a large portion of the legal research, I
report that a truly "patchwork quilt" body of law has developed concerning water impact fees,
together with a potpourri of methods to calculate a fair and equitable "water impact fee" or "water
connection fee." Moreover, there are few common denominators in the cases, the secondary
sources, or the professional water manuals - which makes this task even more difficult. There
is nolhing I enjoy more than a true intellectual challenge, but I simply point this out FYI.
Marian Karr informed me we will not have a full City Council at a work session to discuss my final
legal opinion until September of this year. Steve Atkins and other staff recommend I do not rush
this legal opinion to completion this weekend - as I had planned. Rather, we believe a "status
report" is more appropriate - since this report will enable appropriate staff to review the differing
theories needed to arrive at a fair and equitable water connection fee. Moreover, while I have
already read literally thousands of pages and dozens of court decisions, this legal opinion is
simply too critical to "leave any stone unturned." I am proud of the three prior connection/impact
fees which I have presented to you for adoption which can withstand legal challenge. I hope you
share my interest in achieving that same "legal comfort level."
Brief Review of Research Methods
I have reviewed Iowa statutes and Iowa cases, and also the following secondary sources:
PLANNING, ZONING AND EMINENT DOMAIN, published by the Southwest Legal Foundation;
a good article on "takings" and "impact fees" in THE URBAN LAWYER; former Assistant City
Attorney Dick Boyle's thorough report on "takings and exactions," prepared for a legal seminar
prepared in 1988; former Assistant City Attorney Marsha Weg Bormann's report on parkland
dedication, presented to a 1994 Bar Association seminar; and another article concerning Dolan
v. City of Tiqard in THE URBAN LAWYER. Parenthetically in reviewing the body of law, I am
even more impressed with the thoroughness, insight - even brilliance - of Marsha Weg
Bormann's work on the City's open space/parkland dedication plan and ordinance!
Thanks to Ralph Russell of Howard R. Green, I have reviewed six manuals prepared by the
American Water Works Association ("AWWA"), entitled "Water Rates"; "Water Rates and Related
Charges;" "Water Utility Capital Financing;" "Alternative Rates;" "Revenue Requirements;" and
"Cost Allocation and Rate Design for Water Utilities." I also reviewed a paper prepared by the
Environmental Finance Center of Syracuse University entitled "Fee-Based Models for Funding
Water Quality Infrastructure." Unfortunately, the Syracuse paper is of no help because it is a
report to the EPA on how various states attempt to comply with the Clean Water Act. For
example, the Report lists only three states that have "drinking water connection fees" -
Massachusetts, New Jersey and Nevada. Yet, based on my legal research to date, I know this
information to be inaccurate, since Utah, Flodda, California, Arizona, North Carolina, Virginia and
Wyoming have water and/or sewer connection fees that have been approved by their respective
3
state courts. In addition, I looked over several ordinances from other jurisdictions provided by
Naomi Novick and Water Superintendent Ed Moreno.
Finally, I reviewed literally dozens of federal and state court decisions. The first critical question
I had to answer was whether the constitutional requirement of Dolan v. Ti(~ard applies to our
proposed water impact fee, For this reason, I looked very closely at cases applying the Dolan.
v, Tigard test, namely that some "rough propodionality" be demonstrated-by a uniform formula
or method- that the fee requirement is "roughly proportional" to the need or burden being created
by the property owner's development.
While some commentatore and courts have disagreed on how the Dolan test should be applied,
the U.S. Supreme Court has now made It clear that while the Dolan v. Tigard case dealt with
a land dedication requirement (as opposed to money) for the purpose of needed "open
space" and a bike trail, the Dolan case is not limited to land dedications, Rather, the
highest Court in the land made it clear in two 1994 decisions that the Dolan "rough proportionality"
test applies to monetary exactions or fees where the property owner's permission to use
the property is conditioned on payment of the fee, see Ehrlich v, City of Culver City, 114 S.
Ct, 2731 (1994) (Dolan applies to impact fees, not just land dedication); AItimus v. Oregon, 115
S. Ct, 44 (1994) (future requirement to dedicate land for road improvement upon annexation,
though intangible, still affects value of property and thus requires a Dolan analysis). This means
Dolan's "rough proportlonallty" test must be met by our water connection/impact fee
because we will condition issuance of a bulldlng permit, plat or water connection on the
developer's payment of the fee.
Formalized Theories or Models to Calculate Water Impact Fees or Water Connection Fees
The Amedcan Water Works Association (AWWA) has a series of five manuals to assist utilities
in establishing rates and charges for water utilities, including City utilities. I present the following
methods:
1. Figure 1-1 shows a schematic of the methods discussed by the AWWA in the five manuals,
see attached,
4
2. "Cash needs approach." In Manual 1 ("MI"), page 2, the Association discusses the "cash
needs approach" which is what Iowa City is now using. The Association notes that most major
capital projects are financed from "serially funded debt because the repayment of the debt over
a number of years distributes the capital cost, to some extent, over the useful life of the
facility. This debt-financing approach results In a better matching of the customers'
charges from year to year with the use of the facilities (I.e,, existing customers will not be
paying 100 percent of the inltlal cost of facilities to be used by future customers," M1, p.
2. [Emphasis added.]
NOTE: I believe this rate-setting approach is grounded in historical precedent- which is why City
Manager Steve Atkins and Finance Director Don Yucuis have proposed the current water rate
structure to you. Moreover, these historical practices of a flat rate for sanitary sewer, based on
water consumption, was specifically approved in State v. City of Iowa City, 490 N.W. 2d 825 (Iowa
1992).
3. Extra capacity rate model. This model assumes that some rate should be recovered for
operation and maintenance expenses, and capital costs for "system capacity beyond that
requlred for average rate of use." In calculating a water impact fee, the cost for the facility's
"excess of average capacity" is divided into costs necessary to meet "maximum-day extra
demand, maximum-hour demand in excess of maximum-day demand, or other extra-demand
criteria appropriate for a particular utility." M1, p. 11. [Emphasis added.]
Using this "extra capacity rate" method, we would have to define the "extra-demand criteria," i.e.
"extra demand per day," "per hour," or come up with some other criteria. Once this is done, the
formula uses a growth factor for "new users" - defined to be 'new customers who connect to the
water system.' The formula then comes up with a ratio and a dollar figure to be set as a "rate
for extra capacity," see attached Table 2-1. This method requires a considerable amount of
historical data for "maximum day needs," "maximum hour needs," average rate of use, customer
cost, base cost, and the cost of "extra capacity."
NOTE: Thus far, I have found no court cases which use this "extra capacity rate" model.
5
4. Capital cost/connection cost. On pages 51-52 of the M1 Manual, the Association discusses
this "connection cost" as not really a "rate" as such, and that "connection costs" are beyond the
scope of the manual. NOTE: This is somewhat ironic, since the caselaw is most comfortable
with, and thus more likely to find valid, those water costs which are fairly calculated "water
connection costs," see discussion below.
5. Capital contributions or "system development charge."
a. The "buy-in" method. NOTE: This method assumes that new investment does not
financially benefit existing customers; but as discussed below, this assumption has been
rejected by the courts.
The "buy-in" method is calculated when a new development installs a new distribution system to
serve their own property and to connect with a city's water system. The dollar amount of that
"contributed infrastructure" is then deemed the new developer's "equity" in the entire water
system, as a "buy in," The developer is then given credit for the dollar figure in the rest of the
calculation. That "net" amount is divided by the number of customers, resulting in an "average
net equity investment per equivalent 5/8" customer." In the example shown on page 15 of Manual
26 ("M26"), the resulting "buy-in system development charge" is $200 per customer, see Table
3-1 attached.
I found this buy*in system to be very esoteric; and while the buy-in method is designed to place
a new customer "on a parity" with an existing customer, this method only deals with "buying into"
the distribution system, not reconstructing a water system - as Iowa City is now doing. NOTE:
I found no cases which used this "buy-in" method except as one factor among several to be
considered to achieve overall fairness.
b. System development charge: "incremental-cost pricing method." This model is designed
for systems experiencing substantial growth, and where the need to increase capacity is
becoming an acute problem, M26, p. 13. The Manual notes them are different names for this
charge, including "facility charge," "plant investment fee," "impact fee," and "system development
charge." It is basically a fee for a capital contribution toward the development of a water system
facility which is required because of new-customer growth. The manual notes, however, that
6
the calculation model only discusses "backup utility plant" costs and charges, not "local
facilities construction costs and backup utility plant costs"-which is Iowa City's situation,
Thus, it is unclear whether this model would work for us, because we are not only doing
a "backup utility plant" (also referred to as "excess capacity"), but we are also redoing our
entire local existing facilities, see M26, p. 14.
Clearly lhe rationale for this model is to reduce the inequity to existing customers. The model
also assumes new customers will share the cost of recent construction or projected improvements
- but only to the extent such costs are not from general water-service rates. This means
that this "system development charge/incremental cost-pricing method" is not really a
"rate" at all, but rather a separate charge.
The method assumes (similar to the "buy in") that the new customer will pay for all on-site
water facilities needed for the new development. An example of this is discussed on page
16 of M26, explaining as an example, that if a total investment of $2,600,000 is required for the
"backup plant facilities" to serve new customers, and $1,020,000 is available from net revenue
(presumably from existing users), the utility can invest this revenue amount of $1,020,000 for
these new customers. The utility then projects it will add 2,000 "new equivalent customers over
the next five-year planning period." Thus, the "incremental investment cost" that needs to be
derived from the system development charges (SDC) is $1,580,000, or the difference between
the total Investment cost and the amount supported by revenue. Dividing this total amount
needed to be derived from the SDC by the 2,000 "new equivalent customers" results in a $790
fee or system development charge per equivalent customer in the first year, see attached Tables
3-2 and 3-3.
M26 notes that the utility must take into account the present-worth of money; that the time period
for collection of the fee must be limited and must provide for refunds if more charges are paid
than needed. The collected SDC charges then go to pay off the sources of external capital,
namely debt. Additionally, the SDC should "be equal to the required investment if the
construction were to occur at the time of contribution [of money]," i.e. as "Year 1." This means
the charges must be adjusted periodically for price level changes to match, as nearly as possible,
the changes in construction-cost levels. Also, the charges would be adjusted downward before
construction started - in order to reflect the time value of money and correlatively would be
adjusted upward for years 2, 3, 4 and 5, see Table 3-3 attached.
The information needed for this model would be data relating to existing system investment,
system capacity, customer data, projected water use requirements and customer base. I believe
some of the components of this SDC/incremental-cost pricing have been approved in cases cited
below. The one thing the model must avoid, however, is requiring the new customers to pay for
all of the "reserve capacity," "new capacity," "standing capacity" or "excess capacity" - assuming
these are all equivalent terms (which without discussing with Ralph Russell or Chuck Schmadeke,
I cannot say for sure).
Finally, I should note that although these models are reported by the AWWA to have withstood
the tests of legal challenge, I have found no cases thus far that use any of the models to
calculate water impact fees. However, I do see some court language appearing in parts of the
models. Maybe this is because the fees that have most successfully withstood legal challenges
are actually "water connection fees" - which the Manual itself says is "beyond the scope of their
discussion." M1, pp. 51-52.
Actual Water ImpactJConnection Fees Discussed In Court Cases: No Two Alike
Every community, state and court has their own terms and methods of calculation. A short
"sample list" of these methods looks like this:
1. Virginia - A fee is collected "per drainage fixture unit." As you can see from the attached
Table 7-3 of the Uniform Plumbing Code, the fee would be calculated uniformly, based on the
total number of units in any one house or building. The connection fee is triggered by a new
connection to the water system, as well as by modifications to an existing water system
connection If changes result in Increased drainage fixture units. This is the reverse of how
Iowa City sets sanitary sewer rates of "what goes in must come out," and has the beauty of
simplicity. Tidewater Association v. Cit,/of Vir.qinia Beach, 400 S. E. 2d 523 (Va. 1991).
8
2. California - A fee based on cost of a new project, calculated on the basis of an "equivalent
dwelling unit" formula which is payable at the time a building permit is issued. The case does not
explain how the "units" are figured, but they are probably not unlike the "drainage fixture units."
The fee is required for altered development "resulting in increased demand for the water system."
Carlsbad Municipal Water District v. QLC Corporation, 3 Cal. Rptr. 2d 318 (Cal. App. 4 Dist.
1992).
3. Maryland - Flat fee for number of residential units and based on gross floor area for non-
residential. Waters Landinq Limited Partnership v. Montqomen/County, 650 A. 2d 712 (Md,
1994).
4. North Carolina - Flat fee for connection to water system: $1,000 for each residential unit; plus
a "tap fee" for a one-inch meter of $1,500; commercial impact fee for one-inch meter is $2,400.
South Shell Investment v. Town of Wrif:lhtsville Beach, North Carolina, 703 F.Supp. 1192 (E.D.
N.C. 1988).
5. Arizona - Uses three factors to calculate water impact fee: estimated construction cost of
needed additional water resoumes and improvements; projected growth; and water usage. Fee
is triggered by construction permits, Home Builders Association of Central Arizona v, Cib/of
Scottsdale, 875 P. 2d 1310 (Ariz. 1993).
6. Utah - Uses a lengthy factual/legal set of factors, see discussion below, Banberry, infra.
7. Wyoming - Minimum service connection charge, based on size of meter ranging from $1,000
for a 3A" meter to over $28,000 for a 4" meter. This fee is triggered by requests for a building
permit. Coulter v. City of Rawlins, 662 P. 2d 888 (Wyo. 1983).
While the majority of these fees am triggered by a building permit, some are triggered by a
subdivision plat and/or a connection to the water system. Iowa City charges an "installation and
connection fee," using a flat dollar fee per linear foot for differing size pipes: for example, 6" pipe
- $18 per lineal foot; 16" pipe - $39.40 per linear foot. We also charge a fee of $354 an acre
for "extension of major feeder lines" for oversizing, §3-4-3, City Code. This sliding scale of dollar
figure per linear foot, depending on the size of the meter and pipe, is typical throughout Iowa but
does not attempt to recoup money for anything other than the water distribution system - not
the "new facility as a whole and not for "anticipated increased capacity costs."
Preliminary Legal Findings
Using the above-listed research tools, I feel relatively comfortable in reporting to you the following
"legal rules" which, if used by the City, should result in a legally defensible "water connection fee":
1, "Rough proportlonality" standard must be met, The "rough proportionality" requirement
of Dolan v, City of Tigard, 114 S. Ct. 2309 (1994) must be met by any water connection fee. This
means there must be some "rough proportionalitya between the fee as a condition to connect to
the water system and/or to obtain a building permit, a.d the demand or burden being placed on
the water system by the new development. This "rough proportionality" test is not required to be
a "precise mathematica! calculation," but there must be some "calculable connection" between
the demanded fee and the need or impact on City services the development creates -- or
Is deemed via some reasonable formula to create,
As you recall in the 1994 Dolan v. City of Ti.qard case, Mrs. Dolan wanted to increase her
plumbing supply business. Before the City of Tigard, Oregon would issue her a building permit,
the City required she dedicate part of her land for flood control, open space and a pedestrian bike
trail. The total land dedication to the city was 10% of her property. The City of Tigard's "fatal
flaw" was presuming that the dedicated open space would relieve increased flooding from
additional impervious surface (parking lot), and presumed the dedicated trail would relieve
vehicular traffic congestion expected from increased business, The Clty of Tigard dld not even
attempt to calculate or show via a reasonable formula how the required dedication of land
would mitigate agalnst needs allegedly created by Mrs. Dolan's expanded business.
The U.S. Supreme Court found that the City of Tigard had failed miserably in satisfying the
requirements of a connection between the dedication being extracted from the property
owner, and the Impact or need created by the new development:
"It is difficult to see why recreational visitors trampling along petitioner's floodplain
easement are suffm~ently related to the c~ty s legitimate ~nterest in reducing flooding
10
problems along Fanno Creek, and the city has not attempted to make any
individualized determination to support this....request." [Emphasis added.]
Dolan., at 2320-21.
Some lawyers and commentatom still argue over whether the Dolan "rough proportionality" test
is constitutionally required only for land dedications (parkland, green space, flood control or road
improvements), but that Dolan does not apply to money dedications or impact fees. However,
the U.S. Supreme Court has already answered this question in the negative, see Ehrlich above.
That is, any proposed Iowa City water connection fee, designed to proportionately share the costs
of "excess or reserve capacity," must satisfy the "rough proportionality" test showing a connection
between "fee" and "impact."
2. Water Connection Fee Must Be Reasonable. In Iowa, a water connection fee must be "fair,
reasonable, just, uniform and non-discriminatory," State v. City of Iowa City, at 829. In a case
decided in 1991 involving a sanitary sewer district, the Iowa Supreme Court reiterated this
"reasonableness rule," stating the rule applies to municipal corporations when they set their
municipal utility rates and charges, Kreifels v. South Panorama Sanitary District, 474 N.W. 2d
567, 569-70 (iowa 1991). While I recognize that the .Kreifels case concerns sanitary sewer, not
water, the Iowa Supreme Court nonetheless made it clear this rule applies to all municipal utilities:
"This [reasonableness] standard is the same as the one long used in making the
same evaluation in challenges to fees assessed by municipal corporations. They
are well known and not disputed by the parties."
Kreifels., at 570.
In the Kreifels case, the Sanitary Sewer District decided to give property owners who already had
installed septic systems a "break" in the fee when they were required to connect to the new
system. The District reasoned that these long-time properly owners had already installed their
systems, would continue to use their old septic tanks until the new District-wide system was "up
and running," and had invested certain monies - so the current owners should receive credit
(even though their old systems would be abandoned).
11
The Iowa Supreme Court looked with great disfavor on the inequities between the $50 fee for the
long-time property owners, and the $1,500 fee for the "newcomers." The Kreifels Court declared
the fee illegal for two reasons: First, the existing owners were given a "break" on the $50
connection fee, regardless of whether their septic system was adequate or not- which was totally
irrational thus unreasonable. Second, the District had no other reason to explain how they set
the fee, and why
"...longtime owners in the area should share an equitable, rather than a
nominal, cost in the construction of the new facility ....but it Is not fair to
recoup those past investments [by longtime owners] by way of dispropor-
tionate assessments against the plaintiffs [new connections]."
Kreifels, at 570.
In other words, once the Kreifels. Court found the only stated reason to be wholly irrational, the
fee was not "reasonable" as a matter of law. Thus, the rule in Iowa seems to be that water
connection fees must be "reasonable," and that charges may not be dlsproportionately
assessed on newly developed land.
3. New development cannot pay 100% of new capital costs. Other states agree with the
Iowa rule that a water connection fee must not place all the burden for the new capital improve-
menton the new users of the system, e.g. Coufter v. City of Rawlins, 662 P. 2d 888 (Wyo. 1983).
4. Refund and Time Limitations Needed. The fee must be dedicated and used only for the
designated capital improvement, and should have a refund provision in the event the capital
improvement is not constructed, with a "sunset" provision for refunds, City of Dunedin v.
Contractors and Builders of Pinelias County, 358 So. 2d 846 (Fla. 1978) (Dunedin III). The
Florida Supreme Court agrees with the principle of transferring some of the capital costs directly
to new development: "in principle, however, we see nothing wrong with transferring to the new
user of a municipally owned water or sewer system a fair share of the costs new use of the
system involves....." Dunedin, at 318. The Dunedin Court went on to note that a city which seeks
to shift the "new expenses" to new users must look carefully at whether there is a relationship
between the fee charged and the use to be paid for:
12
"The cost of new facilities should be borne by new users to the extent new use
requires new facilities, but only to that extent. When new facilities must be built
in any event, looking to new users for necessary capital gives old users a windfall
at the expense of new users."
Dunedin III, at 321. [Emphasis added,]
However, it is not 'just and equitable' for a municipally owned utility to impose the entire burden
of capital expenditures, including replacement of existing plant, on persons connecting to a
water and sewer system after an arbitrarily-chosen time certain," Dunedin Ill, at 319-20. Noting
the "costs of expansion" may be difficult to identify, the Florida Court recognized "'perfection is
not the standard of municipal duty,'" Dunedin III, at 320, footnote 10.
5. New Development should pay their proportionate share but not all the costs of "excess
capacity." In Banberrv Development Corporation v. South Jordan Citv, 631 P, 2d 899 (Utah
1981), the Utah court set forth a number of factors which are required in order to collect a water
fee for providing "standby capacity," It is my preliminary opinion that these factors, if followed by
Iowa City, would result in a water ".onnection fee that would likely pass constitutional muster
under the Dolan test of "rough proportionality." The City would then be able to recoup monies
from new development which was fairly borne by both new development and existing
development.
The Banberry Court noted that it is perfectly reasonable to expect new development to pay their
"fair share" for connecting to an existing system, which clearly requires considerable capital to
build:
"The provision of standby capacity to a subdivision requires a commitment of
substantial capital. The city doee not have to wait until someone turns on a
tap or flushes a toilet before it requlres partlclpation in the cost of providing
Its sen/Ices, Subject to the requirements of reasonableness discussed
below, a hookup fee [connectlon fee] that requires a subdivider to make
advance payments of some portion of the common capital cost attributable
to committing service to the lots In this subdivision Is valld...."
Banberry, at 902, [Emphasis added,]
13
In order to determine the equitable share of the capital cost to be borne by newly developed
properties, a municipality should determine the relative burdens previously borne and yet to be
borne by those properties, in comparison with the other properties in the municipality as a whole.
Most impodantly, the connection fee in question should not exceed the amount sufficient to
equalize the relative burdens of newly developed and other properties.
It is therefore my opinion that we should rely on the Banbern/guidelines, which include the
following seven factors:
"(1) the cost of existing capital facilities; (2) the manner of financing existing capital
facilities (such as user charges, special assessments, bonded indebtedness,
general taxes, or federal grants); (3) the relative extent to which the newly
developed properties and the other properties in the municipality have already
contributed to the cost of existing capital facilities (by such means as user charges,
special assessments, or payment from the proceeds of general taxes); (4) the
relative extent to which the newly developed properties and the other propedies
in the municipality will contribute to the cost of existing capital facilities in the
future; (5) the extent to which the newly developed propedies are entitled to a
credit because the municipality is requiring their developers or owners (by
contractual arrangement or otherwise) to provide common facilities (inside or
outside the proposed development) that have been provided by the municipality
and financed through general taxation or other means (apart from user charges)
in other pa~s of the municipality; (6) extraordinary costs, if any, in servicing the
newly developed properties; and (7) the time-price differential inherent in fair
comparisons of amounts paid at different times."
Banberry, at 904.
The Banberry Court notes that using these seven factors should produce a "reasonable" fee,
conceding that cities should have flexibility "necessary to deal realistically with questions not
susceptible of exact measurement. Precise mathematical equality 'is neither feasible nor
constitutionally vital.'" Banberry, at 904.
14
NOTE: It is because of the thoroughness of the Banbern/Court's analysis that I preliminarily
conclude that the Banberry test would likely pass even the difficult test of Dolan's "rough
propodionality" -- namely, we could show a "calculable connection" between the water connection
fee required as a condition of development, and the-impact or burden on the water system
created by the development.
Conclusion
My preliminary report shows that if Iowa City wishes to go forward with a water connection fee,
we could possibly start ou~using the simple "drainage fixture unit" approach of the Tidewater
case above -- but even that approach means calculating some connection between the "new
use" and the "cost of standby capacity" of the new Iowa City Water Supply and Treatment Water
Facility. This means a consultant should probably be retained to gather historical data, detailed
information on construction costs of the "standby capacity" in the new plant, estimated growth,
average existing uses, etc. to calculate what a "fair and proportionate water connection fee" would
be for Iowa City. This would enable us to use the Banberry factors and more likely assure you
of satisfying the Dolan "rough proportionality" test for impact fees. Of course, hidrig a consultant
remains your decision.
I hope this "brings you up to date" on where I am in this research project, and I will be discussing
these ideas with staff - unless I hear from you to the contrary. In any event, do not hesitate to
stop by or call me at x5030 if you have questions.
CO:
City Clerk
City Manager
Assistant City Manager
Chuck Schmadeke
Karin Franklin
Don Yucuis
Sarah Holecek
n
viii
Table Z- I Allocation of Rate Base---IE~se--l:xtra Capacity Method (Test Year)
Extra Capacity Direct
Custemer Fire-
Line Maximum Maximum Meters and Protection
No. Item Total Bane
Day Hour* Services ~ervice
Intangible Plant:
1 Organization $6,000 $3,000
Source of Supply Plant:
2 Land 423,000 423,000
3 Reservoir 407,000 407,000
Pumping Plant:
4 Land 23,000 15,000 8,000
5 Structures 369,000 240,000 129,000
6 Electric pumping equipment 376,000 244,000 132,000
7 Other pumping equipment 157,000 102,000 55,000
Water Treatment Plant:
8 Structures 42~,000 277,000 149,000
9 Water treatment equipment 3,832,000 2,491,000 1,341,000
Transmis~ies and Distribution Plant,'
10 Land 35,000 4,000 31,000
11 Structures 48,000 5,000 43,000
12 Distribution storage 1,020,000 102,000 918,000
13 Ma/ns 5,842,000 2,628,000 1,461,000 1,753,000
14 Serv/ess 2,264,000
15 Meters 996,000
16 Hydrants 404,000
Oeneral Plant:
17 Land 4,000 1,000 1,000 1,000
18 Structures lg0,000 80,000 37,000 31,000
19 Other 1~9,000 55,000 25,000 21,000
20 Net plant in service 16,951,000 7,077,000 ' 3~39,000 '
Plus:
21 Materials and supplies 291,000 122,000 57,000
22 Cash working capital 285,000 119,000 55,000 47,000
23 Construction work in progress 104,000 47,000 26,000 31,000
24 Contributions and advances (1,445,000)
25 Test-year rate base $16,186,000 $7,365,000
*Maximum.hour demand in excess of maximum-day demand.
$3,478,ooo
$1,000 $1,000
2,264,000
996,000
1,000
37,000
25,000 3,000
3,324,000 412,000
57,000 7,000
56,000 7,000
(1,445,000)
$1,992,000 $426,000
Table 3-1 Illustrative Determination of System-Development Charge--System Buy-in
Pricing Basis*
Source of supply
Treatment and pumping
Distribution system
Services, meters, and hydrants
General structures
Less net cost of
Distribution system
Services, meters, and hydrants
Net investment in backup plant
Less:
Outstanding bonds
Original Accumulated Net
Cost Depredation Cost
(SOO0) (SOO0) (S000)
5000 I000 4000
8000 1200 6800
12800 1800 1100O
4§00 800 4000
$32 000 S5000 S27 000
Total equity investment
Number of customers
Average net equity investment per equivalent ~A-in. customer
Required SDC
*Assumes new customers pay for all on-site facilities: mains, servicos~ meters, and hydrants.
11000
4O00
12000
8O0O
$ 4000
20O0O
S 200
200
16 WATER RATES
Table 3-2 Illustrative Determination of System-Development Charge_incremental. Cost
Pricing Basis
Annual revenue under existing rates for typical s~-in. customer
Less: Annual operation and maintenance expenses to be met from rates $115
Annual replacements and improvement costs to be met from rates 30
Net revenue available to service new debt
Deb. t that can be serviced (assume 20-year debt amortization at 10% annual
znterest rate) $60 +0.1175 =
Estimated total invustment in backup facilities required to serve a new
sA-in. customer
Net system-development charge
· Assumes new customers pay for all on-ske facilities: mai~n~, services, meters, and hydrants.
2O5
145
510
S1300
790
Table 3-3 Illustration of Flow Funds Related to Incremental-Cost Pricing In Determining
System-Development Charges
Total investment in backup facilities required
Amount of investment that revenue stream will support
Incremental investment to be derived from SDC charges
Projected number of new equivalent ~A-in. customers
SDC per equivalent customer
SDC charges required reflecting time value of money at 8% annual interest rate
Year 1 $790
Year 2 853
Year 3 921
Year 4 995
Year 5 1075
$26OOO0O
1 020 000
$1 5800OO
20OO
$ 790