HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-01-13 TranscriptionJanuary 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page ]
Council Present: Bailey, Champion (arrived 6:45), Dickens, Hayek, Mims, Wilburn, Wright
Staff Present: Markus, Helling, Karr, O'Malley, O'Brien, Rocca, Fosse, Nurnberg,
Goodman, Tharp, Wyss
Air ort:
Hayek/ All right, well why don't we start. Immediately turn it over to...
Markus/ Okay, you're all set. We have a number of items that, uh, we want to review from the
last budget session. You had some questions on some items so we're going to run
through some PowerPoints, uh, regarding the Airport fund, the GIS system, and the
increase in the storm, uh, water revenue rates. So, uh, Kevin, you want to start the
commentary on this.
O'Malley/ Well, yes. Uh, the first question was what does the Airport fund owe on previously
built hangars. Uh, that slide that's showing here, we don't have them numbered, but that
slide shows four projects that the Airport had done on vertical hangars. Uh, the left
column is our names for `em. The UI Hangar's the most recent one that they finished an
expansion on, and that is pretty much, uh, if you notice it starts in 2010 and the final
payment is in 2030, which is a 20-year life, which is pretty decent. Now the other three
are older hangars that, uh, back in the year 1999, 2000, the Airport had gotten into some
fiscal difficulties and essentially because of the low rents that were being collected on
those three hangars, I had to restructure the loans. So you notice the second one, SE T-
hangar? Um, is, uh, $372,000. It was built in 1997, but we had to stretch it out to 2032
cause that's what the hangar revenue showed. That's an awful long time, but the
alternative was to, um, have the General Fund pay for Airport vertical structures, and that
wasn't the City policy. The policy was to have the tenants pay for the vertical structure.
Anyway, they've improved their finances, but uh, and...and the North Commercial Park
was, um, devised back in 2000, 2001, and we were kind of hoping that when they started
selling some of these lots that they'd come back and address these loan extensions. So
that's, uh, something we want to talk about, and that's the answer to that question on
Airport. As you can see, they have a $1.5 million in these loans, outstanding. Any
questions on those loans?
Markus/ And maybe, Kevin, you can talk just a little bit about, um, their useful life, uh, in terms
of the, uh, the length of these, uh, payments, that it seems like they...you normally
structure these for a lot less, uh, debt, uh, term.
O'Malley/ That's correct, Tom, uh, normally it's a 20-year term because by the end of 20 years,
you start having to look at roof expenses, the skins, the doors, the maintenance starts to
become a problem, and uh, the only alternative at that time, and...and the Airport did
have a problem. We had a retiring FBO and we were trying to solicit for a new FBO, uh,
and they had some other fiscal issues that...that wasn't being managed properly. I think
they've turned all that around in those three or four years, but they still, um, it'd be nice
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council ~pectat
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 2
to get these off the plate, so to speak, uh...because I know that in our current CIP there's
some... some dollars, I think some federal dollars for reskinning some other hangars. So,
to replace, uh...I think there's also...is there any other questions on the Airport? Mike,
was that an accurate statement?
Helling/ If I could add to that too, uh, cause Mike Tharp and I and (mumbled) Horan and
(mumbled) had met, um, well, late last year. Um, anyway, had talked about the
outstanding debt, and about the...the money yet to come in for the...for the Airport, uh,
or for the sale of the Aviation Commerce Park north land that has...that's still on the
market. Um, and two things that the Airport was interested in, and Mike can...can chip
in here, but um, two things they were interested in is retiring some or all of that debt,
depending on how fast the, uh, the property sells, but also using some of that to set up a
maintenance fund for hangars, which I think is an excellent idea, um, because there is
some of this...this, probably more major work that's going to come up before these
hangars are paid off, um, I believe there is somewhere in the neighborhood of $2.5
million... if we sold the remaining parcels at their asking price, I doubt that we will, but if
we do, uh, we could get over $2.5 million, um...and if you look at the debt here is $1.5
million, and that includes the University of Iowa hangar, which I think is...that structure
and... (mumbled) pay itself in 20 years. If you back that out, you've got a little over a
million dollars, so I think that there's the opportunity here, depending on how fast that
sells, the remaining property sells, that the Airport could clear off all its debt, frankly,
if...I mean, if they're fortunate to be able to do that, and then have the income for... for
operating expenses. Um...but as we would sell the parcels, I think the idea was to carve
apiece of that out to put into this, the, uh, the, uh...the maintenance account, and then
use the rest to pay off debt.
Dickens/ Percentage of that or...
Helling/ Yeah, and we...I think the Airport Commission wants to meet with the Council
and...and talk about that, is my understanding.
Tharp/ Yeah, at the, uh, the budget meeting coming up on the 18th, when you meet with the
boards and commissions. I know there's going to be a...a small topic of...of interest to
encourage some further work session, uh, meetings where the Airport Commission and
the Council talk about setting up a more formal agreement for using the Commerce Park
debt to repay, uh, these outstanding loans, as well as, uh, potentially the one that's
building the six, uh, corporate, uh, corporate hanger L, um, what we've got at the Airport
really are two generations of...of hangars. The ones that are coming up now that you're
starting to see in the CIP plan were...were originally built in the 1950s, 1960s, so these
buildings are...are certainly lasting a long time, um, we're talking 50, 60 years now for
the original generation. These are, uh, obviously 19, er, 1990s, uh, you know, close to
2000. Um...with the, uh, financial situation that the Airport had at that...around that
point in time, they were restricted and we recognize the loans are certainly a lot longer
than everybody would like to...to see and...and we're, uh, think the Airport Commerce
Park funds would be a... a good resolution to get those cleared out, uh, fairly quickly.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 3
Markus/ What is the industry standard though in terms of debt for, uh, a hangar of this sort, in
terms of term? Is it 20 years?
Tharp/ I...I've been going 20 years just because a building life, uh, we've got buildings out there
that exist that are 50 years old. So I think if you have a...a debt for the first 20 years, um,
versus a 50-year life span, you've got 30 years, you know, projected to, you know, have
income off of the building.
Outstanding Debt -Landfill Loans:
O'Malley/ (several talking) Thank you, Mike! Next slide is, uh, in answer to a follow up
question (mumbled) Council Member Regenia had (mumbled) how much outstanding
debt or...how much outstanding debt is owed to the Landfill, and uh, these numbers, uh,
as...really as of December, cause some are going to need to change, but it's $5.1 million.
As you can see, some are General Fund ones and those General Fund ones impact, uh,
would impact the operations, uh, of the General Fund. These are ones that we did, some
of the smaller ones, um, were done just for maintenance and small capital, but some of
the larger ones probably could have been sold as debt, if they had been, uh, voted on.
The other thing that...is I wanted to point out on this slide is that, we're looking at
another almost $4 million alone from the Landfill for the, uh, Industrial Park on 420th
Street. And so now we're getting into quite a few dollars loaned out of the Landfill.
Bailey/ The industrial park'll be paid back with TIF.
O'Malley/ I don't know whether it's going to be paid (mumbled)
Bailey/ I think that's one of the things we discussed.
Helling/ Yeah, the...the normal things for our economic development whether it comes from sale
of the land, TIF, uh, but the income that (both talking)
Bailey/ Some combination, yeah.
(male)/ Is it a TIF district now?
Bailey/ Yes (several responding)
O'Malley/Next question is, uh, Rick's question.
Markus/ Let's just back up a second, in terms of um...does everybody follow the point that if we
would have gone to a vote on some of those issues that that would have moved it to the
debt levy, and then that would have been separated out. Everybody...follows that?
(mumbled) Okay.
GIS:
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council 5peclal
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 4
Fosse/ On the GIS, uh, you had asked the question about, uh, if we could move the GIS up into
FY12 and we went back and talked about that amongst ourselves, and we believe it's best
to leave it in 13, and the reason for that is...is the upfront work that's required to do a
good job of a GIS system. It's that system design, they call it system architecture, and
that requires some very deep and contemplative thought about what are our data sets, uh,
how do we currently use those data sets, how do we ultimately intend to and is there...is
there data set overlap between departments and divisions, and if... if we don't get that
right, uh, it's not going to be a good system. It's like putting the wrong foundation
underneath a building, and...and by accelerating it, we fear that we would rush that
and... and put the quality at risk. So we recommend leaving that in... in FY 13.
Bailey/ But it sounds like that project would potentially start in FY12 with building the system's
architecture? Getting the...I mean, you wouldn't necessarily have a person, but you'll
begin to discuss the data sets, correct?
Fosse/ We...we'll probably, uh, begin to...look at how we're going to go after, uh, bringing the
consultant on board to begin that design, but the, uh, the bulk of the design of that would
be in FY13, and then after the design comes data migration, and...and one of the
questions comes, uh, with the...with the staffing aspect of it - do you bring that on, uh,
before or after the system design? It...it's, there's some advantages to both directions,
and that's one of the things that we'll be assessing.
Bailey/ So insofar as a usable system, how...how many years away are we from having GIS that
we can use for various projects? Um, specifically economic development.
Fosse/ Probably two to three years out from afull-blown system. We have components that we
use now, as I mentioned the other day it's...it's a, um, it's...iterate process getting there,
and we have parts that we're...we're piggybacking on to the County's GIS now, and able
to do some things there.
Hayek/ So if we start this in FY13, um, is that the year in which we also start seeing, on the
operational side, some line item?
Fosse/ Probably, yes.
Hayek/ And any work you do during this...FY12, would be more...out of existing operations?
Fosse/ Yes.
Hayek/ Staff brainstorming and things like...the pre-planning?
Fosse/ That's right, exactly!
O'Malley/ (mumbled) ...next question too!
Fosse/ Yes!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 5
Storm Water Fees:
Fosse/ Uh, taking a look at the storm water fees, and in your packet of information, if you go
about three-quarters of the way back there's a January 12t" memo from Brian Boelk, uh,
to me. It looks like this. And that provides the summary information. I'll wait for you to
get there.
Dickens/ It's in our Info Pack?
Fosse/ Yes, it's in the packet that you...
Karr/ No. Everything for tonight, it's at the back of the packet.
Dickens/ Oh, so back here?
Karr/ Yeah, there you go. Come about six or seven pages forward, from the (several talking) six
or seven from the back.
Fosse/ And let me take you through this memo since it's the first that you're seeing it tonight.
What we've done is...is we've put together, uh, it steps you through the four fiscal years
of the rate increase for storm water, and we've done that in, uh, I believe six categories
here. The...the first is in residential, and that addresses both, uh, single-family and multi-
family. Current rate is $2.00, and it's proposed to go up 50-cents, per year, uh, for each
of the next four years, and ultimately, uh, end at $4.00 per month. Um, multi-family
parallels that and it's, uh, really just half of what the single-family residential unit is for.
You get into non-residential, it gets a little more complicated, because- we've got the base
rate and then we also, uh, actually measure the impervious areas for each of our non-
residential customers out there, and those customers are classed into commercial,
industrial, government, and non-profit. The rates are the same for all of them, but we've
broken them up just so that you can see for the average customer in each of those
categories what the impact is. Um, so for an average commercial customer, uh, they
average about 35,700 square feet of impervious area. Uh, their current rate is about
$10.57 per month, and that would go up to $13.93 and so on, up to roughly $24.00 per
month at the end of the four years. Uh, you can see the impact for average industrial. On
the next page, uh, average governmental, and I... I should point out that in... in some
cities they struggle getting the federal agencies to pay, uh, but we've not had that trouble
locally here. The V.A. does pay, uh, storm water utility fees. Now the University of
Iowa does not pay storm water utility fees, and... and the reason for that is is they pretty
much own and operate their own storm sewer system. Uh, they also, uh, are permitted
directly by the State for their storm water system, so they're responsible for that. Uh,
where our systems are co-mingled, we have a good history ofproject-cost-sharing, uh,
though we do not charge them a storm water utility fee. And then we have the average
for the non-profits there. Uh, the last part of the memo, uh, compares to some other cities
in the state, and...get to that...um, what we're finding is Ames, for instance, right now is
at $3.00 a month. So that would equal for our single-family, uh, customers about what
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 6
we're proposing in FY13, uh, Ames is proposing a 15% increase this year, which would
put them up at about our FY141evels. Um, and also, um, Ames has got a flat rate of
$3.00 per customer across the board, for everybody. They do not, uh, they...up until this
year have not looked at the impervious area for individual customers, and they...they're
proposing that change this year, so they would become like us with a (mumbled).
Um...Ankeny currently charges $4.00 per month, tth, for single-family, which is about
the same as our...our, actually...it is the same as our FY, uh, 15 proposal. Uh, they also
charge, uh, $3.00 per ERU for that impervious area. So their...their current charge for
their non-residential customers is higher than what we're proposing in 15. Um,
Coralville is...is...been identical to us since the inception. They adopted theirs shortly
after we did, and their rates have been the same. I don't know if they plan to increase as
we increase ours or not. Uh, Dubuque is at $5.25 per month for single-family. Uh, their
non-residential is $5.25 per ERU, so that's higher than what we're proposing four years
out. And uh, Marion is $3.50 per month for single-family and uh, $3.00 per ERU. So
again, we're... even at the end of four years, we're going to be behind some of the other
cities in the state. Um, what...what this increase represents is a need for a fundamental
shift in the way that we pay for many of our storm sewer capital assets as they're built.
When you reconstruct a road or build a road, it's got the paving component and the storm
sewer component. In the past, much of that was paid for with road use tax. And as
we've talked about that money, just is not there anymore. So that begins to shift it to GO
bonds, and there's a limit there, as well. So for this storm sewer component, we're
looking to shift to pay more of that from the storm water utility fees. Can I field any
questions on that?
Hayek/ How...how did you arrive at these particular increases? Are they commensurate with
something...in particular?
Fosse/ They, um, if...if you get into our budget and look at our...our cash balances, uh, based on
the projects that are on the books that are proposed in the Capital Program, uh, it pulls
that cash balance down to, I think we go negative one year, don't we?
O'Malley/ We go negative in FY13.
Fosse/ FY13, so it...it's the minimum increase that we could...we could propose without really
tanking the account, but you know, we aren't going to be flush there either.
Hayek/ Okay. You keep the account in the black, barely.
Fosse/ With the exception of 13.
Mims/ Even with these increases, we're still going to go negative in 13?
Fosse/ Yes.
O'Malley/ There's a potential.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 7
Wilburn/ Correct me if I'm wrong, Rick, but if I remember correctly, uh, when, um, when we
came up with this, there was some thought given to kind of the different impact with
residential and commercial, and non-residential, and even for example just the notion of,
you know, that base rate plus the equivalent residential, that was an adjustment...there
were several different ways that we could have...am I thinking, uh...
Fosse/ Yes. What...the decision that we had to make back then is...is whether or not we were
going to base our residential rates on actual impervious area.
Wilburn/ Uh-huh.
Fosse/ And we went to a flat rate for all residential customers, just because the...the work
necessary to calculate that impervious area might exceed the...the incremental income
we get from those...those small pieces.
Wilburn/ Right. And I don't know if this ever worked into the...into the thinking too, but there
was some notion about, um...um...if individuals or companies went about certain
creative ways to try and, um, reduce the amount of impervious surface or...or capturing
the, um, you know, the storm water that there...a potential, a way to help give them some
type of credit for that or did..did we ever...am I...am I recalling right or...
Fosse/ Yeah, you are, you are, and...and we've not gone down that road beyond the
implementation of...the ERU's themselves, so if they...if they do things to reduce their
impervious area, it is reflected directly (both talking)
Wilburn/ ...okay, yeah. All right.
Bailey/ Kevin, you said that there's a potential of going negative in 2013. What...what
circumstances would cause that?
O'Malley/ Well, the budget is done on a point in time, and so in FY13, it shows that if the CIP
project transfers are completed exactly at that time, it'll go negative. In reality, most CIP
projects don't start and end according to anything straight, so what probably will happen
is we'll keep an eye on it and make sure that it doesn't go negative.
Bailey/ Okay. Thank you.
Hayek/ Um, if you compare two example commercial structures; one is...and they're both
10,000 square feet, -but one is two-storied so you've got a 5,000 square foot footprint with
a second story, and the other is a one-story and it's also 10,000, but it's obviously got
twice the footprint. Do they pay the same?
Fosse/ No.
Hayek/ Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council 5peclal
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 8
Fosse/ You pay it from a bird's eye view.
Hayek/ Okay.
Fosse/ Impervious area.
Wilburn/ Reason I was asking those questions of, uh, Rick was I remember, um, you know, there
was concern about a huge impact, uh, and so we were, uh, from the very beginning, uh,
this community looked at trying to you know help kind of ease that transition that... the
impact that both residential and commercial would face and the flip side of that is,
um...rather than hitting both with, you know, that higher fee later is that we've
got...we're in the red in some areas and so that's kind of catching up with that. So I was
just...that's the reason that I (mumbled) trying to ease that transition, but...
Bailey/ But it does make it a little bit of...the ERUs make a little bit of sense in there's some
controllable factor, to a degree.
Fosse/ With the completion of the Eastside Recycling Center we'll have our first green roof in
Iowa City, and we'll need to make a decision, do we count that as impervious area or
pervious area, or somewhere in between, when we look at the billing rate for that
structure. Perhaps that'll become commonplace over time as we (mumbled)
Champion/ Um, part of my concern with this, and I know we have to cover the expenses, is that
some of the industrial rates will literally triple...if I'm looking at the right chart. I'm
sorry I was late; I had a family emergency.
Fosse/ It would, uh...roughly double, little more than double.
Champion/ Well...oh! I see, right.
Mims/ One of the things that I'm glad to see is that we're not way out of line compared to other
communities,. I mean, if anything we're behind them in terms of gathering fees for the
specific need, so...even with these increases we're still behind some of them, which is...
Fosse/ I was pleased to see that, as well!
Bailey/ Did you look at Cedar Rapids?
Fosse/ Uh, I don't have their information.
Bailey/ Yeah, I'm just real curious. They seem to have a lot of impervious surface, so...I mean,
because they have a lot of industrial. So...
Hayek/ So...yeah, what I'd like to see for, uh, like an average industrial structure, which is listed
in the memo...how do you do the math to show what...what the difference is in a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 9
monthly expense for that average structure between 2012 up, you know, going forward
three years. Is it...
Fosse/ It is the, uh, the base rate goes up, uh, the base rate right now is $2.00 per unit, and
that...that'll go up 50-cents per year, and then that equivalent residential unit, that ERU,
is going to go up 25-cents per year. So you take their impervious area...
Hayek/ Oh, I see!
Fosse/ ...yeah, and you...
Hayek/ They've already done the math.
Fosse/ Yes.
Hayek/ Okay.
Fosse/ Yep.
Mims/ Look at the bottom of the next page, Matt, it shows a nice chart (mumbled)
Fosse/ Any other questions? Okay.
Animal Shelter:
O'Malley/Next question, uh, how will the Animal Shelter be financed -that's got Rick Wyss.
Um, as far as the budget side of this, we talked about (coughing, unable to hear) the GO
funding from FY11 to FY12, so it'd be the last dollar in, um, (noise on mic) FEMA and
insurance reimbursements and donations first, but I think Rick can...(mumbled) if there's
some more questions about the Animal Shelter itself.
Fosse/ At the...at the CIP meeting last week, you guys asked for more information on
(mumbled) I think that's justified. When you look at this project, you see kind of a blurry
spot (laughter) and...and uh, a lot of that has to do with, we're just trying to figure things
out with FEMA and get some decisions made and...and we're starting to move towards
that. Rick'll talk about that in more detail, uh, but certainly our sympathies go out to the
University because this is our only project we're dealing with this, whereas the
University virtually all of their flood recovery mitigation projects are...fall into this
category, so we understand what they're going through and uh...um, Rick's going to go
over some things and...and try and give you enough information so that you can make a
decision on the funding recommendation for FY13, and if you'll note, that's moved from
12 out to 13, uh, but there is a lot more information to share with you on this project,
and...and we want to do that at an upcoming work session, because there just isn't
enough time tonight to talk about this in a level of detail that we really would like to
share with you. So, Rick!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 10
Wyss/ Thank you. I...if I can make it a little less blurry, as far as the FEMA reimbursement
but...the shelter that was destroyed by the flood, uh, FEMA has agreed, or at least
obligated funding to replace the shelter in like materials and space. So, it would...and, at
a separate location. So it would be very similar to just picking up the old shelter and
placing it in a new location. And again, it was a... at that time it was a 7,200-square foot
facility and it would have to be constructed with like materials (noise on mic) shelter.
Any deviations in the space or the materials used, we would have to apply for an
improved project. Now, if it's classified as an improved project, FEMA would go by the
estimate on the materials that were previously used at the old shelter. So for example, if,
uh, we did want to use the same type of siding on the building, at the new facility as we
did on the old, they would take the old siding, their cost estimate and that would be the
limit as to what they would reimburse us for the siding on the new structure. One of the
problems is, this is a cobble constructed type facility. It was built in, uh, the late 60s, I
believe 1967 or 68. It had some remodeling done over the years, two...at least two
different remodels. Last was in 1989. In 2007, the City conducted an expansion study of
the...of the Animal Shelter and their recommendation was to expand the facility to in
excess of 20,000 square feet at a cost of about $3.2 million. Now having said that, they
were looking at...only at the expansion and the efficient use of the space. They were not
looking at the operational needs of the facility itself. After the flood, we did conduct a
feasibility study and that consultant recommended a facility at 16,000 square foot.
And...I guess one of the concerns that we have is over the years, since it's such an old
structure, and there is so many different upgrades, it's going to be extremely difficult to
use the same type of materials on a new facility. It...it just doesn't make sense to use...
to limit, uh, the structure to a facility that was far below the needs, space needs, of the
facility at the time, and then limit the materials that we're going to use to construct the
project. Is there...questions on that?
Mims/ So we're going to look at having to spend above and beyond what FEMA will give us
because one, we want to use up-to-date decent materials, and two, we want a bigger
shelter than what we had.
Wyss/ That's correct, uh, materials that are recommended...at the current industry recommended
standards.
Wright/ And that they will then basically pay the equivalent costs to rebuilding the shelter with
the improve...being an `improved project,' as they called it?
Wyss/ I don't think that we even pay the equivalent costs. What they'll...they will pay their
estimated costs, which is how we got the $1.6 to $1.7 million figure.
Wright/ Okay.
Markus/ Rick, have they given us a pretty good indication that that's the amount that they would
actually provide?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 11
Wyss/ Actually if...if we construct it to the same size and use the same materials that we had
before, they would pay...reimburse actual construction costs. So, that may be higher, but
again, we don't know about the materials.
Markus/ Okay. So if...if the project took it to the same size, and it was different materials, and it
cost us $2 million, what would you surmise they would actually provide to us?
Wyss/ Between $1.6 and $1.7 million.
Markus/ All right. Okay.
Hayek/ What is the materials difference, I mean, what are we talking about? And without it
getting...there are plenty of materials in a given structure, but in terms of...
Wyss/ I'm not going to be able to address that.
Hayek/ Okay.
Fosse/ One of the primary differences is, difference between stick built and masonry
construction, where you...you're doing daily cleaning, you've got a lot of water, uh, it
just affects the durability of the structure and your operating expenses if you're spending
more time cleaning and drying and that sort of thing.
Hayek/ Was the other one stick built?
Fosse/ Yeah. The old one started life as a garage, and it has been added on to, as Rick said, it's
been cobbled over the years, very...very, uh, good job of making do with what we had,
but you know the vulnerability there is if you have a loss, you know, reimbursement is
for the value of that loss, and that's...that's where we find ourselves right now. And, the
uh, the additional need goes beyond materials and...and simply space. There is some
functionality aspects of it too, and we'll get into that at...at the work session. There're
some things that...that, you know, just don't work well, or didn't work well, in that
existing structure that can be designed differently, and should be designed differently in
a... in a different structure.
Dickens/ It seems to be a regional animal shelter, more than just an Iowa City one. Is there any
hopes of getting any funding from anybody else? (laughter)
Fosse/ Well we...
Dickens/ Slim to none or...
Fosse/ ...we do have contracts with other communities, um, where we do get reimbursement for
those and...and we can share with you more...more information at the work session on
that.. .
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 12
Dickens/ Have those fees been raised at all...
Markus/ We had that discussion at staff at some length and apparently there's some history with,
uh, Coralville apparently actually having an equity position in the old shelter, and um,
then there got to be a dispute as to, um, the stage of euthanizing, uh, animals and...and
having different philosophical, I guess, views on how that would happen and as a result,
uh, we returned, apparently we returned their equity share, um...for their involvement in
the actual facility. So, and we've had this discussion, but we haven't refined it. I think
what has to happen is when there is a charge, there has to be a capitalized, uh, cost
associated with the structure built into the rate for the other users, but that's one of the
things that kind of concerns me as well about how these facilities get built, and...uh,
what participation level the other entities have. We...we find ourselves kind of in the
lead agency role on a number of these issues, and...in the county and in the region, and I
think that...it's...Ithfnk primarily because we have the, um, the largest kind of
population entity that has driven that in the past, and so I'm not convinced that we're
always getting our equitable share back in those environments. And that's...if we're just
going to take the lead all the time, we're probably not putting ourselves in the best
leverage position to get the right return on equity that we deserve. So...maybe some of
those things have to be negotiated up front.
Fosse/ To give you an idea of...of the regional nature of this, in 2009 there were 2,266 animals
served, and of that, 1,213 were from Iowa City. So we comprise, uh, about half of
the...of the animals served.
Hayek/ Have you...have you done the comparison to the (mumbled) we're getting from
our...our partners or other municipal clients, I guess.
Fosse/ Do you know, Rick? If we...
Hayek/ And are we getting 50% of our expenses covered? (several talking) I mean, that would
be a comparison in very rough fashion, wouldn't it? If... if that's a typical year?
Markus/ (several talking) get into those discussions and it gets to be kind of like running a retail
store, where you have loss leaders (laughter and several talking) and uh, so you start
marginalizing the cost on certain items just to, you know, to make the additional revenue,
and instead of having an equity position across the board, you know, starting in that and
that...think we have a little bit of that with our Joint Communication Center issue too,
don't we? That's another issue.
Hayek/ So how do we...factor that dynamic into this decision?
Markus/ I think, um, you can have those kinds of discussions, but I suspect that you'd almost
want to have an intergovernmental, um, about the facility and the operations before
you've progressed there. Um, but knowing the timing of this kind of facility and the need
to get this going, because we do have a time constraint, right, Rick? In terms of, they're
going to run us out at some point and then they're not going to be reimbursing us for the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 13
rent any longer. Um, it kind of puts that pressure right back on us. I suspect the other
approach is you could build it for ourselves, and not for everyone at large, or at least
make that suggestion to the other parties and see if they're willing to come to the table
with a different attitude.
Champion/ Then we can have a facility half the size!
Markus/ I don't know if it'd be half, but it could be reduced. Um, but...you know, if you're
going to...these types of facilities are best done if they do serve, you know, the entire
region, and the...the question is, is there the ability to finesse, you know, equitable
distribution of costs. I think some other entities have gladly sat on the sidelines and let
Iowa City take the lead and...and end up paying a disproportionate share. At least that's
my impression. So...maybe we need to engage the, uh, elected officials from some of the
other jurisdictions.
Fosse/ Any other questions on the Animal Shelter?
Champion/ Will we do this at a work session before we finalize the budget or not?
Fosse/ Think we'll be able to work it in there...
Markus/ I...I think you can have that discussion, but I think probably in terms of the budget, um,
the way this is being set up, we could...we could actually allocate the funds and not get
into a contractual commitment to build, at least so you can get through the budget
process, and then continue the discussion as it moves forward, uh, before we actually get
to the construction of anything.
Hayek/ Are our agreements to the extent they've been reduced to writing with other
municipalities, as it relates to animal control, well, first of all, are there such agreements,
or is it more...
Fosse/ There are some, and I think North Liberty has one on their table right now, that they're
looking at. So based what I'm hearing tonight, they might be wise to sign, and lock into
that rate and (laughter)
Markus/ But you see what that does...because we don't even know the cost of this facility, and
then we're going to, you know, we're going to have alocked-in provision where they
have a...a rate for service that doesn't necessarily cover capital overhead.
Dickens/ How many years is that?
Fosse/ You know, Misha?
Goodman/ (unable to hear)
Fosse/ The North Liberty agreement.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 14
Goodman/ It's year to year.
Champion/ Oh, year to year!
Fosse/ Year to year, okay.
Markus/ Are they 28E type?
Goodman/ They are.
Markus/ Yeah.
Goodman/ Yes, they're 28E, and the one issue that we've had is that, yes, Iowa City has taken
the lead and there is no other facility that, or...or business or anything that's available,
aside from Iowa City, and so our concern in the past has been, uh, you know, great to say
we're not going to take `em in anymore, but our fear is, uh, the county residents
and...and smaller cities have been using our facility since the 60s and probably before,
and so what's going to happen. My guess is they'll get dumped at our doorstep. Or
people will lie about where they came from and so then we'll be picking up the entire
cost. So we're trying to figure out a way to...to take in the money we should be taking
in, uh, without cutting off our nose to spite our face.
Champion/ That's a good point! (mumbled)
Fosse/ So we will be back to you at a...at a upcoming work session with greater detail on this,
and then the...the next decision point you have on this will be when we, uh, express our
desires to FEMA and whether or not we pursue a replacement project or an improved
project.
Champion/ Well, I think you have to do an improved project. I mean, it just seems silly to
rebuild what was inadequate to begin with. But I...I am concerned about the costs, but
I'm totally willing to listen.
Bailey/ So to...to deal with this in the budget, we'll move a placeholder to FY12 of $700,000?
O'Malley/ That's correct.
Bailey/ Okay.
Fosse/ 12 or 13?
O'Malley/ 12. (several responding)
Markus/ Everybody satisfied with that part of the discussion? (several responding) Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 15
Hayek/ So, if I'm editing my, uh, page C-3 out of the yellow book, I'm just moving the $700,000
in GO bonds from 11 to 12?
O'Malley/ That's correct.
Hayek/ All right.
Tax Rate•
Markus/ So the next issue up is kind of leading to the, uh, discussion of potential, uh, cuts, uh,
that the Council had a concern about the actual tax rate. So from meeting to meeting, you
know, you do drop off some of the, uh, memory of what happens at one meeting from the
next, so we wanted to cause somewhat of a thread for you, and the recollection is is that
the major causes of tax rate increase for 012, uh, were the first full year of salaries and
benefits for public safety, uh, expanded service levels. Uh, 25% increase in pension
benefits for public safety personnel. And the debt levy increases for expanded capital
improvements programs. The next thing we wanted to kind of, um, convey to you, uh,
one of the advantages of the budget process that you undertake here is that you look at a
multi-year, uh, approach where you actually do your hard budget for the one year, and
then you have two extended years so you can start to look at where things go, and so
what we did is, uh, we wanted you to understand the importance of, uh, decisions you
make today because, uh, our projections suggest that these decisions aren't going to get
any easier in subsequent years. So, uh, some of the items that we can do some trend
analysis, I tend to look at these as kind of leading indicators of what's coming, uh, public
safety pension increases, uh, apparently the State has notified us, uh, that what's coming
in future years, uh, for example fiscal year 11 the employee contribution as a percent of
payroll, uh, was 19.90%, uh, in...in fiscal year 12 it's going to 24.76%, in fiscal year 13
it's going to 29.31%, and in fiscal year 14 it's going to 37.33% and then you can see the
corresponding, uh, percent increases below that. So, as you look at...as you start to look
at, uh, your budget documents, you have to look at your revenues to see if those revenues
are going to keep pace with these types of expenditures going forward, and decisions
delayed compound themselves as you go forward. There's a few other, uh, trends that we
wanted to kind of point out to you, uh, in terms of...property values and property taxes, I
think in terms of the General Fund, uh, property taxes make up 60% of the revenue
source, uh, back to your General Fund. So when you start to look at property values, um,
usually, and I think Kevin made a pretty strong point of this, in assessment or reappraisal
years, uh, you were looking at typically double-digit increases, and if you look at what's
happening going forward, uh, those are down to single-digit, uh, increases and we put an
estimate together for fiscal year 13 at about 2%. So, your, you know, your main stream
of revenue is really starting to taper off, and of course that puts pressure on...on
ultimately the taxes because without that increase, you do have typical built-in increases
in labor contracts, and just what I indicated earlier in the pension contribution levels that
are being projected. Um, and then under the data below is from the Iowa City Area
Association of Realtors, and we tried to pull some real kind of market data together for
you, so you could see what's going forward, um, in terms of listings, uh, from January-
December through 2009, and the median price of a price sold was $172,900 and then
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 16
from January-December 2010, the median price dropped to about $164,700. I calculated
the percentage on that earlier, but that was about, what...5%?
O'Malley/ That's 5%.
Markus/ Yeah, that's about a 5% drop.
O'Malley/ This is one of the indicators that I look at every year because it's, to me, it's a telling
remark whether or not I can expect an increase. I put 2% estimate, that's in the budget.
We may not even get 2% next year. Cause the average price is actually down 7%, on the
sales.
Champion/ What is DOM stand for?
O'Malley/ Days on Market. (several talking)
Champion/ Oh! You can tell I'm not a realtor! (several talking)
Markus/ Which wasn't, you know...what I have seen in other parts of the country are significant
variations. That's not a significant change, quite frankly, between the two-year period.
Uh, the other thing that, of course, we reported on was the flattening of the interest
income, uh, revenue dropped in...on our fund balances, and you know, as recent as fiscal
year 8, that generated $1,664,000 and you can see it's really dropped, and it's really
flattened out. So you...you've lost a major, uh, revenue source, at least for the time
being.
O'Malley/ And what I'd like to comment on this page is besides, you know, the Federal Reserve
keeping interest rates low, I can't get banks to bid on our money. They're flush with
cash, so I end up parking a lot of it in a day account, so not getting any kind of interest at
all, and we did a comparison with other cities and they're pretty much in the same boat.
Markus/ I think that kind of corresponds to what's happening with commercial lending, you
know, these banks are just not pushing any money out, which is also causing some
problems with their ability to get some economic development projects going. I can tell
you recently, uh, the developers that have come to see us, they...they not only...typically
if you wanted to do a TIF project, the developer'd come in and they'd, you know, they'd
front-load some of those costs with the expectation that TIF would take `em out later on
after those...they're talking to us about front-loading the costs with TIF, uh, to try and
get those things started, which is a tricky thing to do when you haven't had TIF districts
in place that are generating those increments that you have in any kind of fund balance.
So it's... it's going to be a real trick to try and pull off some of this economic
development activity that we've been talking about. Uh, next is the, um, is, and we've
taken some quotes kind of on a national level, and I have to tell you that Iowa has fared
substantially better, um, than just about any other place, uh, it's got to be in the top 10%
or even better, in terms of states and what's happened, and you only need to realize
what's coming out of the State of Illinois here recently and the comments that...that were
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 17
made. I jotted down some notes. Um, did you all hear this story about, uh, what's
happening to their income tax rates in, uh (several talking) yeah, they...they indicated
that, uh, I think Illinois is only second to California in terms of their, uh, gap between
revenue and expense. They're...they're looking at a $15 billion gap in their state budget,
uh, which is...which makes up about 48% of their budget. Uh, they're talking about a
66% increase in their income tax rate, uh, which takes their rate from 3% to 5%, um, they
were actually talking about moving up to 5.2%, which is closer to about a 70...75%
increase. And, um...they're also talking about raising their business tax from 4.8 to 7%.
So, there...there are other places that are in much more dire, uh, circumstance, obviously,
than we are. I noted some of the commentary around some of the boundary states around
Illinois, and they were all talking about the potential for economic development from the
people that are running from the state of Illinois to get out from the tax burdens that...that
exist there, but...this is...this is a countrywide problem that's occurring, and to a certain
degree, I think Iowa has been pretty blessed and insulated from a lot of that. Anyway,
health insurance costs are expected to rise. Uh, again, we're somewhat of an anomaly
there. I think, uh, Kevin's quote was, we're round 3% or slightly less in our actual
increases, and the negotiations, uh, with our various employee units have, uh, got better
cost participation by our employees. So going forward we may not experience that, but
uh, the ballooning and seemingly uncontrollable health expenditures, and in 78 health
outlays were just 12% of state and local expenses. Today they're 20% and rising. And
the other thing I talk about in terms of, um, some trends, you know, you have your local
option sales tax, uh, is going to drop off, and I think around 2014, so that's going to be
another source of revenue that you're going to drop, uh, from and...and not have
available, unless you somehow can renew that. Uh, past and future trends that impact
property taxes continue. Uh, this is a quote from the Kip...Kiplinger Letter, uh, many
local governments face a painfu12011, even as the national economic picture gets
brighter. This is pretty common, uh, as the...as you listen to most of the economic
pundits, they say that our economy is improving, but government typically lags, uh, the
private sector by...by some time. Uh, they indicate tens of thousands of jobs will be
eliminated, services trimmed and local procurements scaled back, uh, they're talking
about less generous pensions and health benefits for, uh, new public, uh, workers. And
that means tougher recruiting of top prospects, even for the, uh, after the fiscal situation
improves. Uh, more defaults, uh, are predicted, and if we think Uncle Sam or, uh...um,
who's our new Governor? Uh, Terry, Uncle Terry are going to come to our rescue, um,
that doesn't seem likely, based on the rhetoric we're hearing, both out of Washington and
out of, uh, Des Moines, uh, so that's not likely that we can depend on that, and it's just
another thing that I think you have to keep in mind in terms of the trend of what we're
going to deal with, with these budgets. Um... so having said that, uh, I wanted to make
that thread between last meeting and this meeting, and so we started to look at ways that
we could deal with, uh, our property tax levies, and we went through and talked to, uh, a
number of different, uh, the diff...the employees, and...realize of course that no one
wants to give anything up. Everybody believes, um, firmly and confidently that the
resources they're using are the...are resources that are necessary to deliver the services.
And I would say to you that I think you have to keep in mind that the economic forces
that kind of create these situations, uh, cause us to respond and react in certain ways, and
it was pretty clear to I think the staff that the Council despite, um, the roll-up in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 18
employees, um, in terms of public safety we had proposed 15 more employees. Nine in
fire and six in police, uh, nine essentially to, uh, open up Station #4, um, they weren't
comfortable with, I think, the proposed tax increase numbers. So we went back and took
a look at what we could do, and the proposals that we made were the reduction of one
police officer, uh, which equates to about $72,000. Uh, one firefighter and that number is
$75,000. These numbers are not, uh, you know, they're not right to the gnat's eyebrow,
but they're pretty close. Uh, agenda software in the Council are $27,500, uh, travel and
that is essentially out of state travel that we're talking about, uh, our budget is about
$107,000 and we're talking about reducing that to $77,000. Uh, deer control, and we
talked about giving that up for a year, um...people have talked about that, and
anecdotally I' 11 tell you that we've had some people offer to do that (laughter) and I think
that, uh, Steve Atkins and Dale and others, uh, including the Police Chief were probably
looking out for the interest of the rank and file who may have wanted to do that, because
I think it would create some, uh, ill will towards the Department that probably isn't worth
the savings in terms of how that's done. But...
Champion/ I think it would cause a lot of ill will to the deer!
Markus/ Yeah, that too! So, we thought we'd give, uh, we'd give it a break for a year, and that's
why we suggested maybe cutting that $45,000. This next one, um...you know, when you
get into budget cuts, at times you get accused of playing accounting games, and this, uh,
probably (coughing) criticism for this, but what it's doing is transfor...transferring the
benefit costs for the Transportation Department away from the benefit levy, which means
the tax levy, and moving it over to the Transit system, and funding it out of Transit's, uh,
fund balance. Now, having said that, um, that will help you reduce your tax levy, but you
have a subsequent discussion coming up when you're talking about Sunday service, and
like so many, uh, things, I suspect that you were looking at fund balances and...and, you
know, when you had... sometimes when you have too big a fund balances, they become
targets for expense, and uh, so maybe we're helping in that regard to resolve this Sunday
service issue. I know Chris and I have had brief conversations about the, uh, transporta-
tion issue on Sunday and we're really not convinced that the bus system, um, wouldn't be
running idle for quite a bit of the time on Sundays so...uh, Chris, if you want to add to
that, I...I think we have some concerns about the Sunday service and whether that's
necessarily something, um, that we can support at this particular time, but I know the
issues come up and you feel compelled to talk about it.
O'Brien/ Yeah, and I still plan to be here for the work session on the 24t", um...unless it gets
pushed to another date, but um, you know, afull-blown, and I discussed the concerns I
had with the full-blown, big buses out there running Sunday service at the time, um, you
know, there are other options which I'll, you know, I'll list some of the options when
we're here on the 24t", but obviously with this economic environment, um, start looking
at expanding service levels, whether it's week-day, weekend, and you're starting to talk
about staff, uh, capital expenses, you know, it's a really tough time to do that, and, uh, I
think that's one of the main topics that we'll be discussing on...on the 24t" when I'm
here. So, if there are any questions about direct impacts, once again, I think on the 24t",
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 19
here. So, if there are any questions about direct impacts, once again, I think on the 24tH,
you know, have time set aside if you would like to...to discuss it then, um, otherwise if
there's any questions regarding that, uh, I can certainly take some now.
Markus/ Chris, we're...we're running a fund balance in that...in that fund of what, a billion?
What was the number?
O'Malley/ It's $2.4.
O'Brien/ It's at 2.4, right, but the last...
Markus/ ...writing that down by $300,000.
O'Brien/ Yeah, with Court Street Transportation Center, uh, online now for, oh, about six, seven
years now, um...it's allowed us to put funds into Transit to spend capital, or to spend
local funds versus, uh, for example, Bongo, um, highly successful, something that joint
agencies putting that project together. All funded with local funds, uh, there's no federal
money attached to that. We purchased a used bus, local fund, um, we've been able to
support... we've gotten six buses out of... some stimulus, some not; um, currently we
have two more that are currently slated to, uh, to be funded through the state (mumbled).
All of that we're able to fund, um, cause the balances that we've maintained, so...
Champion/ In Transit the benefits of Transit employees right now comes out of our employee
levy?
O' Brien/ Correct.
Champion/ Is that (mumbled) like the Landfill where it comes out of the Landfill revenue, isn't
that correct?
O'Brien/ Yeah, it's not an enterprise fund. Parking, for example, that...half the operations is an
enterprise fund and so they're self-supporting. Transit, as part of the General Fund, does
use the employee benefits levy.
Markus/ So what we're trying to do is...is make some cuts that get to the bottom line of the tax
bill for, um, residents and businesses in the community. Uh, maybe go to the next
(mumbled)
Champion/ Uh, when you talk about reducing a police officer and a firefighter, does that include
benefits or was that just a base salary?
O'Malley/ Yes, that includes benefits.
Champion/ Includes benefits, and did we look at other departments?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council 5peclal
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 20
Markus/ One of the reasons that...um, I focused on that, and...and I'll tell both police and
firefighters directly, uh, the reason I looked at that is because that's where the major, uh,
additions had occurred and increased, and in...in many cases, to look at an across-the-
board doesn't necessarily get to the issue of taxes, because a number of the employee
groups are funded out of different, uh, enterprise funds. It doesn't go to the bottom line
of property taxes. Um...one of my intentions, uh, going forward is to really, uh, drill
down into some of these budgets. I've been here for five working weeks when I finish
tomorrow and um, so I came in kind of at the tail end of a lot of this, and...one of the
approaches that I certainly will take is I will be sitting down with every department head,
uh, when we get through this budget and we start the next budget process, and...and
become intimately aware of how funds are directly being spent, how we're manning
operations, and all of those things, uh, so that I will be better equipped going forward in
those kinds of discussions, but to be direct, my connection was back to where we
expanded numbers, and typically I would say to you I wouldn't go to police and fire first,
but for the fact that that's (coughing) expansion was, I consider them to be...you know,
the primary services that governments exist for. Um, police, fire, and public works' type
services, and...and many of us are, uh, the...are the, you know, the support services
behind those, um, mean front-line type services.
Champion/ I think we also sold the franchise fee on public safety, so I mean I would not feel
comfortable cutting out a big deficit we had for so long, but now we finally kind of
caught up, um, with our public safety people.
Bailey/ Well, and I'm glad to hear you say the things you're saying, um, you know that you're
going to take a look at...at operations and that's something that makes a lot of sense and I
understand that you haven't been here that long. My concern with this approach is...is a
little similar to Connie's. I mean, we have three areas that are...and any time you cut a
budget with a governmental entity you affect service. But these seem to most directly
affect citizen services, and my question then would be, and I think others, my
constituents would have it as well, is aren't there cuts, um, staffing cuts within the
organization, deeper, that would have an impact first and foremost internally, and then
may ripple out to affect services, versus something that seems really front-line services.
Sunday bus service, police and fire, that we worked really hard on ramping up, so that
would be my initial response.
Markus/ And...and I understand that. One of the things that, uh, talked to, um, the Fire Chief
about was the insistence that we were to open Station #4, and that it would be manned,
uh, in terms of what we represented to the public about how that was going to be done,
and make no mistake about it, the...the chiefs aren't necessarily willing to give up those
people. Um, this is...this is, you know, based on what I'm currently seeing in terms of a
need to balance, you know; what's an acceptable tax to your constituents in an
environment that, you know, um, I think a lot of people are stressed in and I...I'm
convinced and confident that the Chief can make this work in terms of Station #4 and
getting it open and manning the trucks properly. I'm also convinced that the Police
Department, uh, can deploy the personnel necessary, and when you look at the change
from what was to what is going to be, I think that it is already an expansion, uh, a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 201 I City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 21
attrition situation, so I...that's why I put the trends in there. Your trends going forward
don't make this any easier going forward, and if you...my experience has been if you do
not, uh, step up and take that responsibility when it first presents itself, it actually
multiplies the problem later. So...
Champion/ Well, I agree with you, I think we have to start looking at, um, actual cuts, not just
cutting out the capital improvement projects cause things are going to get worse! Um,
there might be, I mean, there might be the possibility of a firefighter who's not a
firefighter. I mean, they're not a, do you know what I'm saying?
Markus/ No! (several talking and laughing)
Mims/ I didn't quite catch what you said!
Champion/ Not fighting fires, like we hired a fireman to do capacity things, I mean, that kind
of...different position that wasn't, I mean, there are firemen, but they're not necessarily
fire fighters. Does that make (several talking)
Markus/ That's what we are doing in this case. Andy, why don't you comment about what
specifically, um, this adjustment would be.
Rocca/ Well, when Tom, uh, presented the issue to me, asked him for the opportunity to go back
and evaluate what kind of options that we might have in terms of a staff reduction. And
uh, one of my concerns, as he stated, was that we roll out Fire Station #4, adequately
staffed, just like we told the public we would, and...and that was really the bottom line,
the give in. So with that we went back and we looked at the captain of inspections
division. Uh, I think a number of things changed the landscape about the A-2
occupancies, alcohol...selling occupancies. We have the 21-only ordinance now and um,
that certainly has changed the downtown. We've got some provisions in place with, um,
crowd control managers and evacuation planning, sprinkler systems in those occupancies
that we didn't have, so I think we did identify several risks there. Um, we have some
mechanisms in place to continue to address those risks, um, I think there will be a
reduction in service delivery, and...and some delays frankly in our ability to do plan
reviews and inspections and some of those things if we in fact do, um, reduce or
eliminate this position. Uh, but again, the bottom line was maintaining Fire Station #4
staffing and opening it as we indicated we would, uh, and looking at I guess a less of an
impact, if you will, uh, but...but overall that fire captain of inspections position has had a
very positive impact on the community in terms of life safety and fire prevention
activities, but that is one of the areas we're looking at.
Champion/ Has the, um, we have a lot more buildings downtown, and I'm only taking about
downtown now, with sprinkler systems. Um, and that's got to be a good feeling for the
Fire Department. It's a good feeling for me (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 22
Champion/ Has the, um, we have a lot more buildings downtown, and I'm only taking about
downtown now, with sprinkler systems. Um, and that's got to be a good feeling for the
Fire Department. It's a good feeling forme (both talking)
Rocca/ Certainly it's a good feeling (both talking) to have built-in fire protection is certainly a
good thing, uh, there's still some room for improvement down there, but we have made
significant progress in that.
Dickens/ Will the opening of the new station take pressure off the downtown station?
Rocca/ To some degree, Terry, it will.
Dickens/ So, some of that can be partially spread. I'm not saying it...because the response time
to that area...
Rocca/ Response time, service delivery, and the emergency arena will be impacted, for the most
part.
Champion/ I hate to even ask this question, but what do you anticipate as far as a Fire Station #5?
I hate to even ask, but I think it's...
Rocca/ Well, we've identified, in terms of strategic planning (mumbled) will be triggered by
growth. Uh, we've identified the southside of Iowa City, given McCollister, Mormon
Trek, the...overpass there, the bridge over the river, all the water-sewer infrastructure's
in place, so it's a matter of identifying a...tract of land that could be identified as a fire
station, and trying to stay ahead of that growth and programming that in, but it really
hinges on how fast the area grows and develops.
Dickens/ Terry Trueblood area opening up, that will drive some building down there most likely.
Rocca/ Correct.
Wright/ I think I even saw a reference in something I was reading, this budget cycle is number
six.
Rocca/ They're in the unfunded, they are. Because they were identified in our fire strategic plan.
Champion/ Well, I'm glad this one's opening.
Markus/ And you know there's the two parts of these projects. When you go into the new station
and you're talking about the capital side of this and then you're talking about the
operational side of this, and one of the things that, uh, we had earlier on this evening in
the discussion was how do you go about funding your next fire station, and I have no
doubt in my mind that this fire department, uh, would do a service to the community in
helping to sell putting this on a, uh, you know, on an election, a referendum, for that type
of, uh, issue and I personally I suspect that it would be highly, um, successful and that
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 23
way it would keep it out of the, uh, you know, the...the, um...limitations that we're using
right now in terms of just GO funding, so...I mean, that's something we want to keep in
mind, but again, you know, I think what's happened we made these decisions with
additional staffing, and then these trend lines started to...to hit you almost the same time,
so I think the impact was, um, the timing didn't seem to...the lines didn't cross very well
for us in terms of the revenues and the...and the initial expenses. So I, you know, I...I
appreciate, you know, the response of the Chiefs. Don't misunderstand for a moment
that they were happy to have to do this or to have that discussion, um...but I appreciate
them working with me to try and come up with some ideas to, you know, make this
happen. So...thanks, Chief.
Wright/ What is the police position? (several talking)
Hayek/ (several talking)
Helling/ I don't think that's been determined, although I think, uh, the Chief, one of the things
he's looking at is the, uh, Juvenile Investigator, um...but that's really an assignment issue
there, because it's...it's a reduction in the number of officers, and uh, so...you know,
that's one of the things that's been talked about, but...the others would be assigned to the
watches and you know there could be some... some, uh, manipulation done there in terms
of all the watches don't need, unlike the fire department where you have to have three
people, nine people to open a station, the watches don't have to all operate with the same
number of people, so...he'd have some flexibility there too. I don't think that decision's
been made.
Markus/ Rick, in the, um, right now you have three officers, uh, deployed, um, overseas, and
those three officers have been somewhat supplanted by, um, one officer being, uh,
in...over authorization (both talking) yeah, over-hires, so we have a...we have atwo-
deficit in terms of authorization, and then we're in this process where we added some
officers, as well. And...and in talking to the Chief today, I get the impression that, uh,
those three officers may be rejoining the force at some particular time in the not-too-
distant future.
Wyss/ Probably in August to September, uh, I think their release dates are in August and
typically they get 30 days leave and so they'll rejoin us in...in (several talking) there was
one over-hire.
Hayek/ Hey, Rick, could you hold up your mic. Marian's giving us (mumbled) (laughter)
Wyss/ Um, as far as the deployment of the officers and how that would (mumbled) not having
the opportunity to speak with the Chief about this, um...typically the backbone of the
department's going to be the patrol officers. We need to have sufficient staff to respond
to calls for service, and...and we certainly don't want to go below staffing. Uh, think
that, um, you know we have had some considerable success with the Crime Prevention
officer, as well as the, uh, Juvenile Investigator, who...who frankly just started a week
ago and we're really looking forward to, uh, seeing what...what progress can be made
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 24
there. That said, um, it is what it is and...and we will do everything we can with
whatever resources we have available to us.
Champion/ (several talking)
Helling/ Does everybody understand the...this over-hire, cause that was...that was my
authorization and it's...it's net-zero in terms of dollars because those people that are
deployed are on, uh, leave of absence without pay so the funding is there, and there are
three people over we authorized, one over-hired just because of...of the kind of situations
we're talking about. Now you don't want to be all the way up, cause you're relying on
some turnover between now and the time they get back to maintain, stay within your
budget, and we can do this with attrition and still, you know, accommodate those people
when they're ready to come back.
Markus/ But, Rick, if I'm understanding this correctly, you have three officers deployed. You
have one over-hire. When those three officers come back, they fill slots that have been
kind of running vacant, and so aren't you now in a better position when they return in
terms of your deployment of...of officers at that point?
Wyss/ We...we will be, uh, I think one thing is that we have made...we have hired the new
officers, uh...
Markus/ The six new.
Wyss/ ...the six new officers. None of them are on their own yet. They're still in field training,
so we haven't actually seen the, uh, the strong benefits of that until they get out of the
training and get on their own. Um...so...but that said, absolutely, uh, once...once they
return, we' 11 be at full strength.
Markus/ So, over status quo, you should be at a net plus.
Champion/ You' 11 still be one plus.
Wright/ Even losing a position we'll be two ahead.
Markus/ Over what the current scenario is (mumbled)
Hayek/ Has, um...probably hard to quantify, but...but has the...have the benefits downtown
with the 21-policy over the last half year resulted in, uh, a greater ability to deploy
elsewhere in the community?
Wyss/ Yes it has. I think that the responses in the outlying area are significantly better, and
there's a lot of factors go into it, but certainly the 21, uh, only ordinance has had a
significant impact on the downtown. Now one of the things that we are starting to see is
a little bit of change in behaviors in the downtown, and people just going downtown
earlier and earlier, and we'll see how early they can go, but (laughter) um...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 25
Champion/ 8:00 A.M.!
Dickens/ Be done by 10:00!
Wyss/ Exactly, and so the redeployment may have to shift from shift to shift, uh (mumbled) yes
there's been some significant, um, impact (mumbled) and I'm hoping that the statistics
will (mumbled) that out at the end of the year.
Dickens/ Us too!
Mims/ I would just say as I look at the...the staff suggestions here to...to reduce, um, you know,
I certainly agree with Connie, and I think what I'm hearing Regenia say, I'm not at all
excited about seeing public safety targeted; however, having said that, um, given that we
can do it through attrition, uh, or just not hiring positions, given that Tom has just come
on board and has every intent to really drill down into the budget and our staffing and
expenses over the next year, um...and I think a fresh set of eyes on an organization can
always be positive thing, um, to look at things...I...I would support this with the idea that
we'd see Tom coming back next year with, um, you know, some other ideas and
suggestions so that we can still make sure that we're keeping public safety, uh, first and
foremost, which is what we had promised the community, um, and look at some other
areas that, um, where we can cut back if we continue to need to, and unfortunately, given
these increases in... in health insurance, in the pension plans, uh, the flat property values,
um, I think as Tom keeps saying, I think this is just the beginning of our hard choices,
and so while I don't like to see it coming in public safety, I think given where we've
added, and with Tom (noise on mic) to look at this, um, I can live with it for a year.
Champion/ Well now that I've heard, um, police department and the fire department, I think I
can live with it too.
Wright/ Yeah, given the...the inspections position, which I hate to not fill, um...and the...the
fact that we've got two officers who are out right now. Three, excuse me, three
coming...three that are out and they'll be coming back. So they'll still actually have a
net gain. I think I could live with it for a year.
Hayek/ I can...I can support this too for...exact reasons Susan, uh, mentioned.
Mims/ That was interesting...
Hayek/ (both talking) this is not easy but, uh (both talking)
Mims/ No, it's not! It's kind of funny cause when I went through the budget, one of the areas I
came across was the deer control and that was one of the first things I thought was can't
we maybe go with that every other year. The numbers seem to be down and...
Helling/ Let me clarify though. We're not doing it...we didn't do it this year...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 26
Mims/ Right.
Helling/ ...so that will be two years that we don't do it. (several talking) But, the...the counts
were very low and, uh, I suspect they'll start to come back up. I'm sure they will, um,
but I think a second year on this is probably something we can live with.
Markus/ The other cuts at the bottom are, uh, what are called sustainable 1 % cuts, and let me
explain that. One of the things that we did is a bit of a departmental exercise is we went
through the budgets and we asked everybody to, if they had to cut 1 % of their budget, uh,
what would you cut, and so um...as you can imagine, we got quite a wide array of
different responses to that and some were a little bit more, uh, cuttable and some were
what I would describe as a little bit more squishy. Um, so what we, uh, tried to do, and
Kevin went through these numbers and picked out about $50,000 more in items that we
felt comfortable in cutting, and so we'll go back to the departments and make those
adjustments, but these are items that of course everybody had, uh, themselves indicated,
uh, they were willing to deal with. The other thing going back up to, uh...
Hayek/ Sorry, but those are not personnel, that (both talking)
Markus/ No, no. They're...they're within accounts. Yeah. Um...and again, the travel issue,
just so you understand, I think the total out of state travel was about $107,000, and then
you get into this issue of...of, uh, and we were proposing to cut about $77,000 of that,
and then you get into this issue of, well, what are you going to cut, and what...and so
we've already been going through some of that, and of course there's going to be some
travel that's going to continue where that's the only class that you can possibly get,
um...I will tell you I'm a major advocate for, uh, web streaming a lot of these conference
activities and training activities, and I think that's something that all of these national
organizations are going to have to go to, uh, if we're going to continue to see the kind of
declines in... in local governments' ability to spend money. Um, I think we're going to
have to go there, uh, and...and obviously there was a question posed, um...does, um, out
of state travel include...what'sthe name of the city? (several talking) Moline? Um
(laughter) I think we can arrange an annexation to Moline from the state of Iowa and
(several laughing and talking) big issue.
Champion/ They have a decent zoo!
Hayek/ They'd probably appreciate it, before their tax hits go into place! (laughter)
Markus/ So, that...that's what those numbers involve. Uh, now let me kind of explain the
impact of that, and obviously you folks need to deliberate those issues, but the proposed,
uh, reductions, uh, impact on property tax levies. Operating levies would be reduced by
23 '/2 cents, uh, which means the $647,000 divided by 27,700 equals 23.4 cents. Each
cent equals $27,700 in terms of revenue generated. The debt levy would be reduced by
6.6 cents, uh, by moving the Animal Shelter, uh, $700k, and the First Avenue overpass,
$800k, to fiscal 12. What's that?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 27
Bailey/ That poor thing is never going to get done!
Markus/ Uh, so the net result is, if you go to the next page, uh, Kevin, and you go down to the
highlighted, uh, second line, and then go below that, and you go to the, uh, fiscal year 12
revised numbers. The actual impact on the taxpayer is still a 3.78% increase, tax
increase, after you've made those...er, after you've made those decreases. The actual
increase in the tax rate, uh, equates to about a half a percent. So...recall that the number
used to be, um, about 5.6%, uh, in the original document that we presented to you. The
new impact on a resident would be 3.6%. When you look at that 3.78, that...that is
across all taxable properties, but when you drill down and you just look at it from a
residential taxpayer, the impact is about 3.6. So it's a decline of almost 2% over what
was originally proposed, in terms of the impact on the taxpayer. Um...and I would guess
some of you might still have issues about that number, but that's what staff came up with,
and that's what we feel comfortable in recommending at this particular time. The bulk of
that, by the way, I would indicate to you has more to do with the...the not so severe roll
down (several talking) roll back of, uh, residential values, as it does about the actual tax
rate increase. When you take advantage of the, uh, the not so severe declines, I think you
have to take advantage of the others too. So...I think that was the extent of what we were
going to present this evening and...and talk to you about. Um, and if you want to have
more discussion about that now, you can as well. The other thing I...I added to your
packet, uh, which I told you I was, um, recommending when I first, um, went through,
um...the message last meeting was I've prepared a...what's called a draft economic
development policies, a guide, which is something I'd like to suggest that we incorporate
into our budget document. I don't know...we didn't put that on a Power...but that should
be in your packet. It looks like...something like this.
Champion/ Uh-huh.
Markus/ And...uh, if you'd like I can just walk through the highlights, uh, of what I'm
proposing.. .
Hayek/ Sure.
Markus/ ...here.
Hayek/ Please do.
Markus/ All right. Um, basically the first paragraph describes the purpose of the plan, uh, being
to attract new development. Secondarily it is to retain the City's existing business
operations, and third, it's um, the City's plan also supports organizations which help to
incubate, grow, foster, create new businesses, business operations, by providing non-
traditional collaborative environments and for those of you who may be wondering what
is he talking about, um...ICAD has kind of taken over the old incubator study, and
they've migrated to something called co-work, uh, facilities and that's going to be rolled
out over the next couple of weeks, and so that was kind of in my mindset when I included
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 28
that item in there. The expected results when we use economic development policies are
one, increased economic activity, more jobs, lower unemployment, higher wages, greater
property values, more tax revenues, and this is something you won't typically find in
many economic development policies, but more ownership and entrepreneurial
opportunities, and finally, the revitalization of underutilized or blighted areas. And um,
the project that was just rolled out in front of the City Council, uh, here at the last
meeting would be a prime example of that, the Towncrest development. Uh, down to the
fourth paragraph, the various, uh, evaluative tools including financial pro formas, written
evaluation reports, established benefit metrics, and other performance tools will be used
to measure the, uh, the use of the incentives as a part of our evaluation in the
recommendations on those. And...next paragraph, uh, developers are expected to enter
into a development agreement, uh, one of the things that, uh, that I was somewhat remiss
in when we recommended the Press-Citizen, uh, package that we put together is we
should have had a written agreement associated with that that spelled out what the
incentive was and what the expectation was, uh, when they're more substantial than that,
I think we should actually be recorded against the property, and maybe that...when those
incentives are not, um, when...when parties do not meet the intent of the incentive that
there needs to be some methodology where we get reimbursed for the activity that we
participated in. Um...the next...the next paragraph is somewhat of a, uh, a bit of a larger
statement and I'll just try and summar...summarize. The City will not actively recruit
business from other jurisdictions within our MSA. And the point I'm making there is
that, um...to me it's just playing musical chairs by trying to induce somebody from
another jurisdiction into ours. If your...if your purpose is to create more jobs and your
purpose is to create greater tax base, I think you have to look at the MSA that we're in,
and I think that's one of the emphasis that ICAD always points out, that you're trying to
attract interstate commerce. You're trying to attract from outside into our area. That's
the way you create new jobs. That's the way you create net new value. When you just
attract from areas in adjacent communities or in our MSA, you're just moving people,
and I suggest to you that when you do that, you're...you're starting a spiral that's pretty
much unsustainable, because what's going to happen is they're going to get an incentive,
they're going to use the incentive, they're going to incen...they're going to amortize the
facilities, run out the incentive, and then they're going to go looking in the other
jurisdiction to move, and so we're going to get into this game that's played back and
forth. To me it's azero-sum game. That's not what we should be using, and remember,
you're still using public funds on these incentives. That's not the way we should be
using public funds. So that's a fairly strong statement about how we're going to behave,
and...personally my hope is that maybe we can set the standard for how we behave in our
MSA.
Wilburn/ I was going to say I think it's a very strong philosophical policy statement, leadership
statement, to make for our area. It acknowledges that we, I mean, despite our, um,
boundaries that we have around our communities, uh, we're really one community, and
um, and that we want to take the leadership, that we want to have a positive impact on the
entire area.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 29
Dickens/.Well you saw what happened in Cedar Rapids and Marion, fighting over a company.
Just in the last few months...
Markus/ I think our MSA, uh, as I understand, uh, the description includes both Washington and
Johnson County, and I think it approaches 150,000 population. I kind of chose that area
because it, you know, I think even though we're a part of the corridor that runs all the
way up to Cedar Rapids, um, I really don't sense that, you know, that that's...there may
be decisions by businesses that are...I think we could be really considered a very
different market area necessarily than Cedar Rapids, but in this specific area that...that
just doesn't make sense to me, and...I would tell you, you know, all you have to do is
think back about some of the articles that have appeared in recent newspa...newspapers
about a businesses that are being, uh...um, potentially relocated to other jurisdictions to
really understand, you know, how unfruitful that kind of use of an incentive would be, if
that's what's happening. So...um...
Champion/ (mumbled)
Markus/ The next, uh, the next point I'd make is the dollar amount of the incentive, and this is
kind of a, uh, it's kind of a general statement, but uh, in time duration the incentive shall
be the smallest amount necessary to achieve the maximum amount of City benefit, as
determined by the City of Iowa City, City Council. And, what I would say about that is,
when you look at, for example, uh, I believe they call it the Plaza Towers, right? Um,
that project achieved its goal, uh, in a much shorter time period than what was originally
set up, and I...I think what the City did as a result of that is the right example. You
return, you took it off, um, the TIF process, you stopped extracting revenues, and you
returned them to the city and the corresponding taxing jurisdictions that benefit from that.
So...my personal opinion is, that's the right way to go about it, um...now...you may say,
well, but that leaves you short of seed money. Well, there's other ways to still, um,
attract seed money for future development in that process, but to just keep running these
things out to the max, I think does, um, take resources from other taxing jurisdictions that
you don't necessarily need to be doing. And, again, when you're using incentives, um,
you are stepping into the free market place, and you are suggesting that but for the
incentive, this project wouldn't occur otherwise. And, when you're in an environment
that uses incentives, I suspect that you have to do that, but you have to ask yourself, are
we...creating a false economy by just always using incentives, would those businesses
otherwise start here on their own without the incentive. We're in an environment where
incentives are used, and because of that environment, we have to compete to some level,
uh, against those same incentives. So...there's no doubt in my mind that we're going to
have to use incentives going forward, but at some point it would seem to me that I think
all of us in this MSA really need to have asit-down and really talk about how incentives
are used, and...and whether that's really the smartest way to use our tax dollars in terms
of growing our economy. Uh...and finally I say the program needs to be flexible and
nimble, and obviously it needs to be open and transparent public process. Um, working
with developers is kind of a trick in that regard, because developers, uh, typically want to
covet that information. They don't necessarily want that information out there in those
negotiations as they work in a competitive environment, but I think, um...our process
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 30
does have to be very open and above-board and transparent, and that's why I've rolled
that into the policy. These are fairly general, uh, comments about how our policy should
operate, but as these things appear in our budget, I think just like other, uh, fiscal policies
that we have, uh, already in our budget, I think we should add this to our budget
document as kind of a guideline and how we're going to behave, and that does not mean
that we can't get into more specific types of how we do things and what, you know, what
specific funding, uh, we provide. But those things could be run I think through your
Economic Development Committee and...and work in that regard, so...this is what I was
referring to when I talked about this from the last meeting and this is something I'd like
you to consider, maybe as a part of your budget, adopt...
Hayek/ I think, uh...um, one thing, and this relates to the very last paragraph, for...for staff to be
thinking about is, I mean, we've talked about this before, briefly...um...enabling staff
to...to engage in discussions and...and do some negotiation, and...and have that
flexibility, um, which is required by much of the private sector, but at the same time
balancing the transparency concerns that we, you know, we've always had and will
always respect. That's a...that's an interesting balance but something I think we need to
clarify, um, so...
Markus/ We've had some discussions amongst staff, uh, Kevin and Jeff and um...we're trying
to, um...we're all trying to, you know, get used to each other and...and what our
individual areas of understanding, expertise, and, uh...experience has been, and I think
we're kind of forging, uh, some common ideas about how we're going to approach a lot
of these things and I think going forward, um, we are going to be facing some real
opportunities. I think the tough part going forward is we really don't have seed money
established at this point that some places might, that already have had TIFs running, and
have, you know, some fund balance that they can use in that regard. So that's going to be
a bit of a...a challenge going forward but I think we can make those things work. I...you
know, just since I've been here, I can tell ya, I've been contacted by a lot of individuals
that have real serious interest about, uh, different projects, and I can tell you one of the
biggest problems that they all describe is the financial markets, and the, uh, ability to get
funding to start some of these projects going, so...we're starting to kind of examine how
we go about doing some of those things, but...I...I think we can make it work. I think
it...I think we have some exciting possibilities to grow our tax base, but...we'll see!
Commercial markets are still pretty tight, from what I can tell! (mumbled)
Mims/ Going back just a couple of pages, um...on the capital...three pages maybe. Yeah, to the,
um, go back three or four pages to that proposed reductions impact on property tax levies,
the 23.4 cents, etc. On the debt levy, um...I think Regenia almost choked on the First
Avenue, and so my...my question is, in moving that $8,000, ur, or $800,000...$8,000,
yeah (laughter) $800,000, um, on the First Avenue overpass to fiscal year 12,
what's...what is that doing to the actual construction?
Fosse/ That does not delay the actual construction. That...that more or less reflects the rate at
which we're spending the money on this project.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 31
Mims/ Okay. Okay. That's what I wanted to clarify, what that might be doing to the actual
construction of it. Okay.
Hayek/ My sense is there's a pretty strong consensus that this particular project should
happen... should not be delayed. You know, should be (several talking)
O'Malley/ ...we have bond money now that's unspent, so it's no sense to issue more bonds
(several talking)
Bailey/ Are we all in agreement of keeping this on track (several talking) public safety, it's an
economic development...can we just even recount our priorities that this (mumbled)
Okay.
Fosse/ And our plan on the schedule for that is we'll complete the Lower Muscatine project and
then follow on the heels with the First Avenue project.
Bailey/ Okay.
Fosse/ We really would like to avoid overlap there, if possible. (several talking) Yes.
Bailey/ Thank you, Rick. I just wanted to...thank you, Susan, for helping (several talking and
laughing)
Mims/ No, I was concerned too, Regenia, and so I wanted to see what that was doing.
Champion/ Well, I'm pretty happy with this presentation tonight. I...I am still willing to look at
capital projects. Um...and I'm sorry, I don't have one off the top of my head, but I still
would like to reduce that debt levy a little bit. I mean, we're moving some projects
forward...we're going to be dealing with the same issue as we come into those years they
were moved forward. And I'd kind of like to head some of that off.
Mims/ Well, my thought on that is, you know, as we've talked about the difference between, you
know, cutting operational expenses and cutting CIP, and what that really does to our
taxes, um...I have really high expectations for Tom next year (laughter) coming back,
having had a year with a set of fresh eyes to look at our city and how we operate, to, uh,
you know, as he said, to drill deep and uh...
Dickens/ Not aone-hit wonder? (laughter)
Mims/ To come back with, um, but I do, I think any time you get a set of fresh eyes on an
organization this size, and to bring in new ideas and...and challenge people, um, I think
it's very reasonable that we can find ways to save money operationally that...that haven't
really been looked at in a long time.
Champion/ Oh, I agree with you, Susan. Um...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 32
Mims/ So, and...and from it operationally you get a lot more benefit long-term...
Champion/ Exactly!
Mims/...than you do from the CIP.
Champion/ But I've got to be totally honest with you and tell you, I think it's short-term. I'm
more than willing to talk long-term next year. (laughter) Um...and I appreciate looking
at some of the short-term, or some of these are long-term, uh, but I'm still interested in
looking through the capital projects to reduce that, um, tax increase down (mumbled) for
industrial people, who are also feeling the pinch of this economy, and we're going to
increase their waste water, um, you know, they have the franchise fee now, uh, which
won't continue. They're not paying the 1% sales tax, but they are going to continue that
franchise fee until we discontinue it, which probably won't be in my lifetime. So, I
mean, those are...those are my concerns, and I know, I mean, when you're talking about
a small increase, it might not seem much to most of us, but some of those big industrial
people it's a huge increase. And, uh, wastewater's going to triple, double, whatever
(mumbled) I'm just throwing it out there that if we could all just think about a capital
project we think would not need to be done now.
Hayek/ Do you need us on...on the operational, uh, proposal, to...show some consensus, or lack
of consensus, on...on that tonight?
Champion/ I'm fine with it!
Mims/ I am.
Bailey/ (several talking) I haven't decided.
Hayek/ Okay.
Bailey/ I haven't decided. I don't...I'm very, very, very uncomfortable with it. Um...it's...feels
like, um, one step forward, two steps back. I'm...I haven't decided.
Wilburn/ I just said yeah. (several talking)
Hayek/ I think there is a consensus, um, not without the (mumbled) obviously.
Champion/ My concerns have been alleviated by talking, hearing what we heard tonight.
Hayek/ Okay, so you got that part...on the capital side.
Bailey/ I was comfortable with the budget as presented, so these cuts represent something that I
wasn't even interested in pursuing because we'd made decisions all year that were
heading in this direction, and the 3% was part of the roll back so I'm not particularly
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 33
interested, um, in culling through the CIP. I think it's a...a good program that outlines
our priorities. Just to kick off the discussion.
Mims/ I'm comfortable with what has been presented tonight, both on the operational and on the
CIP side. Given it gets us a start, you know, and again, looking...I think we just have to
keep continually looking at this year to year where we can find more things, um, but
getting it down to a 3.6 versus a 5.6 impact that we had on residential, um, I still, wish it
were lower, but...but I can live with that, because I think we have a Council here that is
really committed to trying to hold the line, yet provide the services that this community
expects, and I think we're...I think we're all on the same page in terms of being willing
to make some hard decisions, and, you know, I hope in a year we can put the police
officer and firefighter back in and...and be looking at some other ways that we can
generate some savings.
Wright/ I too expect that, uh, Mr. Markus will have a fascinating year, learning the organization
and...figuring out...where we can make some adjustments in long-term operations.
Markus/ Part of what has to happen for me is I have to understand, uh, the labor environment in
this state. You have different statutory requirements. Um, you can't backfill entirely
with temporary and not end up with fringe benefit packages and, so there's...there's
different techniques that you can typically use, you know, from place to place, but what
you can use here and some that you can't, and so...I'm going to have to look at all of
those issues, and...and there's a culture of, um, the City has done this regularly with
public employees, so to look at that as a...you know, some of those are a huge
(mumbled) to consider alternatives. So...I think...in looking at all of those types of
issues, um, you have to understand from my perspective that economic forces are driving
these, okay? That's...that's what's going to happen. I mean, if you don't...if our values
go...what we're showing is they're not going up as fast as they used to. Watch what
happens when they decline! If that goes that direction. And...that's happened in other
states.
Hayek/ Well, all right, so...uh, on to capital, um, it looks like the majority are...are not
interested in further trimming, at least for the FY12.
Dickens/ There was the one (mumbled) park area, and I don't know if it was brought up (several
talking) yeah, the buyouts. Is that (several talking)
Champion/ That's off the table!
Bailey/ I was the only person interested in that.
Dickens/ Okay. I didn't know if that had gotten taken off or not.
O'Malley/ That was moved to the unfunded year.
Dickens/ That was moved to the end, okay. I didn't have that written (mumbled)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 34
O'Malley/ These are just staff changes, that since it's not affecting the tax levy this year.
Dickens/ Right, that's future.
Markus/ Matt, if it's all right I...I did raise the issue of JCCOG, and I had, um, at a previous
meeting, and uh, I've had a chance to have a conversation with, uh, Jon and Jeff about
that, and what we did is, um, part of our concern with looking at JCCOG and how it was
funded was it...it really didn't have a, uh, in my opinion, a very strong cost allocation of
cost, um...and as I became more familiar with how it operates, uh, what we did is, um,
we started to allocate, because what...what happens with JCCOG is we're using some of
those positions as if they were City, uh, personnel, and so I needed to understand that part
of it. So we went about appropriating how much of the position, uh, relates to a City job,
and then how much of it relates to a JCCOG position, and so we divided that out, and
while I think that there's potential cost savings there, they're not anywhere close to what
I would hope for. Um, I...I wanted to tell you because I kind of indicated that I was
hoping that the six delegates to JCCOG, uh, would take a...a different position when the
budget came up. One of the things that both, uh, Jon and Jeff pointed out to me was that
this was going to, um, your actual budget approval was right around the corner, and that
there had been previous direction by the JCCOG members. So the understanding I have
with Jeff and Jon is we're going to continue to refine, uh, those numbers, uh, and...and
I'm confident we will come up with some savings, not as substantial as I said, uh, but I
also think that there's, uh, a potential that we should be reimbursed for the use of our
facilities housing JCCOG, and that there should be a cost reimbursement from the others
that benefit from JCCOG, uh, on a proportionate basis. Um, and I think that there's a
logical reason why some of our support services for their, uh, budgeting, for their, um,
accounting, for their auditing, uh, should...there's some overhead that maybe should be
reimbursed on a proportionate basis, too. So, we're going to try and refine that over this
next year, and we will, um, then strategize how we approach the other members of
JCCOG to make that happen, but I think you'll see some savings. It's not going to be
hundreds of thousands of dollars, but you know it could be ten, twenty thousand dollars.
Champion/ Have you gotten into my favorite JCCOG? Oh, same one.
Markus/ That's what I'm talking about, JCCOG.
Champion/ Oh, ECICOG (several talking)
Markus/ Oh, yeah, and...and, um, yeah, and as soon as I'm done with that (laughter) deal with
that one. Um, one of the things too then is once we have a formula, then I'll look at the
issue of, um, action to fund...or the staffing, and you know, make some evaluations as to
how much staffing is actually necessary there, but it's... it's so cross-pollinated at this
point, that I have to kind of divide things up and figure out where those allocations are
and so...um, Jeff and...and Jon and I are working in that regard and I think we can make
some progress and strategize how to...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.
January 13, 2011 City Council Special Budget Work Session Page 35
Champion/ When does the Census become, um...um, permanent or...certified, whatever they do
with it?
Karr/ (several talking) March or April.
Champion/ Oh, cause that would...
Karr/ The information is starting to trickle out now, but those firm figures, we don't anticipate
getting til March.
Hayek/ Okay. What other input, if any, do you need from us tonight?
Markus/ I think we're good! Dale? Kevin?
Hayek/ (several talking) a sobering discussion, but product...a productive one, and...and we
appreciate your efforts over the last few days...help us get to where we are tonight.
Thanks, everyone. Thank you, staff.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council Special
Budget Work Session of January 13, 2011.