HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-08-20 TranscriptionPage 1
Council Present: Cole, Mims, Salih, Teague, Taylor, Thomas, Throgmorton
Staff Present: Fruin, Monroe, Dilkes, Fruehling, Knoche, Havel, Bockenstedt,
Fleagle, Brotherton, Grier, Numberg, Carman, Seydell-Johnson, Barker,
Rackis, Jennings, Hightshoe, Ralston, Platz, Weinard, DeLoach
Others Present: Wu, Lenkaitis (UISG)
Discussion of preliminary budget priorities for FY2021 I021:
Throgmorton/ We received a lengthy memo from our City Manager, Geoff Fruin, and I've asked
Geoff to summarize that memo. We'll start there.
Fruin/ Okay, uh, hard to believe we're talkin' about budget already, uh, but we are ready to kick it
off with staff. You can see the excitement on the faces in the audience tonight, uh, talkin'
budget in August. But we do like to check in with ya, uh, at this time and just make sure
that we have a good read on your priorities going into, uh, the budget year that will start
on July 1 st of 2020. Uh, so with tonight's discussion I'm not really looking for specific
direction from you on .... on any particular item. It's really too early to ask you to .... to say
yes, we wanna do this, absolutely or put the tax rate at this level. We don't have enough
information at the staff level to have that discussion with you, but we have enough and
you saw that in the memo, uh, to where I think you can give us some general guidance,
and we'll use that throughout the process, come back to you, uh, in January and then, uh,
start that more detailed review. So my memo contains, uh, a few different sections. Um,
I'll start with the .... the budget climate. Uh, we've talked at length in these sessions
before about the property tax reform legislation from 2013. That's put some pressure on
our .... on our budget and will continue to do so until 2024, when that is fully phased in.
Uh, we have been fortunate enough to, uh, have great growth in the community since
2003, and I....to generalize, I think we've largely offset the losses that we've experienced
from the .... the, uh, property tax reform to date. Uh, again, we've still got a few years left
to navigate. Um, but one thing we haven't been able to do is really grow our operations,
uh, in line with the community growth that we've had, and .... and um, we're starting to see
that stress manifest in (clears throat) excuse me, several of our departments. So again,
we've been able to stay afloat through property tax reform, but we haven't necessarily
been able to grow, uh, to meet the demands of our, um, growing population. Uh, this
year, uh, in March, the Iowa City Assessor's office mailed, uh, property assessments out
and you all probably got a few emails or phone calls or had conversations about those.
Um, I won't go into the assessment process tonight, but the, um, average residential
property in Iowa City is, uh, seeing a 9 '/o% increase in their property value. Uh,
commercial's up to 10.72 and the multi -residential is up 16. Those assessments will be
factored into the tax rate that we set for this upcoming budget. So that tax rate that .... that
starts on July 1st of 2020, uh, that you'll set in ... in March when you adopt the budget, that
will be factored into those assessments. So you need to think about that as you, um, as
you, um ... decide where you want that to be. Our strategic plan continues to have, uh, a
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 2
bullet point, uh, expressing a desire to reduce that, uh, property tax levy, and we do
believe that we will be able to do so through the debt service levy again this year. Again,
uh, over the last several years, uh, we've reduced primarily through the debt service levy,
um, and that looks to be the case again, uh, this year. The rest of the memo details, uh,
some new expenses on the horizon, uh, that .... that need to be considered. Uh, some of
them we've talked about, others that we haven't. (clears throat) For the personnel related
costs, we started the budget on a .... on a sour note. We had a .... a higher than anticipated
health insurance renewal. So after the budget was adopted, uh, we got our renewal
numbers and they were 11 % higher than we thought they were going to be in the budget.
We had a pretty poor claim experience in the second half of. ... of last year. Uh, that led to
$875,000 of unplanned expenses in the budget, and over 500,000 of those would be
directly in the general fund. So that was .... that was tough, but that's.... we plan for that
volatility from, to be able to absorb that in a year. We've gotta make up that number,
right? The health insurance premiums aren't going to come back down. So we've gotta
make up that 11 % and then set it at whatever that new percent, uh, another percentage
growth going forward. Council's talked about minimum wage, and uh, the next step in
our minimum wage increase would be from 11.50, where it is currently, to 13.25, and we
estimate that to be an expense to the budget, about $350,000, 300 of which would be in
the general fund. And then we have another item to talk about later this evening, which is
the conversion of ourl... hourly employees to permanent employees, and there's a ... a long
memo in your packet, uh, with that analysis, but at a maximum that could cost up to
$865,000 per year, for the nine new positions, um, that we're lookin' at. So a lot of
personnel related expenses that we need to get into, uh, tonight, uh, at least, uh.... get
your initial read on that. Some other priorities that have come up through the year that
could be large dollar numbers that .... that we need to focus on would be the Aid to
Agencies program. Uh, you doubled that budget this year. Staff needs a little bit
direction, are we gonna go back to a slightly higher amount than we had in previous years
and kind of do an infla .... inflationary adjustment there? Or you looking to ... to do a more
significant bump to that program. Affordable housing, uh, you know that we've used
one-time dollars to get up to a million dollars in the last two years. Right now our budget
has built in about $650,000 for affordable housing. So again, gettin' a little read from you
where you wanna be there. Uh, the other ones noted — the Saxony -Gilmore House, we
don't know when demolition will come calling for that house. Wanna know how
prepared you wanna be for that, if we wanna budget the full amount or if and when that
time comes, if we warm, uh, look to reserves, uh, for a solution there, if indeed the
Council wants to preserve that house. The climate action plan, it's been somethin' that
the, has been, uh, on your agendas as of late, and with the call for accelerated
implementation of that plan, we're gonna need some funds to .... to do that. Uh, whether
that's for additional staff or for incentive programs, uh, to, uh, improve the performance
of our existing building stock. So, um, that's on the horizon, as is our transit service
enhancements, uh, again, some big ticket items we expect to come out of the transit
study, whether it's Sunday service or evening service, uh, zero fare service, um, those will
all cost a considerable amount of money. Perhaps more than what our transit levy itself
can pay for, probably more than what our transit service levy can pay for, so we're gonna
be lookin' at general fund and other sources of funds to, uh, provide those enhanced level
of services. And then I skipped over quickly the recreation facility master plan. Uh, this
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 3
is a recommendation from your Parks Commission. Uh, we're probably looking at a cost
of $125,000 to $150,000. This would be a new master plan, very similar to the Parks
master plan we completed three or four years ago. It just focuses on facilities. When we
did the parks master plan a few years ago, it was just on the outdoor park areas, it didn't
include our rec centers, our athletic fields. Um .... or our swimming pools, and so we'd
like to .... we'd like to do that. All of those facilities that I just mentioned are .... are aging,
uh, and uh, are in need of some investment over the next decade, and we'd like to have a
plan moving forward on how to tackle those. The last, uh, part of my memo on the
expense side is the core service, uh, needs. Um, as I mentioned in there just about every
department can articulate the need for increased staffing. Um, I highlighted a few that I
think are most pressing in the organization. I think you need to give serious
consideration .... I .... I know I, we will be giving serious consideration to ... to tryin' to, uh,
supplement staffing in a few of those areas, as budget dollars, um, allow for. (noises on
mic) ...get into that in more detail if you want tonight. And then on the capital side, um,
again we've been focusing on the operating so far. Capital, uh, the Council has, uh,
expressed a desire to .... to be more aggressive with street repairs. So we'll need to work
through that. Um, we had a pretty good discussion in January about City facilities and
we were thankful that you all not only provided funding for Public Works, Streets facility,
but also began a .... the facility reserve fund and contributed $2 million to that. Those
were .... those were two major steps forward. And we'd like to continue that, uh, going
forward with another contribution to that facility reserve fund, and uh, some additional,
um, studies and .... and land acquisitions that we feel will be needed going forward. The
last capital item of note, again, comes from your Parks Commission and it's a .... the
unfunded status of two major master plans that we've done in the last five or six years.
That would be the City Park master plan and the Eastside Sports Complex master plan.
Uh, again both those projects are unfunded, but there's a desire, uh, from the Parks
Commission, um, to see those go forward. Last part of the memo is .... is the alternative
revenues. I .... I put this in the memo, uh, not only because we might need it to fund
some of these initiatives if we decide to move forward with 'em, uh, but also it's been on
your pending list for .... for better part of a year. So I wanted to just give you some basic
infor, uh, mation on a couple of those alternative revenue sources, and those were
increased property taxes — whether we wanna tap into say the emergency levy, which
could generate upwards of a million dollars a year; uh, the utility tax, reminder you're at
1% on your utility tax and State law allows you to go up to S%. Uh, a 1% increase is
about a $900,000 bump there. And then local option sales tax. The other one I
mentioned there. So that's a brief, uh, overview, um, of the memo, and I'm just really
hopin' to....we'll answer questions, but really just listen to discussion of the Council and
where your priorities are, and uh, that will help us tremendously as we get started .... with
the budget.
Throgmorton/ Great! Thanks, Geoff. Uh, so you end your memo with five questions for us.
Seems to me we could walk our way through each of those questions in sequence and...
and go into the ... sub -categories for each of those questions, see how people respond, with
all of us understanding we're not going to be able to come up with any definite, uh, firm
answer to questions because this is a big, complicated topic with a lot of moving parts.
Uh, does that sound reasonable to y'all to go through those five questions? Okay, so the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 4
first one is .... is reducing the City's tax rate, especially considering recent property
assessments, still a priority for the City Council? Do you have any general goals for the
overall tax rate? So I .... I think I'll just start things off with regard to that. I think it is
politically wise for us to reduce I guess the debt service levy in order to .... soften the
blow of a very large increase in property assessed value on, uh, various.... various
properties, like the 16% for multi -family units and 9 -plus percent for single-family and so
on. I don't think we should be overly ambitious in terms of the magnitude of that kind of
reduction, but I do think we should reduce it somewhat. So, I don't know what the rest of
y'all think, so please, feel free to weigh in.
Teague/ I would agree with that. When you're lookin' at 16%, um, with the multi -residential and
it's $1,200.11 a year, that can be pretty significant.... for a family. So .... if we were to,
you know, bring that down by usin' the debt service levy, that would be helpful.
Mims/ I would agree. I think, urn .... and not for any political reasons. I just think compassion
for the people in the city that are paying property taxes and who pay property taxes
through their rent or directly, you know, as property owners. When you look at those
percentage increases, those are pretty darn big and we don't, at this point, at least I don't
have any idea what the County and the School District are gonna do, and we have to
recall that ours is only about 40, 41 % of that total tax levy. So I think we need to look at
trying to decrease it and again, I don't have any idea how much at this point because I
don't have any concept of how much the increase in valuations, you know, is gonna
impact us dollar -wise. But I think we need to have some decrease.
Cole/ Geoff, I think one thing I'd like clarification on, because I think this is something that's
often misunderstood in the public at large is we have reduced in the past the debt service
levy over the last several years, um, we've obviously received some compliments about
that. Some people haven't noticed it because of the increase in valuations. And others
have said, you know, what are you doing, we have a lot of needs. If you could just super -
briefly explain the relationship between reducing the debt service levy and our ability to
have operational revenue for things like Library, these sorts of things, cause I think a lot
of times that's misunderstood. It's my understanding that is only for purposes of servicing
the debt obligations of the City, and the second related question to that is, is that if we did
not reduce it, would we be able to reduce the debt that the City has even more quickly.
Um, so those would be the two questions.
Fruin/ Yeah, I'm gonna ask Dennis to come up and help with that.
Bockenstedt/ (mumbled) ...for you. Um, I mean the debt service levy is specifically meant to
reduce, uh, debt, or pay off debt. Now, uh, that levy is a factor of the (mumbled) that's
coming due at a particular time. So even if you did not reduce that rate and kept it higher,
that .... unless that debt was callable, you wouldn't necessarily be allowed or be able to
pay it off faster. So you have to look at your debt schedule, which is a long-term
schedule and that rate is kind of based on your annual needs, and so, you know, as that
annual need, uh, becomes due, you know, you're gonna set that rate based on what that
annual need is. And if you have more than that, it doesn't necessarily mean that you can
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 5
pay it off any faster. And, uh, you know, when .... if you look at the City's overall
property tax rate, it was a culmination of. ... of a number of different levies. Some are
voted in; some are very specific, like (mumbled) employee benefits, uh, or they're for
transit or library, and so they're very specific; and the debt service levy is specific to
repaying that debt. Uh, most of the operating, uh, is funded through the general fund
levy, which is limited to $8.10, and that's why frequently when you look at that, what it
costs to pay for those operations, those limitations and restrictions that are placed on
those operating levies, we've hit those caps, like transit's at 95 -cents. It's capped.
Library's at 27 -cents. It's capped. And so whatever the .... the growth factor is in the
property tax valuations is essentially what we're limited to that growth. Whereas the debt
service levy is more of a factor of ...of our overall debt structure and debt plan.
Cole/ Okay. So reducing that then does not necessarily impair our general fund operating
revenue.
Bockenstedt/ No.
Cole/ Okay. But I .... I just wanted to make that point, because I think that's .... as we have this
discussion, um, we're not necessarily addressing our ability to meet our residents' needs.
Those are other revenue sources, and so with that .... those two questions answered, thank
you very much, Dennis, I do think it makes a lot of sense, uh, to, um ... you know, reduce
the tax burden for some of our property owners, as well as our renters, and um, you
know, while still being able to meet the needs, as well as the debt service obligations.
Salih/ (unable to understand) our goal as a Council is not, we did not come here to reduce the tax
levy, or the debt service levy. We are here to see what the .... what the need of the
community. And last year we used, we reduce the debt levy and we use like 500,000 to
pay .... I just hopefully getting the number right, to .... to buy a new land for the gas
station... for the fire station. And I thinks .... if we borrow that money and we left the debt
service levy as it is, I mean like we did not reduce it, we did not increase it. Leave it as it
is, and instead of use cash money, we will use that from the general fund. We will use
that money to do something else. And also if. ... if we can reduce it, it's really ideal and
good and at the same time we need the community needs. That's regarding the debt
service levy. Last year also we reduce the, uh, employee benefit levy. Why should we do
that at the same time we have employee that they don't have benefit, and they work with
the City for years. And I know that most of the .... money that paid for the employee
benefit now is, uh, we gonna come to that later, but the figure that we have, 800,000, it is
scary but that's not the whole amount is not coming from the general fund. This is will be
employee benefit levy and general fund for salary. I just, you know, I believe if we can
reduce taxes, it's great, as long as we meeting all the community needs, but we cannot as
a city hire employees for years without benefit, without health insurance, and reduce the,
you know, the employee benefit levy. I .... for me I will look at it like what we need and if
we need to increase it, we increase it. If we want to leave it alone as it is, we will, and if
we want to decrease it, we will. But we have to look at the needs of the community.
Throgmorton/ John? Pauline?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 6
Thomas/ Yeah, I .... I would support looking at the debt.... reducing the debt levy, um, and I
would echo, I think, some of Mazahir's comments in that .... my.....my main concern is
that, however we approach our tax, um, situation, shall we say, that we justify it, that we
have a strong argument, a clear argument, in terms of however we set the tax rates or
make decisions regarding, you know, what kind of revenue we need in order to sustain
Iowa City, that it's well documented and justified. You know, when I .... when I live in a
place or decide to move to a place, the first thing I look at isn't what the tax rate is. It's
really what is the quality of life, is it a place whose values and .... and so forth I can
support, and reflect the way I would like to lead my life. That's really where I'm focused.
Um .... but of course all things being equal, yes. If we can reduce taxes, sure. Um, but
....I think we need to balance it with what our goals are as a community.
Taylor/ So I think we have to be clear on what the community would like us to do on this, and
have a clear understanding, that they have a clear understanding of the decision we make.
Uh, I agree possibly reducing the debt service levy, uh, would be one way to go about
this. Uh, reducing the taxes. Uh, from the data we've had I don't think our taxes are very
high. I have a friend that lives in the... course it's the Chicago area, but uh, her taxes are
phenomenal, uh, ours look pretty good compared to that, but I know this is a different
city but, um, I think whatever we can do, as Mazahir said, to, uh, help the members of our
community, and our employees, would be the best way to go.
Throgmorton/ Geoff, how much did the assessments go up by category? I ... I don't remember
from, uh, your memo.
Fruin/ It was 9 '/< for residential.
Throgmorton/ Nine and a quarter what?
Fruin/ For residential properties (both talking)
Throgmorton/ Percent?
Fruin/ Yes. Uh, 10.72% for commercial and 16% for multi -residential.
Throgmorton/ Okay. So the 16%, surely, would be passed along to renters?
Fruin/ Presumably.
Throgmorton/ Yeah. So that's certainly one thing on my mind, because we are ... have displayed
serious concern for the affordability of housing, especially for renters, especially for
lenters...uh, renters who are low to moderate income. So if we jack up....uh, the taxes
too much, that'll get passed along to them and then worsen the affordability problem. So
this is a complicated thing. I'm not tryin' to oversimplify it, but that's part of my thinking.
Okay, let's move on to the second question. So the second question is, which of the new
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 7
expense items are of the highest priority to the Councilors? Are there any that would not
be considered a high priority? So please feel free to weigh in.
Cole/ And by expense we would also include the minimum wage increase, as well as the
employee benefits?
Fruin/ Yes (both talking)
Throgmorton/ ...yeah, Geoffs memo identifies, I don't know, 10 or more items (several talking in
background)
Cole/ So at least in terms of my own priorities, we'll see where everyone else is going, um, I
think the minimum wage increase is absolutely critical. Um, we've made a, I think a
sensible, gradual transition to get up to that $15 an hour. I ... I think we should stay at that
level. Um, two, um, maybe this'd be for the other memo, but I think the employee
benefits issue is important. Um, and then once we get to the capital I'll have some
feedback on the capital and expenses, but ... those'd be the two big things for me, and then
finally, um, I do think in terms of our expenses, we really need to focus in on significant
investments in our climate change program. Um, leave it to staffs discretion in terms of
how that manifests itself, you know, whether it's assistance to residents in terms of, you
know, converting to more renewable energy infrastructure, but I think those are the sorts
of things that .... so we can give staff that direction in terms of the particular... in general,
and then staff can come back to the next Council, um, with particulars on those, but
those'd be the three for me.
Mims/ Just a quick question. So when you say employee benefits, you're talking about
conversion of hourly employees (both talking)
Cole/ Yes.
Mims/ (mumbled) ... to clarify.
Thomas/ Well I would say some of my priorities would be, um, climate, uh.... transit
improvements, affordable housing, streets, are .... are the four that, uh, that I would
highlight. Uh, I.. A hope too as we proceed on this that there's some inter -relationship
between these things. In other words with respect to affordable housing and transit, that
has climate impacts (both talking)
Throgmorton/ Sure.
Thomas/ ....you know, to the degree we ... in fact I think this is extremely important in our
approach to budgeting is looking for, you know, one thing that will do many things, as
much as possible, and so the inter -relationship of these priorities and goals, I think, is
important to consider.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 8
Mims/ I think when I look at 'em, to me we've .... we've made a commitment on minimum wage,
um, so I think .... I think it is important to continue with the commitment that we've
already made in that regard. Um .... I would say that we need to figure out that climate
action piece. I don't know, again, like you're saying, John (mumbled) staff kind of
envision some of that, and I think the transit enhancements, because I think the transit I
think is one of those things that can have the largest effect on some of our lower and
moderate income residents, in terms of getting kids to child care, getting to work, not
missing work, those sorts of things. Urn .... I'm .... on the affordable housing, I'm
comfortable staying at the 650 that staff has .... has budgeted in there. Um, I ... I would like
to see us, um, agree to that 125 to 150 for the recreation facility master plan. You talk,
John, when you think about a place to live you look at what's going on, and I think we're
long overdue to really have a .... have a full analysis of the recreation facilities and things
within this community, you know, looking for the next, 10, 20, 30 years and making sure
we have those kinds of amenities. So, um, so yeah, I .... I would stay committed to the
minimum wage. I think climate action, um, the transit, and do the recreation study, if I
were to do four, would be my priorities.
Teague/ I don't know that I can really sit and (laughs) you know, identify which ones would be
priority because I .... I feel like all of'em are priority, and to John, you know, when you're
talkin' about do some of these interchange. Climate, you know, action, you're talkin'
about tran .... transit service. You're talkin' about the Saxony -Gilmore House, you know.
It ... the .... the master, um .... Parks and Rec and, I mean everything here, so I think for me,
um, it's really figurin' out how do we .... look at what the needs are and then from there try
to determine how we adjust, um, how we can meet them. For the affordable housin'
specifically, the one thing that, um, I know that it's 650,000, um, here has been, you
know, the standin' budget item. But I believe it's been for the past three years we've done
a million dollars. Um ... two? Two? Two years, for the past two years we've done a
million dollars. When lookin' at the Johnson County Housin' Trust Fund, so they use a
revolving loan for some of the funds, if not all of the funds, that are givin' back...that are,
that the City gives. So those funds, so what is a thousand today, you know, that is given
to the Johnson County Housing Trust Fund, it actually still becomes a thousand 10 years
from now, because people pay it back. So for .... so that one there, it...it really is
increasing, you know, if we give a million, you know, every year, you know, for ...into that
fund, not to say that's where all of our money'd go, but that is really buildin' up our
capacity to meet the affordable housing needs in our community. Um, I .... I, I mean I can
talk about that a little more. Um, one thing that I will say is that, uh, when Tracy, um,
Hightshoe gave her update on some of the things that they wanna do with the affordable
housing, and just lookin' at existing properties and stuff like that, I think there's a lot of
opportunity, especially since, um, we are seein' an increase in vacancy rates. I think we
can, um, you know, look at what opportunities would be there for individuals that need
housing. Also, um, when I look at, you know, Aid to Agency and it, you know, it is very
clear that there is some agencies within our agency.... within our area that are helpin' the
most needy, and so I think that's where our community wants to put the money. Um, the
heart of our community really is to ensure that we all move higher in .... together, and so I
don't know that I can just, you know, identify any of these as bein', um, you know, very
important. We ... when we're talkin' about minimum wage. I agree with, uh, Susan. We've
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 9
made this commitment, we're gonna stick to it. The conversion of the hourly employees
to permanent, we're gonna talk about that a little later. Um, so I .... I think all of 'em are,
you know, priorities for me.
Taylor/ I agree with Bruce. It is hard to narrow it down. For me, looking at all of the topics, uh,
they all seem to relate to, uh, staffing needs. Uh, I've been hearing from a lot of the
departments and employees in various departments that they just don't have enough staff
and looking at their departments, some of their staffing needs may have been established
many, many years ago and our city has grown phenomenally and so those needs have
grown. So I think, uh, salaries for those employees, or even asking each of the
departments to, uh, give us an analy...analysis of their needs, uh, what .... what they feel
they need as far as staffing, uh, how we could approve that, but staffing also does relate
to even the transit study. I'm going to be anxious to see how that, uh, comes out and....
and what they say we might need for staffing, but uh, I guess we wouldn't have to
specifically say salaries for transit. It would just be salaries in general, out of ..out of the
fund for salaries, uh, but that could be a .... a significant amount. Uh, the climate, uh, as
somebody'd mentioned, obviously it's been requested that we have a coordinator position,
uh, that probably won't come, uh, at a low cost. Uh, the affordable housing, as Bruce had
mentioned, that, uh, also may be might take some increased staffing in .... in, uh, Tracy's
department to, uh, help with finding the housing and .... and upgrading some of the houses
that are out there. Uh, so those are the kinds of things that I think are going to be
priorities.
Salih/ I ... I just think like the minimum wage piece in here, as Susan said that's something we
committed and Bruce (unable to understand) I guess this is even shouldn't be there,
because this is a commitment, and we said three years, and three years and it's supposed
to be good to go. But for me the priority will be affordable housing. Keep the one
million, if we can add to it that'd be great. But keep the one million. And the second
thing will be, of course, conversion of the hour employee to permanent. That definitely
my second choice. My third will be, you know, the transit. Um, my fourth will be the
climate action plan. I like recreation center, but I need to see people living in houses
before they can go out and park and rec. And that, those are my priority.
Throgmorton/ This is a tough question to answer because we don't really know what the total
amount of money is that we're gonna have, and we don't know how much all these things
add up to. So that .... we'll get to that discussion once we get a draft budget from Geoff.
So let me run through some things. Uh, express my views. So we have to increase, um,
we have to include the increased health insurance costs. That's a given. Uh, like Maz
said, we're committed to increasing the minimum wage to 13.25 beginning in the middle
of 2020. So I take that to be a given. Uh, converting nine more hourly positions to
permanent, status, that's something we're going to discuss more thoroughly in, uh, in a few
minutes. Uh, I would much rather add needed new permanent staff than spend money
converting nine positions to .... um, you know, permanent staff positions. I am open to the
possibility of converting a few positions, but not all nine of'em. I think the City's
contribution to Aid to Agencies should be brought down from what we, uh, brought it up
to last meeting. But it can be a little higher than what it currently is, or what it was....
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 10
planned for last fiscal year. Affordable housing is a higher prior .... a high priority for me,
and I prefer to see a million dollars go into it, instead of 650 ..... 650,000. Historic
preservation is also a very high priority for me, as I think I've made very clear, but I don't
think the Saxony -Gilmore, moving the Saxony -Gilmore House is worth anywhere from
600 to $1.2 million, plus the, uh, lost ... cost or value of the parking lot that it would be
moved into. So I'm really very troubled by that, and I have been hopeful we'll be able to
work out an arrangement with the President, so ... of the University, so we don't have to
make that.... troubling choice. I think we should put money in the budget for the
recreation facilities master plan. It's good to think ahead. Climate crisis, I think .... we're
gonna have to find a new revenue source for it. I had originally been thinking we'd
probably have to go to the public with a referendum, and in many ways that would be a
very good thing to do, because then we'd see whether the public is fully on board with
what we have done in declaring a climate crisis or not. But, there are alternative sources
of funding that we can draw upon, which Geoff mentions in his memo. So maybe they
would be sufficient for what we need to do. And, let's see, yep, we will need new funds
for major transit improvements, and .... that's a big deal with regard to affordability for
people gettin' around town, also. Likewise with regard to the climate action thing, I .... I
see a strong, uh, I don't know, synthesis of interest in affordability of housing with
climate action when you can use funds to reduce utility costs. So I'm hopeful about that.
So that's pretty much what I wanted to say. (mumbled) any points of conflict that, uh, it's
a good thing havin' conflict. Any points of conflict that we really should kind of draw,
uh, dive into a little bit farther?
Cole/ I'm glad you mentioned that, Jim, I was gonna say cut me off if we don't have time for a
conversation, but very briefly. I agree with you on this Saxony -Gilmore House. I think
the community's really going to have to make a tough decision on this. We all love that
structure, but 600,000, at least for me, to a million, is way too much, but again we don't
wanna rule that out. We wanna keep all options open. Briefly related to Aid to Agencies,
we don't need to pick the final number now. I think the number should go down from
where we were last year, but .... I do think that we need to incorporate both the increased
population of the City of Iowa City, that that should be reflected in staffs proposal, as
well as the, you know, we do have, um, more populations with needs, and so there has to
be an assessment of demographics as well to figure out whether there are greater needs.
We've had some, you know, refugee populations that need some additional help. Um, and
that's okay, I embrace that. I think that's something though that needs to be reflected in
those numbers, and I think my key point is that that can't be flat, because that was the
whole problem when we had that discussion. Leave it to staffs discretion in terms of
where we should go. Finally related to, um, the revenues, I do think that the community,
this would likely be a task for the next Council, really needs to think hard and seriously
about the, um, local option sales tax, um, and then the other thing related to emergency
levy, um, I don't like to use the emergency levy but part of me thinks that while times are
relatively good, we may need to tap into this, sort of as a way of preparing for times that
may be bad, as opposed to waiting until times are bad to do the emergency. So something
to think about as far as that goes.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 11
Throgmorton/ Rockne, on those points, I mean they're all good ones, but the last couple
especially, but they're actually addressed under question five (both talking)
Cole/ ...cut me off (mumbled) scope.
Mims/ I would just make an additional comment, you know, I think as a lot of us were going
through this and maybe Jim is the only one that kind of went down past the .... the
significant new expenses in terms of priorities, um, but I would totally agree with you,
Jim, and I've mentioned this I think in other meetings too, that we really need to look at
our core service needs and staffing, and um, certainly look at what the City Manager is
looking at and recommending in terms of some of those core needs where we need to
increase staff levels because I think with the .... with our strategic plan and .... and the
growth and a lot of things that we've been doing, as we've talked about there's... there's a
real stress level on our staff in terms of the demands being put on them, and not having
grown the staff over the last few years. So I would agree with you, Jim. I think it's
essential for the benefit of the whole city and .... and the health of our staff, as well, that
we look at some increases in those core staff positions, um, more than converting some of
the hourly (both talking)
Throgmorton/ So we'll probe that a little more with question three. Okay? Yeah.
Thomas/ Jim, you did get into more detail (several talking)
Throgmorton/ Sorry, Maz.
Salih/ I just have like comment that I wanna add from what just Rockne said, like by looking at
the community and see the needs, and you see all the time, like for the, you know, the
....the agency, but yet I .... I understand that we don't have to double it like last time but at
least we .... we have to look at the needs because look at the community, see like what is
new in the community, what greater needs in the community, because even this report,
this new one, I look at it. I just find out that you know, I don't know, but it's not
highlighting the social justice spending that is very good to the community. It is, and
it ... we .... we done a lot good thing for the, for social justice spending and I need to see
this reflecting here. I know that Fire and Police Department, all those basic needs, are
important, but also we have to just say that there is many, many (unable to understand)
need that I think ... just really, you know, not bein' recognized in this, as... like makin' our
community better, and we been doing that, but I need to see that here. So...
Thomas/ I .... I agree with much of what you said, Jim. I just would .... would want to, um,
comment briefly on .... on Saxony -Gilmore. I .... I think we really need to maintain that
dialogue with the University. I feel it was their actions that kind of put the City into a
very difficult situation.
Throgmorton/ Actually Gloria Dei.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 12
Thomas/ Okay. Gloria Dei. Um .... but we kind of inherited a situation and I'm....I'm hoping we
can, with some collaboration, work out way out of it. Uh, and then on the Aid to
Agencies, I, you know, I hope now that, you know, the agencies have been, I think, a little
more forthright in what they feel their needs are, that the community will respond to that,
uh, in, you know, in their contributions. Um, but I would be concerned if, you know, they
come back and it's .... it's higher than we budgeted. Uh, I would be very, uh, receptive
to .... uh, you know, providing those funds. I felt that they were, um, you know, they've
done excellent work and they're a safety net that I do not wanna, um, sever in terms of,
you know, our community, uh, needs situation. (several talking in background)
Throgmorton/ Okay, so maybe we can turn to question number three? Which is....
Salih/ I guess Austin want to say something.
Throgmorton/ Oh, sure! Austin, sorry!
Wu/ Yeah, uh, just I would wholeheartedly agree with Councilor Thomas in regards to, uh, the
Saxony -Gilmore House, and I do have a point of clarification on it, um, where is the
proposed parking lot?
Throgmorton/ Right across the street.
Wu/ Okay. Thank you.
Throgmorton/ Right across Market Street, that is. It's a City -owned parking lot. (several talking
in background) Okay, question three is supplementing staffing in existing departments a
high priority? Are there certain operations that you would like to see expand service
levels?
Mims/ I would say for me, yes, that's a very high priority, and I would leave it to the City Ma...
Manager's office and consultant with the department heads, to where that .... where that
highest priority is. I don't .... I don't think at our level, at City Council, we necessarily
have enough of the inside vision and scoop of really what the workload is and .... and how
that staff is working to make that particular determination of one department over the
other, but I think given.... frequent and .... and ongoing communication of the workload
and the stress level within our service staff, I definitely think those, uh, increasing that
staffing is necessary.
Thomas/ I would agree, uh.... I would say I have a little bit of personal experience with Parks and
Recreation, and uh, do feel that, you know, given the degree to which that department is,
um, the assets, the .... the properties that are under our control now that have been added
to the, um, system, it .... it, you know, how we could possibly manage a larger system with
the same level of staff doesn't make any sense whatsoever, uh, so I'm .... I'm sensitive to
Parks and Recreation. Susan, I agree with you that on some of these other departments I
would leave it to the staff and the City Manager's office. I .... I am interested in how we
can through permit and fees, um, provide revenues to fund those additional staff. Uh,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 13
you know, Transportation Services is a enterprise fund, if I'm not mistaken, uh, so we
could look into, you know, our parking fees, how to adjust, uh, to .... to accommodate for
additional staffing. I've mentioned on numerous occasions the idea of a neighborhood
parking benefit program, which I hope ..... was also mentioned in a recent report we
received on artificial intelligence. Uh, I think there's potential for that to generate
revenue, um, which could also help address the .... the operational needs, as well as ... from
a climate standpoint, you know, get .... address the fact that free parking has a .... a climate
cost. So ... so those are my thoughts on the staffing.
Salih/ I just think, um, if there is a department that's shortage in staff, and they need new staff,
definitely. They have to have more people. We don't wanna have like a lot of workload
for the people that sometime create a stressful environment, but .... if those...some of those
....like my understanding that I know that there is a position long time ago at the Park
and Ree, at the recreation center here. It used to be a full-time position, where they
converted to two seasonal position, and now I hear some people saying that, uh, I rather
hire new person than like converting those position to, you know, to .... to a, like full time.
But .... if we did that, as a city,'it used to be like a permanent position. We take it away.
Hire two seasonal. We better convert those two seasonal to permanent position (unable to
understand) I know that there is a (unable to understand) later, but ... unless if we can use
the seasonal positions or the, yeah (mumbled) convert them to a position that the City
needs would be great. We have to start with that first, and after that if we see like a
shortage in any position, somewhere else and need to be covered, we have to, but I
really.... at the same time, even though after we fill all our position, and we .... we still
need to convert those position, the people who .... we mis-classify them as the seasonal,
and they work around the year. I wanna work on both, if the department need it — a new
person to be hired because there is no seasonal person there work around the year, we can
look into that, but in the same time we have to convert those people. That what I think!
Taylor/ I think I jumped the gun a little bit on the .... on the first question, because I touched on
the staffing, because I think that is an important need. As I mentioned I've been hearing
from a lot of the departments that they're just short-staffed. It's a kind of antiquated
staffing model they are using now, um, and just can't meet the community service needs
that we have, and just looking at our seven goals, our strategic plan, I ... we've been told
many times that, uh, we have a rather aggressive strategic plan and goals, and uh, the
departments need the staffing to be able to .... to meet those goals that we've set, uh, but I
would like to see then from the departments is .... is an analysis of. ... of what they feel
their needs are.
Teague/ I know we only have so much money at the end of the day, that we're gonna have to look
at. So for me when we're talkin' about, you know, staffing, um, I also have to put in
there, you know, currently what we're talkin' about is the conversion of hourly, uh,
employees to permanent, and .... I would of. ... I don't think that we can look at those
separately, to a certain degree. We were talkin' about we have needs and ... you know, uh,
the conversion where potentially some of the .... some of the positions can remain, um,
where they are currently. I do believe that there's a place, and I know we're gonna be
gettin' into that, um, later in .... in discussion today. I do believe that there is a place for
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 14
hourly employees, as well as permanent, and you know, how do you figure that out. Um,
so for me I really do believe that staffing needs, you know, hourly employees to
permanent is one big discussion and I feel like that, you know, that goes with the
AFSCME and the City staff comin' together to figure that out and balance that.
Unfortunately, you know, we're gonna be talkin' about the hourly employees to permanent
here in a little bit, urn .... and maybe that .... in hindsight, you know, it...it shoulda been a
broader question that maybe City and staff, um, well, urn .... AFSCME and the City
coulda been workin' on.
Cole/ So for me, you know, Susan's right. We don't wanna get, um, too much into the details, but
that said I do wanna give enough detail that the staff can get our feedback, and um, you
know, for me I actually have a real, uh, concern about some of the trends we're seein' in
violent crime in the community. Um, we've seen a lot of stuff in the media over the last
three to four months. Each time one of those events happen, you know, the question is
are we sort of over -reacting to the most recent media report. It's very easy to do that as a
human being. We need to sort of balance that, uh, with what the data tells us. Um,
fortunately we are going into more data -driven direction, um, in terms of making sure we
have that empirical evidence as well, but .... however staff determines it's necessary to
meet that particular issue, um, whether it's funding in other areas, whether it's additional
law enforcement officers, um, I would be supportive of that because I've just noticed it,
um, I've been concerned about it, um, and I think it's something that we need to at least
do everything we can to ensure that the community remains, the community that we have.
Um, related to that topic, um, I also think we need to, uh, ensure that we're continuing to
do everything we can if there is a budget limitation to ensure that we have adequate
funding to increase the diversity of our law enforcement. I think that's incredibly
important, and I'm hoping that that can continue to be a topic. Obviously there is some
challenges with that, um, in terms of ensuring that that happens, but I just believe that
that's an absolutely critical, um, component, uh, of, um, that we need to address, as far as
that goes. Um, and in terms of the overall funding, I ... I think that that's something that,
you know, in terms of the individual needs, um, you know, we're just gonna have to
continue to monitor that very closely and, um, you know, continue to get the feedback
from the community as a whole, but those were some of the concerns that I had had.
Throgmorton/ Have all of you spoken now? Yeah. Okay, well .... Geoff, your memo identifies
eight and a half specific positions that could be added to Police, the Neighborhood
Development Services department, and Transportation Services, plus others, uh, that you
don't quantify, you just kind of refer to others that could be ... helpful in other departments.
So it's pretty hard to sort that through (laughs) without havin' some sense of how many
employees and what's the cost would be and so on. Uh, in terms of values, if. ... data
reveals that in fact there have been trend, there has been a significant trend toward a more
serious incidents of crime, uh, I ... I would be eager to deal with that by hiring additional
staff in the Police Department. I hadn't seen the data, and I'm certainly aware of reports
of things that have happened and they are very troublesome, but .... in terms of data, I
haven't seen it. So, anyhow, there's that, but .... for other reasons I .... I think we do need
additional staff and that .... and then N .... NDS, Neighborhood and Development Services.
I think we need additional parking enforcement person. I think we need another person
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 15
in the Forestry Department. Uh, but .... this really is managerial stuff, in terms of value,
you know, I think....
Fruin/ Yeah, I'm not really lookin' for....you need, you know, two new employees here or there.
I want you to think more on the service level. So for instance if you .... if you felt really
strongly about the climate plan, and I know you do, and you said we need to double our
tree planting in the next three years. Well, that's going to have staffing (both talking)
Throgmorton/ And that's why I mentioned Forestry.
Frain/ Right, so that's the .... that's the level of discussion that, you know, a comment like
concerns over the violent crime, that .... that's what we're looking for here, not necessarily,
I don't expect you to be able to drill down and say, that's gonna result in (both talking)
Throgmorton/ ....on a related point, Pauline rightly mentioned concerns about the cost of hiring a
new person to do the other climate work that we will talk about later on in this meeting,
but it's my understanding that staff person, we can fund that staff person using funds
you've already set aside for what was originally planned to be a different kind of work.
So that in itself I don't think is a problem. There's some elements in your memo, Geoff,
that have to do with capital improvements, but you didn't really fo.... ask us to focus a
question on them. Uh, for example, uh.... well I guess I can .... (both talking)
Fruin/ Yeah, the roads and City facilities and (both talking)
Throgmorton/Yeah, and .... (both talking)
Fruin/ ....park master plan (both talking)
Throgmorton/ ...I guess we can come to roads with regards to, what is it .... the last.... question
number five, about new revenue sources. But ... well (mumbled) I'll just jump to that. So
I definitely think we need to be spending some money on, more money, on improvin' the
conditions of our roads, and that probably needs a new revenue source. I don't know
what the rest of you think about that, but it seems to me pretty darn clear (several
responding) And .... uh, let's see, with regard to City Park and Eastside Sports Complex, I
know there's considerable interest in that. I understand that there are a variety of
organizations and interests, uh, promoting both of them. With regard to the Eastside
Sports Complex, I personally think that we need to be thinking about climate action when
we review that particular project, and we don't need to talk about that in detail right now,
but it seems to me that we will need to do that. Cause (laughs) cause we'll need to do that
for a lot of things (laughs) with regard to climate action. Okay, you wanna move on to
question number four? Or, you know, anybody wanna follow up on anything else before
we do that? Okay, so question number four is pretty easy — are there, not (laughs) easy,
simple question, hard to answer. Are there items not discussed in the memo that the
Council would like staff to explore? I'm wondering, Susan, if there's anything about
operational expenses havin' to do with the, uh, Access Center that need to be discussed,
and then I'm also wondering about this child care initiative that's emerging from the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 16
Chamber and others, and whether there might be any operational expenses associated
with that.
Mims/ In terms of the Access Center, the commitment at this point from the City has been simply
the capital costs of 2.5 million, and we are still working through, um, the 28E
agreements, um, that will, you know, be in place and I know Eleanor and others have
gotten some of that started and I'm going to be talking with her tomorrow. Um, the
County has committed that they are covering operational costs. Um, I think there's
certainly still a lot of unknowns in terms of how much reimbursement they'll get from
insurance companies, from Medicaid, etc., uh, but at this point, we're not on the hook for
any of those operational costs.
Throgmorton/ Good to know.
Mims/ So ... we'll ... they might try to come back later (laughs) I think they're very concerned
about the ongoing operational costs, but uh, you know, we have made absolutely no
commitment to that at all.
Throgmorton/ Did anybody else warm bring up anything else, and Geoff, after we find out,
maybe you could respond to the childcare part.
Salih/ Can we still like, because I know this is not final, right, we can still bring something later,
when we, yeah?
Throgmorton/ Yeah!
Mims/ The only thing I would say, Mazahir, if it's something of a significant dollar amount, what
we're trying to do is get that in front of staff now so that they can see if there's support
from the majority of Council as to whether or not to try and fit it in, into the budget. I
think what we're trying to avoid is I think we had a little bit of this last year and maybe
even the year before of staff gets the budget kind of done and (both talking)
Salih/ ...now and the next Council meeting (both talking)
Cole/ This may be too small ball, Jim, but urn .... I think that the staff, to the extent that they can,
should really look at what we're doing by way of event planning and festivals out more in
our neighborhoods. We do do Party in the Parks, uh, lot of our main events though are
downtown. Again, maybe a little bit of small ball here, but I do think that that's
something that staff should continue to evaluate to make sure that the events aren't only
happening downtown, but they're also happening in the neighborhoods. That's pretty
detailed.
Taylor/ And I agree, Jim, that the childcare aspect needs to be looked at and I look forward to
hearing from Geoff, because from what we've seen and heard, uh, childcare needs relates
to everything —jobs and housing and .... and transportation, the schools, so it is really
important, and I know we in Invest Health, uh, Tracy's not out in the audience now, uh,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 17
had .... had a wonderful.... oh there she is! Yes she is! We had a plan, uh, for childcare
facility but it, uh, kind of fell through. We were going to jointly with the County and
Kirkwood and it was a wonderful plan. I hope we can still follow through and maybe she
can talk to you and maybe that can be part of this, uh, childcare initiative, cause it's .... it's
a big need.
Thomas/ One .... one thing I'll just mention, I .... I brought it up, I'll try to expand on it a little bit,
you know, with parking benefit district. I'm really pleased how we are, you know, over
the years here now, over the last several years, I think capturing and identifying issues
that we need to get a better handle on, whether it's road conditions, uh, you know, the
park master plan, looking at the parks and open spaces. Now we'll be looking at the
facilities that we missed in that .... in that assessment. So we're getting, I think, a much
clearer idea of our liabilities, and I'm really pleased with that. We're also, with the
Transportation Services, uh, question looking at, um, transit. I would add to that, uh, I
would like to have a better understanding of our parking policy. I think, you know,
we ... we're, we've been pushing, uh, the.... development piece very heavily. Um, I think
now we're beginning to understand that there are consequences with respect to mobility
once you increase density, and so I'm .... I'm really, uh, interested in seeing if we can't
expand the scope of our analysis of our transportation and mobility, uh, as we move
forward, with parking being a critical piece of that in terms of, uh, how.....and
particularly if we're .... if we're looking at climate, how our parking policy will, um, play
into that. But I think it .... I think parking is going to be increasingly an issue as we, uh,
increase the density in the downtown. If we do not, uh.....seriously look at that, I think
we could run into some difficulties in terms of congestion and .... um, frustration, uh, with
respect to how to accommodate automobiles.
Taylor/ Any other comments on question number four? Move to question number five, is the
Council open to alternative sources? If so, which ones and for what possible purposes?
Mims/ I .... my preference, and this is not a short-term solution, uh, cause this is going to take
some time, but of those four alternatives that Geoff has listed there, um, is the local
option sales tax. I think when you look at the three... first option's the increased property
taxes, the utility tax, and the users fees, those in my estimation put the biggest burden on
the low to moderate income members of our community, and don't take advantage of all
the money that outsiders spend in this city ,and so, um, Geoff mentions in the memo, we
did a four-year local option sales tax after the 2008 flood, raised $30 million in four
years. I mean that's.... that's a significant, a significant amount of money, and I know
when we were looking at this before, when you start looking at the statistics of who's
actually paying that, an awful lot of that is paid by people who are not Iowa City or even
Johnson County residents, and I know there's a lot of people who say the local option
sales tax is a very regressive tax, but when you look at all of the exclusions under State
law, it is not anywhere near as regressive as I think a lot of people think. Your .... your
rent, your medications, you know, so many .... your groceries, all those things that are the
highest proportion of purchases, particularly for people low to moderate income, are not
even subject to the sales tax. So I think it's ... of. ... of those three, I ... those four that are
listed, I think it's probably the least regressive, and it takes advantage of all the people
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 18
who come into this community, um, and spend money, whether they're here for
something at Hancher or Kinnick or whatever, um .... and they use our roads, they use our
streets, they use our police officers. They might not like it (laughs) but they ...(several
talking and laughing) involuntarily maybe! Um, they... encounter, whatever, uh, I just
think it makes sense. That is not a solution for this next budget. It's gonna take some
time to, you know, make a determination if that's the direction we wanna go, and um,
ramp up that kind of a .... a, an effort to educate the community as to why we think that
makes sense and what it, how it can benefit the community ,but I think for the long term,
uh, financial sustainability of this community that is probably the best and most, um,
impactful thing we can do in terms of improving our revenue sources.
Cole/ I .... I would agree, Susan, and I'm so glad that you mentioned what is and is not included in
local option sales tax, cause I remember actually when I first ran for Council, one of the
first questions I got was, well are you for a local option sales tax (mumbled) and I said,
well I think I am. And ... that person responded, 'No, they're regressive! They're bad!'
Right? And it hurts the most vulnerable, and I don't think the person actually really
thought about what is included and what's .... it doesn't cover food, for example, right?
So, and there's also .... the legislature's thought of this, and they've excluded a lot of those
things, and moreover, we don't ... we pay it of course, but a lot of out of town residents pay
it as well, and so why not help the people that are benefiting from those services, whether
involuntarily, or voluntarily, that they're contributing into the .... cause I, we really are a
statewide city ,right? I mean people come to enjoy the University of Iowa. I do think it's
important that we look at that. It is not a simple revenue fix. It's something that does
take some planning, but I do think in terms of the optics of it, if we're able to get the
support from the adjacent communities, I think now is really a good time to at least
starting that conversation, um, I .... I think we have a lot of potential there, because related
to the roads, we have to do something about it, and by the way, this is no critique at all on
our staff. Our staff has done a terrific job on very limited funding (both talking)
Throgmorton/ (mumbled) ....money.....
Cole/ (both talking) ...but we have to give them the funding to be able to do it, and it's not just
seasonal. Um, lot of times you say, oh, it's just what it looks like in the spring. If you just
go through and look at, you know, you can go two blocks that way, it is .... they're not
good condition and it really does reflect. So we need to give them the tools to address
that, and with those resources I'm confident they'll do a fantastic job. Finally related to
the emergency, um, I'm sure there must be statutory requirements in terms of what we
have to do to establish an emergency, is that correct? Or can we declare an emergency?
In terms of limitations.
Fruin/ It's pretty liberal. We (both talking) if we wanted to.
Cole/ Oh, okay! Well so ... I do think we need to think about, and if we're talking about, you
know, climate change, um, I .... I think it is, we use the word crisis, um, I don't think that
is too untethered from what we just declared. So if we're serious about that, I think we
need to evaluate that, and um, again, while the times are relatively good, as opposed to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 19
waiting for that. So I think that's something we have to look at as far as that goes, but
those would be my comments on revenue.
Taylor/ Think the biggest point for the local option sales tax, which I didn't realize that Iowa City
was the only metro area in the state of Iowa that does not have a LOST, and driving
through Cedar Rapids, there are signs all along their streets, your LOST dollars at work
for their streets, and they've tried to maintain their streets, and so as far as the use goes,
that would be a .... a prime need for that. So I would be in favor of that. As far as, uh,
Susan mentioned (mumbled) the .... the utility tax, even a 1% or 2%, even a little bump up
in that, people on limited incomes, seniors, disabled folks, uh, lower income folks, that's
a hardship. It's hard to .... and then you don't want them trying to determine whether they
should, uh, pay their taxes or get some food.
Salih/ I ... I think really .... for me definitely the employee benefit levy. I just wanna ask Dennis
about last year, if you remember how much did we reduce it by? Ten cent, and how
much that was generating?
Bockenstedt/ (difficult to hear, away from mic) I believe that was 40....$40,000, 400,000!
(mumbled) I think it was 40,000.
Salih/ I think one cent is (both talking)
Bockenstedt/ ....40,000.
Salih/ ....50,000 before (both talking)
Bockenstedt/ ....400,000 (several talking)
Salih/ (several talking) one cent.
Fruin/ ....about 400,000.
Salih/ Yes, it's 400,000, not 40. And I thinks now we need for the employee benefit levy, uh, for
just to convert those people, like around 300 -something and if we left the tax alone last
year we should have not had even this problem, but definitely because we reduce it last
year for nothing. We should have that back. And for the emergency, of course if we
think like, if we declare that we have, uh, the, you know, the crisis for the .... as Rockne
said, we're talking about the environment and the climate action plan that we have, and
we said that we have a crisis. This could be one thing that we can do, and I agree also for
the 1% utility tax or 2% maximum for the utility, but the.... definitely the benefit, the
employee benefit levy.
Teague/ Local osh.... option sales tax, it was interestin' that, uh, we raised, um, over 30 million,
um, so when I was readin' that, I was amazed (laughs) at the difference between the other
options that we had, and so I would agree with, um, the Councilors here that that would
be definitely of interest for us to, um, go down. The other ones, I .... um ..... when we look
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 20
at how .... how much money it would generate, I think it's good. Urn .... but.....maybe we
really look at the local ac ... uh, local option sales tax and see if that really does meet our
need. We know it won't meet our need, but if it'd .... if it'd get us down the road a little bit.
Um, and I do know last year, uh, or this year (laughs) during the budget season, um, I did
learn about the employee tax, and so, um, I .... I would like to ... I think that it's somethin'
worth exploring, uh, and havin' discussion about as well.
Mims/ I think the thing to keep in mind when you're talking about that employee benefit tax,
that's part of the property tax levy. I mean so .... so you're increa... again, you're going
back to increasing the property tax levy ,and again, when you're talking about people in
the apartment buildings, you know, and that is getting passed on, when I look at these,
that's why I think those are the most regressive, because it's hitting those people the
hardest. And so that's why, to me, it makes the most sense to try and go that local option
sales tax and try and keep that property tax down.
Salih/ I'm sorry, uh Thomas one second, let me just like address that. Because I really thinks, uh,
the people of this community would be more than happy to make sure that our employee
have health insurance, the people who serve them. They have health insurance. Ten cent
last year. We didn't use the 10 cent from the employee benefit levy, but we reduce also
for the debt service levy. If we kept it by reducing only the debt service levy and we left
that alone, we still decreasing the tax. And I just think that even if we increase it this year
10 cent, this is not .... when I .... I calculate it I don't remember how I did, but to look to
my bill that I'm gonna pay, it doesn't made difference. It's not ... it's not like big difference,
even you are not going to notice it when you see your .... your ta, like when you're paying
your tax for your property tax. It is really fraction of your bill, and since we didn't use it,
and if the people of this community knowing that we reduce it but we have many peoples
without health insurance, people who serve them every single day, during winter time.
You know, the seasonal employee, all those .... I don't mean the seasonal, I mean like the
people that we gonna convert them now to full time because they are hard working
people. They need to have insurance. And that's where it come from.
Thomas/ I agree with everyone on the LOST, uh, you know, as ... was noted, the, uh, we're the
only metro area in the state of Iowa that doesn't have one. And the scale of the .... the
revenue that it generates is, I think .... so critical, but we, as also was noted, it's .... it, we
may not have that available to us, uh, right away. So I would say some of these other
taxes, uh, we.....we may need to consider. I think user fees, um, could be a potentially
valuable one, and again, they can help sort of make a connection between some of the
things we use the revenues for, as Geoff noted in his, uh, memo, that for example,
parking fees could help us meet carbon reduction goals in the transportation sector. So
you can make a direct connection, uh, same with the emergency levy. Uh, so I think we
may, you know, I'd rather .... not press these others, uh, you know, I'd rather use the LOST,
but I think in the .... in the interim we may, depending on our need, find we may need to
tap into some of these others.
Throgmorton/ Okay, so I'll toss in two cents worth here or maybe $2 million worth, I don't know.
(laughter) Uh, I .... I have long felt that we need to seriously consider .... uh, promoting
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 21
the use of LOST, local option sales tax, in order to fund things that we've not been able to
fund with our ordinary sources of revenue. Repairing our aged streets is one prime
example of that. But there are others. So we will have to engage in a pretty thoughtful
conversation about what would .... where the money would go and ... that we generate
through the use of LOST, assuming it's passed by the public and so on. But I think we
need to look carefully at that. I think we also need a large source of funding to help
owners of aged buildings repair and renovate their buildings to reduce the use of natural
gas. That's a climate action thing. Which also would enable them to reduce utility costs.
Now I don't know that the landlord/tenant thing is a complication to this, because reduced
utility costs are not necessarily passed along to the renter. Sometimes they are because
the renter pays directly, and other times they're not. So we'd have to sort that out. But I
think that's a really good opportunity to achieve two big goals, simultaneously. And ... we
could also plant some trees (laughs) appropriately which would shade homes or, you
know, yeah, homes, and .... and other buildings. And thereby enable the cooling of
buildings in summer time, or in some cases depending on the trees, uh, help, um, reduce
the amount of natural gas used to heat 'em in the winter. So I think maybe the emergency
levy and/or the utility tax and maybe LOST could be part of that, I'm not sure. The other
people know financial stuff way better than I do, but some combination. Okay. That's
the end of question five. Anybody else wanna say anything else on this pretty big,
complicated topic?
Cole/ One quick comment, Jim.
Throgmorton/ Sure!
Cole/ That we didn't talk about is the use of fees. One fabulous fee that we did is probably my
favorite fee I've ever paid is the two bucks that we all paid for our waste
recept.... receptacles. I think that was a great use, an illustration of, um, this past year or
so, uh, every resident in the City of Iowa City had to pay $2.00 and as a result of that got
our, um, various new recycling bins, garbage bins, and those sorts of things. The classic
illustration of everyone chipping in, just a little, and servicing the entire community. So I
think the fees, the staff was very creative in the use of fees as well.
Throgmorton/ Okay, Geoff, I think you got some pretty good feedback. I think (mumbled)
helpful for staff. Okay, we can turn to the next topic, which is clarification of agenda
items and I would like to suggest this. We have a long list of important and very
complicated topics to discuss in the remainder of our work session. So I wanna suggest
that we reserve our discussion of agenda items to the formal meeting, unless it's really
important for some particular topic. Otherwise, we could deal with the questions during
our formal meeting.
Clarification of Agenda Items:
Salih/ I really have one and I .... uh.....I guess this is on the like Housing Trust Fund contribution..
Teague/ 5d?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 22
Salih/ Where is the .... we have a memo right (several talking) Yeah, I .... I, on the memo they
have like, I guess five, A, B, C, D that the things they wanna see on the report every year.
Do you see this? Like....uh, let me just .... the Trust Fund will use the fund for affordable
housing project as follows: A, B, C, D. I just really need to add another item where, like
number five, here on number D. Look at number three, there is one, two, three, four. The
thing that they wanna see on the report.
Fruin/ For those tracking, you're looking at the memorandum of understanding. It's an
attachment to the staff report, after the resolution? (several talking)
Salih/ ...quarterly report must be provide to the City Neighborhood Service Coordinator
beginning January 1 st, 2020.
Fruin/ Yes.
Salih/ That's number D. Do you see there is four of them? One addressing developer, two is
amount of. ... I just wanna add another one, which is to tell us initial rent of the unit that
they being, like say if it's .... so we can just know how much of our money .... has reduced,
you know, rent for the .... the 30% of the area median income or for the, you know
(mumbled) just, I guess that figure they already have it. I just wanted to add it to the new
board, and so we can see like the City money, how much .... say if they said one bedroom
for this area; we provide like five bedroom; two of them are 30% of the area median
income and we renting it for 500 and if we know that the market price is say 700, we will
say, oh, our money (mumbled) reduce the, you know, this by this amount. So (both
talking)
Throgmorton/ Maz, if you don't mind, I ... think this sounds more like a substantive question of,
about amending something that's on our, uh, agenda, and we could pull that item (both
talking)
Salih/ Yeah!
Throgmorton/ ...and just (both talking)
Salih/ However you want it!
Throgmorton/ Cause here (both talking) ask questions and get responses to questions.
Salih/ Okay then. Can you pull it out? From the (both talking)
Information Packet Discussion [August 8. August 151:
Throgmorton/ Sure! What is this, 5....5.d? Okay, can we move on then to ... our information
packet discussion.... which would be the August 8th packet. Anything on that?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 23
Mims/ I just warm thank Angie Jordan for the nice, uh, thank you letter she sent for .... to Police
Department, Fire Department, and others, uh, for their support and attendance at the
National Night Out.
Taylor/ And Item 2, I'd like to thank the, uh, Police and Fire Department for the report on the, uh,
fireworks, over the fireworks season. Uh, it was great to see that the number of calls did
go down from last year. So, that was good!
Throgmorton/ Anything (mumbled) anything else in that packet?
Cole/ IP3, uh, I just encourage the public to review the, um, update on the, uh, Iowa City Public
Art strategic plan. Um, I encourage them to review that. I think that that's, you know,
we've had a lot of discussions about public art and it's nice to see some of those
discussions be, uh.... uh, made in the form of the actual (mumbled) encourage them to
read that. It's IP3.
Throgmorton/ Okay, can we move to the August 15th packet. So ... with regard to that, um,
maybe we could go to IP #4, which is .... has to do with the memo from Geoff about our
....an hourly position analysis. Geoff, you wanna walk us through that or .... Karen or, I
don't (both talking)
Fruin/ Well I think .... we've been through this, urn .... oh a few months ago with the two positions
in the Communications Division. So I won't go through all the .... all the analysis that we
did. You can see Ashley and Karen's memo that .... that follows my cover memo. It's 15,
16 pages long and details the .... the type of analysis that .... that went into this. Um, what
my memo does is it....it copies the summary table from their report and shows you the....
the estimated cost, um, for the conversion. Now that's a maximum cost. That assumes...
we're kind of assuming the worst-case scenario. By worst-case I just mean the most
costly scenario, um, which is the employees would select the family insurance, which is
most costly to the City. We subsidize that at a higher rate, or the .... the cost of the subsidy
is higher than if you were to choose a single or no insurance. Uh, so those cost figures
are there. Uh, it....it comes out to the equivalent of about 17 1/2 positions when you look
at that $865,000. Um, my recommendation is that you keep these hourly and that you
focus resources on, um, supplementing staff where we're seein' the most needs from a
service standpoint. I understand the desire to .... to move these to benefited positions and
I really appreciate where that's coming from, and I know our employees appreciate that. I
just see those service needs out there and I worry about, uh, using these funds, urn .... uh,
to .... to achieve that goal, but then kind of handcuffing ourselves to be able to expand
services, not only in this budget year but in coming budget years as well as we make our
way through the .... the final years of tax reform. I understand the Council, you may
wanna proceed. Uh, I gave you at the very end of my memo, um, a... a few positions
that I think would provide the most benefit, um, to .... to the, uh, to the public by, um,
moving them to a permanent status. And I also clarified that there are a... a couple of
hourly positions that have never been filled. These were new hourly positions that were
introduced in this year's budget. That is the Human Resource office assistant and GIS
technician. Those have never been filled, uh, because of this ongoing discussion and I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 24
would recommend that you just leave those vacant, as opposed to making them
permanent, because if I .... if I was to come to you with two positions, uh, two .... two new
permanent positions, they wouldn't be those two positions. They were ... I was fine
forwarding them on to you as hourly positions, but not permanent. So at a minimum I'd
suggest you ... you just eliminate those two positions, which again have never been filled.
We're happy to go through the detailed analysis, but given the time and .... and your
familiarity with that, um, from going through it a few months ago, we'll ... we'll hold off.
Throgmorton/ I'd like to ask a clar.... a clarifying question that maybe is best addressed to Ashley
and Karen Jennings. You had a memo in the packet as well that was attached to Geoff s.
If I understood correctly, it indicates that the nine positions are currently staffed by 39
temporary employees. So ... am I right in thinking that roughly 30 temporary employees
would lose their jobs? Not necessarily for an individual, but I'm just meanin' numbers.
Monroe/ Um, it's not a direct correlation. So for each position analysis, so we went from 39
individuals... within nine positions, and so just based on the needs for those positions.
Some departments had selected to keep them at two part-time positions so they wouldn't
all convert to a full-time position. Um, others there's a mix of full-time and part-time,
um, a range in some cases of part-time employees, some staying 20 hours, some going up
to 25 hours. Uh, just based on .... whatever the best case scenario for department needs
would be if we were to convert these to a higher level of responsibility, higher skill level,
um, or .... or no significant changes at all. Um, each .... each position was ana.... analyzed
by its own merits. So, um, we talked with AFSCME about which positions should be
considered, uh, we talked with the departments about what their operational needs were,
and so we took the status quo positions, which could stay the same or they could, um, be
altered in some way if they were to be converted to permanent. So I think there's only a
couple of positions that would be converted to a full-time position from part-time.
Mims/ But to clarify Jim's question, cause I had the same impression that I think you had, Jim,
based on your question. Is .... when I read this memo, it said because of our union
contract, if these are going to become permanent — whether they're part-time or full-time
— if they're going to become permanent, they come under the union, and .... all the people
that are currently holding these positions would have to be terminated.
Monroe/ Yes.
Mims/ And they would have to apply for .... that new position, whether it was still half-time or
.63 or converted to full.
Monroe/ Correct.
Mims/ And .... there is the possibility that with a number of these positions, you would be looking
at increasing the requirements and the responsibilities. Like I noticed in one or two, um,
bi-lingual preferred, that sort of thing. So from a procedural standpoint, we would have —
I counted 36, cause I (mumbled) three empty — but whatever, in the high 30s, we would
have that many people, 36, 39, whatever, who would get a termination notice, correct?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 25
Monroe/ Essentially, yes.
Mims/ Okay. And there would be these new positions with new job descriptions and .... and
hours of whether they're half-time, full-time, whatever, and the requirements for that
position, and the duties for that position, and they could, if they wanted to, apply for that
new position, and so we would have some I'm assuming who would get rehired into new
positions, and we would have some who would not, because other people of different or
higher skill levels would beat them out for those positions.
Fruin/ Or the position, you know, the hours requirement may be different, um, but I wanna
clarify the termination notice. I think how we would proceed would be that we would
post, we would keep the hourly positions and then post the permanent position. So....
they, it's .... we don't terminate first and then have (both talking)
Mims/ Okay.
Fruin/ ....nobody working.
Mims/ Right.
From/ We post first and then if they don't get the job (both talking)
Mims/ Then they're terminated.
Fruin/ The job is eliminated and they get terminated at the end. Um, to clarify, I think the best
example to use is the .... is the Parks and Rec customer service, cause there's the most
folks holding that position. And the number fluctuates, but when we did this report there
were 25 employees filling that role for us. Um, as we go forward with the permanent
structure, if you were to approve that, we would have four full-time employees and six
half-time employees. So you go from 25 employees to 10 employees. That means 15 of
them would no longer have a role with us. And it could be more than 15, because we
would post it and there could be others to, uh, externally or either .... or internally that
would, um, have more qualifications perhaps than some of those existing employees.
But, you know, again, some of those 25, they may not want full-time employment. So
it .... they may not choose .... they may choose not to apply for those because they liked the
20 hours or they like the 10 hours, whatever they may be working.
Mims/ Well when I look at this, urn .... I've got a number of concerns. I .... I certainly understand
the issue of wanting to, where we can, provide, um, benefits to employees, but I think
it's .... I think it's pretty typical with large organizations that you use a mix of full-time
permanent staff and hourly staff, and I .... my sense is that in many ways .... we struck a
pretty reasonable balance with this. Um, I have a concern of people, you know,
potentially more than just a handful of people losing their jobs, because of this change,
and these people may be very happy with the kind of schedule, um, that they have now
and if they .... if they aren't, well, they can look, you know, hopefully they're looking for
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 26
something maybe that suits them better. I'm concerned about kind of the opportunity
costs of where .... where do we put our money in terms of the kinds of personnel resources
we need to gi.... to give the best service to the members of this community. And I think
as.....as Geoff has made clear from his perspective, and I think he's probably got the best
perspective in terms of analyzing the whole thing, is .... making, doing these conversions
is not .... is not gonna give us a whole lot more in terms of the service to the community.
So spending potentially up to $800,000 -plus, um, in doing this versus being able to use
that money for other new hires, I don't think gives the members of our community kind of
the best bang for their buck. Um .... so.....and I'm really concerned about people losing
their jobs, as well.
Throgmorton/ What do the rest of you think?
Salih/ I .... I really think our goal as a Council wasn't the intention to fire nobody, and I respect
what Geoffs saying by advertising new things, having new skill, but don't forget all those
people they been working there for long time. They have experience, and they are well
qualified to do that job, better than bringing somebody new who never had experience.
That's number one. Number two, I would love to hear AFSCME, what your input on this,
if you don't mind, Mr. Mayor. If they can just tell us their input on this, because I wanna
hear from them.
Throgmorton/ I .... I think it would be okay, as long as nobody else objects. I would note though
before we actually invite somebody to come up that the memos we received document
ways in which the staff interacted with AFSCME to come up with the .... the data and the
information that it has.
Salih/ I understand, but I wanna hear it from them again, if you don't mind.
Throgmorton/ Who is in the best position to speak? Chris? Terri? (several talking in
background)
Byers/ We went through...... during the process, we went through a lot of (clears throat) excuse
me, jobs. We looked at how converting would disrupt operations. We looked at how
many people were doing the job. We found that some people were only working two or
three hours a week. We thought.... it's not really bang for your buck! There's.... there's a
phrase. Um, I also wanna point out, in 2007 we had 90 hourly employees. 2017 we have
over 300. Somethin' needs to be done, and .... we need to look at jobs. We need to look at
what people are doing and how it's contributing, and whether that job could be
permanent. Whether it should be hourly. But we don't need this many hourly, that many
permanents. We need to look at a balance. I think this .... this, what we started, it's a good
start. I would like to see all the jobs become permanent. I don't .... it's a budget thing, I
know that. I understand that. But I think...... City staff did work really hard on looking at
these jobs. I .... is it perfect? No! Is it what I would like to see? No. I would like to see
a commitment from the City to reduce the number of hourly jobs and create more
permanent jobs. That's what a union wants, and that's my viewpoint. Um, but in terms of
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 27
getting together and working together, I think we had a start, and that's... that's more than
we had a year ago.
Cole/ So the initial start would be these nine positions, like the unions behind them.
Salih/ And is those position, most of those position, work 20 hours or more, or as you said there
is some people only work three hours.
Byers/ The positions, if they were permanent, would be more than 20 hours.
Salih/ Okay!
Byers/ Twenty or more. And then, you know, it may not be convenient for the person who's in
that job, and you're right about that. But .... you may have somebody who only had 12
hours because there were other people doin' the job and now you have somebody who
could do 20 hours. So I mean it's a balance and it's not perfect and .... and a lot of stuff
with employment is not perfect. I mean .... they worked hard on it, we worked hard on it,
it was not easy to go down a list of people, and you see that there's 35 people doing four
jobs, but if you looked at the numbers and you looked at all the factors that came into it,
and to figure out that you might get 15 jobs out of ...out of that job, permanent jobs with
benefits, and.... retirement and IPERS and things like that that are all good things, and
things that draw people into the city, to work for the City. I think it was a good start. It's
not perfect!
Salih/ Exactly.
Cole/ ...cite that number again, how many full-time.....or how many hourly employees did the
City have in 2007?
Byers/ Ninety.
Cole/ And how do we .... how many do we have now?
Byers/ (several talking) close to 300.
Fruin/ I'd like to .... (both talking)
Byers/ But we don't have sea .... I mean the contract was different then and I'll clarify that too.
We had seasonal employees and we had other kinds of classifications in the contract for
employees. So that ... that's different, but .... it still has expanded, and it .... you know, every
division comes in and wants staff, and they ask for it at budget time. They don't
necessarily get it. They're kinda forced to make an hourly job if they need the people,
and that's something that .... that's bigger than a union. That's.... that's on their heads and I
can sit and say, 'Yep!' I can sit there and, sit back and say, 'Yep, they're not doin' that; but
1 understand the process and I do respect that they .... they did work hard on this. So it's a
start. It's not perfect. It's not 100% what we should have, but I think it's a start.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 28
Throgmorton/ Thanks, Terri.
Cole/ So my two cents on this is it's my understanding (both talking)
Salih/ I'm sorry, I just wanna continue (both talking) I just was trying to bring her and ... sorry, I
just wanna continue and you can take over. Yeah, so like just by listening to her now,
there is few people, maybe they will lose their job, as I said and those people are working
three hours or something like that. I don't think they are depending on health insurance
(unable to understand) less than 20 hours. Of course (unable to understand) I don't know,
but like nobody work like less than 20 hours somewhere and expect to have like health
insurance from that job, and the City has been .... those people, the 39 people, has been
working for years without like getting health insurance. Thirty-nine people was working
for years without living wage. Is that what the City want? Is that what the Council want
to continue doing, and we are supposed to set the, you know, the standard and the bar
high, and I .... I really thinks AFSCME made it clear and the, this is their
recommendations, and .... that what I really, as a City Council, warm see — the people
who work for the City, they have health insurance, and then I know that the number
865.... 865 is really like (unable to understand) number, but as I said earlier, 483 from
this is from the tax levy and, you know, coming from the, my understanding what it come
from the general fund would be 374 which is will be for the salary, and I thinks if we
(unable to understand) moving the City forward and we're really committing to our
community that the people who work for the City, they get what they need. We just
setting the standard high! And that what I think.
Throgmorton/ We're almost out of time here for the work session. We have at the most like
seven or eight minutes to go probably.
Taylor/ I just wanna quickly clarify something and .... and thank Terri for using the terminology
'permanent,' uh, cause all along I've been very confused by the number of classifications.
You got hourly, temporary, seasonal, full-time, part-time, permanent, and so I .... we're not
talking putting.... making these people all full-time. (both talking) the discussion is
temporary versus permanent.
Salih/ Uh huh.
Taylor/ .... so .... (both talking)
Salib/ Did I say full-time?
Taylor/ You said full-time (both talking)
Salih/ I mean permanent (both talking)
Taylor/ ...cause I'd like to see that practice stopped, of having all those different categories as
soon as we can, uh, because it was done to avoid paying, uh, benefits, including health
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 29
care. Just imagine that, 200 positions.... 210 positions over the last 10 years. That coulda
gone a lot towards some very significant (both talking)
Fruin/ Those numbers aren't accurate.
Taylor/ Oh, they're not, okay (both talking)
Fruin/ ...we can report back to you on those.
Taylor/ It still seems like a lot of money to be saved with calling them that and, uh, as well as the
orientation of these people. If they're comin' and going, you know, through a revolving
door constantly, uh, the cost alone orienting them is a phenomenal amount. Uh, so I think
a conversion needs to be done and I appreciate AFSCME's, uh, input into this and hope
they'll continue, uh, to monitor this and if they were agreeable, I'd be in favor of
continuing some of them now and....and over time, uh, converting the ones that would fit
in there.
Salih/ Sure.
Cole/ Should we wait, Jim, until after the meeting?
Throgmorton/ Well we .... we still have six minutes we can go. I'll express a view here. As I
indicated at the start of our discussion about the prior topic, I don't support, uh, spending
this amount of money for converting this number of employees from .... hourly to .... um,
permanent employee status. Uh, which is not to say I don't support our unions because
what I've advocated initially was that we hire new people to fill important jobs that we
discussed in our discussion right before this, but also .... I see good reasons to hire, to
convert some of these positions. I just don't think it's financially wise to convert all of
them. So I know that GeofPs memo recommends in non -rank order, as you put it, Geoff,
the Animal Center clerk, the Engineering clerical assistant, the Senior Center clerical
assistant, and then you also go into the Rec.... customer service attendants. I'm not sure
how many of them there are, and the total cost of that would be $466,000, if I read
correctly. So, I'm supportive of converting some of the nine positions, not all of them.
Thomas/ I kind of take a .... incremental approach to this. I ... I, in a way similar to how we
managed the, uh, hourly, you know ,moving toward 15 incrementally. Yeah, I tend to...
first of all I think it's very difficult to sort of pull out one particular issue related to our
budget and come to any kind of clarity as to what seems appropriate when we, you know,
this is much of a much larger discussion. I think it's very hard to assess what to do on
any particular thing without having an understanding of. ... of the big picture. Uh, but ... I
do support incrementally working towards the transition over a period of time, uh, with
trying to identify those positions where there would be the most benefit. I also would just
wanna quickly add that this is a very complicated issue. You know, I mean this whole
question of, uh, the organizational employment structure, uh, with temporaries and
permanents. I ... I've spoken before and in fact referenced when we've talked about the
minimum wage, uh, I think for me it's very important to understand what.... identifying
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 30
cities that we feel are of comparable complexity and have comparable values as cities, uh,
to have an understanding of how they structure their workforce. Um .... and just as a .... as
a point of information, I mean we may not agree but it would be useful for me to have an
understanding of that. My quickly, you know, in the days before this meeting, looked
into, into that with respect to Bloomington, Indiana, and Madison. Uh, some of their
temporaries have, um, worker .... work benefits, such as transit passes, healthcare coming
out of their... their wage, sick leave, holiday pay, retirement, overtime. So there are a
number of things that can be negotiated as benefits, uh, without changing the status from,
uh, hourly or seasonal to permanent, and we .... that wasn't part of our conversation.
So....
Fruin/ That .... we are prohibited from doing that through our collective bargaining agreement
with AFSCME.
Thomas/ Okay.
Fruin/ They would have to re .... agree to remove that provision and allow us to provide benefits
to those temporary employees. That's probably not likely to happen.
Thomas/ Okay.
Throgmorton/ Okay, anybody else want to address this topic?
Cole/ I think for me the big picture is .... is this, um, did not come out of, you know, thin air. It
was about 10 years ago that a management consultant, it's my understanding, was hired,
uh, with the process and the goal of reducing full-time employees for the City of Iowa
City, is my understanding, and that .... as a result of that process, a number of full-time
positions were converted to hourly positions to save money on behalf of the City, and I
think in terms of service to the taxpayer, I think it has done damage, uh, to the City in the
sense that those hourly employees are very talented, so I don't wanna impugn them, but
because they're not paid very much, and because they don't have a stake, there's a lot
more turnover. Some are long-term, but because we don't have those benefits, I think
customer service, for example, that is a very complicated position, I think. I don't think
it's simple, where you're interfacing with the public, in the .... in the rec centers, and I
think if we had more full-time people there, I think we would see a lot more stability of
service. I think that's important. So for me the big picture is .... is that I think we want to
at least communicate to the staff what the Council's values are in terms of negotiating
with AFSCME, um, that the .... the position of the City of Iowa City is that we want to
unwind the steps that were taken 10 years ago and move in the opposite direction, to .... to
restore a lot of those positions, incrementally, over time, consistent with the budget.
Hopefully that ... if we can instruct staff that that is our bargaining position, on a year -in,
year -out basis, reviewing the budget with AFSCME, uh, that they will come up with a set
of recommendations on an on-going bat .... basis to make sure that we have more and
more full-time and less and less hourly.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 31
Throgmorton/ That's a big topic, seems to me. Completely reasonable to suggest it. Big topic
though.
Dilkes/ I'm just not remembering the history that way at all. So I think we need to get that clear.
Cole/ Okay.
Throgmorton/ Okay, speaking of clarity, uh, we probably should .... take a break now. We haven't
fully resolved this. I think we're gonna have to come back to it after the (mumbled)
formal meeting. So we'll reconvene at 7:00, and then after the formal meeting visit the
rest of our work session agenda.
(Break to Formal meeting 6:44 pm — Returned to Work Session 9:48 p.m.)
Information Packet Discussion [August 8, August 151 (cont.):
Throgmorton/ All right, we're back in the work session. I need to take a, you know, couple
minute break but we could get started anyhow. Oh let's see, uh.... we had....
Salih/ (mumbled)
Throgmorton/ ...come pretty close to finishing our discussion about the hourly position analysis,
which was, uh, Item .... IN or whatever (mumbled) August 15th packet. So .... um .... let
me (both talking)
Salih/ ....finish that (both talking)
Cole/ ....just defer till next time?
Salih/ Yes!
Throgmorton/ Uh, you know, if y'all wanna defer, we can. Yeah.
Salih/ Because la .... I just last time you said, uh, you know, this is need like more time and it will
take our time (mumbled) have it (both talking)
Throgmorton/ Yeah, I mean if. ... if it's not a problem with, uh, staff. Okay. So (both talking)
Fruin/ It's not a time -sensitive issue for us.
Throgmorton/ We'll .... we'll pick up on the hourly, um .... position analysis during our next work
session.
Salih/ Hopefully we don't have a lot thing like this.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 32
Throgmorton/ Okay and then .... so I gotta find out where we are here. So .... the next item is IP5
and IP6, which has to do with Forest View development and .... I think y'all know that
we've received a .... a.....a letter from .... the now two co -presidents of. ... by way of Rafael
Morataya, we've received a letter from the two co -presidents of the Forest View Tenants
Association.....and they ask for a deferral of our discussion. They, uh.... they also have
asked that, um, they be able to meet with Geoff. I think I'm getting this right, Geoff, to
meet with Geoff and two Council Members. Is that right, I mean .... I think I'm conflating
a couple things but....
Salih/ Uh huh.
Fruin/ No, you're correct.
Salih/ That's true!
Throgmorton/ Yeah. So ... uh, I'd be happy to meet, but I .... I think it's really up to the Council, I
mean along with another Councilperson, but I really think it's up to the Council to figure
out who should attend, but .... (several talking) interested?
Mims/ I have a question with dividing up and only one or two Council Members getting this kind
of information. To me it.....to me what they wanna say should come to the whole
Council so we can kind of all hear the same thing and be part of that discussion, if there's
a discussion and .... you know, where we head. I .... I have a problem with an issue that
this .... this big and this important that just a couple Council Members (coughing, unable
to hear speaker)
Throgmorton/ Yeah, I .... I think, Maz knows more about what I'm going to mention here, but I
think there's some challenges that the Association is tryin' to process right now. I
understand that they had a lengthy meeting on Sunday out at Fore View .... Forest View,
and I understand a lot of people were present and there was a lot of conversation and you
were present, so you know, and I .... I know (both talking)
Salih/ (mumbled)
Throgmorton/ So I think .... it's not so much .... I mean, their concern is to how to proceed, I think,
but, Geoff, I know you've had some conversations. No?
Teague/ Is the concern that staff will be there and two Councilors?
Throgmorton/ (both talking)
Teague/ Because they can meet with two Councilors (both talking)
Salih/ Yes!
Teague/ ...request and Councilors could go.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 33
Throgmorton/ Tell me if I'm wrong, I think Rafael asked if it's possible for ...to meet with staff
and....
Fruin/ I think the bigger question is do .... do you want a sub -set of Council to be negotiating
economic development or financial incentive deals? That would be very non-traditional.
We would typically either have staff advance those or we would advance 'em through
your Economic Development Committee, um, and .... and vet'em that way. I've never
been a part of a situation where you have a .... a sub -set of Council and staff negotiating a
deal like .... like this. That would (several talking)
Mims/ ....deal then I (several talking)
Salih/ ...I don't think that what they want.
Throgmorton/ I don't think it is either but (both talking)
Salih/ Don't think, you don't understand, guys, maybe but I was there. They just need like ... I,
they don't wanna say we wanna meet with three, four Council Member, which is gonna
make quorum, but they would like to lay some option and discuss it with, uh, maybe the
staff and the developer and the Council and see if that could be possible, but before they
can present it, you know, sometime you like ... you gonna think about something that
maybe is really you cannot do it, by the law you cannot do it. So they need somebody to
be there. I don't think they wanna discuss a deal or anything, and everybody receive the
letter here, right? I ... I think, and that what it is, but it's not like negotiating the deal with,
like the (mumbled) development deals just you and two Council. No, no! And don't
think .... the developer will be there I guess that what they requesting, and it could be any
Council, whoever want to, you know, and it's not like (both talking)
Cole/ ....no decision to be made (both talking)
Salih/ No, no decision!
Cole/ Just let me finish! Um .... if there's no decision to be made, we realize that no Councilor
less than quorum has any authority whatsoever. They understand that, and assuming
there's no decision made at the meeting, um, you know, maybe.... whether it be directly
with Geoff or not, but we could do some two on ones where we're just getting
information. We're not telling, we're not communicating, we're no deciding, just getting
information, um, I .... I would be supportive of that. Obviously we cannot make any
decision (both talking)
Salih/ No you can not (both talking)
Throgmorton/ Hold on. Go ahead, Eleanor.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 34
Dilkes/ If the goal is to gather information and find out what is and is not a possibility, I mean
staff can provide that .... that (both talking)
Salih/ But if somebody requesting a Council Member to be attending, we cannot just say, you
know, if there is some Council willing to attend and they are not quorum, they only two
people and they .... they are not gonna make a decision! They will report to us (mumbled)
if they ask them anything, they will come here and we ask 'em if we need any
information, but .... why not? Any resident could request a Council Member to be like
attending as long as it's not a quorum and they are not making the decision for the whole
Council.
Taylor/ I .... I guess I must have, I apologize, I must have missed the memo. I saw the email that,
uh, requested, uh, the developers and City staff and, uh, but I didn't see the part about
requesting Council and I talked to Robin and Robin hadn't mentioned having a Council
Member. I mean the fall intent of the decision not really is a makeup of who's going to
be there but ... but wanting us to table discussion so that they have time, uh, to develop
or...or have, that addresses everybody's concerns, because apparently we had concerns
about this development and the size of the .... of the modulars and apparently a number of
the residents did also, and they just want a little bit extra, uh, like planning time and some
conversations, but, uh, I don't think we necessarily have to insist a Council Member be
there but if City staff is there, I think that was the prime thing they really wanted to be
sure, uh, somebody from the City was there.
Salih/ I just think it's up to a Council Member. They requesting and if there is Council Member
wanna attend, I can say I wanna attend, I can attend. Yeah it's a public meeting, I'm not
going on behalf of you.
Taylor/ Right.
Salih/ ...or I'm not making decision. That's why I think this is completely up to the Council if
they wanna attend or not.
Dilkes/ I agree, I mean of course it's completely up to the Council. I think what .... what we're
trying to do is just identify what the purpose of it is. I think it's an awkward position for
staff to be in, at times, to be there with two Council Members, not knowing what the
position of the Council is, um, it's a very .... you know, I'm not sure if the Council
Members are just supposed to be listening rather than giving their own personal opinion
or what .... what the function of the, what.... what the result, what the intended result is.
(both talking) in terms of providing information, we're certainly.....we have done that on
numerous occasions and can continue to do that.
Salih/ For example, if like I went to community event and somebody ask me my personal
opinion, and somebody was there, like Geoff. I .... I can say my personal opinion, as long
as I'm not saying this is the Council opinion. And still, if they been there with.....what
the problem they been there with the staff and they saying their personal opinion, is that a
problem? By the law?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 35
Dilkes/ I .... I think it's not a .... a good situation, but again, it's the Council's decision.
Salih/ No, you know, this situation that from your point of view. I know you are the legal adviser
here. Tell me, is this legal or unlegal? Are we gonna be holding accountable because we
done this, or this is legally it's okay.
Dilkes/ It is legal for you to meet, and I have said it is your decision. I don't think it's an
advisable decision to make.
Salih/ Like according to what, like is there a law supporting that or you, that's your opinion?
Dilkes/ I give lots of opinions that are based on what I think ultimately will be the .... the good
outcome that will serve the Council.
Mims/ My concern in having Council Members go to this is .... the .... the expectation of
individuals there of getting input from, advice from, recommendations from Council
Members, urn .... that then one, they may either rely on and other Council Members aren't
in agreement, and/or then we end up with certain Council Members that have one set of
information and other Councils don't have that same set of information in terms of
making final decisions. I think .... I'm not quite sure how you go into a meeting like this if
there isn't some kind of at least informal negotiation, um, and discussion about how to
resolve the problems, and I think that at this stage is best left to staff and .... and the
residents and the developer, and then that's.... brought back to all of us as an entire body
to look at and discuss. Otherwise I think if people, if. ... if Councilors do choose to go, I
quite frankly think that you should go and not say a word and simply listen. I .... I really
don't think you should have any .... and I think it seems rude, but I really think that's what
should happen because otherwise I think there's a potential problem with that
communication.
Salib/ I don't think there is a problem here, but .... legally there is no problem, but this is up to
YOU guys.
Cole/ Why don't we just have .... the residents, the developer, and staff meet, and then if the
individual residents, I mean they can always approach us individually, right, I mean for
questions, and then we will get the staff memo and then we can also approach staff
individually with our own individual concerns and questions. So if we want to we can
have that individual contact, um, I think that we can sort of have the best of both worlds,
as far as I'm concerned, that we'll get the individual contact with the residents, staff 11
meet .... I think you're really worried that, you know, unconsciously we'll sort of put our
thumb on the scales, one way or another creating expectation at the Council at large, even
though we don't have that authority the residents may perceive that we .... that we do. So
I think that makes sense.
Throgmorton/ Yeah (clears throat) I ... I think there's a lot goin' on beneath the surface, in ways
that I don't warm talk about at the moment, and I think that, um, it would be unwise of
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 36
more than one of us to meet in this particular situa.... kind of situation, uh, not knowing
precisely what the topic would be and what the expectations would be. Uh, I .... I think...
I have had, uh, one-to-one conversations with.... various people, uh, who are involved in
this, and I think that's completely appropriate, but .... I do that with ... just about (laughs)
everything. So .... I.....I..... I think because I believe there's more goin' on beneath the
surface, that we need to have the staff try to meet, well meet with the, uh, the tenants
association and its new two co -presidents, and, uh, presumably with Rafael, presumably
with Charlie. It depends on who they wanna have present. Presum.... I don't understand
why the developers not involved in this particular request, but .... there you go. Uh, and
....and that, uh.... uh, I don't ... how do I wanna put this? Um.....I..... I think that kind of
meeting should take place ... oh, the other thing I'm thinkin' about is part of what's goin' on
is there's lots of challenges having to do with language and .... two different kind of
language — English and commun... uh, the difficulty of translating, but also the complexity
of zoning codes and subdivision regulations, and financial stuff. It's my understanding
that it .... that is tremendously complicated, especially when you're tryin' to translate it
into another language for people who have no familiarity whatsoever with these kinds of
things. So....I.....I think maybe we're gonna have to help sort that out, but I don't think
the Council should be directly involved in givin' that out .... doin' that. Uh, okay. So I
think that means .... tell me if I'm wrong. (several talking) So I .... what I'm understanding
is that we should ask staff to respond and try to arrange something, so that staff can meet
with, uh, with the tenants association and whoever, uh, else they warm have present.
And, uh, and see how that goes.
Teague/ I think I would just mention, um, it .... to the, uh, Forest View Tenant Association, it does
sound like they're tryin' to do a, uh, collaborative effort to inform .... uh, Council, staff,
or .... and .... and maybe even to help'em navigate maybe some of their ideas. I ... I do
agree with the perception of Councilors bein' there, urn .... I don't know that we can... of
course we are directin' staff, at this point, to reach out to them and be a part of that. Um,
I don't know that we have the ability as a Council to restrict anyone, staff or I'm song, a
Councilor from showin' up. So, urn .... but I do hear the concern and I do encourage the
Forest View residents to reach out to Councilors. I think that is somethin' that any
resident, anybody can do. So that's what I would encourage 'em to do, in a collaborative
effort to, um, one-on-one, um, or two -on -two or whatever you warm do, uh, to reach out
to Councilors. I .... I would agree, um, that just from a perception of...of Council
Members bein' there, potentially could not be the best situation given where the situation
is at this point.
Throgmorton/ Okay, I think we have a clear.... set of guidance for the staff here, comin' from the
Council majority.
Salih/ But if any Council would like to show up, I guess it's still the staff cannot say no. We have
to make that clear. (both talking) No.
Dilkes/ Actually we could. It's a private meeting; it's not a public meeting.
Salih/ No, if they invite us to this meeting, I guess it's up to the Council, don't you agree?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 37
Dilkes/ If you come as a representative of the tenants association, yes. I don't think that is wise,
given your position on the Council.
Salih/ No, but I'm telling you again, unless you provide me a code, saying that if some people of
the community ask me to attend the meeting, and I cannot like ...... I cannot attend it, if
the Council said (laughs) I cannot but nobody said you cannot. They say it's up to the
Council but they don't recommend it. But .... nothing that will (both talking)
Dilkes/ I think we talked before about the conflict of interest issues and I don't think you should
be involved.
Salih/ No, you didn't say that! Give me a clear something the law saying that. Otherwise I'm not
gonna listen to that, so.....
Dilkes/ That's fine.
Salih/ Yeah.
Dilkes/ That's fine.
Salib/ By the way, I'm saying that just in case (mumbled) I have another thing that preventin' me
from coming to those kind of meeting because at least I have my boss will be there. I
don't have like for me it will be like awkward to be there. I'm not going, but I'm saying
that you cannot (unable to understand) somebody else, you know, from coming to the
Council, just because of that. And I ask you three time, you say no but it's not, I give you
advice, it's not preferable to be there, but nobody say there is clear no, preventing you
from being there if I been ask by the community to come.
Throgmorton/ You are getting advice from the City Attorney (both talking)
Salih/ I'm sorry sir... (both talking)
Throgmorton/ Let me finish, please! Then the advice is that you would be opening yourself up
to a charge .... not a charge, whatever the word is, uh, to an obvious conflict of interest,
and if you're in that kind of situation, ordinarily you're expected to recuse yourself from
decisions involving this .... the topic about which you have a conflict of interest. So if
you ... if you do...
Salih/ Why, if I was present there I did not say anything about the rest of the Council decision, or
supporting anything or ... just .... what the problem here? How is a conflict of interest?
Throgmorton/ Boy I tell ya how I think if there's a conflict of interest (both talking)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 38
Salih/ And don't talk about me, I'm saying for example it's Bruce, you know, don't talk about me
personally because I have my own reason, but give me an example. Bruce, for example,
okay? Bruce is going to attend the meeting. What the conflict of interest here?
Throgmorton/ I .... I think the situation's different but, uh....
Salih/ I'm not talkin' about myself. I tell you I have many reason not to attend that meeting,
because that ... I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about you cannot tell Council what
to do in this case, and I say don't talk about me. I'm talking about Council Member.
Bruce is attending the meeting. Where is the conflict of interest?
Dilkes/ Does the rest of Council want me to continue to advise Council Member Salih?
Salih/ What? I'm askin', I have a question.
Throgmorton/ Of course.
Taylor/ Explain her conflict.
Dilkes/ No, I do not think it would be a conflict of interest if Council Member Teague attended.
Salih/ Yeah, that's what I was saying. By the way, I wasn't intend to attend the meeting, not
because of what you telling me. Because you never told me that, and ... about like don't go
to this specific meeting. I was not going because I have my manager there, you know,
and I'm .... I cannot, two of us cannot be in the same place because I have something else,
but that's .... if not that, I wanted to know if there is conflict with this because you did not
say that in the beginning, you know, while we were talking... you are saying general. The
Council Member, you don't advise them to go. You are not saying, Mazahir Salih, you
cannot go. Next time please be clear! Thank you.
Throgmorton/ You know I think given the time and given the situation, we should not try to do
the last three items unless it's absolutely necessary that we do that.
Cole/ Yeah, I .... I .... let's defer. (several talking)
Taylor/ One quick thing, sorry! It was an item in the correspondence that I had, um, talked to
Eleanor about and I think maybe some of the other Councilors had questions about it, the
bike lanes and all kinds of legal, uh, statutes were stated and we were violating all these
rules and regulations and I just quickly asked Eleanor and she sent me just a very brief
statement that '11 only take her 90 seconds, uh, to reiterate, cause I just wanted to relieve
some concerns that I had that .... that, are we violating these rules about these bike lanes.
Is that okay? (mumbled) Sony!
Dilkes/ This is I think the correspondence that Pauline's referring to is, was the one from David
Dixon on the Clinton Street. Um, and what I told Pauline was that the answer to the
liability question that he raised in that communication was that the City has immunity
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.
Page 39
when faced with a claim that negligent design of a street caused injury or damage, if the
City can demonstrate that the reconstruction was done "in accordance with a generally
recognized engineering or safety standard criteria or design theory in existence of the
reconstruction." Um, staff understands that standard. They've understood it for years.
While I cannot address the specific design elements that were present on Clinton Street,
uh, it's my understanding that the Clinton Street plans were .... were done by an engineer
and those plans were stamped.
Taylor/ Thank you, Eleanor.
Throgmorton/ Okay, so without objection we're gonna defer discussion of these last three items
to our next meeting.
Cole/ I'll move to adjourn.
Throgmorton/ Well you don't have to move, so .... we don't have to move to adjourn so we are
adjourned (laughter)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council work
session of August 20, 2019.