HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-06-04 TranscriptionPage 1
ITEM 2. PROCLAMATIONS
2a. Pride Month
Hayek: (reads proclamation)
Karr: Here to accept the proclamation is Deb Tiemens and Sharon Beck. (applause)
Tiemens: On behalf of the Pride Committee and also the LGBT Community of Iowa City,
we'd like to say thank you to the Mayor and Council Members, and let you know
how very much we appreciate your efforts to build a city that welcomes diversity
and celebrates all of its citizens. Thank you very much!
Hayek: Thank you, and thank you for your work!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 2
ITEM 4. COMMUNITY COMMENT (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA). [UNTIL 8
PM]
Hayek: This is, uh, the opportunity at each City Council meeting for members of the
public to address the Council on items that are not on the agenda. So if there's
something that is not on the agenda this evening that you would like to bring to
our attention, we invite you to step forward. Please sign in and also verbally give
us your name, and we ask that you keep your comments to five minutes or less.
Gravitt: Uh, my name is Mary Gravitt. I'm here about a quality of life comment. I have
two comments. One is that I want the City to have a clean-up, fix -up, paint -up
campaign because I'm tired of picking trash up off my lawn, apartment where I
live. Somebody's always coming and throwing empty, uh, pop cups, paper bags,
and ... and uh, items such as that. And I'm saying that it's because of ignorance.
When I went to school, every year we had a clean-up, paint -up, fix -up campaign,
and people learned how to put trash in receptacles. You can't assume that people
know that trash goes in the receptacle. You have to tell them, train them from
children on up. So I ... I think we need a clean -up, paint -up, fix -up campaign, and
my second thing is cameras. We need cameras. I know there's a petition going
around that we don't need cameras, but we ... I know better! Because maybe you
could catch that person who likes to smoke joint up there on Linn Street and
Washington. Now I smell it coming, uh, past that street that go to the Senior
Center. I've done it twice. Once in the afternoon, and once in the morning.
Now ... I think that's enough to have cameras here, and besides, the 4th of July is
coming, and I don't want Iowa City to look like Boston, cause we couldn't take it.
We wouldn't be able to do anything about it. Boston, because it's a major city,
they... and because of the camera that was in ... I think it was in a department
store, they knew who did it. And I want cameras ... you can watch me! You can
put a camera in my bedroom. I ... want to (laughter) feel safe, and the final thing
is about the storms. Sandy has ... has traumatized me, and what happened in
Oklahoma has traumatized me. And I think about what's going to happen to the
Co -Op when it's down there, when that river starts to rise. Today it's been cloudy
all day. It's raining, in the center... center of the state. Now something has to be
done about the Co -Op cause I don't want to see it drown, and that will change the
whole personality of the city itself. So that's all I have to say. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you. Appreciate your comments!
Brown: Two things. I ... I'm Mark Brown at 320 S. Dubuque and I came down here
tonight because I live at 320 S. Dubuque and uh, I ride MegaBus but ... but can
you get a MegaBus, uh, out at where I live because we have two angle fire and
police, and they know (mumbled) or in need help right away because MegaBus
(mumbled) I know where (mumbled) have you ever considered moving the
MegaBus down to the train depot because... because we have (mumbled) address
a MegaBus problem because (mumbled) 320 S. Dubuque and MegaBus and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 3
(mumbled) and ... and (mumbled) Capitol House and I (mumbled) I want it to be
at the ... another place, because that's private property.
Hayek: Thank you.
Parsons: Hello! (mumbled) I'm Cindy Parsons. I know quite a few of you. I haven't
been here for a while but um, I'm here tonight on behalf of Project GREEN and
with me is Diane Allen, who's passing out one more handout, and Linda
Schrieber, back here, who is our, um, our volunteer public relations person, and
she also heads up the Downtown Planning Committee. And you had some
information in your packet we sent as correspondence, just kind of as our final
year -end report for 2012 to tell you a few things about what we've been doing,
and hopefully most of you are aware of Project GREEN and know at least some
of the things that we do, and I'm ... I'm sure you do. I know some of you do
anyway, and hopefully all of you do. Um ... but we're an all - volunteer
organization that we were established in 1968. Our goals include beautification
and enhancement of our areas' public spaces, such as parks, roadsides, riverfronts,
median parkways, and school grounds. And also public education is a very large
part of what our mission is, because we want to encourage businesses and private
citizens to beautify their own spaces just to make our community a more pleasant
place to live. Uh, throughout the years we've fostered very strong partnerships
with local businesses, governmental bodies, and non - profit partners and ... and
probably the City of Iowa City is probably our strongest partner, and we have a
very good working relationship with Mike Moran from the Parks and Rec
Department, and also Terry Robinson and the ... and the City maintenance crews.
So we can't say enough good things about how cooperative the City has been with
us. Um, first I've ... well, in your packet is the 2013 report, um, just kind of which
is a general overview of Project GREEN and then also, uh, Laura Hawks, who is
our landscape maintenance person compiled a 2012 report of what's been done
during 2012 to, you know, where we've spent our money and... and what parts of
the City projects we've done on that, and ... and um, Diane Allen will speak a little
bit more on that in a minute. So this ... what we're giving you tonight is pretty
much a financial spreadsheet that just shows, um, really since 1968 what, you
know, what monies we've expended on public projects around here. So we'd like
to highlight just a few of those things. But, um, as far as our history, we were
founded in 1968 and we ... at that time Iowa City was in the urban renewal process
and our three co- founders were Jim Maynard, uh, Gretchen Harshbarger, and
Nancy Siberling, and their vision was, um ... you know, as a ... they were just
concerned as a part of the urban renewal process just that the green spaces and
um, you know, creating the green spaces and preserving those green spaces, that
that not got forgotten. And so that was our original mission, and that really
continues to be our mission, to really, um, you know, promote and ... and beautify
the ... the public areas of Iowa City that people see. Um, that was 45 years ago
and that's what we're still doing. Our funds ... you may not know that, you know,
we're kind of a quasi -city commission and our funds are actually held by the City
Treasury, and so when we expend our money, we have to request funds from the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 4
City Treasurer, so we are, you know, I guess that just goes to show a little bit
more of our partnership we've had going. Um, it's also notable that many of our
original volunteers are still involved with the organization 45 years later. Jim
Maynard, who was one of the co- founders, is still on our steering committee and I
guess I'll just take this opportunity to mention to the public that we do need new
volunteers. So, many of ours are aging and um, you know, in their 80s and so...
Diane and I are kind of some of the younger members (laughter) which is kinda
sad (laughs). So anyway, now thank you for that and um, now Diane will just tell
you a little bit of specific information on some of our projects.
Hayek: Thank you, Cindy!
Allen: Hello, everybody!
Throgmorton: Hi!
Allen: Uh, Project GREEN has designed, funded, and continues to maintain a large
variety of civic projects. As you can see from the spreadsheet, to date our non-
profit organization has provided nearly $1.9 million in funding for local projects.
That's a lot of money! In addition, we have recently contributed $75,000 to fund
landscaping at Iowa City's newest urban park, the Terry Trueblood Recreation,
uh, Area. The financial report distributed this evening lists the numerous projects,
for which Project GREEN has collaborated with the City on, and for which
Project GREEN has contributed funds for the planning, creation, and maintenance
of those projects. Our largest single project this far has been the restoration of
College Green Park in 1997. At a cost of $285,000. Other major projects which
are on -going are the Iowa Avenue medians; the Melrose Avenue medians; North
Dubuque Street, from Park Road bridge to the interstate; and Highway 6 east
bypass from Gilbert Street to Sycamore. Uh, we have signs out. Have any of you
seen these around town where it says, um, this project is maintained and, uh,
created by Project GREEN. There's one just down the block! In 2008, Project
GREEN volunteer Linda Schrieber began planting more than ... planting more
than 4,500 perennial plants in more than 40 planters in downtown Iowa City. The
project has expanded to include private contributions of annual plants each year.
This project builds on the original long- standing endevadors ... endeavors of the
1968 volunteer crews who began planting containers and parks in the downtown
area at the inception of Project GREEN 45 years ago. To raise funds for our
projects we plan and execute an annual GREEN garden fair, which is our major
source of income. Thousands of plants grown and donated by local gardeners are
offered at the fair. Our most recent garden fair held on May 1 lth raised over
$30,000, which was made possible by the efforts of our many dedicated
volunteers. We also rely on private donations, and we have recently created an
endowment fund through the Johnson County Community Foundation, which will
someday generate sufficient income to pay for the ongoing maintenance of our
projects. We have several other events that we host each year. Project GREEN
and the Iowa City Public Library co- sponsor three two -hour free Sunday garden
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 5
forums during the winter months, videotaped and available on Cable Channel 10
throughout the entire year. Project GREEN plans and hosts an annual garden tour
on a variety of local gardens in the summer months. The Project GREEN garden
tour was the first in our area during the modern era, and we view this as an
educational event to demonstrate to homeowners in our area ways they can
beautify their little corner in the world to add to the quality of life and
attractiveness of our community. Our tour this year will be on Sunday, June 23ra,
and will feature four gardens in the Manville Heights area and one on the east side
of Iowa City. Details can be found on our web site at projectgreen.org. Upon
application, Project GREEN gives green grants to the local public schools for
landscape design and perennial plant materials on school grounds. Since 1978
Project GREEN has funded school projects totaling over $230,000 in the Iowa
City Community School District. In addition, for the past five years in
cooperation with Iowa City Landscaping, Project GREEN has funded the
kindergarten tree project at each elementary school building. Project GREEN is
directed by a 30- member vil, uh, volunteer steering committee and monthly open
meetings, and publishes a bi- annual newsletter. Project GREEN has been the
recipient of several statewide awards for innovation, reforestation, landscaping,
and education regarding environmental awareness. We hope you've learned a
little more about our organization this evening, and we intend to continue our
strong partnership with the City of Iowa City for many years to come. Thank you
for your time, your support, and your past, present, and future support. Thank
you very much!
Hayek: Thank you, Diane, and thank you, Cindy (several talking)
Parsons: I guess I'd just say, um, we're not here to ask for anything, which I'm sure you all
will be very glad about (laughter) and we just wanted to tell you what's going on
and, um, I think one of the things you'll hear about later tonight is the ... the Ned
Ashton House and we hope to be involved with that in some capacity, as well.
So, thank you very much.
Hayek: Hope you are! Thank you for all your group does!
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
Mims: So moved.
Payne: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Payne. Discussion? Those in favor say aye.
Opposed say nay. Motion carries 7 -0. Is there anyone else who would like to
address the Council during community comment? Okay, we will move on ... to
Item 5, Planning and Zoning Matters.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 6
ITEM 5a AMERICAN LEGION ROAD REZONING - CONDITIONALLY
REZONING APPROXIMATELY 2 ACRES FROM COUNTY
RESIDENTIAL (R) AND APPROXIMATELY 2.83 ACRES FROM LOW -
DENSITY SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS -5) TO LOW- DENSITY
MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM -12) LOCATED AT EAST OF
SCOTT BOULEVARD AND NORTH OF MUSCATINE AVENUE AND
AMERICAN LEGION ROAD. [Discussion only at formal meeting] (REZ13-
00002 & REZ13- 00003)
1. PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. The public hearing is open. (bangs gavel) Is there any
ex parte communications to disclose? Okay. Mr. Davidson!
Davidson: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council. I'm Jeff Davidson,
the Director of Planning for the City. First item on your agenda under Planning
and Zoning Items this evening is a request by Allen Homes of Iowa ... Allen
Homes of Iowa City, Iowa. Uh, the requested action, um, this evening is for a
rezoning from County R and City RS -5 to RM -12. Uh, you can see here the two
parcels. Urn ... this parcel here you might recall was, uh, annexed two meetings
ago. We at that time didn't have the Conditional Zoning Agreement ready for
you like we usually would. Uh, so, uh, that has been delayed until tonight. Uh,
but there are two parcels here. This one, uh, formerly in the County, uh, the
corporate limits line would now come down. That east boundary, uh, would be,
um, that's approximately a 2 -acre parcel. This is approximately a 2, uh, .8 -acre
parcel for a total of approximately 4.8 acres. To orient you, here's Scott
Boulevard, um, American Legion Road, Muscatine Avenue intersection. Uh, the
Silvercrest, uh, elderly housing development is here. Um ... single-family
subdivision on this side. Urn ... the, uh, purpose of the rezoning action this
evening is to, uh, rezone the property from low density single - family to multi-
family, uh, development, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, uh,
for the area. Uh, and again, I won't go through the rezone ... uh, the annexation
conditions cause we did that a couple of, uh, meetings ago. Uh, in terms of the
zoning, uh, there are a number of things that are proposed as part of a Conditional
Zoning Agreement, and I will read those to you, uh, in summary. Uh, one other
thing you might be aware of, and if you're not, uh, this intersection is slated for
either signalization or a roundabout. We're evaluating both right now. We think
the conditions may actually be pretty good for a roundabout. Ultimately that will
be the City Council's decision, but there will be, uh, access control, uh, or I
should say traffic control put in place at this intersection. That will not be the
existing four -way, uh, stop. Basically traffic has gotten to the point where there
needs to be a more efficient traffic control system there and that's, uh, what's,
uh ... proposed. In terms of those, uh, conditions then for the Conditional Zoning
Agreement, basically to deal with the specifics of the site here. Uh, one other
thing I wanted to notice is that, uh, or to note rather is that obviously Scott
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 7
Boulevard has been reconstructed, uh, in the recent future, about 20 years ago, 25
years ago, as an urban arterial street. This portion is also an urban arterial street,
but the southside of the subject property here, uh, American Legion Road is what
we would refer to as a `county rural arterial' and does not have sidewalks. Has
drainage ditches instead of, uh, storm sewers. It is slated in the City's capital
improvement program to be improved to city- street standards, but is not, uh, as of
yet in that state, and we don't know exactly the year it's in the ... it's in five years
out right now. Council could always accelerate that, uh, if you desired, uh, but we
want to try and plan for the inevitability of it possibly being five years out. So
one of the conditions that the developer will be required, uh, to do is a temporary
sidewalk along, uh, that south side of American Legion Road, uh, if for some
reason the street was constructed by the time the development occurred here, then
it ... there would be the 8 -foot sidewalk that you would, uh, find, um, along arterial
streets, uh, in Iowa City. So the other conditions then would be pay ... payment of
a 12.5% fee for the eventual reconstruction of American Legion Road. All of the
subdivisions, uh, along this portion of American Legion Road, all the way out to
Taft Avenue, have had that condition. So that is consistent. Uh, installation of an
8 -foot sidewalk along this, the west, uh, side of, uh, the property, the east side of
Scott Boulevard. Again, uh ... um ... that is our standard for arterial streets. The
City will pay 3 -feet, uh, of the required 8 -foot width. Uh, the temporary
sidewalk, as I mentioned, along American Legion Road, um ... here is a concept
plan, uh, and I want to emphasize to you that it is just a concept plan, but on how
the site would be laid out with two ... I believe these depict 36 -plex buildings each.
The site would accommodate under the existing zoning ordinance up to 77 units.
Uh, the developer has indicated, uh, something less than that. Perhaps 60, 65
units, but the site would accommodate up to 77 units, and you can see, again, the
...the layout. You see Silvercrest there in the background. The thing I wanted
you to note is that there is a requirement for a public street to be dedicated, uh, on
the east side of the property which would then ... provide access for future
development. Basically between this site and the Windsor West development,
and so dedication of that right -of -way is one of the, uh, conditions. And then
approval of a, basically to go through design review, uh, for approval of the
development plan. The ... the developer has indicated this is basically just a pretty
picture to show what could happen. They are not, uh, necessarily, um, committed
to this architecture or this number of units. So that is something that will be
handled administratively, uh, through the site plan review process, uh, and that
will be required to go through design review as a condition. Uh, that is
everything. Any questions?
Champion: What is a temporary sidewalk?
Davidson: Um, we ... we've had one (both talking) probably the best example, um, it would
be the regulation width of at least 8 -feet, uh, but it would be asphalt. Generally
on the backside of the ... the drainage ditch. We had one along Sycamore Street
for quite some time until Sycamore Street got constructed. They actually work
fine, but they're not considered permanent.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 8
Champion: Thank you.
Payne: You said it was going to be on the south side of American Legion Road? Did you
mean on the south side of the property?
Davidson: South side of the property, yeah!
Payne: Okay!
Davidson: North ... north side of American Legion (both talking)
Payne: Okay! Um ... as we talked about at a couple meetings ago, I have concerns with
how close that access road is ... to the intersection of...
Davidson: Yeah, and after you raised that concern, Michelle, we did take a look at it, and this
distance from the intersection to the proposed access road, as well as from the
access road to the off -set access road. I guess it's right here, it's a little hard to
see (away from mic) uh, that goes into the Silvercrest development. Both of
those, um, distances meet our subdivision requirements for the distance from the
intersection, as well as offset driveways. So there's at least 125 -feet between
each of those.
Payne: And ... in, I mean, I don't see any parking depicted in the picture. I mean, I'm
assuming they have to have two parking spots per bedroom or... (both talking)
Davidson: Yeah, the development, it looks like there's a surf ...two surface lots for each
building and then I assume, uh, subterranean parking, but ... but again, that's
...that's to be worked out as ... as part of the site plan. Um, they would have to
meet the parking requirements.
Payne: So if they could have 72 units with two bedrooms each, that's 70 ... you could
have two cars.
Davidson: Right.
Payne: I mean ... that's a lot of traffic trying to pull in and out, that close to that
intersection. It seems to me.
Hayek: Jeff, is the ... is the 2.83 acres we are asked to rezone.
Davidson: 4.83, uh, Matt.
Hayek: Oh, right.
Davidson: Two ... two in the county and ... and 2.8 (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 9
Hayek: Is that, is the totality of it, does that include the future development (both talking)
Davidson: No, it does not!
Hayek: ... depicted there?
Davidson: It's basically, Matt, those parcels right there.
Hayek: Where is the future development? Is it to the east of the...
Davidson: That's this area here.
Hayek: Okay, and what is that zoned and what would...
Davidson: Uh, that is currently still in the county.
Hayek: Uh huh.
Davidson: Uh, so that would have to be brought into the city and rezoned according to a
process like this.
Hayek: Okay.
Davidson: Yeah, the ... the city limits start up again at Windsor West. So there's a gap right
here. I ... I think I indicated to you during the annexation that this is basically in-
fill development because it kind of...the city leap- frogged out when, uh, the
Windsor development was platted.
Throgmorton: I ... I would hope when this goes to administrative review, Jeff, that um,
somebody's doing some thinking about how the buildings relate to one another,
rather than just thinking about them as zones in which buildings are located.
Davidson: Right.
Throgmorton: Uh, cause when I look at those two buildings, set up there by themselves, and I
think about something going in just to the east of them, I ask myself, well, what
would go in there? I don't know, a couple other buildings, uh, tossed in. You
know, so ... I really hope somebody pays careful attention to that!
Davidson: Yeah, it's certainly something to, uh ... uh, pay careful at ... attention to.
You ... you can see that fairly soon here you get ... this is the Scott Park property.
Uh, this area in the flood plain here wouldn't be developed with buildings. So
it'd basically be this part of the site here. What's... what's shown here, Jim, is the
possibility of single - family development in the back part here. Uh, maybe some
more multi - family development along American Legion Road, but as ... but as
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 10
you've indicated, certainly we want to make sure that it operates cohesively and
it's well - connected, relates to the street well, and that ... that'll all be considered.
Mims: Jeff, under the current zoning how many units could be built?
Davidson: Let's see, RS ... city RS -5, um, sort of as a general rule of thumb builds out at
approximately 3.25 to 3.5 units per acre. So that would be 3.25 times basically 5
so roughly 15 to 18 units.
Mims: And we're going from 15 to 18 units up to 70 something?
Davidson: Up to 77, right. And ... and again, it's... it's... it's common for property to be
brought into the city when there's no development plan for it at the lowest density
development, acknowledging then that it'll take additional scrutiny, such as this.
Mims: Uh huh.
Davidson: ...to increase the density on it. We do feel that it is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan that at the intersection of two arterial streets, you would
have higher density, multi - family development, rather than single - family. So we
do feel that's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Mims: So would the ... would the very preliminary design that the developer has, what we
would be looking at for this ... roughly five, four to five acres, is two buildings
total.
Davidson: That's what's been indicated, yes.
Mims: Okay. And so ... on this schematic, the city street that has to go in is that in the
middle of that four to five acres or...
Davidson: That's on the eastern edge.
Mims: Okay. So...
Davidson: That would be ... along this edge.
Mims: Okay. So that road is on that edge. Okay.
Davidson: And the idea is that it'll provide access to both sides. To this development as well
as to what happens to the other side.
Mims: ...other side, okay.
Davidson: That way we eliminate additional driveways along the arterial.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 11
Throgmorton: I ... I know we're talking about land use here, uh, but I ... I'd just like to ask a
question so I can be clear about the facts, uh, in my own head at least. Am I right
in understanding that, uh, this is a multi - family residential set of buildings that
would be subject to the new commercial property tax legislation recently enacted
by the State? And therefore pay much less in property taxes than would otherwise
have been the case?
Davidson: I wouldn't pretend to be an expert on that legislation, Jim, but yes, that is my
understanding.
Markus: That would be my interpretation.
Throgmorton: Yeah.
Hayek: Although couldn't it be condo'd?
Markus: Regardless.
Hayek: Regardless?
Mims: Yeah.
Davidson: Yeah.
Dilkes: That, I mean, that legislation really doesn't affect buildings that are being built
now. It... it's because everyone builds condos now anyway. It... it rea... it effects
older buildings that are apartments.
Davidson: Anything else in terms of your decision - making this evening... before you
continue your public hearing?
Hayek: Well and I ... I don't know if it's relevant or ... or permissible for us to talk about
zoning outside of the proposed rezoning, but I guess ... uh, I came in
here... thinking that I would, and I guess I still am, uh, be...be supportive of the
rezoning for this, with ... with the expectation that the land to the east would, uh,
would ... would remain low density, single family, um, given its proximity to the
neighborhoods to the east, and when I see a future development depicted east of
this rezoning piece, I understand it's not part of what is before us, you know, I..
that gives me some pause.
Davidson: Right, I ... I guess, Matt, if it ... if it puts you at ease at all, this is absolutely nothing
that has any rights associated with it, or that ... that a developer would come back
and say, oh, well, when you approved this rezoning, I thought this... that's... that's
just purely conceptual. You're absolutely correct, Matt, in that the Windsor West
development, which is an entirely single - family residential development how this
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 12
undeveloped area relates to that will be very important when this comes into the
city and is zoned and platted.
Champion: Can you ... just point out on the map where Windsor West starts?
Davidson: Um...
Champion: I mean, is it...
Davidson: You know, unfortunately it's hard to (both talking) see out here. I mean, it is
somewhere in this vicinity, Connie.
Champion: Okay. So ... (both talking)
Davidson: There's a parcel of property owned by the Hieronymus family in between where
the golf course was, which is now Windsor West. It's basically that parcel that
remains. And in fact I believe a portion of that property was purchased for ... for
this development.
Champion: Then I know where it's at then.
Davidson: Right. Any additional questions? Thank you.
Hayek: This is a public hearing. Uh, anyone's welcome to address the Council.
Allen: Hi, I'm Jesse Allen with Allen Homes. I guess I wanted to kind of start off and
kind of relate to how we kind of came up with the project, how we were, you
know, interested in it and kind of what my vision was and kind of start off with
that. So, as you guys all know, or maybe some of you know, the project's been
for sale for several years and ... and when I first looked at it, it didn't really make
sense to me as ... as what would happen or how this would all play out with the
City and... and with the Comprehensive Plan and the East Side growth area of the
Southeast District Plan, but over time we kept looking at it and going back to it,
and ... if you're out at the property and you notice the elevation of the city, it kind
of dawned on me that there's some great views to be had out there, you know,
when you ... when you put a building out there ... cause it's kind of sheltered with
the house and the trees, but there's... there's a great view. We had a meeting with
the architects and the designers. There's a great view of St. Pat's steeple. Um,
looking south down to the new industrial park that'll be coming up. So there's
some great advantages to living at this property, so that's what kind of got me
interested to ... develop the plan a little further, as far as a multi - family use. Um,
when you start looking at Village Green, that area's all filled up now! Um, the
baby boomers, per se, they kind of overtook the neighborhood and moved into
there are, you know, there's nothing for sale at this point or there's very little.
Um, the end of Court Street is starting to fill up. So that's when I kind of stepped
up to design the plan and ... and move forward, and looking through the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 13
Comprehensive Plan, it made sense to put a higher density on the corner, and then
transition it down to lower density, moving... moving to the east to, um, Windsor
West, which that's kind of how we came up with this concept working with the
City. We ... we went through probably 10...10 before this, um, kind of what I
envisioned was maybe transitioning down to townhouses or detached duplexes,
similar to what's in Village Green, and there's kind of a line drawn in ... in the
sand basically at the end of, uh... Scott Park, there's that kind of cut -off mark,
where it would transition to single family, you know, and then ... and then go to
Windsor West, and there's probably a good 50 -acre parcel left there to the east
that could all be single - family. We've kind of mapped that out, as well. Of
course we don't own the property and, you know, the Hieronymus family farms
owned it. We ... we've had discussion with that but ... uh, for this project, to kind
of stay on point here, we've kind of laid out two 30 -unit apartment buildings.
Condo'd, and we made the units bigger so that they're more desirable for
residents to live. More attractive to, um, an older generation that maybe want to
stay in the home and ... and you know, disappear to Florida for a month or
Arizona. So we tried to make `em attractive to the people that are across the
street to the south of us, you know, maybe this is a stopping place, you know, to
...to downsize your home. You can have a nice condo with an elevator, um,
larger units would give the flexibility to have A ... ADA accessibility issues, and
then we also did the underground parking to, I mean, both buildings are designed
currently on this concept with underground parking. So, we're ... we're kinda
already hiding 70 cars on site. The ... that won't be visible from Scott Boulevard.
Uh, one of the first concepts we had was also the buildings were flipped, and the
parking was heavily visible coming down Scott from the south. So that's when
we just ... we ... we kinda saw the, uh, the fact of kinda having the parking u-
shaped interior with green space mixed into it, um, it's ... it's kind of difficult to
see in this picture, but you come in off of Muscatine, and there's kind of a u-
shaped parking area that would be more to screen the parking, and the other
unique, uh, physical characteristic is there's about 28 feet of topography change
from the top to the bottom of the hill, which makes it unique and desirable to ... to
have the underground parking. So when we ... when we put the buildings further
apart, we create more green space interior, and also have, you know, the ... the
buildings further apart and... and it makes the residents feel like, you know, their
neighbors aren't so close. Urn ... also we ... we wanted to save those ... those con -
color trees that are on Scott, as a screening mechanism for when we build the new
buildings to, uh, keep that traffic separation from the residential, which would
make it more attractable for, uh, people to want to live in ... in that neighborhood.
Um, I feel that it'd be strong to ... to start moving east, and this'd be kind of a ... a
good project to kind of connect the gap from ... from here in Windsor West and
it's kind of an attractive neighborhood for me with the ... the City's infrastructure
already in place, um, the park is very desirable with ... with the Scott Park and the
...and the new dog park that was put in several years ago. So ... that's, I just
wanted to give you a quick kind of rundown of how I came up with it and if you
have any questions for me ... be willing to answer those the best I could.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 14
Hayek: Thanks, Jesse.
Throgmorton: Jesse, how ... how would the, uh, if in fact you do pursue this schematic, how
would the, uh, how ... can you talk about your vision of how the buildings would
relate to the intersection itself? Off ...the intersection of Scott and American
Legion Road?
Allen: Well we kind of designed `em two- phase. Muscatine with ... with the first
building. So that the windows and doors would face Muscatine, and then... then
we would ... we would basically be screened from, uh, Scott Boulevard with the
trees, cause there's a lot of, uh, topov ... topography change that goes to the north
with this site. So as far as if you're walking on a sidewalk, an 8 -foot wide
sidewalk, you'll still feel like you're walking down a city street and you'll, you
know, you shouldn't notice that there's buildings or pedestrians. It should play a
pretty good part, you know, as far as cooperating, you know, with the park and
the other amenities that are already in place.
Throgmorton: Okay. Thanks.
Hayek: Any other questions for Mr. Allen? Okay, thank you! Anyone else from the
audience? Okay, I need to, uh, take the temperature of the Council before I close
the public hearing. (mumbled) there appears to be support?
Champion: I support it.
Hayek: Okay. Close the public hearing. (bangs gavel)
2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Payne: Move first consideration.
Dickens: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Payne, seconded by Dickens. Discussion?
Champion: Well I support this project. It's been ... we've planned all along to do multiple
family housing on major intersections and on, where two arterials meet and I
think this is an ideal place for it. I do think the problems are going to come when
you, when we rezone the area east (both talking)
Throgmorton:... east, east of.. .
Champion: But I think this is an ideal place for multi - family housing.
Dickens: It's a great in -fill project. (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 15
Champion: Yeah!
Dickens: It's starting to move closer to where Windsor... that's kind of a `no man's land' in
between there right now.
Throgmorton: I have a lot of trouble understand... envisioning the intersection itself, because
there's the elderly housing — I've forgotten the name of it, just to the south.
(several responding) Uh, and this project, and single - family, uh, catty -corner
across the ... the intersection from this project, and some proposed redevelopment
directly to the west.
Champion: Right!
Throgmorton: Which I think would not be residential. So I'm really having trouble imagining,
picturing, visioning, uh, the intersection.
Payne: I live right by here, so I walk this intersection all the time, and ... to me the, how
he has this design leaving those trees in there, and I ... I think it ... I think it fits in.
Throgmorton: Uh huh.
Payne: I mean ... I can feel it when I walk through that intersection, I can feel how it
would be and ... I ... I really think it fits into the intersection.
Throgmorton: Uh huh.
Mims: I think so too, with, you know, as you say with the Comprehensive Plan, putting
higher density housing on, you know, the intersection of arterial streets and there
is a lot of screening down, or north, on Scott Boulevard. I say down because the
hill does go down. There's huge, uh, elevation change there (several talking) um,
and so I think it makes sense. My, you know, my initial concern is, you know,
how much more density we have from what it initially is, or what it is right now,
but again, if that's the standard when you bring things into ... into the city and then
we make adjustments, you know, as we have projects like this. Relative to
Connie's comment, I do think that P &Z and the Council have to look very
carefully in the future as to the zoning to the properties to the east, in terms of
stepping down that density, um, in terms of a transition to those, but that's not
what we're here to address tonight.
Payne: And one of the things that was in the Bust... sustainability report was density.
Mims: Uh huh.
Payne: And you got more points for being more dense.
Mims: Right.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 16
Payne: (laughs) Not that kind of dense! (laughter)
Hayek: (laughter and several talking)
Throgmorton: Nice try, Terry! (laughter)
Payne: So, I mean, this is the ... I think it's the perfect spot for this kind of development.
Dickens: And the truck traffic eventually is going to move farther out when Taft is ... is
developed. I mean, that's in our long -range plan is to build that so there'll be less
truck traffic on Scott, which will reduce some of the traffic as it moves farther
out, so ... that's a little longer range, but still that will eventually affect that area.
Mims: It's interesting to see this potential for change because when I came to Iowa City
in 1977, I lived in that house on that corner (laughter) for three years.
Hayek: So you know it!
Dickens: You have to excuse yourself!
Throgmorton: There you go! (laughter)
Mims: That was a long time ago! (laughs)
Throgmorton: I'm not fully persuaded but I'm going to vote for this also, but I do worry ... you
worried about the east. I worry about the west, right across the street.
Dickens: ...cause we had the, somebody come to us about the (several talking) commercial
property.
Mims: But again, the thing I will say, if you go out by there, Jim, those trees that (both
talking) you know the City and /or Hieronymus has put in when Scott Boulevard
was widened have really grown up. You can probably speak to that, Michelle, are
...are very dense.
Payne: Right.
Mims: They're kind of offset and they've gotten quite high so that provides quite a
screen there on the west side of the property.
Throgmorton: Uh huh.
Hayek: Well I'll support first consideration, but reiterate my concerns about transition to
the east. I would expect that to develop as RS -5 or have a very quick transition to
that, um ... but it's not before us tonight. Um, but I just want my views to be
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 17
known as we move forward and eventually that will come to us. So, but I'll
support this, uh, first consideration. Further discussion? Roll call, please. First
consideration passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 18
ITEM 5b NORMANDY DRIVE REZONING - REZONING
APPROXIMATELY 5.23 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT 515, 527, AND
539 NORMANDY DRIVE AND 820, 822, AND 930 PARK ROAD, FROM
LOW- DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY (RS -5) ZONE TO NEIGHBORHOOD
PUBLIC (P -1) ZONE. (REZ13- 00013)
1. PUBLIC HEARING
Hayek: This is a public hearing. The hearing is open. (bangs gavel) Any ex parte
communications? (several responding) Okay. Jeff!
Davidson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh, this item is a request from the City of Iowa City on a
rezoning from RS -5 to P -1, and you can see the area in question here. Uh, what
this is, if I can bring my pointer in ... right ... here is the Ned Ashton House
property and we have some ... oh, yeah, it shows up better here. Um ... right here's
a driveway that leads from Park Road and then the Ned Ashton House is here, and
I think most of you are familiar with it. There you see it... in the background,
right there. Um, this was purchased as part of the flood buyouts. Here's a
good ... good picture of it, is now a City facility for lease through the Parks
Department. Beautiful, beautiful facility! I guess Mike has had the doors open,
uh, I guess Mike left. He's had the doors open with the high water, the way the
house was designed to, uh ... uh, be operated. Uh, what we ... we have this evening
before you is basically all these other lots here ... uh, surrounding the Ashton
house are flood buyout properties that are now going to be part of the, uh,
essentially the lands that will surround the ... the Ned Ashton House, and so we are
proposing rezoning, uh, from the existing zoning of single - family residential to,
uh, P — public — uh, to reflect the City's ownership. So everything here is
consistent with the, uh, flood buyout program, including preservation of the
Ashton House as a, uh, historic property. Otherwise the houses have all been, uh,
taken down to create flood capacity, uh, for when we do have high water. The
only other, um, thing that is, um, remaining in the future about the property it
is ... it is likely that we will try and add some type of parking facility, probably
order of magnitude of 25, 30, 35 spaces, uh, so that you can have events at the
Ashton House. That will likely occur on the, uh, the property that you're being
asked to rezone here this evening, uh, and again that's consistent, uh ... you can't
place any new structures in the buyout property, but you can have things that are
allowed to be inundated, such as a parking lot. So, uh, any questions about what's
proposed? Thank you!
Hayek: Anyone from the audience like to address us during this public hearing? Okay, is
Council inclined to support this? P &Z?
Mims: Yep.
Hayek: Okay. I'll close the public hearing at this time. (bangs gavel)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 19
2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Dobyns: Move first consideration.
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved by... Dobyns, seconded by Mims. Discussion? Roll call, please. First
consideration passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 20
ITEM 7. CIGARETTE PERMIT SUSPENSION OR CIVIL PENALTY -
ASSESSING EITHER A 30 DAY RETAIL CIGARETTE PERMIT
SUSPENSION OR $1500.00 CIVIL PENALTY AGAINST THE SPIRIT
TOBACCO AND MORE D/B /A HOOKAH COVE, PURSUANT TO IOWA
CODE SECTION 453A.22(2) (2013).
a. CONDUCT HEARING
Hayek: This is a hearing and uh, we'll commence it with the, uh, Honorable Andy
Chappell of the County Attorney's Office.
Chappell: Good evening, Andy Chappell, Johnson County Attorney's Office, uh, this is the
second, uh, violation by, we'll just call it the Hookah Cove in recent months, and
I think that this was actually when you ... when you fail a compliance check,
they ... they give you a recheck, and I think they had the misfortune of, uh, failing
the recheck. So a second violation within a two -year period gets you ... at your
option, either $1,500 civil penalty or a 30 -day permit suspension. So the way the
resolution is written is they have the option. They'll have to decide and let the
City Clerk know, either by delivering the $1,500 or their permit to serve the 30-
day suspension. And I can answer any questions you may have.
Champion: So we don't have to know what they're going to do before we vote on this?
Chappell: They haven't communicated that (both talking)
Champion: Okay, thank you.
Hayek: Can you remind the Council of the `shall' part of this, uh...
Chappell: The `shall' part, it's ... it's essentially, urn ... like strict liability, if you will. If
the... employee sells or provides tobacco to the minor, the business has to be
issued a civil penalty by the permitting entity, which is you. If you refuse to do it
or you just, say you don't want it on your agenda, the State Department of Public
Health will come and take care of it. And then they'll assess the civil penalty.
Hayek: Okay.
Payne: And then they get the civil penalty.
Chappell: And then they keep the civil penalty.
Payne: (laughs) Okay.
Dobyns: Good distinction!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 21
Hayek: Um, are there any questions for Mr. Chappell? Is anyone from the Hookah Cove
here this evening to address the Council during this hearing? Okay. Anything
else you need to give to us, Mr. Chappell? Okay. I'm going to close the hearing
at this time.
b. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Throgmorton: Move the resolution.
Dickens: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Throgmorton, seconded by Dickens. Discussion? Roll call, please.
Passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 22
ITEM 8. OLD HIGHWAY 218 AND MORMON TREK BOULEVARD /
MCCOLLISTER BOULEVARD TRAFFIC SIGNALIZATION —
APPROVING PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND
ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE OLD
HIGHWAY 218 AND MORMON TREK BOULEVARD / MCCOLLISTER
BOULEVARD TRAFFIC SIGNALIZATION PROJECT, 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.
b. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION
Dickens: Move the resolution.
Payne: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Dickens, seconded by Payne. Discussion?
Payne: (several talking) ...something that ... needs to be done!
Dickens: If you've been anywhere near that corner, it's dangerous to pull across there so...
Dobyns: By car, bicycle, or running shoes! It's dangerous! (laughs)
Mims: Agreed!
Hayek: Roll call, please. Passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 23
ITEM 9. PARATRANSIT SERVICE CONTRACT - AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST THE 28E AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND JOHNSON COUNTY FOR
THE CONTRACTING OF PARATRANSIT SERVICE.
Champion: Move the res ... it's, what ... it's not a resolution (several talking) How do we state
it? Move to accept the 28E agreement? (several talking)
Hayek: Just move the resolution.
Champion: Move it! Move it!
Mims: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Champion, seconded by Mims. Uh, discussion? Um, so ... uh, so we
can, uh, all be on the same page here. I know there are people in the audience
who wish to address the Council on this item, and ... and we will encourage that,
uh, input. What we're going to start with is a ... a presentation by staff. If we have
any questions, we can ask those, um, either now or during our discussion, but
after the staff presentation I think we'll open it up for public discussion and then
we'll close it down for Council deliberation.
O'Brien: Good evening, Chris O'Brien, Director of Paratr ... or, paratransit! Director of
Transportation Services here to talk about the paratransit services contract. Um,
I'm going to briefly go through a presentation. A lot of these slides, if...if not all
of them, um, have been at prior discussions that we've had. Um, we've kind of,
uh, put them all together into one presentation (mumbled) that kind of
summarizes, um, how we got to this point, and then briefly the points about the
contract. Um, obviously if you have any questions during this, let me know, um,
or afterwards, uh, I'll be here so ... um ... once again, a couple recap slides just
so ... to everybody's on the same page with regards to what it is we're required to
provide. Um, once again this slide's been one that we've ... we've had several
times, uh, related to what we ... the mandated paratransit services, and that we're
to provide service that mirrors hours of operation of fixed route services. Uh, we
are required to provide curb -to -curb service and we're required to charge a fare
that no more than doubles the fixed route fares. Um, once again, this is another
recap slide that shows, uh, what's required versus what we provide currently.
Um, the highlights in red, uh, Sunday from 8:00 A.M. to 2:00 P.M., um, is
something we provide above and beyond. Door -to -door versus curb -to -curb
service, uh, as well as the half fare, which is not a requirement that's currently at
$1.00, uh, versus, uh, which is half of the doubling of the fixed route fare, and that
equate to about 90% of the rides that we provide. Um ... kind of how we got
here ... um, through lengthy discussions, uh, with the County, um, trying to
negotiate a contract for paratransit services, um ... there were some agreed upon
... agreed upon funding levels, uh, that have happened with multiple meetings and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 24
exchange of documents, uh, that resulted in roughly a $310,000 decrease, uh, in
the funding that came out of the County for paratransit services, and ... and here
this goes back to 2002, um... showing graphically and also by numbers, uh, what
the funding levels have been over the ... the last 12 years. Uh, and that represented
about a 67% decrease, uh, in the funding level from ... from FYI and 12.
Urn ... so, um, there were several agreed upon points, um, and what this ... this is
another slide that we've had multiple times, uh, that outlines, um, what we've
paid in 12 and 13, um, and then four different scenarios related to, uh, different
funding scenarios, uh, assuming that the $154,000 from the County is ... is
implemented in here as their participation level. Uh, we also addressed what the
decrease, or the difference from FYI 3, was both percentage wise and in ... in
dollars. Uh, we outline what the expenses are without paratransit so you can see
the fixed route, um, expenses. Estimated total expenses. Uh, what our transit
revenues are, and then the bottom in... in red, um, is the impact that it has on the
transit... excuse me, the transit fund balance. Um, as you can see in scenarios A
and B, uh, we're operating at a deficit under those scenarios, and with the agreed
upon we had basically five or six agreed upon points, um, through the meetings
that we had with ... with Johnson County, Coralville, uh, North Liberty, and Iowa
City. Scenario B is really where we landed, um, and that includes a mainten...
bringing maintenance in- house, um ... so scenario B, once again, that ... that leaves
us at an operating deficit of $81,500 roughly, um, before we make any other
changes. Um... so then, uh, C is if we bring into account eliminating of the half
fares. Um, that change, um, results in ... in being a $38,000 surplus budget wise.
Um, D is also incorporating then the elimination of Sunday service, uh, which
brings the transit operating budget to a ... a surplus of $106,000. Um ... there've
been some questions related to that $106,000 number as it relates to our operating,
um, with a $6.5 million budget, um, and being... transit being funded by multiple
sources. You have user fees, you have, uh, federal assistance, state assistance,
um, property tax revenues, uh, that come in through the transit levy, um ... that
doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room, um, as it relates to ... to transit. Uh, it's
operations as well as the capital expenses that we ... we face. Um, for example, a
bus purchase is roughly $400,000, of which we'd be responsible for about 20% of
that, uh, which is about $80,000. Um, we've got a fleet of 27 buses. I think the
average age is roughly 12 years. Urn ... we have a ... a facility that's on a former
dumpsite that ... that all of you are familiar with on the corner of Riverside, uh,
and the Highway. Um, it's ... it's in need of relocation, uh, probably within the
next five years to 10 years. Uh, we'll have to come up with funding levels for
that as well, and that's about a $16 to $20 million project, of which we'll be
responsible for probably a minimum 20 %. Um ... so those are just some of the...
the capital expenses, um, there's also operating expenses, um, for example a 10-
cent hike in fuel costs relates to about $19,000 of impact on our budget. We use
about 190,000 gallons of fuel per year. Um, engines, transmissions ... so those are
some high - dollar items that could eat into that ... that surplus pretty quickly. Um,
so some of the proposals, the half fare was one of the things that we ... we
recommended eliminating. Uh, as far as a cost - saving measure for our paratransit
service contract. (mumbled) this is just some information, um, once again, this is
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 25
information that we've provided in slides prior, um, paratransit fares $2.00, uh,
we have a $1.00 half fare that we, uh, we have a program for half fare. Those are
90% of our trips. Uh, the average cost per ride for paratransit is $16, and then
when you go to Sunday service, uh, that actually bumps up to about $37.00 per
ride. Um, it'd be about an estimated $120,000 budget impact, and then we
checked across the state for comparable, uh, comparable systems, um, and then
we also ... we always kind of compare to Madison. It's a ... it's a comparable city.
Um, as far as Big Ten college campus, intertwined with its downtown. Uh, we
checked all of those and none of those have, uh, a half fare program. Uh, Sunday
service, uh, the average cost per ride on Sunday we, as we just discussed, is
$37.00. Um, Johnson County currently doesn't provide (coughing, unable to hear
speaker) on Sundays. Coralville City Council directed their staff at their May 28th
meeting, uh, to draft a contract with no Sunday service as a part of that. And
that'd be an estimated $68,000 budget impact, uh, for the transit division of
Transportation Services. Um, this ... this slide and the next kind of summarize,
um, the contract as a whole. Um, these first bullet points are ones that we agreed
to, uh, in ... in discussions with the County. These were mutually agreed upon
with Coralville, North Liberty, Iowa City, and the County, uh, where County
would provide $200,000 for mandated services, um, and that's down from
$461,000 and $463,000 in the prior, um, two years, and that's just for Iowa City.
I think the total number was around $605,000, uh, is what the total number of
funding was, uh, for those years. Uh, the agreement would be for five years, uh,
with annual increases not to exceed 3% for Johnson County. Um, and that either
party can opt out after 12 months. Uh, Iowa City would be responsible for the
maintenance of the Iowa City owned vehicles, uh, they would also be responsible
for all matching funds when we purchase vehicles. And then of course as we've
always done, vehicles can be used across all jurisdictional lines to make sure we
maintain efficiencies. Um, so ... those were the things we agreed upon. There
were some things we had to work on, uh, we came to you on the, uh, May 14th
work session and discussed some items, um, to receive direction on in ... in
drafting a contract. Uh, one of those was eliminating the half fare. Uh ... what we
propose then is that would take effect September 301 so basically the second
quarter, uh, of the upcoming year. Um, eliminating Sunday service. Once again,
that would, uh, hold off until roughly the ... the second quarter of the coming
fiscal year, and we would maintain door -to -door service. Uh, we ... the curb -to-
curb service is something that we've eliminated from our proposal, um, and
maintain door -to -door service, um... for all services moving forward. And then
once again, I pulled up the budget one cause I figure we'll have several questions
about it, and it's an important, I think, slide to discuss. As we move forward, um,
the sustainability of the transit operations, uh, moving forward, not just in FY14,
but in ... in all those years to come, uh, especially in light of...uh ... recent changes
regarding property tax reform. Um, the transit department basically 43% of the
funding received from transit comes from the transit levy which is a property tax,
uh, levy and that's about $2.9 million of...of transit revenues. That comes in
annually.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 26
Hayek: Again, what percentage of the budget is from the transit levy?
O'Brien: 43% of our revenues are from the transit levy.
Hayek: Which is a property tax levy.
O'Brien: Correct. 95 -cents per thousand dollars evaluation.
Champion: Chris, can you just tell me, and maybe it's up there but I can't read it.
O'Brien: Sure!
Champion: Um ... how much money is the Transportation Center providing transit now? Do it
just roughly! I ... I'm sure it's listed.
O'Brien: Yeah, roughly around $800,000.
Champion: Okay. Great! Thank you.
Throgmorton: Chris, I'd like to ask you a couple questions, which I already asked you via email.
O'Brien: Sure!
Throgmorton: Um, but I'd like to get `em on the record. Uh, do I understand correctly that the
County has agreed to provide substantially more funds over a five -year period
than it initially proposed? In other words, uh, they had initially, as I understand it,
they initially proposed, uh, $100,000 for the coming year, $50,000 for the
following year, and nothing for the year after that. Whereas now they're
proposing I think it's $154,000 for each of the coming years, with an increase not
to exceed 3 %. A ... am I right in understanding that?
O'Brien: Yeah, that through the ... through the negotiations we've had extensively over the
last several months, um..that three -year proposal was ... was changed to a five -year
proposal with, uh, a $200,000 cap, which $154,000 of that goes to Iowa City, um,
and then the response I gave you as I outlined that was a $310,000 drop from
(both talking)
Throgmorton: I understand that but I'm just trying to be clear about what they ... what they have
agreed to contribute.
Hayek: (mumbled) see if I understand, even after they came up ... we're still looking at a
67% drop over current funding.
O'Brien: Yeah, correct. That was I think slide four.
Throgmorton: Yeah, I understand that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 27
Hayek: Okay.
O'Brien: Right here, this slide there, Matt.
Hayek: Okay.
Throgmorton: Right, so ... the ... I think both facts are im ... significant, all right. The second
question has to do with, uh, whether I understand correctly that completely
eliminating Sunday service and half fares for the coming year will result in a
surplus for the transit division of $106,000. And I understand what you said
about the total operating budget and (both talking)
O'Brien: Sure.
Throgmorton:... and how you get, you know, gotta consider all sorts of factors but...
O'Brien: That's correct.
Throgmorton: Yeah. Okay. Thanks. I was just, wanted to just be clear about those two facts.
Dickens: Does that take into effect the rent that we're going to have to start paying for the
housing of the buses and the...
O'Brien: yeah, actually incorporated that into the Line 2 of that spreadsheet to make sure it
was included in that.
Dickens: Okay! Cause you have the in -house service too that (both talking)
O'Brien: Yep. As of right now that includes everything that we anticipate happening.
Throgmorton: You know, I ... I think another relevant question is one I didn't think of...before
our meeting tonight, so I couldn't prepare but, uh, um ... I completely understand
why you're thinking about the transit division and making sure that we don't
spend more than we take in for the division. Or for ... for Transportation Services
in general. I ... I mean, you're doing ... you're thinking that way, right? That, and
that's a good thing!
Champion: Yeah!
O'Brien: Correct.
Throgmorton: What I'd ... what I didn't ask about is, uh, what ... what do we have, not in terms of
the City, not the Transit Division. What do we have in reserve? How ... how
much money is in ... being held in reserve?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 28
O'Brien: Talking about overall for the City?
Throgmorton: Yeah, you may ... I'm not asking you that question, cause I don't think you
probably would know the answer, but Dennis might or Tom might.
Markus: I'd ask Dennis to come forward, if he has the number. We have a policy
provision on how much we can maintain (both talking)
Throgmorton: Right! I ... I need to know that too.
Bockenstedt: Uh, Dennis Bockenstedt, Director of Finance. We have reserves across multiple
types of funds. A lot of those reserves are restricted to the specific purpose, and
they can't be used for just any purpose that Council would wish because they're
restricted under law.
Throgmorton: Uh huh.
Bockenstedt: Our general fund, uh, right now exactly sure of the balance cause we have a lot of
sales tax funding there, uh, but I believe we're around, uh, $30 million, but I'd
have to go back and verify that.
Throgmorton: Okay. Thanks!
Dobyns: So, Dennis, I had a question. When the municipality dips into its reserves, is that
traditionally used for one -time costs, or recurring costs?
Bockenstedt: Uh, typically for one -time costs. For property tax reduction.
Dobyns: And as I see this up here, this is a recurring cost that we're talking about in terms
of...the County not providing funds.
Bockenstedt: Generally, um (both talking) annual basis you (both talking) yeah, generally on an
annual basis you want your operating revenues to match your operating expenses.
And not necessary... and leave those one -time costs to your capital costs.
Dobyns: Uh huh.
Bockenstedt: And actually now I'm thinking about that fund balance, and I believe our ... our
unassigned fund balance is around, probably slightly under $20 million.
Dickens: Do we know what kind of levy we pay to the County for transportation in our
taxes? Is that figured in anywhere? Cause don't we pay, when we pay property
taxes, part of it goes to the County and I didn't know if they have a separate levy
for transportation (both talking)
O'Brien: They don't have a transit levy.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 29
Dickens: Okay.
O'Brien: To my knowledge I should say.
Dickens: All right.
Hayek: Chris, can you talk again about the, um ... we've talked about the cuts, but can you
reiterate what the staff recommendation does in terms of an increase in City
funding under the recommendation. I mean I see (both talking)
O'Brien: Yeah...
Hayek: ...9% up there but I also ... I mean, I know we're bringing maintenance in —
house...
O'Brien: Sure! Yeah, if we implement everything, meaning the Council agrees to move
forward with ... with everything, um, we would be paying an additional $140,000,
um, $90,000 roughly in, uh, difference from the FYI contract and another
$50,000 that goes into operating as we're bringing maintenance in- house, uh, for
a total of $140,000, which is roughly 14, just over 14% of our operating budget.
Payne: That's an additional $140,000 from what... is...
O'Brien: From what we paid in FYI for paratransit services. That's correct.
Hayek: Okay. Any other questions for Chris at this time? Okay, why don't we open it up
for, uh, community input. If anyone would like to address the Council, we invite
you to come forward. (mumbled) (noises on mic)
Karr: That one comes off as well.
Hayek: Thanks (mumbled)
Karr: You can just take the ... yeah!
Ostrognai: Hi, my name is Nancy Ostrognai, and I live on Glendale Road. Uh, I am livid
(laughs) you know, I'm just seeing red. Do you realize that, uh, if you would get
a disability, you'd have to spend all of your money. You would have zero before
the government would take you. They (mumbled) social security money to
people unless they have nothing. And uh ... and you know, that means if the City
of Iowa City were a person and it had a disability, it would have to spend its $30
million before, uh, they could have any services. You're asking people who have
nothing to, uh, if they try to work, they ... you know, they're expected to spend
$4.00 a day a ride. You know, every time you go to you have to go back. So it's
$2.00 one way, $4.00 both ways. Uh, I ... I just, uh, feel very strongly that, you
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 30
know, uh, you're going in the wrong direction. (mumbled) instead of providing
the $200,000, you know, urn ... I don't know (mumbled) that's my opinion. I ... I
think that you should, uh ... uh, you know (mumbled) and now another thing is
that the ... the, uh, I know the Parks and Rec Center (mumbled) reduced fees for
members (mumbled) Senior Center (mumbled) Why can't City? Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you..for your comments.
Gravitt: My name is Mary Gravitt. What I'm concerned about is the reduced fares. I'm
not concerned about the Sunday ... I guess because I don't go to church. I always
keep church in my heart. But ... being on social security, we didn't get a raise for
two years, and all the other social services aren't kicking any... in any money. We
have one of the meanest governors in the United States, next to Rick Perry. So
there's no more money coming down for disabled people. And it's a shame to
make a disabled person a prisoner in their own house. Like I said, I don't go out
on Sundays. I take Sundays for my day of rest because when I hear that bus, I
have to be on the bus. But ... there are people who ... who go to church. They go
to church to socialize, and ... if there's anything that has to be cut, Sunday service,
you know, because it's relatively new, but the half price fare, because there is no
more money! And there will be no more money. When the sequester comes
down, it's really going to be terrible. So my thing is ... keep the half price fare.
Maybe we can get some money out of block grant money, and I've heard the
gossip that the Downtown Merchants are gettin' $200,000 to buy awnings, and I'd
like to know where that money came from! Now, I was under the impression
every business has to buy their own awnings. Ever since I've known about
business you bought your own awning. But the problem is a decision has been
made. There's no more money coming in to disabled pa ... people from any of the
social agencies. So the half price fare has to stay! Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Cunningham: Hi there, my name's Terry Cunningham and I'm here tonight to speak for those
folks who are unable to speak for themselves, either because they literally can't
speak, or because the thought of talking to you guys scares the crap out of `em.
There's a lot of folks who ... depend on Sunday sery ... Sunday transportation to get
to work, to get to church, to do any other shopping that because they work or
otherwise occupied, don't have a chance to do other on a ... than on a Sunday.
They don't have ... the money to ... be able to do ... full ... full fare and maintain
what lifestyle they may have ... because if the fare doubles, then they're not able to
make all their appointments, or they're not able to take part in social activities,
which as all of us know ... is a very important part of day -to -day life. But ... that...
that just makes it appear then that they're in an institution. You know. It may not
have a big sign on the front of it. It may not have a big gate. It doesn't matter
that it's setting in the middle of a community that has a hell of a lot of things to
do, if you can't get out and participate — you're locked up! If you can't get out
and participate because you don't have the money for it, it ... that's an incredibly
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 31
large shot to somebody's moral who works all week to try to scrape together the
money to enjoy something with. And the reality of it is, most of the folks who
use SEATS, who are living in different gro ... group homes and that live on $50 a
month. Now ... most of us spill that much coffee in a week. But ... we're talking
about people who live on the edge, you know, that they know exactly what their
budget is and ... you know, another $5 or $6 a week blows them out of the water.
When we consider ... the 130...180- whatever - thousand - dollars that we're talking
about as a short-fall. That's a drop in the bucket of the total budget. And I would
certainly urge you to look under every rock you can to try to let these folks
continue to have some dignity and some quality of life. Thank you.
Brown: I was not going to talk to you about (mumbled) but I am a person that don't need
service (mumbled) All I'm asking is put yourself in our shoes and treat
everybody right, respect. We don't ... we want a people here to have a (mumbled)
Iowa City. We can (mumbled) but we want to be treated equal and (mumbled)
treating people equal about (mumbled) because (mumbled) what people want.
People don't want to be (mumbled) treated like human beings. (mumbled)
disabled but ... but treat us as a human being. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Ruff: My name is Keith Ruff. I would advise you when you vote on this think about
yourself when you get old (mumbled) able to move around and then (mumbled)
stay home (mumbled) afford the bus (mumbled) how it feels to be consis...
consistently overlooked. Just because you're able- bodied now doesn't mean
you'll be able- bodied when you get old. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you, Keith.
Welsh: Good evening, Mayor and Members of the City Council. My name is Bob Welsh.
I'm a, uh, I live at 84 Penfroe, Iowa City, long -time residence. Uh ... my
association with SEATS goes back before the ADA requirements. Uh ... my
preference would be ... well, let me first say ... I think there's a difference between
the role of your staff and your role as the City Council. Uh ... I think that the staff
is ... is built -in, and Chris's presentation to you is based on fiscal matters. And I
think that's appropriate. I think your decision has to not only take that factor into
account, but the impact on human lives, and human services. And, that's where I
personally come from ... is I put the high priority on how your decisions impact
the lives of persons. Uh... if I had my preference, it would be that you would say
there's about between the cities, Coralville and Iowa City, North Liberty if you
want to toss that in, about $111,000 that you would make that up out of reserves
or, as Terry said out of the places between rocks and all. If you can't do that, then
it seems to me ... and you eliminate Sunday services, I mean, eliminate half fares,
which I can understand some rationale for because I gather that many of the
people who now pay half fares... the... their transportation is being paid for by
other funding sources other than out of their own personal pockets. But if you
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 32
make that decision, then ... please set in motion some way of helping those people
who those ... that increase fare comes out of their pockets, which does lead to
further isolation as Terry's pointed out. And there's recent studies that show
isolation causes deterioration of health, and creates death. Uh ... so you know, if
you can't go, making up the whole thing... deficit, and you feel you need to
eliminate half fares, then please set in motion and ask your staff to come up with a
way that those persons for whom it would (mumbled) affect their style of life to
have a way in which there can be some mechanism where that will not create a
burden for those people. In relation to your options C and D, I ... I don't
understand the value of D over C, unless you say, hey, we'll make up the
difference off of disabled persons. Now you might think since I'm a retired
minister that my concern on Sunday service would be to get people to church!
(laughs) And ... and that's really not my concern! Uh, it's a much larger thing in
terms of their expansion of life. Uh, work, uh ... so I guess my hopes are, number
one, uh ... come up with the $111,000. If you can't, eliminate the half fares, but
ask your staff to explore a way in which for those individuals where those fares
are paid out of their pockets, there can be some kind of reduced, uh, mechanism
so it doesn't hurt them. And then ... the other (mumbled) uh, chose D over C so
that, uh, you're not making ends meet fiscally by eliminating a service to a section
of the population that needs that service. I'd also remind you that, and I have not
read the Diversity Report to you all. I've read in the paper that one of their
recommendations is that you consider Su... Sunday service. Uh, are you
considering that? It doesn't make any sense to me that you would eliminate
Sunday service at this time for the disability community. And when the ... Keith
said, you know, some of you may get old, um, I've reached that stage already.
Uh, and you know, I'm here not because I'm a member of the disability
community, but because of my concern (mumbled) whole area of human services,
and so I ask you as a Council to look at that dimension. Thank you very much.
Hayek: Thank you, Mr. Welsh.
Dean: My name is Bryson Dean and I live at 310 Scott Court, and I find it always
interesting when we get talking about budgets, whether I'm thinking about my
own or the ones that we're talking about, sort of narrows our focus. Where are we
going to get the money? But how easy it is to forget the big picture. And the big
picture since I've retired to Iowa City, which I dearly love (mumbled) I've been
here since 08, is that we are a livable community. But to put flesh to that livable
community, it means it has to be a livable community for everybody, and one of
the things that ... that I've noticed is kind of in the back of my mind is this thing
about Sunday service, and I know Mary, whose comments are always very
relevant, talked about church, but you know, we're a business community as well
as a community that educates, that has fun, that has parks, and has, you know,
developments and all the things that we do ... but we are ... we are a working
community seven days of the week! And many of the people besides the people
on disabilities, many of our low- income families, there may be two people with
one car, and we know in today's economy that both people may have to work to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 33
make ends meet. Those people may have service jobs, restaurant jobs, jobs
wherever, and they need to get to work, and so we need to open up. We need to
think outside of the box. We need Sunday service for everybody, including
SEATS, and we need to find the money, and I don't care if you gotta increase it,
the taxes by a penny, or the property taxes ... I'm on fixed income, but I drive a
car, and you know, I'm willing to pay a little more in my parking tickets, but we
need to make this a truly livable community for everyone. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Yoe: My name's Peter Yoe. I live in, uh, 910 Rundell Street. 907 Rundell Street. Um,
I was here earlier this evening and ... and heard, uh, the sustainability report
delivered, uh, to the Council, and it was fascinating, and I think what Chris, uh,
has delivered to you is a financial sustainability report for ... for the transit system,
for the paratransit system, but... one of the things on the sustainability report you
heard earlier this evening had to do with the quality of life of Iowa City and how
we are an exceptional community as compared to many others. So while there are
cities that are comparable to ours, that may not offer half fare or may not offer
Sunday service ... if we remove those two items off of the service, you can take
two notches off the sustainability or quality of life report that you heard earlier
this evening. So I would like you to consider... everybody's request here to, uh,
cause I think they've made some very good points about the big picture, about the
humanity, uh, of the people whose ... whose life would be affected, um ... the fact
that we're not a five- day -a -week city. We're a seven -day, you know week city.
The shops don't close on Sundays, uh, we have an event going on all summer
long, you know, the Arts Festival coming up and that goes on during Sunday.
Um, and then there's the issue of the fixed income, uh, social security changes
with (mumbled) CPI will reduce people's expected incomes coming into the
future. So ... please consider a larger scope of sustainability and not just a narrow
financial sustainability scope. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you for your comments! Anyone else from the audience?
Honohan: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm Jay Honohan. I'm speaking
individually, not ... not as a Member of the Senior Center Commission. Um... and
I'm kind of going to be ... the devil's advocate in this because ... I think we're
omitting the real villain. The real villain is Johnson County. The Board of
Supervisors has caused this problem, and it's not the Iowa City or Coralville that
caused it. The Board of Supervisors for their own reasons decided to drop their
funding dramatically as shown by Chris's presentation. They kind of dumped this
on the City Council of Iowa City, Coralville, and North Liberty! So if these
people are really concerned about the funding of SEATS, may I suggest they go
to a Board of Supervisor's meeting, and ask the Board of Supervisors to give us,
the cities, more money. It is unfortunate. This ... I'm disappointed in this proposal
too because I advocated at the Board of Supervisors for full funding for SEATS,
and I've always felt SEATS is very important for seniors in Iowa City and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 34
Johnson County. But unfortunately ... money doesn't grow on trees, and I know
the Council has to abide by certain restrictions as far as the way you can spend
your money, the way you can budget, and I think this is the best solution possible
so I am ... giving it my support. Thank you!
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Hampel: Hi, my name is Martha Hampel. I live at, uh, East Court Street. Uh, I just wanted
to please ask you to not vote in favor of cutting the half fare. I personally don't
use the bus, but um, I understand that there's a reason, uh, these people qualify for
the half fare and um, I'm just ... and maybe ... um, consider what it would be like if
you had to double the amount of money you spend on your transportation and
where you would have to make sacrifices and um... something tells me that the
people that qualify for the half fare and ride the bus, um, their sacrifices wouldn't
be, you know, coffee or eating out. Their sacrifices might be, um, co- payments
for medicine or doctor visits or you know very practical things and um, I just ask
that you, um, not cut the half fare for them. Thank you.
Hayek: Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much for those comments. I'm going to close
the discussion down to the Council level at this time.
Champion: Are we going to vote? We're just going to vote on the contract with the County.
That won't include ... the stuff we're talking about. It will? It's not part of the
contract with the County (both talking)
Hayek: ...yes it is.
Champion: Oh! It is? Oh!
Hayek: So the ... the proposed 28E agreement, um, en ... entails the... the... the numbers
and the changes that (both talking)
Champion: Oh, okay! Okay, I'm sorry! All right. Got it!
Hayek: And I think ... I think what, um, staff would suggest we do is ... is vote up or down
the proposed 28E agreement, um, with ... with the understanding that if there are
...that the County still has to react to it, and if there are any... typographical or
very minor changes that... that... that... that that not require it to come back before
us, but if there's anything that, um ... uh, is ... is significantly different from what
we're voting on that it... in that event come back to us.
Champion: Got it! Well, I ... (both talking)
Payne: Sorry!
Champion: Should I start?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 35
Hayek: (several talking and laughing)
Champion: Okay! I mean I ... I suggested a couple weeks ago that we look at our Aid to
Agencies as a way to help fund this half - price, A SEATS ride that I think some
of that money is, as you all know, is being wasted by duplicating services, and
this is a service that I think is really very valuable, and I do understand that...
$2.00 one way and $2.00 another way adds up to $4.00 and ... I think to a lot of
people $4.00 is a lot of money, and I would like to find some way, I don't know
how, to get ... to keep our half fare but somebody mentioned that some half fares
were paid by somebody else. Is that true?
Dickens: Some of the agencies (several talking) ....I'm on the Paratransit, uh... Committee
and some of the entities that these people live at help pay or there're services that
help pay for their... their...
Champion: Oh, so does that $37,000 ... no, that's what it cost per ride ... no, that's...
Dickens: That's for Sunday.
Champion: That's for Sunday.
Dickens: ...roughly 16 (both talking)
Champion: So...
Dickens: Maybe Chris could...
Champion: Yeah, Chris, kind of help me here. So, the half fare costs us $38,000 a year,
right?
O'Brien: No, it's $120,000.
Champion: Okay, it's $120,000. Oh, that's (mumbled) I ... I don't, I'm sorry I asked you. I
thought it was $38,000!
O'Brien: $37.00 was the cost per ride on Sunday. That's probably where you're (both
talking)
Champion: Oh! Okay! All right. And does that include... those fares that are covered by
other people? The half fares that are covered by other places or people or...
Dickens: Other agencies.
Champion: Other agencies.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 36
O'Brien: Yeah, if they've qualified for half fare ... um, and someone else is paying that, we
may not. We wouldn't know that. We wouldn't know where that funding's
coming from.
Champion: Okay. So ... okay.
Hayek: Well let me ... let me weigh in where ... where I am on this, and I've been part of it,
urn ... a lot of these discussions. I mean, this goes back months and we've had a...
a forum and... and meetings with the other cities and the County, etc. It... it's a
difficult situation. This is a difficult topic, um, and we're talking about a
vulnerable population. Um, but ... but the...I'm going to support the staff
recommendation and I want to explain why. We're looking at a 67% drop in
funding from our funding partner. Um, and there are only two ways for us to
react to that. One is to increase our funding, uh, our portion of... of the budget,
and the second way is to look for cost - saving measures. And what staff is
proposing is to do both, and the proposal shows us increasing our, uh, budgetary,
uh, contribution by 14 %, um, at a time of difficult budgets, um, and also has us
looking at the two ... at .... also has us pursuing two of the three possible cost -
saving measures. The third one being the door -to -door versus curb -to -curb.
We've ... we and staff agree should... should not be changed. Um, but ... but the
half fares, um, and ... and the Sunday service are ... are the only two things we can
do, uh, to ... to maintain, um, the, you know, the solvency of...of this, uh ... um,
service other than increasing above and beyond the 14% increase that ... that...
that's proposed. And ... and, you know, the half fares are ... we can't find anybody
in the state of Iowa who is ... who has offered such a service, and it seems to me
that ... that, uh, in terms of the ... the impact to an individual's budget, that impacts
who receives paratransit services throughout the state of Iowa are ... probably in
similar situations in terms of their ability to weather, uh, a ... a change like this.
Um, you never want to have to do something like this, but ... but when every other
community that we can find in Iowa and some outside of Iowa, such as Madison
don't charge a half fare. I think it's something that we have to look at, um... you
know, so ... so that's our response, uh, 14% increase in our budget and ... and the
pursuit of... of some, uh, cost - saving measures. Um, I ... I think it makes sense. I
think it in particular makes sense when we consider what is going to happen to
cities like Iowa City as a result of the property tax legislation that, uh, is coming
out of Des Moines. Later this evening we're going to hear a report from our, uh,
Finance Director about what we project the hit to Iowa City to be from these
property tax changes, and we're going to hear that over the next ten years Iowa
City can expect potentially a $50 -plus million impact to our budget. Um, those
are real numbers, and ... and the transit levy, which provides 43% of the funding
for, uh ... uh, SEATS, um, will be impacted as well because it's a transit levy that
is based on property taxes, which are based on valuations that the ... that the State
allows us to ... to utilize. Um, and so I ... I think in fact the forecasting that we've
done to date, um ... may need to be revised in the future, uh ... uh ... um, be...
because it doesn't account for what we anticipate, uh, the impact to Iowa City,
um, to be, uh, as a result of the legislation. Um, the ... these are serious numbers
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 37
and ... and I think that a ... that a, as hard as it is to make a decision like this, a ... a
service that is not solvent, that is not sustainable over time, at the end of the
analysis is not a service. Uh, we ... we have to ... we ... we want to maintain it; we
have to maintain it in a healthy fashion so that it does benefit our population, and
when you look at increasing, uh, the ... the half fare up to the full fare, um, you're
...you're still, uh, ending up in a situation where the ... the user pays roughly 12%
of the cost of the ride. Um, and when we're trying in other areas to have our user
fees, um, cover a much higher percentage of the cost of that service, you know,
30 + %, um, I think aiming for a 12% coverage rate, in other words aiming for a ... a
level where the user is paying an amount of money that covers 12% of the actual
cost of that service, is ... is still quite reasonable, um, and ... and these are not easy
decisions, um, but I think we ... we have to be, uh, responsible while ... while at the
same time recognizing that ... that this is a highly valued service with excellent
staff, uh, a popular service, a necessary service, a one that reflects our community
morays, um, but ... but I just don't see us as having much choice when we're faced
with the kind of, uh, decrease in funding from our partner, uh, that we see here.
Throgmorton: Yeah, Matt, I ... I think we can and should think more creatively about this. It's
really a question about what we value, as a group of people up here and as a
community — the people of Iowa City. I ... I take it as a given, and I know you just
alluded to this, but I take it as a given that we have an ethical commitment to help
most those who are least well off. That's my starting point. It's not doing some
accounting trying to figure out how to balance the numbers within one division of
our total city government. Given, you know, I asked Chris some questions to get
a few other facts on the table. Given that ethical commitment, and given the facts,
uh, as presented, I ... I just can't see any compelling reason to immediately and
completely eliminate those two services. We don't want to isolate people with
disabilities. We don't want to make ... we don't want to make it too expensive for
them to travel. We don't want to make it impossible for them to work or attend
services on Sunday, despite Bob Welsh's, uh ... claim that he doesn't care about
sending people to church on Sundays (laughs) only kidding, uh, and yet... and yet
I know we're facing a ... an increasingly tight financial situation. I mean, it's just
blatantly obvious when we read Dennis's uh, report and think about it. So, what
that tells me is we need to think about making a ... um ... we should facili ... at least
facilitate a slower transition, instead of completely and immediately shifting away
from this stuff, all right? So for example for the first year, we could pay for the
two services out of our reserves. The money's there. We can do it, if we ... if we
chose to do it! Or ... we could devise a first -year program that saves the City
maybe $85,000 instead of $188,000. So, you know, we come up with the zero
effect... we end up with a zero balance instead of, uh... um, $106... $106,000, um,
net increase or, uh, positive, uh, balance. Uh, and we could do that, partly be
charging say three- quarters fare instead of half fare. Just an example to toss
something out as an idea. For the second and following years, let's consider
changes, uh, similar to the ones that were recommended by the Task Force on
Aging that Bob Welsh just referred to, the staff ...we have a creative staff, very
smart group of people. Chris is a great guy! Really knows his stuff! But can
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 38
imagine a transition that isn't hard on the people involved. And yet acknowledges
our financial situation.
Payne: I ... I agree with what you're saying in concept, Jim, but also immediate to me is
tomorrow. I mean, we're saying September 30th. To me that's not immediate.
It's giving people time to react. It's not a long period of time, but it is time to
react to knowing that there is ... a change going to take place. I think it is our
responsibility to be fiscally responsible, um, and ... but that doesn't mean we're...
we're heartless! I mean, it ... it's painful to have to do this ... to ... to somebody
that's already have ... have had this service and we're going to take it away.
Whenever you take something away, it's hard! So I agree that I ... would love to
be able to do that, but I don't think that that's fiscally responsible to do that. Is
my opinion. I... I agree with the staff s recommendation.
Dickens: I have a real hard time accepting that. I realize it's dollars and cents, but I sat next
to Mr. Honohan at the budget meeting with the County and it was one of the most
frustrating days of my life, so ... urn ... I think we need to do something. Uh...
phase it in, use reserves. These people need it!
Champion: Yeah, this isn't the first time the County has done this to us (several talking)
either.
Dickens: No, and that's where we have to look is who's running our County. That's our
next step. We need people that agree that these people need help and we need to
fund it.
Dobyns: I'm not quite as ready, Mr. Honohan, to, um, paint the County as a major problem
here. I'm very concerned that they de- prioritized their interest in paratransit
services. Um, I think the, um, excessive use of tax increment financing by
adjacent municipalities has siphoned money away from the County, and they, like
us, are not an island and they have to react to things. And I think that's
unfortunate. I don't appreciate some of the narrative that has come out of the
County, even though I do appreciate to some extent the decisions that they've had
to make. There's a lot of great things that the County does for the people of
Johnson County. I wish they had prioritized paratransit, uh, service a little bit
better, um, I do appreciate the fact that they came back and offered some monies,
uh, to us. Um, however, I can't get around the fact that, um, I'm willing to use
reserves to do good things once or twice if it was for like one or two or three
years, but this is a decision unfortunately made by the County in perpetuity. And
so I'm not willing to use cash reserves, um, in that way. And therefore, I will be
supporting the City staff recommendations as recommended.
Mims: Well we sat and talked about this before, um ... you know, and listened to ... to staff
when Chris first gave us this proposal. I think a ... at least in rough form a couple
of weeks ago. Um, part of my comment at the end of that was, you know, I have
a great deal of respect for Chris and the staff, and them looking out for the fiscal
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 39
responsibility of this community, because that's how we stay strong in the long
haul is to be fiscally responsible. But my last comments were to the effect that I
felt very strongly that we needed to look then at how we could, um, and I hate to
use the word backfill because we know the ... what state and federal governments
do with backfill promises, and that is they go away after a year or two. Um, but
some way for the City to look at other sources of revenue, um, that could be used
with this program because I ... I fully agree with the concept that if we are running
a division of the City as an enterprise fund, that an enterprise fund should be self -
sustaining. It should run in the black. It should make money. It should have
sufficient reserves to do what we expect it to do. And yet I sit here, I sat here two
weeks ago when ... when our last meeting was and I sit here tonight, and look at,
you know, the most vulnerable part of our population... and I ... I wish we had
some more time, because we need to have a contract, uh, in place with the County
by the first of July. Um, tonight is the first time that I heard, and... and my sense
is maybe that Connie did too, and I don't know if it just ... nobody really realized it
until somebody from the audience men... mentioned it tonight, that some of these
half fares are not paid by individuals. Um, you know, they're paid by agencies
supporting individuals. So, you know, that raises another question to me, you
know, is there a way of continuing with ... I guess I'm not sure how to say it, you
do away with the half fares but you find out a way to help the people who are
paying it out of their own pocket basically is what somebody said. If an agency's
paying it, let `em pay the full fare. If somebody's having to pay it out of their
own pocket, we find a way to help. Um ... I just feel that, you know, when we talk
about the values of our community, as I said, you know, at the last meeting, I
think it goes to the heart of how we take care of the most vulnerable people in our
community. And so while I completely respect what staff has done in bringing
this to us, I'm not going to vote for it tonight. I just ... I think we have more work
to do, um, to find ways to ... to support the people, um, that are the most needy in
terms of this funding, and ... and again, I totally respect staff and what you've
done and brought forward and you've done your job, um, but we've got to find a
way to work through this.
Champion: I, urn ... I am willing to give up Sunday services, as much as I hate to, but I'm not
willing to totally get rid of the half fares.
Mims: You don't have a choice. It's yes or no tonight.
Throgmorton: But we could give ... we could (several talking and laughing) directions.
Depending on how the vote goes or (several talking)
Hayek: Well we're going to need to, depending on... (both talking)
Mims: Yeah, well I mean and I think another thing, you know, in looking at that is ... is,
and when I asked this to Chris last time and we don't have ... an indication of
those Sunday riders, you know, how many are going to work, how many are
going to religious services, what kind, you know, what locations for religious
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 40
services. So to start trying to do some partnering with those areas. I mean,
another thing that I believe was commented on, maybe not in the public tonight
that ... um, you know, we have to look at for Sunday service if...if we were to
continue Sunday service, for example, and Coralville does not continue Sunday
service, we can't ... if we give people rides into Coralville, you can't just take `em
there and leave `em. Chances are they need a ride back, and then all of a sudden
the way that accounting works, that ... ride gets charged to us and not to Coralville.
So it gets very complicated on some of these things. So ... I think there's a lot
more work to do. Uh, it sounds like there's the votes there to pass it tonight. I...
I'm going to vote against it, but I think regardless of that, I think everybody feels
that there's issues that we still need to try and work on, and I would hope that we
would still try and address some of these other issues.
Hayek: Connie, your Aid to Agencies idea is ... is an intriguing one.
Mims: Uh huh.
Champion: Well, I think it's the best idea we ... anybody's come up with to finance part of
this, and we could actually ... I think (laughs) (mumbled) Aid to Agencies as you
know (laughs) but we actually could ... borrow from our contingency for next year
to cover (mumbled) come up with some other way to do it. I mean, part of it is
federal money and part of it is our money, and I ... I just feel, I mean, I grew up
without much money. My grandparents were actually quite poor and they were
self - sustaining, they lived on a farm, and $4.00 at that time, well they would have
never had $4.00 but probably 50 -cents would have meant a huge amount of
money to them, and ... and these are people who use ... I see my brain is gone
(laughs) uh, who use this transit need it. I mean, they really need it. That's the
only way they're going to get around. They're not going to be able to walk
downtown or ride a bike or don't have the money f o r a cab or they ... so I...I just, I
just think something has ... has to be done. Something has to give and ... and I
hope the Council will consider the Aid to Agency money.
Hayek: How ... how many Sunday riders do we typically have, Chris?
O'Brien: Um, between 1800 and 1900...a year.
Hayek: So on a given Sunday.
O'Brien: Thirty -four.
Hayek: Thirty -four. All right. Well...
O'Brien: That's one -way trip so...
Hayek: I'm ... I'm ... I am certainly interested as we go forward to look at, you know, what
other options are out there, whether it's partnerships with, uh, the non - profit
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 41
sector or use of Aid to Agencies funding or ... or ... or other organizations in the
community who ... who could help with this. Um, but I, you know, I ... I don't... I
don't think it...it is heartless for us to ... do a ... to charge a ... the ... the full fare
when, uh, Ames and Cedar Rapids and Davenport and Des Moines and Sioux
City and these other places that have paratransit that we have looked at are doing
that themselves, um...
Champion: But we're not Ames! And we're not Madison. And we're not Cedar Rapids!
We're not one of those communities! Urn ... and I ... I don't think that's an excuse.
I mean, I think that's ... they probably have never started it and haven't had to deal
with the aftermath of it. But I won't consider this. They also ... we have the huge
amount of volunteers, much more than Cedar Rapids and Madison and Ames. I
mean, this is a different community. I just think we need to find a way to keep the
half price fares, and I'm willing to wait to vote on this at the next Council meeting
to ... to see if we can find it.
Throgmorton: Yeah, and just...to be clear, I ... I (both talking) I cannot support the resolution,
just to be clear about it. Unless I see that we are instructing the staff to devise
some kind of transitional... program or have transitional elements that alleviate the
burden, reduce the burden, on .... on those who are most vulnerable. That I ... I've
got to see that or I can't support it.
Dickens: I realize we need to have an agreement with the County move forward (both
talking)
Mims: Right!
Dickens: We have to do that fairly soon, but I do ... I agree with you, Jim, that we... it has
to be steered some way that we can keep as much as we can, and if that does take
reserves (several talking)
Hayek: Eleanor!
Dilkes: As Connie has suggested, it may be, uh, appropriate given that you still need to
have some discussion to defer it at this point since we don't have a contract that's
been approved by the Council, or County, anyway. (several responding)
Hayek: Right.
Champion: I'd like to move to defer this to the next Council meeting.
Dickens: Second.
Hayek: Okay! Motion to defer to ... what is that, the 18th? (several responding) uh, from
Champion, seconded by Dickens. Uh, further discussion? All those in favor say
aye. Opposed say nay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 42
Dobyns: Nay.
Hayek: Motion carries 6 -1, Dobyns in the...
Champion: Can we still ... I mean, what I think we should do too is tell... staff what part of this
agreement we're willing to accept so they're not working on something that we're
already... we're going to vote on, or we're going to accept anyway.
Throgmorton: Yeah, they've heard lots of things, it seems to me.
Hayek: Well I think ... I think ... I think there's a split on .... on the two cost - saving
measures.
Throgmorton: Yeah.
Hayek: I think some people ... from my ... my sense of things is that some people can live
with one or the other, or some not with either, um, and then there's a discussion of
transition, I mean, there's a lot of stuff flying around. So...
Throgmorton: Maybe we can hear some creative thinking...
Hayek: ...not sure we're in a position to give staff direction tonight because I'm not sure
we're in a position to come down on one side or the other, as a majority. So... I
think we'll just have to take it up in two weeks.
Markus: We have to have something approved.
Mims: Yeah. Yeah. Well ... I guess one thing I would suggest, and I don't know how we
go about finding this out, um ... but again, back to the comment earlier that a lot of
these half fares are actually paid for by agencies, not of...out of individuals'
pockets. If there's some way of...finding that out ... I mean, that would give us a
better sense of...
Champion: Chris said he ... he would not know who they were, that they're paying full fare.
So they would not (both talking)
Mims: Is there any way, Chris, to find out...
Markus: Ninety ... 90% of the fares, as I understand it, Chris (both talking)
O'Brien: ...are half fare but I think what they're asking is who's paying it. I'll check and
see what I can find out, I mean, we ... we only get lump sum data. We don't get
individual trip data, uh, and what paid and who paid it. So let me ... let me work
on talking to the Director of SEATS and try to get some more of that information
if that's what you're interested in (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 43
Mims: ...if we could find out that half of those half fares are paid for by agencies, and
not out of individual people's pockets ... then trying to `backfill to individuals' is,
and I don't know what we're getting into logistically...
Markus: Well then if...if I understand what you're saying is the half fares, some agency's
paying the dollar instead of...instead of the individual, so is the presumption then
that they can then afford to pay $2.00 instead of the, um ... because those agencies
are largely, I would guess dependent on donations themselves. (several
responding)
Payne: Well they're going to have problems too.
Mims: Well they're going to have problems if we get rid of the half fare! Period! I
mean...
Payne: Right!
Mims: But I guess (both talking) I guess the point is, I mean I guess the point is if... if the
concern is more at the individual level, okay ... is there a way to ... get rid of the
half fares. The agencies are going to have to deal with it. But we find a way to
help the individuals that are paying it out of their own pocket. I...
Dobyns: Chris, can you (both talking)
O'Brien: I understand what she's asking and I will try to get as much data as I can related
to that.
Dobyns: Yeah.
Payne: And my only concern, Susan, would be those agencies aren't going to have
enough money, and then it's going to in fact impact the individual also. Because
that agency is going to run out of money quicker or something, so that will also
impact the individual.
Mims: Well, but what we have in front of us right now does away with the half fare
anyways. So they're still going to have the same problem.
Payne: Right. Right, I mean, I ... I agree with Connie. Somehow, and all of you, we need
to do something, but ... creative out of the box, I don't know what it is (laughs)
Throgmorton: Well I ... I'd like, you know, to ... for us to remember that Bob Welsh and the Task
Force for Aging made some suggestions. I don't know if they're viable, but I
have ... I don't know if you've had a chance to think about them, Chris. I'd like to
know whether they're, you know, how they could... whether they could be fleshed
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 44
out, whether they're viable. If not, okay, we don't ... we don't do them, but I'd at
least like to ... take them into account, consider the possibility.
Hayek: I'll tell ya this. We ... on the 18th we need to pass something because July 1St is,
uh, the first day we operate without any contract.
Champion: Right! I understand.
Hayek: So...
O'Brien: I'll be expedient. (laughter)
Champion: You're going to have to be ... a genius to help with this problem.
O'Brien: Then you're in trouble! (laughter)
Hayek: Yeah, I mean, and if we can't ... if we at the ... on the 18th can't get around some...
get around an idea and ... and find a majority in support of it, I mean, we may need
a ... a temporary, I don't know, you know, a six -month or a 12- month, I ... I ... some
(both talking)
Markus: Well in the first place the impact doesn't go into place until September.
Champion: Right, with the...
Markus: So what you're doing is you're setting yourselves up for a situation where you're
trying to resolve something that hasn't been resolved over this many weeks, um,
before the 18th. Uh, going... circling back to Jim's suggestion, maybe you want a
companion recommendation that says that we're to study these things and return
to you a month before the ... these are to go into effect. So that ... it has a period of
time where we can actually study those specific things. Uh ... to think that we're
going to come back on the 18th, I mean, we're all ... we're all working on agenda
items right now for the 18th. And so to think that we're going to come back and
discover something that we haven't already seen or somebody has suggested...
it's less likely than if we were to be given more time. And so the way the ... the
current resolution is drafted is that those two provisions that seem to cause the
most consternation don't go into effect until September. So if you had a
companion motion after the resolution that said before they go into effect that you
expected us to come back and evaluate alternatives, before it goes into effect, that
would probably result in a better chance of something, uh, that's more acceptable.
Champion: Good point! Good point, Tom.
Throgmorton: Yeah, that's a possibility. And (several talking)
Hayek: Are you suggesting that we withdraw the motion, pass the resolution...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 45
Markus: And give us an additional direction. And I'd ... and I'd ask Eleanor to weigh in if
she thinks that that's a viable suggestion.
Dilkes: Yeah, and I would ... I would ask that you, we clarify ... if we're going to do that,
that you clarify that you're talking about authorizing the signing of an agreement
that doesn't have any substantive change. Um ... because I think there will be...
Andy Chappell hasn't approved it yet and... so...
Champion: So I should withdraw my motion?
Dilkes: Withdraw your motion to defer.
Dickens: And I'll withdraw my second.
Dilkes: Okay, and then ... do I understand your motion, okay ... your earlier motion to
approve the resolution is assuming no substantive changes.
Champion: Right. That's exactly what I said.
Dilkes: Okay. (laughter)
Markus: To somewhat relieve maybe some of those ... on the table here that might have
some co ... concerns about what we would evaluate. I would suggest that we
actually look at phasing differently than we have so far. Um, if that's what you
want us to ... to consider. Um, which ... defers the impact but ... remember where I
come from and ... I watched services be diminished for a number of years and you
can't keep giving things that you can't fund. So one -time solutions don't
necessarily satisfy anything. At the end of the day you have to pay and make it
work. And so if this is an enterprise fund, which you expect to pay for itself.
Revenues and expenses have to balance, and they have to ... they have to make
sense to make it work.
Throgmorton: Yeah, this is ... this is, uh, a point that makes sense administratively from with...
from within a managerial point of view. It does not make sense from the point of
view of users of a service who see city government providing the service. There
are two separate ways of looking at things. So...
Markus: I can tell you, Jim ... when the money runs out, the service goes away, and to make
promises for services that can't be afforded to me isn't a ... isn't an honest way to
delivering services either.
Throgmorton: I ... totally get that so I mean I recognize there are financial challenges, but I
think ... I think we can address it more creatively and differently. So...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 46
Markus: Well, and I ... I'm saying that given more time, we might find something that is
more creative.
Champion: Okay!
Hayek: So we're... we're... we're voting on the resolution as originally provided in here
(both talking)
Champion: Yes!
Hayek: With the caveat that any non - substantive changes are ... are okay (both talking) but
then we'll be ... someone'll make a ... a motion immediately following the vote...
as ... as indicated by Tom.
Payne: Was there a second?
Hayek: I think (several talking)
Karr: ... Champion, Mims.
Payne: Okay.
Karr: Champion, Mims.
Payne: Okay.
Hayek: Okay.
Mims: Given that the fact that we're gonna pass another motion afterward for staff to
take some serious look at this and ... and help us be more creative and look at
some options, I will go ahead and support the motion (several talking)
Dilkes: ...why don't you just go ahead and ... and add that to your motion, Connie.
Karr: To make (both talking)
Dilkes: Let's make it just one vote.
Champion: Oh, okay!
Hayek: ... state the full motion.
Dilkes: Okay, we have a motion to approve...
Champion: What are you going to have me say?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 47
Dilkes: Motion... motion to approve the resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign the
agreement that's been provided to you, or one that has no substantive change, and
directing staff to explore, um, alternatives to reduce ... to eliminating half price
and Sunday service, prior to the effective date of those in the contract.
Champion: Great! (mumbled) a second?
Mims: Who seconded it?
Dickens: Second. (mumbled)
Champion: Thank you, Eleanor.
Karr: Okay. You making a new motion ... we had...
Champion: Yes!
Dickens: Cause we deferred (mumbled)
Champion: We withdrew the second motion and we made...
Karr: You withdrew the withdrawal, then we went back to the original motion.
Hayek: (several talking) You're right.
Champion: Then we withdrew the original motion. Now we're making this one.
Karr: Okay.
Hayek: Okay, moved by Champion, seconded by Dickens. Discussion?
Throgmorton: If...if I can feel confident that the staff will aggressively (several talking) look
into this, and then come back to us with, you know, really, uh, careful analysis,
taking the values being expressed up here on the table. If I can be confident that
that's what's going to happen, I'll vote for it. (several talking)
Dickens: ...to ask the private sector to step up too if they feel strongly about it. There's
other ways to try to help fund it.
Mims: I would agree, Terry! We've got to look at partnerships with this, as well.
Hayek: And I ... I want to commend staff who have been working on this non -stop since
early... September or thereabouts (several talking) Um, and have worked
extraordinarily hard to get something in place and have faced, um, a lot of unfair
criticism, and ... and they're doing their job and, uh, and in my opinion they
presented us with a very reasonable, responsible response to the situation we find
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 48
ourselves in. Um, and I think it's important for us to ... to be supportive of their
efforts.
Mims: I would agree.
Champion: I totally support the staff. I'm not being mean to them.
Markus: We don't feel that you are! (laughter)
Hayek: Roll call, please. Passes 7 -0. It's 9:15, can we ... do you think we can get done, or
do we need to take a break? (several talking)
Throgmorton: ... have that presentation from Dennis, which is ... (several talking)
Hayek: Oh, yeah. (several talking) All right, we will (noises no mic) take a five - minute
break and resume the Council meeting to... (BREAK)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 49
ITEM 11. THEATRICAL PERFORMANCES INCLUDED WITHIN
ENTERTAINMENT VENUES - AMENDING TITLE 4, ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGES, CHAPTER 1, DEFINITIONS, SECTION 1, DEFINITIONS,
TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "PERFORMER" TO INCLUDE
THOSE TAKING PART IN A PERFORMANCE OF THEATER, AND TO
ADD A DEFINITION FOR "THEATER ". (FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Champion: Move first consideration.
Mims: Second.
Payne: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Champion, seconded by Mims. Discussion?
Mims: I just want to commend staff for their creativity in helping, uh, our local
businesses who are trying to do something and didn't quite fit with the previous
ordinance to find a way to make it fit without, um, I think is there was somewhere
in the memo, it didn't say it exactly this way, but not making a hole big enough
for a Mack truck to drive through (laughter) type of thing.
Dilkes: Basically, yes! (laughter)
Mims: So, appreciate probably particularly Legal staff's, uh, efforts on that.
Hayek: Further discussion? Roll call, please. Passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 50
ITEM 12. RESTRICT USE OF TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT CAMERAS AND
DRONES AND AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE RECOGNITION
SYSTEMS - AMENDING TITLE 9, ENTITLED "MOTOR VEHICLES
AND TRAFFIC," OF THE CITY CODE BY ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE
SIMILAR IN SUBSTANCE TO THE PROPOSED INITIATIVE MEASURE
TO RESTRICT THE USE OF TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT CAMERAS
AND DRONES, AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE RECOGNITION
SYSTEMS AND OTHER HINDS OF TRAFFIC SURVEILLANCE
SYSTEMS, AND BY REPEALING CHAPTER 11, "AUTOMATED
TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT" OF TITLE 9 (ORDINANCE NO. 12- 4466).
(FIRST CONSIDERATION)
Mims: First consideration.
Champion: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Champion. Discussion?
Throgmorton: (several talking) I think some people want...
Hayek: Yeah, is there anyone from the audience who wishes to, uh, provide information?
Champion: Him!
Walters: Someone left their notes. (several talking off microphone) (laughter and several
talking) I'm Jim Walters. I live at 1033 E. Washington Street ... which I'm
writing down. Uh, we all should be concerned with issues of privacy and the loss
of privacy. It's just about dead, but I want to submit to you that traffic camera
enforcement has absolutely nothing to do with personal privacy. If you're
concerned about personal privacy, you should be concerned when you go to your
doctor's office and sign one of those HIPAA documents which, uh, allegedly
protects your privacy when in fact it gives your doctor and your hospital the right
to divulge everything about your personal health to anyone they want to at any
time. Read it! Take, read the fine print. That's exactly what it says. Uh, if
you're concerned about personal privacy, you should be concerned about your use
of the internet, because you're ISP, your internet service provider, can monitor
every keystroke you make on your personal computer and have a record of that.
And ... most people who are tech savvy now are putting a piece of tape over that
camera on top of their computer... because they can not only watch you making
those keyst ... or read those keystrokes, they can watch you making them.
Personal privacy, carry a cell phone? Your cell phone provider knows every call
you make. Not only that, they know everywhere you go, and everything you do.
Credit cards same thing. Um ... personal privacy, check into a hotel room, motel
room, you're on camera because those people are monitoring you for insurance
purposes. So ... personal privacy is just about dead. Traffic cameras have nothing
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 51
to do with you! They have to do with what is happening with your car. It's a
two -ton vehicle, plus, if you happen to drive an SUV. And ... what a camera does
is monitor what that vehicle is doing. It doesn't care about you! Doesn't care
about your attitude, whether you're texting, what you believe — it cares about
what that car is doing. On my street tonight, we have a traffic circle on
Washington Street, I watched three people go around the traffic circle on the
wrong side of the road. Right? If I... if there was a traffic camera there, to
monitor that, each one of those people could have paid the appropriate fine for
violating the law. It's people - neutral! Has nothing to do with you. It has to do
with what your vehicle is doing. Okay? And ... your Police Chief ...is ready to
use traffic camera enforcement as a vehic ... as a method of helping enforce traffic
laws in our city. Why do you ... why do you want to deny your Police Chief the
latest technology that he's ready to use? Why on earth do you want to do that?
Why do you want to be luddites and say, oh, this is something terrible! We've got
to ban this. We've got, you know, Cedar Rapids is doing it! Cedar Rapids is
using it, and they're making money. It costs them nothing! You're talking about
money! We're talking about money in this town and you're saying we don't have
money to help people who ... poor people, handicap people ride on Sundays. God,
you could get millions of dollars just by enforcing the traffic laws on some of our
streets. Millions and millions of dollars and it costs you nothing. There're
companies that will come in and do it for you! You don't have to spend one cent
to do this! Right? So you're sitting here saying, oh, you know a ... a hysterical
group of people has got up a petition, drones, this and that, terrible things,
personal privacy. Oh, it's all terrible. We should concede to them? Is this the
kind of government we have now? When a bunch of hysterical people come
down and say, oh, oh, the sky is falling? Come on, folks! Don't do this! Okay?
Be rational! You know, accept the fact that you've got a technology that works,
that's legal, that costs you nothing, that you're law enforcement officers want.
What's wrong with this? Help me out! (laughs)
Hayek: Thank you for your comments.
Walters: Thank you!
Hayek: Anyone else from the audience?
Hampel: Hi, my name is Martha Hampel. I live on East Court Street. Um, I just wanted...
I'm actually one of the two that, um, filed this imitative with the city and I wanted
to thank, um, several people, Marian Karr, um, for one. Um, she's been very
supportive and helpful. Any time I've made a phone call she's returned my call
immediately or emails, um, and answered several questions for me, um,
sometimes twice. Um, so (laughs) thank you so much, um, for your help in this
process. And, I'd like to thank the thousands of Iowa City residents who signed
our petition, um, to get this issue on the ballot or put in front of the City Council.
Um, if it weren't for the citizens of Iowa City, um, this initiative, um, wouldn't
have made it this far. It wouldn't have gotten as much attention as it has, um,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 52
we've had several groups of people, um ... um, involved and several volunteers,
and I just want to publicly thank them basically, urn ... didn't really have any other
comments beside that, urn ... so thank you for ... your assistance, your help in the
process, and I really appreciate, um, that, um, we have this kind of process in
Iowa City to allow Iowa City residents to take up an issue like this and have our
voices heard. So, thank you again!
Hayek: Anyone else? Okay. Council discussion.
Mims: Well, I'm going to go ahead and support this, but let me explain why. Okay?
Number one, um, because of state regulations or the ... what's happening at the
state level right now, we're not in a position to put up red light cameras until the
State Department of Transportation, um, makes some rulings on where they can
be used, how they can be used, etc. From what we've heard from staff, we don't
expect anything to come out of the State probably for at least a year or so. Uh,
they're in, uh, so we're not going to be able to do anything until that happens.
Um ... secondly, uh, it's a choice then of either going ahead and doing this or
going ahead and putting it on the ballot in November for a referendum. And so
my feeling is, it doesn't necessarily prevent us from doing what Council may or
may not want to do, uh, two years down the road from now, once we have
clarification from the State Department of Transportation, and then it just gets it
kind of off the plate for us at this point in time. So it's not because I don't believe
in using red light cameras, because I do believe in using red light cameras and uh,
you know, to Mr. Walters' point, I think, as you mentioned with so much of the
technology that we all use out there on a regular basis, uh, the whole issue of
privacy is, um, very much diminished from what an awful lot of people think. So,
I will support it, but not because I necessarily agree with this, but simply we can't
do a lot of this anyways right now because we're waiting on the State, and it
basically will start the clock for a two -year window that we can come back and
address it once we know what the State's going to allow us to do.
Hayek: Yeah, I ... I'd ... go ahead!
Dickens: I ... I'm the same with Susan. I'm going to have to support it. Have to is the key
word there. Because of our state has chose not to move forward with the
technology that could ... be a big safety issue and as you said a fundraiser. We
talked about using that money to go to SEATS if... if we put this in, but with the
State holding us up, it's not going to happen. So ... I ... I will support it,
reluctantly, but ... I will bring ... I'll be the first one, if I'm still on this Council, I
don't know if that'll happen (laughs) but I'll be the first one to bring back the red
light cameras as soon as we can, once the State approves `em and we go through
the two -year period.
Hayek: Yeah, I ... I'd echo those comments. I was from ... the very early ... early stages
when ... when staff brought this proposal to us, a supporter of looking at this, um,
and I continue to be a supporter of looking at, uh ... uh, an appropriate, uh, contract
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 53
and appropriate red light package, uh, for the City, but uh ... you know, to sum up,
Susan, what you put very eloquently, you know, uh, to what end at this point, and
I think, you know, we could adopt this or we ... we could not go this route. We
could proceed with ... with, uh, what we originally intended to do. We could, uh,
go to a ... a ballot measure in the fall, um ... the City could win on that and that the
public would support, uh ... uh, the direction we're going in, and ... and it could be
a, what they call a pyrrhic victory. I mean, we wouldn't be able to do anything
with it, because we're waiting on the State, um, and so that, uh, despite the
compelling arguments, uh, Mr. Walters makes and ... and ... and my personal
feelings about why this is a good idea for the community, um ... the futility of the
situation is driving us on this, and I think under the circumstances staff came up
with a very appropriate, uh, response, um ... which allows us to do what's on ... on
the table this evening, uh, waits for the State to tell cities what they can do, and
then in two years time, if the Council chooses to, go right back into the
conversation! So...
Walters: (away from microphone; speaking loudly) ...doing it. You don't have to wait for
the State. Cedar Rapids has led out!
Hayek: Jim, okay, the Council's talking right now. We appreciate your comments, and
we're going to proceed here. Um, so, that's where I am.
Dobyns: I continue to agree with, uh, the cameras; however, in this, uh, case, patience is a
virtue.
Champion: I've never agreed with them.
Payne: I ... I voted (both talking) yeah, I voted against the original ordinance, not because
of invasion of privacy, but more because of the way it was presented by staff that,
and I'm not ... I just didn't agree with the way staff presented it, that it was going
to ... increase safety at the ten intersections they chose. So, it's not that I'm
against the red light cameras. I'm just against the way it was presented to us. So
I'm going to vote for it because I don't think that we should have them at this
point.
Throgmorton: I ... I too voted against the red light cameras back then, uh, and, Jim, y'all tell me
if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that Cedar Rapids uses speed cameras, but
not red light cameras?
Mims: No.
Walters: (away from microphone)
Hayek: Hold on a second here. (several talking)
Dilkes: Can I clarify ... or you want to clarify?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 54
Markus: Yeah, I think they have both and ... and...
Throgmorton: That's what I needed (both talking)
Markus: Because the state... statement was made, uh, in response to the Mayor's comment,
it's my understanding ... that the State has delayed issuing any authorization to put
either speed or red light cameras up at this stage. Cedar Rapids has their cameras;
has had them for a long time. When we started to look at it, and others across the
state, it became a legislative issue. Uh, I don't know that the Governor is
necessarily either in support or doesn't agree with `em, but what couldn't be done
legislatively seemed to get moved into the administration. And so the Department
of Transportation, which has authority over Burlington, which is where most of
these go, has the authority to issue or not issue permits. They've put this into...
oh, what's a nice way to say it? Into a...
Mims: Black hole?
Markus: ...a, no, it's a ... it's a `extended study' of these issues, and so when we went to
pursue this, we were told you'd have to come up with all this additional
information that you can't just install `em. I'm sorry, what's your last name?
Champion: Walters.
Walters: (unable to hear, away from microphone)
Markus: Walters. Mr. Walters, you can't just install them anymore. You have to go
through the State process. The State has now told us that they intend to
promulgate rules and regulations for how these ... for whether permits would be
issued or not. And that's what was being referred to earlier that these, that that's
going (both talking, Walters away from microphone)
Hayek: Mr. Walters, would you please stop talking. You've had your time. The
Council's discussing. We're getting some input from staff. But you're disrupting
the meeting. Would you please proceed.
Markus: And ... and so the point I would make is, it's not a (mumbled) to just pursue it at
this point. The thought process of the staff was to give this the time, to let
the ... let the State promulgate their rules, all of this takes place. If the Council or
a future Council wishes to revisit this issue at some point in the future, this... this
creates a two, I think a two -year window. At the end of that two- years, they can
address it again. And by the way, it wasn't just the Police Department that
supported looking into these. The Administration did as well.
Hayek: Okay. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. First consideration passes 7 -0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 55
Karr: Motion to accept correspondence.
Mims: So moved.
Dickens: Second.
Hayek: Moved by Mims, seconded by Dickens. Discussion? All those in favor say aye.
Opposed say nay. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 56
ITEM 16. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION.
Hayek: Why don't we start down with you, Jim?
Throgmorton: Connie!
Champion: Oh! I would just wanted to point out when, um ... who was here tonight that
pointed out they started at Foundation of the Johnson County, uh, Foundation?
Dickens: Was it the (several talking)
Hayek: Project GREEN?
Champion: Project GREEN! I just wanted to point out to citizens that that's a great way to
donate money, and that if you donate money to a non - profit, to the Johnson
County Foundation, you will actually get a tax credit from the State and the State
is still doing that. So it's a really good way to benefit yourself and benefit a non-
profit.
Mims: Nothing!
Dickens: Arts Fest this weekend. Uh, it starts Friday, uh, a lot of you have seen the parking
signs to not park after Thursday night at 5:00. They'll be clearing the streets. Uh,
they have lots of bands. A lot of great artists; uh, Saturday from 10:00 to 3:00
they have a whole children's street. I believe it's on College Street. So lots of
things for the younger kids to do, as well as the adults.
Payne: I just want to mention that tomorrow night, uh, Wednesday, um ... the School
District is having their final, uh, input meeting for the, uh, RPS that was passed in
February. It's at Hotel Vetro from 6:00 to 9:00 and if you are interested in having
input into what's going to happen with our school facilities, please attend the
meeting.
Dobyns: Earlier today the City staff talked about some of the flood efforts that, um, have
both been made by the City staff and by the citizens, uh, regarding, um, you
know, preparations, uh, we're all very glad that the City staff has shown us, um,
that they've become actually regional experts in flood control. They've been
asked to speak, um, just because of all the work they've done. It definitely
showed up, um, this past week and um, want to thank all the citizens who, uh,
spent their time in helping out with the flood efforts. Thank you!
Hayek: Yeah, I want to ... echo, uh, Mr. Dobyns's comments about the flood work. We
got a report earlier this evening, uh, as to what we have done in reaction to the
2013 floods. You know, knock on wood, we're looking pretty good right now.
Um ... but that could change. Um, I want to thank, uh, the public if you
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 57
volunteered, if you assisted in any way, um, or if you were on the front line of
either a local government or a business that ... that did work, uh, we ... we thank
you for that, and also City staff, uh, public may not fully recognize this, but pretty
much every single department in this ... in this, uh, operation has been involved,
uh ... on an almost 24 -hour basis, uh ... uh, gearing up for the ... the flood event,
protecting our, uh, our infrastructure and private property, and doing a slew of
things, uh, to uh ... to position us in the event the flood waters get any higher
than ... than they already are, but ... our staff has done an excellent job. They did
an excellent job in 2008, but they took all of those lessons and all of the
relationships that were built, um, and... and did a lot of things over the last five
years to..to better protect this community against floods, but also react to them
more efficiently and more professionally, with more collaboration, uh, in the
broader region and with the State and the federal, uh, stakeholders, and um, so
this response has been ... has been exceptional, from my perspective.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 58
ITEM 17. REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF.
a) City Manager.
Finance Director presentation on Property Tax Legislation
Hayek: I know we have a special presentation.
Markus: Yeah, I just wanted to add to the comments about the flood response. Uh, Dave
Wilson serves as our emergency management agency coordinator and he does an
outstanding job in pulling us all together. There's probably more than a dozen
different agencies, city governments, uh, represented on the, uh, daily call that we
have at 8:30 to coordinate our activities. Urn ... he holds us all together and I think
he does a pretty (mumbled) job so ... I wanted to make sure people realize, uh, that
he shows up for those events. We don't just see him when the sky is blue, but
he's there when it's really ugly and does a good job. Um ... we just wanted to
walk through the property tax reform bill. Dennis Bockenstedt is here, our
Finance Director, and we wanted to put it on, uh, put it out over the, uh,
television, uh, so that the public can see what we're going to be confronting and
we'll be dealing with this, as the budget evolves, uh, going forward. It, uh, the
purpose is not necessarily to bemoan what has happened, but to kind of identify
what is expected, and what we will be, uh, dealing with in terms of how we
construct, uh, our budget document and how we respond to these issues. It isn't
going to happen all at once. It's going to roll out over a period of time, a number
of years, so, uh, Dennis'll talk about what those expected impacts are, and we'll
be glad to answer any questions you might have.
Bockenstedt: I'm going to try and update you with a, what's going on with the 2013 property
tax reform bill. Uh, there's also a Senate file, uh, 295, uh, and that passed through
the legislature on May 22nd of this year and ... and that has made it through both
the House and the Senate, um, and it's on its way to become law. Um, the impact
of this is it'll ... the first provisions will take effect on evaluations as of January 1St
of 2013. So those properties have already been valued, will be effected by this...
by this bill. Um, the first city budget that'll be impacted by this law will be the
City's fiscal year 2015 budget. Uh, this is actually a pretty extensive bill. I'm
only going to try to cover the provisions tonight that actually, uh, directly impact
the City's property tax revenues in the future. Uh, there's four major components
of the bill that'll affect us into the future, uh, the first provision is the change in
the limitation in regards to, uh, residential assessment and how that's assessed.
Uh, the second is that there's been added a roll -back for commercial and
industrial property. Uh, the third provision is that there's been a... a new
classification of property added, uh, for multi - residential, multi - family property,
uh, and the fourth, uh, provision would be, uh, new exemption for
telecommunication property. Uh, for the residential assessment limitation, uh,
currently there's a ... a limit on the statewide growth of residential property that's
set at 4 %. Uh, this bill amends that figure and ... and changes it to 3% limit on the
growth. Uh, the affect of this is essentially that it's going to lower the taxable
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 59
values of residential property. Where it's going to lower the... slow the growth of
residential property. How's that affect us? Um, in that first year that takes effect
in fiscal year 15, the City will expect to lose about $306,000 in revenue. Um, as
this compounds over the years, uh, at the end of the 10 -year period, fiscal year 24,
the cumulative loss, or I shouldn't say the cumulative loss. The annual loss at that
point would be about $4.1 million. The 10 -year impact at that time period would
be about $20.7 million. Uh, the next provision, uh, commercial, industrial
rollback, uh, currently commercial and industrial property is taxed at 100% of its
assessed value. Uh, the provision of the bill will reduce that in fiscal year 15 to
95% and then years after that would reduce the (mumbled) to 90% of its assessed
value. Sothis is a ... a property tax reduction for ... for commercial, industrial
property. Um, at the current time the State is planning to backfill the City's
losses, uh, for this, uh, the losses due to the provision of this bill. Um, that
backfill will be frozen at the fiscal year 17 level. So whatever we are reimbursed
in fiscal year 17, that amount will remain throughout the re ... the remainder from
then on. Um, so we will start to experience loss because of that frozen, uh,
backfill and we could expect that annual loss to reach $179,000 in fiscal year 24.
Um, as far as the 10 -year impact of this bill, um, if the State follows through on
this backfill for that 10 -year period, we would lose about $685,000 due to the
frozen backfill. Without that backfill we ... the City would lose about $15.4
million in property taxes. Um, for the multi - residential property classification,
uh, this is a new property tax classification for apartments, assisted living
facilities, uh, mobile home parks, and other types of those facilities. Um, this
provision takes effect in fiscal year 17. Essentially this is, uh, altering the
treatment of these commercial, multi - residential properties from commercial to
residential. Uh, and this provision'll be phased in over an 8 -year period and this
loss in revenue will not be backfilled by the State at all. So the first loss we
would expect to incur in this is fiscal year 17 would be an $851,000 loss, um,
which would grow as the phase in moves forward to fiscal year 24, we would
have about a $3.4 million annual loss in property tax revenue. Um, so just in the
first 10 years of this provision alone we would lose about $15.5 million of
property tax revenue over that time period. Um, the fourth provision, uh, that will
impact our property tax revenues is that there's a new exemption created for
certain types of telecommunication property. Um, this is a ... a direct property tax
reduction for telecommunication companies, um, we ... it's unknown at this time,
uh, what that impact will be, either annually or a 10 -year period. Uh, we do know
that we received $187,000 in property taxes from comm .... telecomm property in
fiscal year 13. Uh, (mumbled) brief summary of those provisions, uh, the
property tax reform bill, it slows the taxable growth of residential property. It
lowers the taxable values of commercial and industrial property, um, it changes
the treatment of multi - residential property from commercial to residential. It also
exempts certain types of telecommunication property from taxation. Overall, the
next 10 -years we can expect, uh, a loss of property tax revenue of about $51.7
million and the expected backfill of that loss is about $14.7 million from the State.
Um...
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 60
Hayek: That's if they backfill everything...
Bockenstedt: That's if they backfill everything they've ... at this point, that they've promised at
this point. And I'll try and answer any questions if you have any on that.
Champion: Can you go back to that last slide? I ... I'm just confused. So did ... the $51
million, uh..did that include the deduction of the $14 million?
Bockenstedt: That's the total property tax reduction. So the property tax ... Iowa City taxpayers
would pay $51.7 million less in property taxes because of this bill. That's a direct
loss of revenue to the City; however, the State is going to backfill $14.7 million of
that loss.
Champion: Thank you. Just needed the clarification.
Throgmorton: Dennis, earlier in the day by email I asked you a question about, uh, wh... what
this cut would constitute as a percentage of total estimated property tax revenues
over the next 10 years. Can you give us a sense of that? I know you did by email
in responding to me and I can read it here if you want but (both talking)
Bockenstedt: ...just to kind of put it in rough numbers, you know, at the ... because it's phased
in, you don't get a true picture of the impact until it's fully phased in at year 10.
In year 10 we could be looking at a loss of 11 to 13% of our total property tax
revenue. Um, which would be about 8...8 to 10 %. The ... the property tax
revenues are really only used in three or four funds across the City. It does
impact water revenue, or water fund, sewer fund. It's really the City's primary
operating fund, the General Fund; it will affect the Transit Fund. Um ... and
maybe lesser known by most people, it'll affect our Debt Service Fund. Um,
essentially our ability to repay our debt. Um ... so ... that's the major impacts. The
General Fund is the one that uses the most property tax, about 75% of our
property tax revenue goes into the General Fund. Which funds, Police Services,
Fire Services, Library, etc. And so we can look at, as far as the entire funding of
that, of the General Fund, losing about 8 to 10% of our annual revenue in that
fund...at...at the peak of the loss. I shouldn't say the peak. At the 10 -year mark
when all the phase -ins are complete. And if the... at some point the State would
not backfill their portion, uh, that loss could be .... could be much worse.
Mims: Dennis, there was an article I think in the paper. I know it was addressing a
couple things that the State legislature did, and I believe this was one of `em that
Moody's had responded to, saying that this, and I believe I'm correct that this
could potentially lead to a downgrade in the ratings of municipalities for
borrowing. Is that ... have you seen that, or did you see that article...
Bockenstedt: ...I've seen the article, I mean, Moody's takes a look at a ... a whole host of
factors. Um, you know, they ... they look at the economy. They look at fund
balances. They ... they look at a ... a wide array of factors when determining how
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 61
they're going to grade you. Um, you know, the ability to raise revenue, and the
willingness to raise revenue are two of those factors. Um, so ... they would take
that under consideration; however, it would be only one of the things they would
take under consideration, and generally if it's of significance that you're in the
position you may be downgraded, they generally give you a warning, you know,
that you need to react to this, something needs to be done, because you potentially
could have a ... a downgrade. So actually our ... our Moody's call for this
upcoming bond issue is ... is Thursday. So we'll find out a lot more after
Thursday of how interested they are in this particular bill.
Mims: Well I brought it up simply because it ... it's another piece that we have to be very,
very conscious of going forward, you know, as we look at how we do our
budgeting, you know, if we have ... if we're more restricted on the revenues we
can raise, you know, we're going to be very much po ... possibly restricted on how
much we can borrow because they are going to be looking at what is our ability to
repay those debts, uh, and we certainly want to continue to keep that triple -A
rating so we can get the best possible interest rates whenever we're borrowing
money. So it's just another piece that we, Dennis and the rest of the staff need to
obviously keep an eye on.
Markus: One of the things I think that article suggested too is that ... as your, uh, revenues
from tax, property tax, are impacted, you start to shift to alternative forms of
revenue, and so when Moody's looks at that, they go, well that then diminishes
the alternatives that you previously had available cause now you're using them.
Mims: Right.
Markus: So they like ... they like the array of alternatives and opportunities that a
community has to go there, and the other point, and Dennis hit it, is fund
balances. Uh, having gone through, uh, specific reviews, uh, these folks that do
the ratings for Moody's and S &P and Fitch, uh, they're... sometimes they know a
lot more about our operation than we do. I mean, they really drill down into the
details of the finances of a municipality, and ... and so they ... they look at things
like fund balance and making sure that you have a, uh, a healthy fund balances. I
think all those things come into play, um, all those things that have led to our
triple -A, which at the end of the day relates directly to the cost of borrowing
money. So ... those are important things that we're going to have to adjust to.
Throgmorton: I ... I would hope and expect, Tom, that the staff has been vigorously exploring,
um, ways of raising new funds by, I don't know, a ... having targeted fees for
services provided to particular kinds of users.
Markus: Yeah, one of the things that we did, uh, very early on was say that we had to look
at our fees on an annual basis. Lot of times there's limits, for example, in
purchasing, and so those limits, for example, they'll set purchasing authorizations
at $5,000. And ... and there, you know, a lot of institutions are very proud of the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 62
fact that they haven't raised that $5,000. My argument to them is ... if $5,000 was
the number you used 10 years ago, the inflationary impact or the cost of the good
that you're buying 10 years later is maybe, you know, substantially higher than
that. Why wouldn't you have adjusted that number? That applies to us with fees
as well. We try to ... we try to get staff to look at each of their fees on an
annualized basis to keep contemporary with what the cost is to provide that.
Because the fee has to equate to the cost of providing the service.
Throgmorton: I was thinking in particular of services, uh, required or demanded by, um, multi-
family, uh, apartment complexes or condos or whatever...
Markus: I think we've adjusted those since I've been here. That's (both talking)
Hayek: Tempting, but there are a lot of legal and other regulatory issues that come with
that.
Markus: And they do have to correspond with the cost of providing (both talking)
Throgmorton: There's got to be (mumbled) rational (mumbled) I suppose as a reasonable term.
Hayek: Yeah.
Dilkes: No, no, I mean, that's the limitation is that ... that we don't have taxing authority.
So you... the... the fee you charge for the service has to equate to the cost of the
service. Otherwise it's viewed as a tax.
Hayek: But ... to your point, I mean I ... everything's on the table as we go forward, and as
we react to this, um, we're going to have to be very careful with our budgeting,
uh, to ... to look at all the options... alternatives that we have now and haven't
tapped, and alternatives that, you know, may come into existence in the future. I
mean ... we're going to have to be very smart about this going forward.
Markus: And it's not going to be resolved on one side or the other. It's not going to be all
revenue. It's not going to be all expense. It's going to be adjustments to expense,
and it's going to be adjustments to revenue. I mean, that's the way these things
typically play out (both talking)
Throgmorton: ... political response as well at the State level.
Markus: Pardon?
Throgmorton: There should be a political response as well at the State level, which has nothing
to do with our... our authority or anything, but that's (both talking)
Markus: I have a more practical response (laughter)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.
Page 63
Hayek: Thank you, Dennis, uh, for leading us through that. Uh, anything from the City
Attorney? City Clerk? Need a motion.
Payne: Motion to adjourn.
Mims: Second.
Hayek: ...Payne, seconded by Mims. Discussion? All those in favor say aye. Opposed
say nay. We are adjourned. Have a good evening. (bangs gavel)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council
formal meeting of June 4, 2013.