HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-05-01 TranscriptionMay 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 1
Council Present: Champion, Dickens, Dobyns, Hayek, Mims, Payne, Throgmorton
Staff Present: Markus, Fruin, Morris, Hargadine, Dilkes, Karr, O'Brien, Bentley,
Davidson, Havel, Miklo, Hansen, Niichel - Hegwood, O'Malley, Cohn,
Fosse, Howard
Others Present: Uttermark, UISG
Council Appointments:
Hayek/ All right, well welcome, everyone! Why don't we get started with our work session.
First item's Council appointments. I believe there's only one, uh, before us today for the
PCRB. Anybody know anything about the applicant? (several talking)
Champion/ Well, he certainly appears to be qualified, or she. He ... right, he. I keep getting
confused on these gender things.
Throgmorton/ Yeah, looks pretty qualified (several talking)
Champion/ ...I did the same thing! (laughter)
Hayek/ Okay. Sounds like there's a consensus and support. Okay, I'll put up that individual.
And next is questions from Council regarding Planning and Zoning items. Two of them,
6b and 6f, if I ... if my memory serves ... we have to pick up tonight. (several talking)
Planning & Zoning Items:
Throgmorton/ Yeah, which one's are those? 6 which ... which ones?
Mims/ ... b and f I think.
Karr/ They're identified right under the Planning and Zoning items, the last line of the opening
paragraph. Each week we try to put items that...
Hayek/ Yeah. So the ... the McDonald's property rezoning and the, um, uh, 108 McLean Street.
Historic landmark. The others we can ask questions about right now ... if we have them.
Payne/ Those we can or we can't?
Mims/ Cannot.
Hayek/ Cannot. We take those up at the formal.
Payne/ And ... can I just ... can I ask a general question? Why when we're...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 2
Hayek/ (both talking)
Payne/ ...pass and adopt can we ask questions when we're at the very end. Why wouldn't we
ask questions at the beginning about those items? I mean, we've already voted on `em
twice.
Dilkes/ That's not the distinction. It's based on whether, um, it's a, uh, classical rezoning or
a ... something that the Court might characterize as a quasi-judicial proceeding, which
requires, um, more due process than otherwise.
Payne/ So...the other few times these have been on the agenda, they've been the same?
Dilkes/ Yeah.
Payne/ Okay.
Hayek/ Yes.
Payne/ I ... I didn't pay attention, I guess ... which ones (both talking)
Dilkes/ I did a memo on that and you're certainly ... I think I sent out a copy at one point but...
Payne/ Yeah. It's hard to remember all these rules!
Hayek/ Yeah, well there's a little cheat sheet at the beginning of 6 ... Item 6, for each of our
agendas, that identifies, uh, which P &Z items are only for formal, uh, meeting discussion.
Payne / Right.
Throgmorton/ Uh, Matt, uh, I'm trying to learn how to navigate, uh, the electronic stuff. You
know, so some of you have already gone through this, so I feel like I'm kinda bouncing
back and forth between paper and (both talking)
Dobyns/ (both talking)
Throgmorton/ ...electronic stuff. So if I get hopelessly confused you'll understand why. It in
part has to do with me, and in part it has to do with this stuff, but I ... I do have something
that I know ... you, all of you are aware except Connie perhaps that I was going to bring
up, uh, with regard to the proposed parking ordinance. Uh, I sent each of you an email
about this and ... uh, what I want to suggest is that, um, you give me an opportunity to
move, that we defer second consideration of the parking ordinance. And that if... if
someone's willing to support that motion, we would discuss why, uh, I would want to
make that motion. And, to be honest and to be very clear about this, I'm not sure if I
want to vote in favor of the motion once we discuss it. Okay? Uh, but I ... I do want to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 3
bring it up and ... and I'd be happy to elaborate on why I'd like to make that motion (both
talking)
Dobyns/ ...I mean, that's one of the ones we can discuss. It's not, uh (both talking)
Throgmorton/ Can discuss here, right.
Dobyns/ And I think it's in second consideration tonight.
Karr/ For 6d?
ITEM 6d CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14, ZONING,
ARTICLE 5A, OFF - STREET PARKING AND LOADING STANDARDS,
TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES FOR
CERTAIN MULTI - FAMILY DWELLING UNITS WHEN LOCATED
WITHIN A DESIGNATED UNIVERSITY IMPACT AREA (UTA).
(SECOND CONSIDERATION)
Dobyns/ Yes (several talking)
Throgmorton/ And I know that, uh, Bob, uh, and Jeff are aware that I've had some concerns and
I think they're prepared, it looks like it! Prepared to, uh, respond at least to the, at least
the email that I had distr ... distributed. I don't know if this is all sounding pretty obscure,
Connie, cause I can't send an email to you easily, as far as I know.
Champion/ I ... I'm not going to give you my email address either! (laughter)
Dickens/ No, I ... I think we need to look into the parking a little more. The ... after talking to, uh,
Chris from, uh, Parking, seeing how much it costs per parking space, being close to
downtown. I know the ordinance is saying they have to have three spaces for a three
bedroom, where all the other areas in town are ... are much less than that. And it's
actually doubling, I believe, from one and a half to ... is it one and a half for a three
bedroom in other parts of town versus three in that... University impact area?
Miklo/ The proposal in the University impact area would go from two parking spaces for a three
bedroom to three parking spaces for a three bedroom.
Dickens/ But it's ... outside of the impact area isn't it ... less than that?
Miklo/ It's outside... outside the impact area it's two parking spaces for a three bedroom, across
the city.
Throgmorton/ And ... and it is per bedroom right?
Miklo/ That's right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 4
Throgmorton/ Yeah. Could ... could I very briefly (both talking)
Hayek/ Yeah, I think that's fine. And ... but the context is, Jim, you're interested in ... in putting a
motion on the floor to defer... consideration of.. .
Throgmorton/ Right.
Hayek/ ...6d?
Throgmorton/ Defer consideration. I ... I suppose for ... till our ... till our next meeting.
Hayek/ Yeah.
Throgmorton/ Um ... and with the possibility of, uh, an amendment being proposed. All right?
When we get... so that when we get back together an amendment could be considered for,
uh, for the ordinance. But what I have in mind is ... is this. Or what my concerns are are
these: uh, first I think many of you, if not all, know that, uh, I've recently read the long -
range transportation plan, the draft long -range transportation plan for the MPO of
Johnson County. And I'm concerned that it does not show enough foresight about how
our transportation system can adjust to, um, the possibility of significant climate change,
or to the possibility that we'll see significant reductions in federal and state funding over
the planning horizon, which is to the year 2040 for the long -range, uh, transportation
plan. So, my own personal sense is that we need to begin thinking of ways to take
advantage of, uh, the opportunity to, uh, very modestly reduce reliance on the ... on the
private automobile. So that's one thing. And I think our proposed parking ordinance
does just the opposite. All right, the second thing and probably more important in the
...in the here and now is that as I've expressed earlier, uh, I ... I'm concerned about the
...the effects of, uh, the parking ordinance on ... on the streetscape by requiring more
parking, uh, for larger buildings that would be built in the ... uh, the zone, uh, that would
undermine our ability to create a really urbane landscape, streetscape. That those are my
two big concerns.
Champion/ Can you explain that? What do you mean by that? Why would it?
Throgmorton/ Yeah, well, you know, if you have, uh, if you have ... my idea, and maybe I can be,
uh, demonstrated to be wrong. My idea is that ... that the more parking you have around
individual buildings, uh, the less ... the more it will detract from the urbanity, and uh,
liveliness and uh, walkability of...of streets located very close to the ... well, located in
the core of the city. And, from an urban design point of view, that worries me
significantly.
Dobyns/ But as I recall, the City staff was thinking that this could actually do the opposite. Not
that you can ever predict (both talking)
Throgmorton/ ...like to work through, if you all are willing.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 5
Champion/ It seems obvious to me that it will improve the streetscape. You won't have so much
parking on the street...
Throgmorton/ Well (both talking)
Champion/ ...which is really hazardous in itself!
Throgmorton/ So my ... my suggestion is that no ... not only that we defer, but that we invite, uh,
developers to work with, well (mumbled) we invite developers to invent an amendment
that would provide a verifiable contractually ob ... obligatory way in which they can rent
spaces to people who will guarantee they will not own or operate motor vehicles out of
the place they rent.
Champion/ That's probably impossible!
Throgmorton/ I don't know if it is, you know! Maybe it is.
Payne/ I ... I agree with your idea ... that we need to do something like that. I just don't think that
the world is there yet. I mean, I think that we created ... the parking ordinances that we
have today thinking that not everybody brings a car when they come to school. But the
fact of the matter is, almost everybody brings a car when they come to school. I ... I
mean, you have to have some place to put that car. They don't want the car over in the
Finkbine parking lot. They want it within walking distance to get it. And, no ... they're
not going to rent an apartment saying, `I'm not going to use a car.'
Throgmorton/ But we're also reconfiguring the interior design of these buildings, so that they're
one, two, and three bedroom units so that they will not be occupied exclusively by
students, and I know people in this town who do not own or operate motor vehicles. I
didn't own one for six years! And I know other people who are in a ... a similar kind of
situation. Maybe they're the kind of people who would want to rent, uh, or... in these
kinds of buildings.
Payne/ I think they're few and far between.
Markus/ Mayor, urn ... Jim was good enough to share this information with us and I did ask our
staff to take a look at these questions and kind of respond and maybe at this point we
could, uh, entertain the staff, uh, just responding to some of the, uh, thoughts that Jim has
shared (several talking)
Miklo/ We ... we looked very seriously at the ... at the issue of will requiring an additional parking
space for a third bedroom result in more parking on new developments or on ... on
properties, and how that would affect the streetscape, and we do not believe that it will,
based on recent projects that are ... that have occurred or have been occurring over the
past several years, under the current ordinance. Our observations going back and looking
at site plans, and I have some that I'll share with you from three different zones. The, uh,
development proposals typically they start out and identify what the setbacks are, the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 6
required setbacks and open space, and this is a recent proposal that we saw. Uh, they met
the minimum 20 -foot setback on the front. They had ... they met, uh, there was a
minimum ... 7-foot setback on the sides. They had 10 -feet, so they had three additional
feet on the sides, and then there was a, uh, a requirement for some separation, uh,
between the alley and the parking. And, this is pretty typical of what we see. They site
the building. It often has parking within the first floor of it, and then the remainder of the
property, uh, that's available to them by our setback requirements is paved for parking,
and that often determines the number of bedrooms that they can get on the property,
regardless of...of its zoning, uh, and again, this is one that we saw based on the ... the
ordinances that were in effect or that are... are currently into eff... in effect. By requiring,
uh, a third parking space for a third bedroom, what it's likely to do is take away the
incentive to do all three bedrooms. It will, um, provide an incentive to, or it'll equal the
playing field in terms of someone building a one - bedroom unit, a two bedroom unit, or a
three bedroom unit, uh, because they're not getting that freebie parking space, um ... so
based on that scenario, we do not see this effecting the multi - family residential zones.
Um, this is another example. This is actually one of our neighborhood stabilization
zones, and uh, this recent proposal, again, they had their minimum, uh, front yard
setback. Um... a minimum rear and side yard setback, and then the interior of the
building had parking spaces within it, and then there were two parking spaces just outside
of, uh, of the building. Um, so again, this is pretty typical. The building's laid out to, or
the property's laid out to determine how much parking you can provide and from there
the developers determine how ... the bedroom mix and ... and the number of units. So,
again, we don't see this changing, uh, with these amendments. We're still going to see
buildings that are maximizing the footprint of the building, and uh, the ... the rear yards
for parking. Uh, this is an example of a commercial development that's... that's currently
being built on ... on Washington Street, and, um, there is ground floor ... a minimum, um,
amount of ground floor commercial is required in that zone. So you can't park right up
against the street. That building will have the first 30 feet of the lot will have, uh,
commercial storefronts, uh, and then the, um, then there will be a parking garage over the
rest of the first floor, and then a deck over that. So, urn ... again, we do not see the
additional third parking space resulting in more paving cause it's already being paved to
the max. What it will result in is perhaps fewer three - bedroom units. For that reason we
...we would suggest continuing with the ordinance as is. I think the ... the other concerns
that Jim raised ... they are concerns of us, they are concerns of our, uh, Transportation
Planning Division, uh, but I think that those are things that we need to address outside the
zoning code, through our Transit policies, through, um ... uh, encouraging more use
of...of bicycles and ... and alternative modes of transportation, and making it easier to use
bicycles and ... and to walk in town. Um, but I believe, and staff believes, that's
something that occur outside the zoning ordinance. It's something that we can't
impose in terms of the zoning ordinance. Um, the issue of entering into a contractual
agreement that a tenant is not going to have a car, I think the difficulty in Iowa City is
that ... that um ... tenants change often, uh, once a year. Um, it's rare that a ... a student will
stay in an apartment for more than two years, or definitely more than four, and so the, uh
... um ... um, each time a student moved out or a ... a renter moved out who promised that
they wouldn't have a car, the landlord would have to find another tenant that'd be willing
to, uh, agree to that, and if they don't have the parking space on site because they got a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 7
break through the zoning, they're going to have difficulty renting that space. That would
be a ... a difficult, um, procedure of a diff...uh, a difficult, uh, agreement to enforce. I
don't believe we have ... would have the staff to go and check to see if the tenants actually
have cars, who've agreed that they wouldn't have cars. Um, Eleanor may have some
ideas on how we would approach something like that, but it's not something that we've
seen in other communities or believe that would work here.
Hayek/ Bob, is ... is ... I was thinking about Jim's, uh, second concern, the impact on ... on parking
and the footprint of a ... of a development, etc. Is it relevant to his concern that this
parking, um ... measure, uh, in the aggregate with the household and ... and .... and
bedroom zoning items, uh, causes a... a lessening of the density in these areas, which
therefore... makes this more of a wash, or you know, mitigates the concern. Do ... am I
making myself...
Miklo/ Well, I think in some cases it may result in less density because if you can't fit enough
parking on you can't have as many three bedrooms. Um...
Hayek/ But don't the other measures also reduce the ... the density? I mean, that's kind of
underlying these separate... these three different measures.
Miklo/ They may reduce the density of three bedrooms, but there's the possibility to make that
up with one bedrooms because of the bonus. Um, it may not be a one - for -one make up,
but uh...
Hayek/ But there's some... connection there.
Miklo/ Right.
Hayek/ Yeah.
Dickens/ There's potential it could move it out ... density farther out.
Hayek/ Maybe, although that was addressed in ... in the memo, I thought.
Miklo/ Yeah. We don't believe that's the case, because uh, our... as you... as you go out,
our ... we already have a three, uh, person cap or a three unrelated person cap, um ... in ... in
those farther out zones. Karen, did you have something to add?
Howard/ Well I just wanted to note, uh, you know, Jim's concern about the streetscape and ... and
the urbanity of the downtown areas, and should be noted that we have a number of
provisions already in the zoning ordinance that give a break to the parking in the
downtown areas, say for example south of Burlington Street. That's our parking impact
district where we only require developers to put in 25% of their required parking, and the
rest of the parking they pay a fee to the City, and those ... that money is used then to build
our parking structures. So we consolidate the parking and therefore leave more of the
land available for development. We also have standards in the code that prevent parking
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 8
up against the street in our downtown areas. And in our, in fact in any multi - family zone
you can't put the parking out front. It always has to be in the ... in behind so that you have
right along the street you have the more active uses, whether it's residential uses or
commercial uses that you don't have the inactive, sort of parking that interrupts that
streetscape that you're concerned about.
Throgmorton/ Uh -huh.
Dobyns/ Jim, I would plan on not, uh, continuing with the second consideration, because every
action has a reaction ... a reaction. Um, sure that is a possibility. You know, they could
move cars out into the street, but I think there are already some disincentives toward that
that they've mentioned. I think with anything we do we can't anticipate everything. Um
(mumbled) and perhaps responding to that. Um, if we keep playing that game we could
be doing this forever. (mumbled) I'm just trying to look at the core mission of this
ordinance consideration. I think it's a good one, and I think I'm willing to accept the
disincentives that would keep that parking from occurring, and plan on watching for that
and responding to it if they need to be, um, increased. So I ... I guess I wouldn't ... be
supportive.
Throgmorton/ Uh -huh. If I could say one other thing and then certainly defer to the general will
here, but uh ... what I was imagining is that ... we ... we would have ... have, as a core of the
ordinance what's currently being proposed, but that we al ... provide an alternative
pathway, uh, that developers could follow, if they could invent a ... a contractually
obligatory and verifiable mechanism by which, uh, a ... a specified percentage of their
bedrooms in their building would not involve the use of an automobile, an owned or
operated, uh, motor vehicle. Now, is that possible? I don't know. I mean, I'm as
skeptical as Connie is, but ... but ... (both talking) giving them an opportunity. I mean...
Champion/ ...think the problem with it is too, Jim, is that my kids took, some of my kids took
cars to school, not all of `em, but they weren't in their name. They were in my name. So
they could say they don't own a car!
Mims/ Well...
Champion/ I just think it's unenforceable.
Mims/ Well and I think ... we can't even enforce over - occupancy!
Champion/ No!
Mims/ And so we're just adding another thing that I think is even more difficult to enforce than
the over - occupancy issue, and so to try to go down that path ... I'm not willing to do. I ... I
agree with what Rick is saying. I think the idea that we can't anticipate every outcome of
these zoning changes, but I think for the most part, we are headed in the absolutely right
direction in terms of neighborhood stabilization. We're grandfathering in everything
that's already there. We're trying to not allow more and more increases in the density in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 9
these areas. We're trying to address the parking. Um, we've spent the last 10 or 15 years
building a ton of four and five bedroom apartments. Um, that I believe that we as a group
feel we don't need more of in this area. And so, I'm more than willing to move forward
with what we have. I'm always open in the future to looking at, you know, different
ideas or things that we need to do to ... tweak this based on unintended consequences or
whatever, but at this point, um, I'm supportive of moving forward.
Hayek/ I want to make sure I understand. I mean, you've expressed your concerns, and you
expressed, uh, Terry, your concerns about this measure and I think voted against it at the
last consideration, but ... but they're really (both talking). They're two different concerns,
and you're worried about moving, creating an ... essentially a incentive to...
Dickens/ Move outside.
Hayek/ Move outside.
Dickens/ Yeah, the University impact zone.
Payne/ To push the development outside of that area, is that what you're saying?
Dickens/ Where we want to try to keep it close, but I think ... well, we won't know. We can't tell
(both talking)
Champion/ ...and I think with all the land south of Burlington, that's not going to be a problem.
Markus / And ... and that was addressed, as well, in the, uh, staff report. The staff talked about the
next phase of this whole neighborhood stabilization issue is to start to look for particular
areas where we might be able to encourage some, uh, private dorm -type housing and
we've actually started that discussion and actually identified some sites, uh, that may
make some sense for that type of zoning district in the city.
Champion/ And I think the problem with that, with these five - bedroom units is they are
unsupervised dorms (both talking)
Dickens/ ...don't care for four and five bedroom. I just didn't like the way this whole thing has
been worked out. Um...
Champion/ I like the way it's been worked out!
Dickens/ (mumbled) difference of opinion! Has ... has any of the other recommendations ... from
the Homebuilder's been looked at, or ... compromised into those?
Miklo/ Uh, yes, we did review the suggestions submitted by the Homebuilder's Association and
we met with them last week to dis ... discuss them in some detail. And we agreed with
some of the concerns in the letter. In fact, um, some of those were addressed in the
ordinances even before they worked their way through Planning and Zoning and... and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 10
the ones that you voted on. Uh, for example the 20% limitation on three bedroom
apartments in the RM -12 zone, uh, was addressed in an earlier draft, and no longer is
included, uh, in ... in what you're voting on. Uh, and there also is ... so there is no
limitation on three bedroom apartments in the RM -12 zone. Those zones are generally
on the edge of town in newer neighborhoods and the market there has been producing a
good mix of two's and three- bedroom apartments, um, so that ... that's one area where we
did see eye -to -eye. Um, another area where they expressed a concern was the 20% cap
on three bedroom units in the multi - family and commercial zones. Uh, through the
process, through Planning and Zoning, uh, that was removed in most of the zones in
exchange for the graduated density provision, which provided a bonus for ... for one
bedroom apartments, uh, and then a slightly greater, um ... uh, requirement for floor area
for three bedroom apartments. Um, in the ... in the one area where we did keep a cap was
in the downtown, and we went from 20 %, the original proposal, to 30% in the CB, uh, 5
and CB -10 zones, where there is no maximum density, um, so we think that's a ... a
reasonable approach. Um, there were other, uh, proposals that the Homebuilder's made
that we ... we didn't agree with, didn't see eye -to -eye on. Karen's memo I think went into
some detail on those and Karen, (mumbled) ...have questions or want more detail on any
of those, we'd be happy to try and answer them.
Payne/ Did you speak to the Homebuilder's specifically on ... item by item?
Miklo/ Yes, we went down their ... their checklist. And did determine that they ... they, uh, some
of their concerns were, they were using an older version of... of the ordinance.
Payne/ I ... I think I agree with Karen. At some point you just have to agree to disagree. I mean,
everybody's not going to see eye -to -eye all the time, so ... you know, I mean, you said that
in your memo.
Hayek/ Was that a ... that was an in- person, sit down meeting.
Miklo/ We met on Friday. (several talking)
Dobyns/ So that was their second chance for rebuttal.
Hayek/ Well, I like this concept of...of...of...you know, gauging you know what the ... what the
demand is for ... for, uh, this kind of, uh, multi - family housing, and then looking at, um,
zones or general areas where it would be most appropriate, uh, not only for the
community but by the residents... not only for the community but for the residents, etc.,
and you know if that demand persists, you know ... looking to help ... help incent or
encourage it to ... to go into places where it makes the most sense.
Payne/ Isn't that what planning is?
Hayek/ That's kind of (laughter). Yeah! Anyway, so I picked up on that comment in ... on the
second page of your ... your memo (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 11
Dickens/ ...River Landing area that is going to be hopefully an area that we can move
into ... as ... (several talking)
Payne/ So you're saying we're doing it.
Dickens / River Crossing! (laughter)
Hayek/ Sounds like it! (several talking) Okay, so, uh ... Jim, I think ... I mean, you got ... I think
you got some of your questions answered — maybe not all of them. Obviously if you feel
compelled to ... to put up a motion, uh, to defer (both talking) you should.
Throgmorton/ I think, yeah, I think it's quite ... quite clear there would not ... there would be
support for the motion to defer, and then we'd discuss it, and then the vote would, uh, be
a negative vote. I mean, that's the way I get it, and ... and that we would not defer. So, I
don't see a compelling reason to make the motion, given that situation.
Dickens/ But I like bringing up the idea that there is maybe alternatives that we can look at
(mumbled) work now or they may work in the future.
Payne/ And ... I that think your ideas are very noble and we should consider them in some other
way. I just don't know that ... our culture is there at this point in time, and I don't know
that we can zone a change in culture! (laughter) I guess that's what I was trying to say.
Throgmorton/ I'd say the culture begins right here! (laughter) You know? We are the culture!
Payne/ But I'm not sure we can zone that. I mean, I ... Bob had some ideas that maybe there was
some other way we could get people to change their attitudes and then gradually change.
Hayek/ Well and some of that opportunity may come through the MPO process with ... with...
with the federal money and the projects that we submit applications for. Whether it's
trails or otherwise. But, that may be a venue. Okay. Um, well let's move on. Uh, so
other questions regarding P &Z items?
ITEM 6a VACATING .27 -ACRES OF STREET RIGHT -OF -WAY ADJACENT TO
LOTS 1 -8 MELROSE PLACE. (VAC12- 00001)
Dobyns/ I just wanted to bring up Item 6a. That's ordinance vacating and conveying, um, a
portion of Melrose Place right -of -way. I'm not trying to engender any discussion, nor am
I trying to convince. I just wanted to let Council know that I'm leaning toward not voting
for this. Uh, probably just from my perspective of working at the UIHC. I've watched
what we've called affectionately the `march toward Melrose' over the last 25 years the
Hospital has grown south. Very appropriate for, you know, a hospital that really has
contributed a lot to the region, the city, the state. Um, however, I'm not quite
comfortable with the lurch across Melrose, and I realize that taking a look at this, um,
vote makes a lot of sense. Reason it makes a lot of sense, frankly, is that the University
has built all the property around, um (mumbled) for a vacated right -of -way area, and I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 12
actually really have some concerns about areas adjacent to that because if you sort of,
um, start to intrude on those areas just east of the property being considered, those have
really legitimate historic buildings and according to the Comprehensive Plan, we're
supposed to be maintaining those areas next to the University for some (mumbled). So I
just wanted to let Council know why (mumbled).
Davidson/ Yeah, I would just add quickly to Rick's comments that just to clarify, staff's
evaluation of the vacation is according to the process that we use for any requested
vacation of public property. We as staff are not taking a position on the political issue of
the University going south across Melrose Avenue and the impact on the neighborhoods.
We certainly have taken that into consideration in our analysis, which you'll see in the
staff report, but ... but obviously the political issue is ... is yours to debate.
Throgmorton/ I think (several talking)
Payne/ I was just going to say ... where are all of these people that drive these cars going to cross
Melrose?
Davidson/ Um, there is a crossing light at the intersection and it may need to be tweaked or... or
worked out, you know, with the new driveways, that'll be kind of a work in progress, and
we ... we always, Michelle, in that situation we'll have our traffic engineering guys out
there the first day it opens and make sure that (both talking) if we need to tweak things
that we will do that, but it ... it's a marked crosswalk with a crossing light that will enable,
hopefully, safe pedestrian crossing.
Payne/ But they're going to have to walk, I mean...
Davidson/ Yeah, they're all going north across Melrose.
Payne/ Straight north?
Davidson/ Well at some ... to some destination at the Hospital.
Payne/ I mean, they're not going to be able to go ... when they walk out of their ... the exit there.
Davidson/ Right.
Payne/ ...going straight across would be jaywalking, right? I mean, they're going to have to go
one direction or the other to get to a light.
Davidson/ Uh, yes, they will have to go presumably, uh, west to get up to the Hawkins Drive
(both talking)
Payne/ Okay, to the closest light.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 13
Davidson/ Yeah, these are ... my understanding is these are people that formerly parked at, uh,
Parking Ramp #2, so ... likely they would go across at the ... at the Hawkins Drive
intersection.
Payne/ Okay.
Davidson/ They could ... they could, as you point out, also go down to the light that's to the east,
uh, by the parking facility.
Throgmorton/ Jeff, could you, uh, use a pointer to highlight where on this map the parking
structure would be?
Davidson/ The ... the parking lot?
Throgmorton/ Yeah, sorry, parking lot.
Davidson/ There's the aerial showing the vacation ... and here is the parking lot, and Melrose
Avenue, just because of the orientation... Melrose Avenue is here. Um ... Melrose
Place...
Throgmorton/ Where's north?
Davidson/ Pardon? Uh...
Throgmorton/ Where's north?
Davidson/ North is ... is to the left. (several talking) North is to the left. Um ... this is the area of
Melrose Place that will remain for access to these four, uh, five, well, this has access to
Melrose Avenue. These four properties, uh, basically, and then there'll be the new
driveway here, which... this... this was the original proposal, for two -way, uh, had the 711
Melrose property remaining, uh, what's basically been .... been negotiated with the
University is this is what it's intended to build now, uh, the notion being that it's a ... it's a
much, um, you know, but we hate to see the property at 711 go. They ... the University
was not able to work out with this property owner what would have been necess, uh,
necessary to get the three lanes here which we feel is the ... the best design. The three
lanes in, uh, in .... and use some of this, an easement over this property. So it did involve
the ... it will involve the demolition of the 711 Melrose house, um, property and there's,
uh, some information in the staff report on that. We can elaborate on that, uh, if you'd
like.
Champion/ This is ... really a giant parking lot in a neighborhood.
Davidson/ 252 spaces.
Champion/ Huge! What is a floor at like a Tower Place parking lot (mumbled)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 14
Davidson/ Approximately a hundred.
Champion/ And this is how many?
Davidson/ This entire lot is 252. At... at Court Street Transportation Center, Chris is in the
audience — he'll correct me if I'm wrong! I believe it's a hundred spaces per floor, isn't
it? Just to give (both talking)
Champion/ And the Dubuque Street, no, the Capitol Street ramp?
Davidson/ Capitol Street, the entire ramp is 825. What is there on a floor, Chris? (unable to hear
away from mic) About 160 on a floor at Capitol Street (both talking)
Champion/ So we're talking about more than a square block here, basically.
Davidson/ Yeah, this ... this, uh, parking lot is larger than one floor of our largest parking facility.
Champion/ Right! Right! I can't support it!
Mims/ Well I think the issue that we have is it's going to get built with our support or not. I
mean, and the University has very methodically over the years purchased property south
of Melrose, um, you know ... with the intent to give them flexibility, you know, for their
expansion needs, whether, you know, whether we as a city, you know, agree with it or
not ... and I agree with what Rick is saying, that concern about seeing the movement
across Melrose, but it has certainly been, uh, I mean, if you go back and look at property
records, they have just continually been acquiring property on the south side of Melrose
for a long, long time. Um ... to do with as they can as a State agency, you know, as they
see the needs for expansion in a lock... landlocked campus. So, while I do not like the
idea of this parking lot and particularly in this neighborhood and... and the whole thing at
all, I think the question really before us is, you know, are we going to agree to the va...
the vacation of this property so that we get some buy -in from the University on some of
the design aspects, or are we going to refuse to vacate property and the lot is still going to
be built, and in a less desirable manner than it will be if we vacate. And so while I don't
like the lot. I don't like the location of the lot. Given the choices before us, I'm going to
support the vacation because from everything I've read, it's going to be a better lot with
better screening and some of those issues, because of the City's involvement.
Davidson/ And just to elaborate a bit on Susan's ... what the point that Susan's making, the
screening here ... with the plantings, the screening here with the plantings, the tree islands
are all things that were added after our discussion with the University. Bob has just
clarified for me that the University has indicated that they will build a lot of 50 fewer
spaces without those planting amenities if the vacation is not approved.
Hayek/ I would ... I would also add this to ... to Susan's comments, I mean ... yeah, this is
somewhat tough to see, but it also, um ... helps the University construct the Children's
Museum and (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 15
Mims/ Children's Hospital.
Hayek/ ...Children's Hospital, and other, uh, substantial investments in ... in, uh, in hospital
facilities over there, which, um, quite frankly, uh, will benefit the community in a
substantial way. Um ... and ... and we did get input on this, uh...
Champion/ (both talking)
Hayek/ ...it's a tough situation but ... but they are landlocked and ... and their reinvestment con...
continuous reinvestment on... on that campus, um, benefits the community long -term, and
so I...that's kind of where I am right now.
Throgmorton/ My own, uh, inclination to vote, uh, on this particular topic comes from what I'm
recalling about, uh, the process we went through in widening Wel ... Melrose, roughly 20
years ago when I was on the City Council. I think I'm remembering correctly, uh,
hearing all sorts of statements from University officials about how they had no intention
whatsoever of moving south of Melrose. Maybe I'm wrong, cause you know who can
remember accurately from 20 years ago but ... but uh, that's what I remember.
Champion/ Well I think it was on the agenda more than 20 years ago. (both talking)
Throgmorton/ ...and it was the big controversy when we widened Melrose. So I don't want to
support it, but I absolutely recognize (both talking)
Champion/ Right! Right!
Throgmorton/ ... so what I'd like to do is vote against it, you know, and end up with a 4 -3 vote,
but that's really (laughter) unfair to everybody else so (laughter) we'll see.
Champion/ It's ... I ... I just don't like it. Doesn't mean I won't support it, but I just think it's kind
of too bad that that's neighborhoods going to be destroyed, and ... thank goodness the
University Hospitals are there, but they do have an incredible amount of wasted space.
They could put a Children's Hospital in their foyers! (laughter) That's just my personal
opinion. (several talking and laughing)
Dickens/ Vote yes with an asterisk!
Champion/ Yes! Thank you!
Davidson/ Maybe one additional piece of information for Council's, um, consideration as you
make your decision and possibly have some caveats as part of your decision. Rather than
try and paraphrase it, because I wasn't part of the discussions, I'm just going to have Bob
fill you in on, uh, a request by the Historic Preservation Commission.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 16
Miklo/ During the, uh, discussion at Planning and Zoning there was a concern about the house at
711, that it's within the National Register Historic District. It's not one of the key
properties but it is within the historic district, and uh, the neighborhood requested that the
...the, uh, Planning and Zoning Commission and Historic Preservation Commission go
on record that that house should remain. Uh, both of those commissions, uh, discussed
that question and basically came to the determination that the greater concern was the
neighborhood to the east, where it's much more intact. The buildings are better kept.
Uh, they have more historic value. The Historic Preservation Commission did send a ... a
letter to the University requesting a meeting to discuss the possibility of making plans to
preserve the more intact part of the neighborhood. Perhaps the Council could encourage
the, um, the University to follow through on a meeting. So far they haven't, uh,
responded to that request for a meeting.
Throgmorton/ I think we should do that, and the one thing I'm constantly conscious of is that the
University's really two entities here. There's the main administration and then there's the
hospital complex, medical school complex, uh, that whole array, and they operate largely
independently of... of the rest of the University... as a practical matter, uh, so I think we
should try to influence their ... their judgment here about what to do next.
Payne/ Can you go back to the other slide that you had that kind of shows, yeah...
Dickens/ Where is the famous barn?
Davidson/ (several talking) Bob, can you point it out to ... I think I know where it is.
Miklo/ Barn currently sits about there and they would move it to (several talking)
Payne / And is it feasible to move that house, like some... some of the, you know, the letters that
we ... that we received?
Miklo/ If there was a vacant lot it may be, um, I believe one of the reasons both Planning and
Zoning Commission and the Historic Preservation Commission didn't feel real strongly
about it is because the house is not in the best condition. Um, it's ... it has some integrity
issues in terms of some of the remodeling that was done to it.
Hayek/ Okay. All right, thanks, guys. Other P &Z questions before we move on? Okay, I'm
going to move on. Uh ... agenda items, and before we ... entertain your thoughts and
questions on agenda items, I want to mention Item 9 which is the Police and Fire
remodeling. Uh, Kumi Morris is here to answer any questions you have. She's got an
obligation this evening and probably won't be at the formal, um. ... and so that's why
we're ... we're throwing her to the wolves now to see if (laughter) if you have questions
that she can answer we do so now. That's Item 9.
Agenda Items:
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 17
ITEM 9. PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND ESTIMATE
OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FIRE AND POLICE
DEPARTMENT INTERIOR REMODELING PROJECT 2012,
ESTABLISHING AMOUNT OF BID SECURITY TO ACCOMPANY
EACH BID, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE TO
BIDDERS, AND FIXING TIME AND PLACE FOR RECEIPT OF BIDS.
Dickens/ Just a long time coming. If you've taken the tour of this facility, it's long overdue.
Throgmorton/ Speaking of tours, um, when Rick, Michelle, and I were given a tour, uh, initially,
we didn't get an opportunity to go through the Police, uh, Department. I'd love to be able
to do that.
Markus/ You're always welcome to do that, and you're always welcome to, uh, do a ride -along
with the Police, as well. They...
Throgmorton/ Like to do that as well.
Markus/ ... take you out. (several talking)
Throgmorton/ (mumbled) ...maybe we could arrange that.
Dickens/ They'll even handcuff you if you (laughter)
Hayek/ They had to handcuff you (laughter and several talking)
Dobyns/ If Mr. Dickens thinks it needs work, it needs work, so...
Champion/ I don't know, as a teenager I think I spent enough time in police cars! (laughter and
several talking)
Hayek/ Okay, other agenda items?
Throgmorton/ Let's see, what is IP10? Let's see if I can figure that out.
Mims/ That's not on the agenda. (both talking) We're on the agenda right now.
Throgmorton/ Sorry!
Mims/ Just a quick clarification maybe on the, um ... all the bonds, like 13, that we're not doing
tonight.
ITEM 13. INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS TO TAKE ADDITIONAL ACTION FOR
THE AUTHORIZATION AND ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $700,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2012.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 18
ITEM 14. INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS TO TAKE ADDITIONAL ACTION FOR
THE AUTHORIZATION AND ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $700,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES.
ITEM 15. INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS TO TAKE ADDITIONAL ACTION FOR
THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $650,000 TAXABLE GENERAL
OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2012.
ITEM 16. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE ADVERTISEMENT
FOR SALE OF $9,070,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES
2012A, AND $620,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS,
SERIES 2012B, AND APPROVING ELECTRONIC BIDDING
PROCEDURES AND OFFICIAL STATEMENT.
Hayek/ You mean from the revised agenda?
Mims/ Yeah, revised agenda.
Hayek/ Yeah.
Markus/ We had some notice provisions on that.
Mims/ Oh, okay!
O'Malley/ Yes, that's what happened. These bonds are classified as, uh, essential corporate
purpose and general corporate purpose ... and our bond attorney is, we have a newer bond
attorney, and uh, she gave us the proceedings but she didn't highlight which ones had to
have the 10 -day notice and the 4 -day notice.
Mims/ Okay.
O'Malley / And so she found out, uh, Saturday morning, distress... called us Monday morning,
and we said we'd take care of it.
Mims/ Okay.
O'Malley/ Marian said she'd take care of it. (laughter) Thank you!
Mims/ Okay. Thank you!
Hayek/ So we're just pushing that back to meet the notice requirements ... of the statute. Okay.
Mims/ Thanks!
Karr/ We're resetting. We're cancelling the public hearing scheduled for tonight and resetting
for the next time. (several talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 19
ITEM 20. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS RECEIVED ON APRIL
17, 2012 FOR THE LOWER MUSCATINE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION
PROJECT (KIRKWOOD AVE. TO 1ST AVE.) [STP -U- 3715(37)-- 70 -52].
Dickens/ ...question for Rick on #20, on the, uh ... Lower Muscatine. How soon will that be
rebid or is that going to be re ... redrawn?
Fosse/ Uh, Jason Havel, one of our engineers, is here to ... to cover that item tonight.
Havel/ Your question was ... when would that be rebid? Um, I think at this point it's tough to
say. We're kind of looking at things right now, uh, trying to figure out where we're at as
far as why bids came in where they did. Uh, if there's something we can do to change,
whether it's schedule or the scope of the project, to come back, uh, more in line with the
budget. Um, so I think we still need to go through that process before we can say for sure
when that would be rebid.
Dickens/ Cause I didn't know ... is it going to be redrawn, the project to try to...
Havel/ Um, you know, again it kind of depends on where we ... you know, as we go through and
...and talk to contractors and ... and other, uh ... methods to try and figure out whether, you
know, the estimate was just low, if it's a matter of there's just more work than we think
there or... or why exactly bids came in where they did. Uh, we need to figure out kind of
what we're dealing with before we can figure out how to, uh, repackage it and ... and be
closer to where we want to be budget -wise.
Dickens / Right.
Payne/ So...let's say it gets pushed back till next year.
Havel/ Okay.
Payne/ Does that mean Sycamore and Highway 6 gets pushed back a year after that and then
First Avenue and the railroad is the year after that?
Havel/ I think it's definitely something we'll have to look at, how those projects will be
coordinated, um, we actually, you know, there was talk of potentially moving Sycamore
and Highway 6 back to this year, get that done, if Lower Muscatine were to get pushed
back, um, there's definitely some issues to work through there on how that'll all fit
together and make sure we're not causing any, uh, undue harm to ... for example, the
Mall. Uh, we have a meeting actually scheduled with them tomorrow to kind of go
through some of those issues and figure out how we could work it all out so that we can,
uh, coordinate those projects.
Payne/ Like all the temporary sidewalk that was put in, you know...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 20
Havel/ Yep, that's certainly an issue that we'll have to consider and how we're going to handle
that moving forward.
Dickens/ (mumbled) (laughter)
Hayek/ Well, I ... I think that makes sense, I mean, I think we ... and staff want to make as much
progress as quickly as we can, but with this development, if there are opportunities to
shuffle the order (mumbled) sun shines, we should do so.
Havel/ I think it was one of those things too, it was a bit of a surprise kind of where they came in,
and so I think we want to make sure when we do go back out to do it that we're pretty
confident that, uh, we know where we're at and we aren't surprised a second time too.
Hayek/ And maybe it's heartening to see these two overbids fairly close to each other, if not to
the engineer's estimate.
Havel/ But there's also, you know, the... some of the, I guess items that have come up as
potential reasons for some of this, you know, it is later in the year. There's potential that
maybe they're not as hungry for work as ... as they would have been earlier. Um, you
know, issues like that, that if we were to push it back and bid it earlier, as they're sort of
planning their work, we might be able to shave some of that cost off that way. (both
talking)
Dickens/ ...time penalties on this that they have to finish it by a certain date or...
Havel/ There was definitely some, uh, there was two sort of intermediate, uh, completion dates.
The section there in the middle by Kirkwood had to be done by August 15t , uh, and with
a late start date of May 21St, that's pretty tight for them to get that finished. I think
there's enough time to do it, but if they are busy it's going to be tough to schedule ... or
shuffle that other work and still get it done in time.
Payne/ So, bottom line is, we're not going to do this this year. May 21" is not going to happen,
to get it done by April, or August 15th
Havel/ No. May 21St is not going to happen this year. I mean, there's still some potential, I
think, to maybe get some work done this ... later in the year, but it wouldn't be the same
amount that would be done, if it had been awarded.
Hayek/ Thank you, Jason.
Markus/ Something I'd interject and ... and the rest of the Council probably doesn't know about
this, uh, but Michelle was absolutely instrumental in helping us secure signatures on
some easements for this, and then we ran into the frustration of getting the bids, and the
bids were all higher than the estimate, but we literally, and you know, you talk about
bureaucracy in the public sector, and Michelle deals with her own bureaucracy within her
company, and um ... I think it required eleven signatures from the west side of Iowa to the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 21
east side of Iowa that we had to run these back and forth to get the signatures on these
documents. So...
Mims/ Thank you, Michelle!
Hayek/ Hopefully they're still good when we take this up! (laughter)
Mims/ It goes with the property, right? (laughter and several commenting)
Hayek/ Okay! Other agenda items? If not...move us along to the non - public safety radio system
selection item. Think there's a handout ... nice beige -color handout. (several talking)
Non - Public Safety Radio System:
Fosse/ Yes! Well what we want to do tonight is review with you the end of our long and
complicated process of looking at a replacement for our non ... non-public safety radio
system, and because it's been long and complicated we have a lot of depth with us
tonight to answer your questions. Uh, Tom Hansen is here as our equipment
superintendent and he's the project manager. Uh, to his left is Jeff Thorsteinson, and Jeff
is our radio system consultant who's helped us put together the specifications for this
project and evaluate the options. Uh, Mary Niichel - Hegwood is also here. She
(mumbled) the request for proposals' process, and then finally, uh, Gary Cohn, our IT
coordinator, is here, and he's been our in -house technical advice. So ... I wanted `em all
here because it is complicated and if you have questions I want to be able to ... to answer
those for you. Um, what we're going to do tonight is review the proposals that we've
received on the ... on the non - public safety radio system. We'll present our
recommendations, and then seek your recommendation for the action, the formal action,
that will take place at the May 15th City Council meeting. And... and we've deliberately
staged it this way to give you a couple weeks between when we discuss it tonight and
when you make your actual action because it's a long -term decision. It's complicated.
We want to give you an opportunity that if you're sleeping on it and ... and have
subsequent questions and want to discuss it more, you have that opportunity to do that.
So, with that introduction, let's begin! Here's... here's how we're going to accomplish
our goals tonight. We're going to give you a little bit of background; uh, go through the
requests for proposals, evaluation process; look at the costs and capabilities of the ... of
the proposals that we received; and then share with you our recommendation and talk
about the next steps. So let's begin with the, uh, just defining the difference between the
public safety and non - public safety radio systems, cause that's not always entirely clear.
Uh, the public safety users are ... are police departments, fire departments, sheriff's office,
uh, Department of Public Safety, that is the University of Iowa police, uh, ambulance
services, and then some miscellaneous others like the Corps of Engineers and ... and
DNR, who through their interactions with the public within the county here have a need
for law enforcement capabilities there. So there's a handful of other users. Uh, for the
non - public safety users, we've got Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Housing and
Inspection Services, uh, Transportation Services, which includes both Parking and
Transit, and then we have some outside agencies, uh, Cambus being the most significant
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 22
of those. And I want to point out that those are currently operating on our ... our city's
Legacy system. The, uh, all the public safety radio users are ... are currently operating on
the JECC radio system. Um, little bit about interoperability. Within the non, uh, public
safety realm it's good to be able to talk to each other because we work together, we help
each other out, and ... and having that interoperability is important. Um, but occasionally
we need to have interoperability with the public safety folks, as well. I've shown you
three examples here. One we've got somebody who's run into a light pole, knocked it
down and they need to get a hold of, uh, Public Works to deal with the electricity issues
so that they can ... they could... Michelle, this is actually on the City system so we ... we
dealt with this one (laughter).
Dobyns/ (several talking) ... shaking over here, Rick! (laughter)
Fosse/ You always hate to see that, that level of energy down. (several talking) Uh, we have,
uh, towing going on where we ... especially during snow emergencies. We ... we
coordinate with the Police Department for towing, and then of course when we have
large -scale disasters, we have all of our ... our public safety and non - public safety folks
working side -by -side. Now most of the time those communications go up through the
ranks on one side, across, and then back down, uh, but there are occasions where it is
good to have the frontline staff able to talk to each other. So that was an ... an important
part of any system that we considered is that interoperability between systems. So let's
look at the evaluation process that we went through. Um, it began back in April of 10,
and ... and let me, uh, recreate our mindset back at that time. There was ... there was a
certain sense of urgency because our existing system was over 20 years old. You could
no longer get parts for the radios. So we kept the old ones; we cannibalized `em; we ... we
did whatever is necessary to keep the system going, but we wanted to ... to get off that
system. Uh, and we also, uh, expected that it was going to be a simple matter of just
buying some radios and migrating on to the JECC system. Uh, but we knew because of
the magnitude of that purchase, we needed to go through a request for proposal process to
...to go out and buy over 330 radios to do that. Uh, but ... but just for good measure and
to introduce an element of... of competition there, and because you don't know if you
don't ask, we put in a part, uh, that allowed a ... a replacement of our Legacy system for
the non - public safety users. And, a part of that would be a requirement that it be
interoperable with the JECC system. So that's... that's what went out in April of 2010.
In June of 2010, we got the proposals back, and ... and the outcome surprised us. It
wasn't what we expected. It ended up that the preferred alternative, uh, was to ... to build
a ... a new system, independent from the ... from the JECC system. Um, and we'll talk
more about that in... in greater detail in a minute. Uh, but... one of the things we learned
as ...as we began to understand that ... that in the world of radios, uh, the ... the right tool
for the job can vary depending on what the job is. And ... and that, as we got further into
this, became more clear. Um, the process that we followed, we ... we used our regular,
uh, defined process for scoring. Uh, we compared technologies, uh, evaluated testing
results. Uh, we know the JECC system works (mumbled) because our police and fire
already using that, but we wanted to make sure that the ... that the other system that was
proposed would work. So we actually got radios; we set it up; we put in a patch, uh, so
that we were communicating with the JECC system to make sure that we had those
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 23
interoperable components tested and fully functional. Uh, we developed a cost model
and evaluated governance factors. And you'll notice there's quite a time spread between
June of... of 2010 and December of 2011 when we requested the best and final offer. Uh,
that was partially because of the testing and we... and we wanted to take our time to fully
vet this process and make sure that we were making it ... uh, the right decision there. Uh,
there was also some things going on at JECC that we wanted to let play out, and ... and
have the opportunity to ... to wait that out, and what created that opportunity was when
our police and fire systems migrated over to JECC, that ... that created a lot of old radios
for our ... from our Legacy system that we could use and that bought us more time. So
that was a good thing for us. Um, and uh, in December of 11, uh, you know, a lot can
happen in the technology world in a ... in a little over a year. So we requested best and
final offers, and then in January 2012, uh, we got those ... those offers submitted and in
April, uh, we made a condi ... conditional award to CEC, uh, for the MotoTrbo system,
uh, which is contingent upon Council approval, and the reason we did that is that allows
us to discuss in open the numbers that are ... the figures, the proposals and the details of
the proposal, rather than doing it in executive session. We wanted this to be done
completely out in ... in the light of day. So that was the reason for the ... the, um,
contingent award. So let's look at the, uh, costs and capabilities comparisons. We ... we
got two proposals. One from Communications Engineering Company, uh, based on the
City's infrastructure. The second was from RACOM, based on the JECC's
infrastructure. Uh, the initial cost of the stand -alone system is, uh, $629,000 and uh,
initial cost of...of, uh, going with the RACOM offer is $722,000 roughly.
Hayek/ When you're referring to infrastructure, are you referring to where equipment is mounted
or...
Fosse/ It... it's referring to the, uh, the antenna system, the base radio system, backup power, all
those components that allow the radios to work. Yep. That's a good question.
Payne / And, when ... I mean, in the RACOM bid I'm assuming that the license fees for radio
frequencies is included in there, but I don't see that included in the City bid.
Fosse/ That's cause we already own our licenses. We have eight channels, is that right?
Somewhere in that neighborhood. We ... we already own the channels there.
Payne/ And you don't pay a per year fee ... to the ICC to use that? You purchased it at some
point in time.
Fosse/ That's correct. We own those. (unable to hear person away from mic)
Payne/ Okay. Oh, okay!
Fosse/ Okay. So it's on the record, no cost for governmental use there. Uh, so you'll see a good
deal of that initial cost is ... is in the radio units themselves. The handhelds are 705. This,
for the City system, uh, 604 for the vehicle mount, and 1,263 for the ... the control stations
that you have in the offices. Uh, for the, uh ... RACOM system ... I want to point out these
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 24
are P25 compliant, which is a... a federal standard that's been imposed for public safety
systems. Uh, so that's... that's a different standard of radio, and that drives a lot of that
cost factor. Uh, you'll see that the units are more expensive, and that's... that's driving a
lot of that, and then on our cost model we looked at a 10 -year comparison, because
there's... that's the other part of the equation. We got our initial cost and then what's it
going to cost to run this thing. Kind of what you were getting at, Michelle. And, one of
the components that was in our proposal is the ability to ... to transmit data, in addition to
transmitting voice, we want to be able to do things like GPS, uh, and then simple pieces
of data, for instance. Uh, are the plows up, are they down, are we spreading material, are
we not, you know, binary type things like that. Um, in the ... in the CEC proposal the
ability exists to push that information over the radio system. In the ... in the JECC system,
and the JECC architecture, it's necessary to, um, use a ... a, uh, phone card to do that.
The, uh, cellular cards ... to transmit that data, and we'll talk a little later about ... about
that. Uh, but that, uh ... creates a further spread in the price of those two because it's
... it's built in to the CEC system for the, uh, for the JECC system, uh, we're looking at,
uh, about $150,000 over that 10 -year period, if we just get phone cards for 75 of the 330
radios. So if we expand that and we use it on a broader basis than that, that cost spread
will ... will be more significant. Uh, both 10 -year cost analyses include a 10%
replacement of radios that are lost, destroyed, you know, whatever, and need to replace
them. If it's higher than that, again, that ... that would create a larger spread there. Our
experience has been closer to about 20 %, especially near the end of our useful life of our
Legacy system.
Payne/ Is that per year, or over the 10 years?
Fosse/ Over the 10 years.
Payne/ Okay.
Fosse/ Yep! And then finally is the system maintenance. And, we know from past experience,
we've been operating radio systems for... for many years here, ever since the City got
their first radio, uh, that we ... we can project those costs pretty clearly. Uh, our ongoing
expenses to be on the JECC system is $75 per radio per year, and what I want to point out
is the ... the sensitivity, um ... to ... to those rates. Because we have over 330 radios, if the
rates, uh, go up a little bit, that creates a ... a more significant spread there. So that's one
of the vulnerabilities we have at that point. Um, so... staff s recommendation is to utilize
the CEC MotoTrbo system on the City of Iowa City's primary and backup tower sites.
So basically to ... to create a new... leg... Legacy system. Uh, the primary factors
considered in this recommendation center around functionality and cost. Uh, system
coverage and interoperability have been tested and passed for both systems. Both
systems will meet our needs. Uh, the ... the cost is, the initial cost, and I've got a typo
here. I want you to fix that on your sheet. This ... this 104, want you to change that 4 to
0. That should say $100,410. It's the difference in initial cost. And then the 10 -year cost
is ... is roughly $404,000 difference between the two systems, pointing out the sensitivity
to the variations in ... in the number of GPS units you want to use, or the ... the, uh, annual
rates. Um, functionality, the CEC system has the ability to transmit data without the use
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 25
of additional equipment or monthly fees. And ... and another neat thing about the
Motorola MotoTrbo system is that platform prevents the development and use of third
party applications. You know, you look at all the different apps that are developed for
your phones, this platform is ... is put out there in a way so that other ... other vendors can
create applications that we can use. Now I want to back up for just a moment because
I ... I don't want to leave you second - guessing about any of the decisions that ... that JECC
has made over the years, and... and I want to point out this difference in radio costs. Lot
of it's related to the P25 compliance. You know, was that a good decision? It wasn't a
decision that JECC was allowed to make. That is a federal mandate. Uh, feds require
that for all public safety systems. So that ... that's the way that is. As far as being able to
push data over the radio system, that's not built into the JECC system, and that is a ... a
good and appropriate decision for JECC's uses, and ... and the reason for that is, is the
type of data that ... that public safety is ... is moving is ... is a broad spectrum. It's got
reports. It's got pictures, got video. The kind of stuff ...that's too much data to push over
a ra ... radio frequency. So the ... the phone cards are the appropriate solution for that, uh,
but they're not necessarily the appropriate, uh, use for knowing where our vehicles are
and some very basic datas, uh, data about that. So I just wanted to back up and I didn't
want to leave any doubts in your mind about where they've been and the... and the
decisions that they've made.
Payne/ So does ... does the City have, I'm going to call `em a mobile... mobile data terminals, a
computer that hooks up to the car that you can push data directly to that mobile data
termi ... terminal over the RF, right now, or would that be something you would purchase
in the future?
Fosse / Are you talking about, uh, public safety vehicles or...
Payne/ No, the ... this new stuff (both talking)
Fosse/ Oh, the new stuff? Uh, no we do not currently have it. That's something that we'd look
at in the future.
Payne/ Okay.
Hayek/ So, Rick, uh, numbers are obvious but what's the downside of going with the
recommended, if any, uh...
Fosse/ Well the ... the downside is ... there's a certain appeal to us of getting out of the radio
business. You know, to just hand it all over to JECC and say, you know, you guys are
the radio folks now. Uh, but when you ... when you're ... when you're in the radio
business on a scale that we are for our non - public safety, uh, it's ... it's hard to get past
these ... these dollar figures. Uh, North Liberty, for instance, just made a decision to ... to
go onto the JECC system with their Public Works. It's like five radios. On that scale
that's... that's a very appropriate decision (laughter). Uh, but on our scale, our
recommendation is ... is not to go that route. The ... the other, uh, is to ... is ... we want to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 26
make sure there's no question about the interoperability, and that's why we ... we actually
scale tested it and made sure of that.
Hayek/ Is ... is there a greater personnel expense to the City if we stay on our system? I mean, is
that ... is there a difference there that would be factored into the comparison?
Fosse/ I ... I think we're in good shape there because we're going to have the station masters and
the PD that will ... will be operating a console that we'll ... we'll deal with any time that
we need to interface with public safety ... for public safety purposes. And, Gary, are there
any IT related staff expenses... that aren't, or they're factored into that ... that cost that we
looked at, this 125,000?
Thorsteinson/ (unable to hear away from mic)
Markus/ I would say that there's another issue here, and that's the perception issue, and it's
something that, uh, Susan Mims and ... and I are probably going to get to deal with as
members of the JECC board. I think when this system was put in place there was a
contemplation that all of the communications would work their way through JECC. And
with this proposal, uh, we're maintaining a certain level of service, uh, separate from
JECC. I think the ... the Police Chief and the Fire Chief, uh, probably, and myself, would
have preferred that the service would have been run through JECC, but when you're
faced with the numbers that we looked at, and we looked at `em with these folks that are
in the audience this evening, and with the fact that ... that this system provides the
capability for processing data, um, this is such a significant advantage over, uh, the cost
and the system capacity, uh, through JECC that we're find ... kind of forced to go this
way. So what we decided to do, and I think ... I think, uh, Rick alluded to this, was to
separate our meetings. Typically we'd have this work session and we'd have this
discussion and then we'd go right to the formal meeting and ... and ratify this decision.
But we have a meeting, uh, with JECC, I think next week (both talking)
Mims/ Next Monday.
Markus/ ...so we deliberately set this meeting up so that we could have this discussion with you,
that you could understand the issue we're dealing with, um, that some of the staff will
likely attend the JECC meeting, uh, with the two board members, and we'll have that
discussion there and then we'll bring that information back at the 15th, May 15th meeting,
um... so that you can make your decision at that particular time. And... and have the
benefit of any feedback or pushback that we may get from JECC, but you know the
numbers are so compelling, um, and it's even hard to imagine that they could eliminate
some of their expenses at JECC, which by the way this staff has attempted to, um,
convince them to do in the past, and we have not received, uh, reductions that would even
come close to, uh, meeting this cost objective.
Payne/ So I guess I have two questions. One to expand on Matt's question. Do we ... you talked
about cobbling together old pieces of equipment to make something work that ... that
broke. You take, you know, somebody has to do that. Is there a person that's a radio
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 27
person that does that, and their salary isn't factored in here? Or is that just somebody that
works on the staff that knows how to do it?
Fosse/ That's... mostly outsourcing. Uh, we work with CEC to do that. So we're able to take
`em multiple radios that don't work and they do the surgery.
Payne/ So actually it's gonna be a savings because we won't have to do that cobbling together
anymore, right?
Fosse / Right. We'll have a new system in hand.
Payne/ For a while!
Markus/ But that ... but there's two parts to that. There's the initial installation of this equipment,
which will be operable, and then there's the maintenance agreement that we maintain,
and then you can look at the ... the maintenance differences on the chart, as well, and so
that that's built in to keep that system going.
Fosse / Right. That's what that $125,000 is there, as well as the ... the replacement costs.
Dickens/ ... comparable warranties and guarantees between the two companies?
Fosse/ Mary, we good? Yes!
Throgmorton/ I'd like to ask a related question. We recently had considerable difficulty with a
firm that was supposed to install a system within our, uh, operation and that didn't turn
out so well. So what's the experience nationwide in other locations with, uh ... with this
system?
Fosse/ Well certainly our experience with CEC has been good, and we've had a long -term
relationship with them, uh, so ... so we know what we're getting into there. Uh, the
MotoTrbo system is manufactured by Motorola, and again, we've had good experience
with Motorola products over the years.
Markus/ We also have a consultant, uh, that's worked on this project with us here this evening
and maybe it'd be good to get his testimony on the record as to the reliability of...of this
system that we're looking at. (unable to hear person away from mic) If you'd come to
the mic, please.
Hayek/ Gotta come up to the mic, sir!
Throgmorton/ But you got a good voice! (laughter)
Thorsteinson/ Yeah I do! Thank you! (laughter) All right. I don't usually need microphones.
(laughter) So the MotoTrbo system is based on a European standard and uh, that's part
of the background of P25 versus... versus other standards, and MotoTrbo's very popular
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 28
so we made trips to go see it in action, at the Muscatine Scho ... Schools. Uh, we're
further ... I think, uh, brightened our outlook when John Deere, uh, a pretty notable
company here in Iowa, uses it for their manufacturing, for their inventory. So, uh, in
terms of systems, it's deployed in non - public safety throughout the United States, and
then MotoTrbo, actually Motorola, has a P25 version, as well, but the P25 kind of drives
up the cost. Uh, the P25... experience was one of the things that we had to wait for, so
Rick mentioned a long delay be ... between December 2011 and June 2010. Part of that
was the JECC system was being established, and the P25 systems across the United
States didn't have a whole bunch of tire mileage on `em, so, uh, you know, things went
well and all that, but to compare the two and say here's how one works and here's how
the other works, we were kind of short on the ... on the P25 data. But both systems are,
uh, robust and reliable. Does that answer your question?
Hayek/ Yeah, amply. Thank you.
Thorsteinson/ All right! Thank you.
Throgmorton/ So Rick, I'd like to toss out an incredibly naive question because I'm just
imagining that some people out in the public might ask it. Why not just rely on cell
phones?
Champion/ I was going to ask that same questions, Jim! (laughter)
Fosse/ That... that's... that is a reg ... reasonable question. Two reasons. Uh, or two good
reasons. One is is for those, such as plow drivers and all, when ... when they're driving
and operating and they need to communicate, radio — you pick it up, you key it, there's
very little distraction to the driver versus making a call. Uh, the other thing that we
experienced both during the tornado and ... and certain points of the flood is that the ... the
cell phone capabilities get saturated locally, and you cannot communicate when you need
to communicate most. The radio system allows you to do that.
Payne/ One other advantage with the radio is everybody hears your communication. That has a
radio.
Fosse/ Yes.
Payne/ You're not just talking to each other. Everybody else hears you too so everybody else
knows what's going on. That's a huge advantage when you're doing plowing and
whatever. Um ... one, I had one more question and that just ... and it's probably an easy
answer, but does the JECC system, is there any way possible to not have to be P25
compliant if you're not a public... safety entity using that system?
Fosse/ No.
Payne/ Okay, the law just says this is what you have to do.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 29
Fosse/ Well it's not the law and ... and help me out here if.. if I drift, but it's ... it's the mechanics
of the system. It is built for P25 platforms.
Payne/ Okay.
Fosse/ And you have to build an interface...
Payne/ Got it!
Fosse/ ...to go non.
Hayek/ That was a good question. Okay. Let's keep moving here.
Fosse/ Okay.
Hayek/ Thank you for that.
Fosse/ Sure. So our next steps would be, uh, we'd like to know your thoughts on this tonight. At
least your initial thoughts, uh, for... so that we can prepare a... a resolution for the 15tH,
and uh, whatever we decide, uh, we'll close out the RFP and notifications, and implement
our detailed project planning, and then implement.
Hayek/ Is ... is anyone inclined to go against the recommendation?
Mims/ No.
Payne/ No.
Throgmorton/ I ... I'm not at this moment and don't expect to be, but ... but I've learned over the
years that, uh, even though we're pretty smart people trying to think of good questions to
ask, sometimes other people ask questions that influence our thinking.
Fosse/ Uh -huh.
Throgmorton/ So I ... I want to hear. If anybody's got those other questions over the next couple
of weeks, I want to hear what they are.
Markus/ That's why we left the gap for ... for JECC to somewhat respond to this issue, as well.
Dilkes/ I just...
Champion/ ...and you'll let us know what they say!
Markus/ Yes.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 30
Dilkes/ Let me give you a little bit of additional information on that point. Um, after staff talked
about this, my staff communicated with, uh, JECC's counsel about the kind of broad
strokes that we would need in order to ... to make something work with JECC, and I
believe that subsequent to that, there was a mee ... a JECC meeting. This would have
been the previous board. Um, and we have just as ... late as last week, um, told Jeff Stone,
JECC's counsel, that we intended to present this to you all tonight, so ... they should know
that's coming.
Markus / And in fact we invited, if they wanted to have a staff representative attend this meeting
and observe (several talking)
Dilkes/ It should not be news.
Dobyns/ (mumbled) ... going to be contrary, we have two weeks to become contrary.
Fosse/ Yes you do! (laughter)
Hayek/ Okay. Thanks (several talking)
Fosse/ Thank you!
Hayek/ Next item is legislative issues update.
Legislative Issues Update:
Markus/ Okay, the um ... the Legislature obviously has been, uh...
Hayek/ Thank you for coming, by the way! Sorry, I should have mentioned that. (several
talking) Appreciate your work on this.
Markus/ ...quite interesting of late. I want to comment on just a few pieces of legislation, and if
you look at the packet that you received tonight, there is a memo in the packet from me to
the State Legislators. Uh, the first issue is the TIF reform, and urn ... the House passed
out a bill earlier in the year that, um, met with significant opposition from the Metro
Coalition and from the Iowa League of Cities. It moved on to the Senate, and in the
Senate the Senate decided that they would, um ... they would come out of their ... with
their bill and their bill addressed the three main issues that the City of Iowa City was
concerned about from the very beginning, and that was reporting, transparency, and anti -
piracy, and I'll tell you that anti - piracy is a terminology that's used in the law. It's not a,
uh, terminology that we came up to disparage anyone in the process. That's right in the
...right in the law. Uh, we have signed on to the, uh, Senate bill based on those three
critical areas, as has the Metro Coalition and so, um, we're supportive of that bill. It's
likely that that will have to go back to the, uh, House and they have the opportunity of
rejecting it, starting over, um, modifying it. It may end up back in a joint committee
before it moves on for final, um, vote on that issue. Uh, if in fact it moves that far. So,
it's ... it's a difficult thing to do. The House bill that came out, it had some other
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 31
provisions. It was much more expansive than the Senate bill, but because we had decided
that, um, our three main issues were the ones that were ... that came out of the Senate bill,
we felt we had to stick with that, and with our partners in the Metro Coalition, um, in
terms of the process of how you negotiate this and you ... and you collaborate with others
in terms of trying to get something done. Uh, in my opinion there's still an absolute risk
that nothing, uh, will be amended this year. So we tried to put our apples in the ... in the
basket that we felt had the best chance of getting some amendments. Then as time goes
on, chipping away at different issues as those develop from year to year. The ... one of the
reasons that we put this whole issue, uh, the legislative, uh, issues on the agenda was we
were hearing that ... the Senate, the House, and the Governor's staff were all negotiating
behind closed doors on property tax reform, and so we wanted to make sure that you
knew that there was a possibility that before you met for your next meeting, meaning the
15th of May, that there may be a property tax reform piece of legislation that came out.
Um ... if you happen to read any of the local papers over, uh, the ... the weekend, it sounds
like there's a bit of a crack in the, uh, behind the closed doors discussions. Uh, one
article talks about Iowa, uh, Republican law makers say there is a way to break this year's
legislative stalemate, and throw up their hands and go home. Uh, reminiscent of some of
the Wisconsin, uh, things that happened. And then there was a, uh, a discussion about
what the Governor wants, which is a little different than what we're hearing. Um, one of
the concerns we had about the, what we were hearing about the behind - the - closed -door
session was that if an agreement could be reached between the three, that they may come
out of that session, uh, get it up on the floor, vote it, get it signed without any public
reaction to it, without any lobbying going on, without any, uh, testimony going on and
that was a big concern, because they're actually past the deadline for the session to be
over, uh, again this year. Uh, the Senate plan that has come out does not have any real
impact on our city budget because they were intending to backfill the Senate approach to
this. It was rumored to be about a $130 million property tax credit in their plan. Then
the House plan talks about a 3% rollback, uh, for five years which would, uh, total about
15% at the end of the five years and the total impact on an annual basis to Iowa City
would be about $633,000 per year, and of course then that would be compounded on an
annual basis. It would grow each year. So that'd have a significant impact on our
community. The big, uh, unknown up until this time, and there's been kind of brief
conversations about this ... is the change in the apartment classification to residential, um,
valuing in terms of... of taxing it from commercial, and we estimate at a minimum the
impact on the ... on the first year, uh, in Iowa City would be about $2.8 million and there
is also discussion that that could be phased in over five to eight years. Uh, that represents
about a 7 to 9% impact on our general fund, if it's enacted over, uh, one year. Um, we've
already lost about $300,000 from co -op conversions, and I think that also has some of the
condo, um, impact in there as well. Uh, the problem with the ... the approach in terms of
reclassifying apartments is, is that it ... has a disproportionate impact on jurisdictions
across the state of Iowa. Of course the university communities are going to be impacted
more severely, and we've also, uh, heard that Polk County, Des Moines, would be hit
pretty severely as well. And if you read the papers, you'll know that Des Moines has
been suffering, uh, for some time in terms of value loss and the impact on their budget.
Um, the other thing is that there's no guarantee that this, if there is a rollback on property
taxes for apartments, that this is going to roll to the tenant. You know, if you think about
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 32
Iowa City, Iowa City has very high, um, occupancy and you know market, er uh, rents
are market - driven, so that there's no obligation that this is going to roll back to, uh,
students or, uh, families that are renting in these ... in these, um, apartments. Urn ... and
quite frankly, uh, last year we had one of the largest tax rate cuts of the major cities in the
Metro Coalition. So these commercial property owners have already received a
significant tax break, uh, at least through the city taxes of the City of Iowa City. In
addition to the property tax reform, uh, they're also talking about changing the telephone
equipment taxation, and uh, basically eliminating, uh, that tax from what I refer to as a
`personal property tax.' Uh, some others I think they used to call it `machinery and
equipment tax' here in the state. That would impact us another $100,000 and then the
other thing that's being proposed in this whole property tax reform is that they were
going to cap our tax levy growth rate. Uh, the idea was to cap it at about 3% per year, but
I can tell you we've heard anywhere from 2% to 4 %, uh, that they could cap that per
year. Um ... again, you know my concerns about property taxes. One of the issues, um,
that we have in our area is that we tend to be one of the higher property tax rates in terms
of the Metro Coalition and even in our immediate area, and just to remind you of the
rates. I don't mean to beat the drum constantly but it's something that I'm very
conscious about and am concerned about when we get into budgeting. Our tax rate for
fiscal year 13 is $17.27. That's after 57 -cent reduction. Uh, when you look at North
Liberty, North Liberty's fiscal year 13 tax rate is $11.03. When you look at, uh,
Coralville's tax rate, Coralville's tax rate is $13.53. Now, I can tell you ... I've studied
these issues a long time and a lot of people will argue that taxes alone are not the ... the
reason that people make decisions as to where they locate, but I can tell you when the
spreads get to this level, people pay attention to these things. So we have to pay attention
to this going forward and ... and my big concern about the property tax reform is that it is
so significant that it will make it difficult for us to start to constrict some of our
operations so that we can control some of those tax rates. I think it'll actually.... actually
distort our picture in terms of the relationship to the other jurisdictions that I've quoted.
Couple other, uh, items still in the Legislature this year are the 411, uh, pension system
reform and ... and this is not an easy one for a city government or a city, uh, elected
officials or administrations to oppose. Uh, the 411 pension system affects our police and
fire, uh, departments and um ... in the state of Iowa, this applies to communities over
populations of 8,000. It's also my understanding that there's certain jurisdictions that
even after they get to 8,000 there is some exemptions that occur for some period of time.
Um ... those communities that ... that don't ... that don't belong to the 411 pension system
and also have police and fire systems, it's my understanding that in an IPERS system,
which is what, uh, all the other rank and file employees outside of public safety are here
in Iowa City, and um, while the ... it's a good benefit program, there's different, uh, cost
allocations to the employee, uh, in terms of their participation. They also share in the, uh,
increases in, um ... um, you know, if there's benefit increases and ... and if there's... there's
other changes to the system, the employee also participates in those. So that's one of
those systems that we paid a lot of attention to. Um, the legislation so far the Senate is
actually advocating that, uh, the state Legislature contribute about $5 million to the
system, which would help with the unfunded accrued liability of that system. Um,
previously the State actually did participate in this system, and they stopped making
payments in 2011. Um, to give you an idea of the impact of this system, uh, 27% of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 33
salary goes to the pension system for Police and Fire here. And that's expected to grow,
uh, to over 30 %. So it's a significant impact when you think about the cost of our
employees, and uh, putting employees on the street, especially in the public safety area.
Again...
Hayek/ That's an expense in... on top of the salary.
Mims/ Yeah.
Markus/ That's ... yes, that's a percent (several talking) of the salary on top of the salary, that is
correct. And then finally, uh, the passenger rail service issue. Um, there's no action
expected this session. Um ... pending the Chicago to 0 ... Omaha route analysis. Um, I
don't know if you saw the story, the story has recently come out — Iowa City is, uh, the
preferred route and continues to be. Um ... the study is also looking at ridership
projections, revenue projections, impact of higher speeds, 79, 90 miles - per -hour, 110
miles - per -hour. Impact of greater frequency. Actually talking about increasing, uh, daily
trips, uh ... um, two trips daily versus five. Uh, the ... the study's expected to be completed
this winter. Um, we hope to get into a major lobbying effort, uh, with the, uh, in the
spring of 2013. (noises on mic) I've assigned, uh, Geoff Fruin, uh, as our point person
on this issue and I think, Jeff, you might want to comment. There's a session coming
up... um ... that we've invited Council to ... in terms of...of the study.
Fruin/ Yeah, right now from an advocacy point of view, the ... we really felt strategically there's
no point in really pushing this issue now, because you have to wait for the study to
complete. So we want to keep the item in the news without, um ... uh, going overboard
with the advocacy, and we'll ... we'll hit it hard fall ... in the fall. So, um, again, what we
want to do, um, probably throughout the summer is just keep the issue in front of the
public and um, we've been, uh fortunate enough to partner with the, um, Des Moines
partnership, uh, and the Chamber of Commerce here for a, um, educational event on May
24th and uh, you'll be getting some information on that, I believe, in this week's
Information Packet, um, but there's a speaker, um, John Robert Smith who is the, a
former mayor in Mississippi, um, and has some direct experience with passenger rail.
He's now the CEO of a, uh, kind of a transit think -tank that ... that studies these issues and
the impact of rail. So he's ... he's a ... a nationally known speaker on the issue. Um, so
we'll ... the Chamber will be inviting, um, you know, government, business, and int
...leaders and other interested, uh, people to come listen to him. So he'll be speaking in
Des Moines in the morning, coming to Iowa City and speaking at 3:30 in the afternoon
here at the Chamber. Uh, again, just to try to educate people on ... on the benefits of
passenger rail. We'll try to do a few of those things throughout the summer and getting
into the fall. Um, but really most of the advocacy's happening behind the scenes. We're
trying to, um, align the different cities that this would impact. We're trying to reach out
to the private sector, um, and uh, to the freight companies and things like that, and uh,
gear up for a big push come, uh, this time next year.
Markus / And as (mumbled) indicated, I think the key to a lot of this is to get our business
leadership behind this initiative in this state, and I think they will help push this at the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 34
legislative level. Um ... quite frankly the, you know, the major rail advocates are, um, I
think that's a tougher message for them, but if we can convince business of the value of
this, I think that's a ... a uh, step in the right direction. And quite frankly, as difficult as it
may be, I would really like to see the University step up and participate in this. I think
the University would be one of the clear, uh, beneficiaries of this system. I understand
that they may have some reluctance to do that for lots of reasons, but it seems to me that
if ..if we could get our student government, uh, to support this and recognize that, um,
we market, uh, to a large extent to Illinois and that this system would run right out of
Chicago and the suburbs of Illinois. Major attractor for enrollment and growth at the
University of Iowa, and so I would hope that if the University, um, administration
chooses not to get into this that maybe this is an issue that the school, uh, students could
get into and support us on this, cause I think it would really be a big help.
Payne/ This also plays into what Jim was talking about, about people having cars. If you have an
easy way to get home in Chicago, you don't need a car.
Dobyns/ Welcome to the Iowa City Council! (laughter)
Hayek/ (several talking) ...last week I met the, uh, student body president of Drake, and they're
working on this, and I'll follow up with you (mumbled)
Uttermark/ Yeah, and I know the, uh, student body president, uh, at Grinnell is also working at
this. So there's ... I think there's some stars aligning there. Yeah.
Hayek/ Okay. Let's uh ... thanks for that update. The ... the biggest issue far and away is the
commercial property tax and the apartment deal. I mean, a 10% hit to our general fund.
Throgmorton/ If I'm hearing all that correctly, the apartment rollback also provides an additional
incentive for developers to build more apartment buildings, doesn't it? I mean, that's
what it sounds like to me. So I mean we don't need to discuss that but...
Information Packets (4/19 & 4/26):
Hayek/ Okay. Uh, Info Packet. We've covered some of the items on there. There's April 19th
and April 26th. Anything on there? Okay! Uh, Council time?
Council Time:
Dobyns/ I want to give you all an update. Um, as you recall, Jim submitted a resolution, um,
couple of weeks ago. Just wanted to let you all know that Jim and I have, uh, been
meeting and we've sort of discussed broadening, um, what we could present to Council
for your consideration. Everywhere from a proclamation, resolution to maybe even some
operational changes in some of our boards and commissions. Because of that, we're
meeting with Eleanor and Tom, uh, later this week and uh, other stakeholders in the
community about issues of, uh, racism, and uh, just wanted to let you know that we're
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 35
going to be presenting that to the Mayor for your consideration, perhaps the next meeting
or subsequent to that.
Champion/ Thank you for taking the time.
Hayek/ Absolutely! Thanks. Any other Council time items?
Throgmorton/ I'd like to, uh, make a quick comment about TIFs and ... and our use of TIFs, and
I've conveyed these particular ideas to Matt and... and to Tom by, uh, you know, in other
ways. I ... I think when it comes to major TIFs, uh, that ... that might be politically
controversial or really substantive and would have a significant effect on the city, that we
should as a matter of policy not vote on them the same night that we receive information
about them. That we should have at a minimum, and I think this'd be a reasonable
amount of time, two weeks to, uh, think about the ... the proposed TIF and ... and to, uh,
talk with whoever else in the community we think would be appropriate to talk to, to get
a sense of how it's reverberating. Uh, and ... you know, what constitutes a major
substantive TIF? I'm not sure. We could probably work that through. The second thing
is ... I ... I think as a matter of courtesy it would be good, uh, whenever we're proposing a
TIF, uh, at least a major TIF, that we, uh, notify county, uh, the County and the School
Board in advance. Uh, to let them know we're ... we're, uh, proposing to do it, and just to
give `em an opportunity for ... to provide some kind of, uh, information and feedback that
could possibly influence us. As a matter of courtesy. Um, so those are two suggestions
I'd like to put out there. We don't have to deliberate them a lot right here and now, but I
... I...
Mims/ I don't think we can cause it's not on the agenda.
Throgmorton/ Right, because of the time, sure.
Mims/ Well, they're not on the agenda.
Dilkes/ Jim, I assume you're talking about notification at the time a development agreement is
being considered? As opposed to the earlier times when they are required to get notice
by code?
Throgmorton/ Um ... I'm not sure I'm thinking about, you know, a proposal to provide any
particular developer with a significant TIF on something that might be controversial; we
hear about it; and then that same night make a vote on it. This... this ... I think we ought
to change that.
Hayek/ Well ... well we're starting to get into the substance of that ... of that issue...
Throgmorton/ Right.
Hayek/ ...um, so if people want to have ... put this on the work session we can. I mean, I will
point out though, Jim, that this goes through Economic Development Committee first.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 36
Throgmorton/ I understand that.
Hayek/ ...which involves almost half the Council and is a very public process.
Dobyns/ ...recommend that a discussion be on a future... discussion item of that, the Economic
Commission. Would that be appropriate?
Hayek/ Ask Economic Development you mean?
Dobyns/ (mumbled)
Payne/ Just to understand the process... better?
Dobyns/ Well, to bring up Jim's idea of...I'm just thinking rather than bringing it up here,
bringing it up in that forum. (several talking)
Markus/ I agree with that but I ... but I think the other issue is ... I'm going to look for your
guidance here (mumbled) if I stray, uh, it seems to me that we have adopted policies, and
I think that it would be best if Jim would take a look at those policies and focus in on the
policy. We have adopted, written policies on economic development and give us maybe
some suggestions, you know, as to what his ... what he would propose that we consider
there. And that, yes, I think the Economic Development Committee would be the right
place to ... to vet those (mumbled) (noises on mic)
Hayek/ You want to do that? (mumbled) ...up the pole that way?
Throgmorton/ Okay.
Pending Work Session Topics:
Hayek/ Okay. Thanks, Tom. Uh, any other Council time? Okay. Uh, pending work session
topics. IP4. Anything to add or edit there? The only thing I would add is we ... we've
been talking about, and I think we're under a general agreement, that at some point we're
going to look at, uh, neighborhood stabilization and these broader zoning issues, sort of
as a stand -alone topic. So maybe that ought to be added to the (several talking)
Fruin/ Yeah, I think it's under the heading of Strategic Plan Update, since that's one of the
priorities of the Strategic Plan, we would ... we would (both talking)
Hayek/ ...okay, that's... that's what covers (several talking)
Mims/ Okay. Thank you.
Throgmorton/ (several talking) ...Matt is also saying we need to focus attention on it, not just
have it be one of several categories of discussion in one particular night.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.
May 1, 2012 Iowa City City Council Work Session Page 37
Fruin/ Certainly we could ... we could have a separate session on that, if that was ... yeah,
it's ... that's fine.
Hayek/ It just depends on what else you're reporting. Maybe the other strategic items don't
require as much time as the neighborhood stabilization does.
Fruin/ Yeah. We'll make sure that maybe we address that first and if we need to carry it over we
certainly can.
Meeting Schedule/Upcoming Events /Council Invitations:
Hayek/ Okay. Okay ... uh, meeting schedule? Upcoming events, Council invites? Jim, you're on
tomorrow morning. KXIC. (laughter and several talking) Not that early! (laughter and
several talking)
Champion/ Well, I think we ought to put on the pending list ... we ought to be talking about
backyard chickens too.
Payne/ About what?
Champion/ Backyard chickens.
Throgmorton/ I agree! Let's get it on the list.
Hayek/ Is there a third? (several talking)
Payne/ They're going to be coming to a meeting to talk to us about it, and we'll get it on there
anyway, so ... (several talking)
Hayek/ Okay! Uh, anything else for the good of the order? If not, let's uh, adjourn the work
session and we'll reconvene in 20 minutes for the formal. Thanks!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of May 1, 2012.