HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-20-2007 Council Economic Development Committee
AGENDA
City of Iowa City
City Council Economic Development Committee
Tuesday, February 20,2007
8:30 a.m.
City Hall
Lobby Conference Room
410 East Washington Street
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes of February 9,2007 Economic Devel<?pment Committee
meeting
3. Compile Interview Questions for consultant interviews
4. Determine decision-making process.
5. Committee time
6. Adjournment
Next two meetings:
. February 27,2007,9:00 a.m.
Chamber of Commerce, 325 E. Washington Street, Large Conference Room
. March 6, 2007, 9:00 a.m.
Chamber of Commerce, 325 E. Washington Street, Large Conference Room
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
February 9, 2007
LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM
DRAFT
Members Present:
Regenia Bailey, Connie Champion, Bob Elliott
Members Absent:
None
Staff Present:
Wendy Ford, Karin Franklin
Others Present: Nancy Quellhorst, Joe Raso, Craig Gustaveson, Lisa Barnes, Helen
Burford, Irvin Pfab, Tim Kenyon, a reporter from the Daily Iowan and several journalism students.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL:
None
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
Chairperson Regenia Bailey called the meeting to order at 9:05 AM.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JAN. 23. 2007 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
MEETING
MOTION: Champion moved to approve the January 23, 2007 minutes as submitted. Elliott
seconded the motion. The motion passed 3:0.
DISCUSSION OF PROPOSALS FOR DOWNTOWN MARKET NICHE ANALYSIS
There was discussion and consensus to evaluate proposals on their content and merit without
discussion of fees initially.
Each council committee member, the representatives from the Downtown Association and
Chamber and Staff members shared with the group their three top three choices of the eight
proposals submitted.
Two proposals were eliminated initially: Gibbs Planning Group and University of Wisconsin
Extension Service. Of the remaining six, the group agreed that three clearly stood out: Marketek,
ERA and PUMA. Discussion ensued about each of these.
Progressive Urban Management Associates
They have done extensive, worked with similar communities and have intimate knowledge of the
area, having successfully worked on the renewal of the Cedar Rapids SSMID last year. They
understand the importance of locally owned businesses in downtown. They seem focused on
BIDs, SSMIDs as an outcome or solution to all downtown's problems and there was concern
because of that, their focus might be limited. There was some concern that implementation
strategies did not have an analysis component. Consensus was that their process was not clear
enough.
Other concerns were that there was not mention of lodging or entertainment and they may be too
focused on retail. They talked about retail leakage in the proposal, which indicated their interest
was too strong on retail and of competition or cannibalism of one local area on another. The
leakage study suggested an approach of competition with other shopping areas in IC instead of a
preferred focus on how downtown could improve its pull by improving market mix.
Another concern was that they did not specify a timeline and that 9 visits seemed excessive.
After thoughtful discussion, the committee agreed to set this one aside for now and not invite
them for an interview at this time.
Economics Research Associates (ERA)
There was favorable discussion of ERA's apparent understanding of downtowns and college
towns. Past studies include Chapel Hill, NC and Austin, TX where the campus is integrated into
the downtown. The project team is impressive. Melissa Mayer had experience in St. Louis which
has come a long way.
There were favorable comments about their study of local policy for a framework of reference at
the outset. Also about how their market analysis looks thorough, and their project task outline
very good, and timeline -- excellent in 4 months. They also mention pull factors which the group
noted has a better perspective that "leakage". The group indicated that they'd like to bring in the
project team for an interview.
Marketek
Favorable comments included that they were results oriented. They also seemed tuned in to our
interest on the arts and who we are from the beginning. They did their research. Broad scope
which goes a little beyond - looking at ability to develop a creative cluster downtown. Good
proposal presentation.
Discussion ensued about surveys and how are they are conducted. Mailed surveys are expensive
as shown by the detailed item in the proposal. Discussion to include specific questions about
surveying in the interviews ensued. We should explore internet survey possibili~ies with the firm.
Since surveys are an integral part of each of the proposals, we need to ensure that the expense
of them will net the value that we want. We should ensure that the surveys are necessary,
relevant, and conducted in order to achieve the goals we want. We should explore whether we
could we get the same info with focus groups. There was consensus that there should be several
questions about surveying techniques and tabulation in the interviews. The group agreed they'd
like to bring in the project team for an interview.
Interview process
The committee decided to meets once early to assemble and assign interview questions on Feb.
20 at 8:30 a.m.
Staff will schedule interviews with Marketek and Economics Research Associates on 2 different
mornings chosen from Feb 27, March 1,6, 7, or 8. Quellhorst offered the Chamber conference
room as the location for the interviews. Ford will make invitations and begin due diligence.
Council Time
Adjournment