HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-08-15 Correspondence ,..o
City Council Members
City of Iowa City
Civic Center
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Council Members:
August 3, 1995
I have reviewed the plans to develop a 41-unit apartment complex on 7.8 acres east of Old
Dubuque Road and north of Dodge Street. I understand that a recent request by Mr. Burns
to have the area rezoned from RSS to 0PDH-8 has been rejected.
I don't understand this response. Iowa City desperately needs quality, lower cost housing for
the young couples and people who are beginning their employment experiences. NCS has
over 800 employees in Iowa City, most of whom earn in excess of $35,000 per year; and
many who started their work history with jobs that paid between $15,000 and $20,000.
If Iowa City is not interested in efforts to develop housing for this kind of quality individual,
then I suggest that future growth of companies like NCS will be limited due to lack of
employee availability.
I urge you to reconsider your decision.
Sincerely,
Vice President
/rick
Bob Burns
Charlie Eastham
Jay v. Clark
Vice President
Measurement Services Division
National Computer Systems
P.O. Box 30 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 (PF0 319-339-6560
(FAX) 319-339-6990
3 August 1995
Att'n Lorraine
City ~anager's office
City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
Lorraine, City Manager's Office:
The attached written statement is in support of my presentation to
Council during public discussion of the Draft "Economic Development
Policies, Strategies, and Actions." It is my understanding that this
will appear on the agenda at the meeting of August 15 or August 29.
Please include this in the appropriate meeting packet.
225 Church Street
Iowa City, IA 52245
351-4515
3 August 1995
Att'n Lorraine, City Manager's office
city of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
To the City Staff and Council:
This draft of the City's economic development policies misses an
important opportunity to clearly and forcefully articulate a vision
for our economic future. Some rhetorical flourishes aside, it follows
a familar pattern of low-road smokestack chasing. As an alternative,
we ask that you consider the high-road taken by many municipalities in
recent years: a social compact with investors which pursues good jobs,
public accountability, and environmental sustainability. My response
to this draft is organized around three general concerns:
1) This draft focuses too much on growth and too little on the kind of
growth we should pursue or reward or encourage.
The logic here is clear: municipalities have always competed to offer
an attractive business climate; a struggling national economy and
increased global competition have made this competition even fiercer.
But the logic is also false. The vast majority of jobs are not in
footloose multinational companies; most existing firms can and will
accomodate themselves to new rules; and most new firms actually
desire, even depend upon, the sorts of resources cities like Iowa City
have to offer.
* [Policy 1]: Many terms need clearer definition: What are the
"targeted industry groups" and by what criteria will they be targeted?
* [Policy 2]: The assumption here is that growth = jobs, and that the
nature of those jobs is a purely private concern. We should only
reward "high road" firms willing to pay a living wage and respect
workers rights.
* [Policy 4]: Here the shape of economic development is left largely
to the promoters. In this way, the City not only surrenders public
authority and responsibility but also invites constant pressure to
relax its expectations and facilitate indiscriminate growth.
2) This draft makes no effort to llnk p~bllc regulation or public
subsidies to particular avenues of growth.
In setting the rules and conditions for economic growth, the City
should be less anxious about the mobility of capital and more
attentive to the long-term goals and interests of all its citizens.
The question is not how much regulation, but what kind and toward what
ends. As experience elsewhere suggests, attaching strings to public
subsidies and regulating land use in the public interest do not shut
off local growth -- but they can divert it into more promising
channels.
* [Policy 2] Instead of merely shaping the local labor force to meet
business needs, the City can and should tie living wage guidelines and
tenure requirements to any public subsidies.
* [Policy 5] Rather than simply "encourage" or "support"
environmentally conscious business, the City should tie public
subsidies (and clawbacks) to past and future environmental records;
and it should demand energy conservation through commerical building
codes.
* [Policy 6] The financial incentives should include both explicit
rewards or subsidies for high-wage, environmentally-sensitive
development and explicit penalties (no subsidies, clawbacks) for firms
who cannot meet (or who violate) the terms of the "social compact."
3) This draft assumes, in tone and in po1icy, that economic
development is a process driven by investors and employers,
forgets that the economy is a public good in which the rights of
workers and consumers deserve equal respect.
* [Policy 1, Strategy A]: "compatible with the community" should not
be equated (in Action 2) with "complement[ing] local businesses" or
(in Action 3) "assist[ing] businesses."
* [Policy 1, Strategy B, Action 2]: It is not the role of the City to
use "community education efforts" to "increase public awareness of the
role of business in the community."
* [Policy 2]: This section is strongest on meeting the labor market
demands of employers and weakest on meeting the needs of workers.
* [Policy 2, Strategy B, Actions 2 and 3] Any "school-to-work"
initiatives at the K-12 or post-secondary level should also include
education in workers' rights, labor law, and workplace safety.
* [Policy 3]: In all, Policy 3 is hopelessly inconsistent: Strategy A
appeals to new investors with new perimeter infrastructure; Strategies
B and C appeal to established businesses by suggesting inner city
development. And none of this is tied to a larger sense of community
growth and sustainability.
* [Policy 4]: "Cooperation with existing local and regional
organizations" lists ICAD, the University, and business interests.
What about labor, environmental groups, consumer and citizen groups,
neighbourhood associations, and the like?
* [Policy 5]: This is a feeble nod to environmental concerns.
By conventional economic wisdom, pursuing the high road might seem at
best a sucker strategy and at worst economic suicide. We reject this
wisdom. The high road strategy not only costs very little, but it
will also create a community whose high-wages, public goods and
infrastructure, and environmental climate make it more attractive to
prospective investors, workers, and citizens alike. Here, by way of
summary, are some of the things we can do:
* Attach strings to public money: New investment often relies on
public subsidies (loan guarantees, tax expenditures) and in-kind
services (industrial parks). Increasingly, municipalities are trading
this candy store mentality for a social compact with new investors.
These take the form of conditions on public support such as wage and
environmental thresholds, or "clawbacks" which force firms which do
not live up to their promises to reimburse public subsidies.*
* Retain, renew, and upgrade "old" investment: In their eagerness to
attract new investment, municipalities routinely overlook the
potential of old (even abandoned) investments. The retention and
renewal of old investment is not only as good a path to job growth and
new investment, it also promises environmental rewards by "greening"
old jobs and minimized industrial sprawl.
* Protect the rights of workers and consumers: The rights of consumers
and workers are no less important than the "property" rights routinely
championed by municipal growth strategies. Strings on public
subsidies should encourage worker participation; "school-to-works
initiatives at the K-12 or post-secondary level should include
education in workers' rights, labor law, and workplace safety; local
zoning and licensing should encompass full compliance with the letter
and spirit of OSHA, ADA and related laws in such a way that guarantees
equal and safe access to all citizens.
* Guarantee a 1lying social wage: Municipal government does not have
the regulatory power to fully control local wages. But it can -- in
its subsidies to private employers, in its contracting of public
works, and in its role as a local employer -- set high standards for
both wages and benefits.
Some examples: Iowa requires subsidized firms to pay wages at least 75 percent of
the county average. North Dakota requires subsidized firms to pay wages which meet
the federal poverty level for a family of four. Mississippi ties the interest on
state loans to wages paid; States (Ohio, Illinois, Connecticutt, Vermont) and cities
(Austin TX, New Haven CT) clawback loans and tax abatements (with interest and
penalties) granted any firm which leaves the state or city within a designated
period. In Washington, state legislators have proposed forcing any firm recieiving
public assistance to permit union organizing, provide a living weage (including
health insurance}, and comply full with environmental and plant closure law.
Clawbak provisions can easily be combined with "early warning systems" which give
workers and communites time to adjust to plant closures. Connecticut and Lousiana
tie public subsidies to firms' past and current environmental records. Gary IN
cosiders past environmental performance before granting tax abatements.
* Use public capital and p~blic institutions for public ends: One of
the most appealing short-cuts to a more democratic and public economy
is to bypass, when necessary, private capital. Private investment,
after all, is necessarily short-sighted and eager to avoid the costs
of public goods. The options here are limited, but promising:
Encourage alternative forms of economic organizations, such as worker
and consumer and housing co-operatives. When possible, use public
capital such as state and federal grants or pension funds to finance
innovative development, affordable housing, and the like.
* Demand environmental Justice and sustainability: Contrary to popular
wisdom, environmental regulation does not stifle growth -- or at least
the kind of growth we want. Economic regulation can (as suggested
above) reward environmentally-conscious investment. Local zoning can
accomplish effective and sensitive land use. And strict environmental
guidelines can (as experience elsewhere attests) actually create
"green" investment and jobs and spur impressive productivity gains.
Colin Gordon
Iowa City New Party
225 Church Street
Iowa City, IA 52245
319-351-4515
colin-gordon@uiowa.edu
ROBgRT P. BURNS
328 East Washiogton S~reet
P.O. Box 1226
Iowa City, Iowa 52244
August 9, 1995
City Council
City of Iowa City
Civic Center
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
RE: Rezoning No.
Old Dubuque Road
Dear Council Members:
019) 33g-7600
FAX 019) 337-2430
I hereby request a revision to rezoning application number REZ95-0010 to limit density to
thirty-two apa~hnents plus one site manager's apartment on parcels numbers 59341000 and
59343000.
I am available to answer any questions regarding this project and look forward to the process
of being considered by the city council.
Sincerely Yours,
RPB/slk
XC: Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission
Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date:
August 7, 1995
To:
The Honorable Mayor, City Council and City Clerk
From:
James Brachtel, Traffic Engineer
Handicapped Parking in the 1100 Block of Church Street
As directed by Title 9, Chapter 1, Section 3 of the City Code, this is to advise you of the
following action:
ACTION:
Pursuant to Section 9-1-3A14 of the City Code, the City Traffic Engineer will direct the
removal of the handicapped parking zone in front of 1129 Church Street. Removal of this
handicapped parking zone will take place on or shortly after August 22, 1995.
COMMENT:
In 1989 the resident of 1129 Church Street was the primary care provider for an infirm parent
that lived at 1129 Church Street. The then resident had been provided with the appropriate
designation for his vehicles designating his vehicles as eligible to use handicapped parking
stalls. It has now come to the Traffic Engineer's attention that the infirm parent no longer
lives at 1129 Church Street and the resident of 1129 Church Street no longer requires the
handicapped parking stall designation in front of 1129 Church Street. The removal of this
designation will return this curb frontage to the on-street parking inventory.
bl~ ! 129chu~