City Council - Regular Meeting

Be giving you enough space. Josh, I can switch my stuff over a little bit. Over Okay. >> That's the thing. That's the thing. >> That's really good thing. Anyway. >> I'll be bugging you and everybody I know about it because I know. All right. >> It is 4 p.m. on Tuesday, February 3rd, 2026. I want to welcome everyone to the Iowa City Conference Board agenda meeting, and I'm going to call the meeting to order. Roll call, please.

Iowa City Council alter here. Bergus. Here. Harmsen. Here. Here. Here. Here. Here. Johnson County supervisors Here. Remington. Sullivan.

Here. >> Iowa city board of Education. Abraham. Here. Eastham. Here. >> All right, well, welcome to everyone that is joining us from the other municipalities. We're going to move on to item number C. Can I get a motion to approve to approve the minutes of September 16th, 2025 from the conference board meeting. >> So moved second. >> So moved by. Rod County, seconded by the city. Roll call, please.

City council. Alter. Yes. Bergus. Yes. Harmsen. Yes. Yes. Yes. Teague. Yes. Yes. Supervisors. Fitzmorris. Remington. Sullivan. Yes. School board. Abraham. Eastham. High. Yes. >> All right. We are on to item number D, which is the fiscal year 2027 budget. And I will probably just turn it over to you.

Yes. Thank you. my name is Brad Colmer. I'm the Iowa City assessor. our budget is included in your packet. around 80% of our budget is personnel. So it doesn't change drastically from year to year. But in salaries, we've budgeted a range of 3.75 to 4.25 increase for our staff. Those numbers do include Cola and merit. We do have one appraiser position that's currently open. It's been open for a little while, and I've kept that salary flat. I don't have any immediate plans to fill that position. cost savings and potential legislation have kind of played a factor into that. big change in the budget. The health insurance, according to Johnson County's HR, was going up 9.64%. postage and printing are two that we we change every other year. We mail out assessments to everyone in the odd numbered years. So this is this. This is for the fiscal year 27. We would be mailing assessments to everybody adding 2000 to our auto replacement reserve. We have three cars, a 2010, 2016 and a 2022. don't have any immediate plans to add, but we just keep putting a little more in there. I think we have 24,000 in there. Maybe. yeah. On that cycle, we'd probably be due for another 1 in 2028. Maybe, but we'll see. I mean, no, no rush. so overall, the proposed budget shows a total increase of 63,932 or 4.87%, but there's just a 1.98% increase, or $21,090 in the amount that we would be. that would be raised by taxation. delaying the higher of that open position is kind of helped us keep that number low. And in addition, I guess I'd like to thank my evaluation committee of Mandy Remington, Josh Moe and

Ruthina Malone. And I'm happy to answer questions if anyone has any >> President or Mayor Teague. I'm sorry. Brad, could you just go over your opinions about the effect of not filling that position will be on the on accomplishing your duties. >> I don't feel like it's hindered us too much at this point. and that's why we haven't done anything. I, I've also I've asked input from our staff. They're kind of happy with the staff that we have statistics wise, the numbers still look pretty good. We're getting the work done. So, I it seems like it's okay to leave it vacant and and just kind of monitor the situation. We we used to prior to 2010, our office had six employees. We have we're at six right now. In 2010, we hired someone to for our full time reappraisal where we had somebody going door to door all the time. Over time. And we had two people that were full time office. Now we just have one full time office. We have two people that are in the field a lot. And and we have actually five of our six people are do appraisal work, including me. So I kind of feel like we're more efficient maybe than we than we were in the past. And it's possible that six is enough. But I'm not sure that I'm ready to commit to that. >> Okay. Thank you very much.

All right. Any other comments? All right. Can I get a motion to approve the publication of the proposed budget? >> So moved. Second. >> All right. Moved by school board, seconded by the city of Iowa City. Roll call please. Who? Seconded. >> City of Josh. Josh Councilor Moe. >> From both. Oh. All right. roll call. Alter. Yes. Bergus. Yes. Harmsen. Yes. >> Yes. Yes. Teague. Yes. Yes. Supervisors fix mores. Remington. Sullivan. Yes. School board. Abraham. Eastham. >> Yes.

Motion passes. We're on to item number E. Can I get a motion to set the date for the public hearing? There's a suggested date of March 10th, 2026. So moved. >> Second alter. Are you ready to move forward with that. Roll call? Please? Any discussion on that before we that does that date seem okay? All right. Roll call, please. >> City council alter. Yes. Bergus. Yes. Harmsen. >> Yes. Yes. >> Yes. Teague. Yes. Yes. Supervisor. Myers. Yes. Remington. Sullivan. Yes. School board. Abraham. >> Yes. Eastham. >> Yes.

All right. Approved. Motion passes. we're on to item number F, which is present. Board of review applications. there is one appointment. I'd like to. >> Nominate. Ryan O'Leary, based on his background in commercial real estate for this position. >> We have.

Great applicants, but he has a very specific skill set that would be useful for this particular board. As I understand it. >> Any other number nominations? Any other nominations hearing? None. could I get approval for Ryan O'Leary to the Board of Review? I'll move. >> For that nomination. Is that. By city of Iowa City? >> Second. Seconded by the county roll call, please. Alter. >> Yes. Bergus. Yes. Harmsen. >> Yes. Yes. >> Yes. Teague. Yes.

Yes. Fitzmaurice. Remington. Sullivan. Yes. Abraham. Yes. Eastham. >> Yes. Motion passes. We're item number G. Board comments. Any any thoughts by anyone? >> I say this every time, but it's true every time. Brad's office not only does a great job that shows up statistically versus all the other offices in the state, but they're just great people to have in the building. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. We're going to move on to item number H, which is adjournment. Could I get a motion, please? >> So moved. Second. >> Moved by the city. Second seconded by the county. Roll call, please.

Alter. >> Yes. Bergus. Yes. Harmsen. >> Yes. Yes. >> Yes. Teague. Yes. Yes. Morris. Yes. Remington. Sullivan. >> Yes. Abraham. Yes. Eastham. >> Yes. Motion passes. We're adjourned. Enjoy the rest of today. >> See you all. Nice.

Meeting. >> School board has a meeting. Have fun >> Yeah. So straightforward Let's go. Do I have IP? IP? Yeah. Our principal informal. Thank you. You too. Work session agenda. Or is it just continue. Budget discussion. >> Oh. Come on. I think that it's just. I don't remember seeing it. I know what we're doing, I just didn't. >> Yeah, thanks. I mean,

There is there is an agenda for work. Oh. I'm sorry, I guess I didn't see it when I looked over the weekend, but I don't think it was there early last week or late last week. Okay. I remember kind of being confused to, like, on Friday. Okay. No, no, no, he was just asking about the agenda itself. Yeah. No

All right. >> Bless you. Bless you, bless you. All right. It is February 3rd, 2026. And this is the City of Iowa City work session. I'm going to call it to order. And the first item is the University of Iowa Student Government updates. USG. Welcome.

Hi. Okay, so first on agenda. Currently we have some our Director of Student Services who is in the current stages of a program that would coincide with our like with the lease gap, essentially to work and make the storage units and Iowa City more affordable for our students, because that is in high demand during that time. We also have some senators working on an initiative to revamp the bike repair stations downtown in Iowa City. Also, along our campus, just to encourage alternate transportation >> Great

Yeah. And then also some bigger announcements. We've got Dance Marathon happening this weekend. I'm sure you guys all know what Dance Marathon is, but it's a fundraiser we do every year. specifically for childhood cancer. And we will have some USG representatives because we do give a big donation to them every year. I can't remember off the top of my head how much it is, but it's a couple thousand dollars. And then also town hall. Our town hall is next week. I apologize again for the late notice. We had some scheduling issues on our side. but we have given all of our senators a cheat sheet and presentation like we did last year, so hopefully they'll come with some really good, informed questions for you all. and we look forward to it. So thank you. >> Great. Thank you. All right. We're going to move on to item number two. Clarification of agenda items. I'm going to move on to item number three information packet discussion January 22nd.

Just like to say thanks for the Housing Authority strategic plan, which represents a ton of work and is really helpful to sort of put a lot of the work session topics into one document. So thank you for your work on that.

I was going to flag that as well. And just a question for staff. If we have any thoughts yet on how to kind of publicly present our this, this journey that we're going on as a city and just, you know, I think this document is a great example of something that's really digestible and probably would be of interest to the public, just as we're, you know, just to put that idea out there of making this public facing and easily accessible. >> Yeah, it's a good, great point. And it's definitely on our list. We're currently working to try to secure an intern for the summer to work on just that project, kind of that branding and that storytelling.

Cool, cool. Great. Thank you. >> All right. We'll move on to January 29th. Some of that probably come up in our next agenda item. >> But. All right, we'll move on to item number four, fiscal year 2027 budget discussion And I'll turn it over to our city manager just to kind of get us started.

Yeah. Just a quick introduction. So on page 61 of your information packet on the 29th there, there's a memo from Kirk Lehman, assistant city manager, that just tried to encapsulate your your, conversation at the end of our budget meeting on January 24th. it sounded like most of your follow up budget discussions, if not all, were going to focus on local option sales tax and the staff's recommendations on how to expend those dollars. So we've listed the topics that were mentioned at that work session that you'd like to follow up on. We're happy to provide some support for that discussion. If it would be helpful. the only thing that we've really prepared at your request was a a deeper dive into the Arts and Culture endowment. recommendation. So at some point tonight, if you would like, we've got a slide deck of about 8 or 9 slides. I think that give you a deeper dive into the thought process there and how that would work. we also have Shelley Mary here from the, Community Foundation who can answer any questions about endowments that would be stewarded at that location.

Might be helpful just to go ahead with the presentation for the arts and culture, just so that the council can get that review. Okay. Sounds good. >> Agreed

Okay, I didn't fall, I feel better. Rachel Kilburg Varley put this together. She's our economic development director, as you know, and is really the mastermind behind this proposal. Unfortunately, Rachel caught the flu bug that is going around quite a bit here in town and is unable to join tonight. So, again, you get the B team back up here. I'll do my best to give you this overview though. So, with our arts and culture funding, remember we're talking about the partnership piece of the lost recommendation. And really want to talk about some of the the reasons that led to this recommendation. What are those driving factors? So first of all, we've had status quo funding for our arts organizations for several years. And you've heard that, concern from all of those arts organizations. it's not just our budgets that are being challenged these last few years. Every organization, every household has budget challenges. And when we haven't been able to increase our support for those organizations, they can do less for the community. we've also had really inconsistent and unclear funding processes over time. If you look at the history of how these organizations were funded, they were usually one off requests, meaning there wasn't a moment in time. And when we put out a call to support arts and culture organizations, it was a decision. In 2007 to fund this organization. In 2012 to fund this organization. And there's never really been a holistic look at how we do that or metrics and really some decisions on why we're funding them and what we hope to get out of it. and then the last piece is we've seen over the last couple of years, just a really encouraging effort amongst the arts community to work together. and we're seeing more of that from fundraising together, like the strength and grow evolved to

doing things like Free Week, which is upon us again. so we see a really opportunity, a real opportunity to, to kind of leverage that spirit of collaboration through a shared endowment strategy. these are the goals that we shared with you last time. So we hope that what lost will be able to unlock is increasing those long, stagnant operating supports that we've been able to provide, and allow those organizations to continue to meet the demands from the community. we want to facilitate and encourage that collaboration. Right. We know that that's a hard thing to sustain. So how can we play a role in encouraging the long term collaboration? we all know that there's pressure in the general fund. That's been a lot of our talk about budgets the last few years. And this strategy aims to remove those arts organizations out of the general fund. So they're no longer competing with those core services, and they have a more stable funding source that can continue to grow despite whatever challenges we may have in that general fund. And then to partner with the Community Foundation to leverage the city funding and create opportunities for potentially the community to to participate in a shared investment in the arts. So that's what's driving behind here. I'm going to show you this screen a couple of times. So first, I just want to kind of point out the three pronged investment strategy here. And then the three funding sources that are involved. And then we'll circle back to each of these. But from a support standpoint, what we envision is being able to fund that organizations directly. That's that middle column in the green box there. The organizational operation support. we hope to fund that endowment. and then on the left side is that Arts Alliance. And the caveat or the asterisk I need to put with the Arts Alliance is there's still some decisions being made on whether an arts alliance is needed and what that

may look like. So we don't want to focus too much on whether it's the Arts Alliance or not. If there's a decision not to pursue an arts alliance, those dollars can be shifted over into the organizational support or the endowment and still get us to where we want to be. from the funding force funding source side of things. Right now, we're just reliant on the general fund, which, again, has led to stagnant funding. So that's that middle column there. You can see our goal is to slowly draw down that general funding to to to to eventually zero and then rely long term on lost. And the endowment.

Did I understand you correctly that if the Arts Alliance doesn't come into fruition, that we would still, utilize this financing opportunity through the Community Foundation? >> That's correct. Yes, yeah. I have a maybe related interim question, and that would be there's time and effort required in understanding distribution of funds and how the person holder, the organization holding the funds and how our organization would, would work with distribution. What do you imagine that time frame being and what is the interim? Is it just in the city budget? Is it money rolling around in the city budget until we establish the actual parameters around the organization that would hold the money and the distribution.

Of that money? Yeah, we'll get to that a little bit down the road here, but at least initially I would envision the city retain full control of this probably for several years. Right. If it gets to the point in the future where there's an established arts alliance and we have the confidence to give decision making, capabilities over to the Arts Alliance on how to distribute those funds. I think a future staff and council could could figure that out. But for right now, even if we create an endowment, we would still control how those funds are dispersed. And we can get into that. And Shelley can help kind of talk about how those could be, you know, how those constraints can, can work. >> And have an sorry. Have we had any updates? Because I know that they've had a few the Arts Alliance working group, if you will, has had meetings. I've talked to some of the folks I know. There's been discussion about scope and, countywide, citywide region of the citywide those are some of the discussions that we're having that they were having, have you been updated on any, or have you been updated on the status of, like, how people are feeling? the direction it's going.

So the last conversation I had with the arts organizations was, early January. And at that time, there was, I think, a sense of, optimism that there would be a path forward. But, I know there were several decisions, including the scope, the geographic scope to be worked out. And I don't know what the latest is there.

Okay. Thank you. >> I think to being on the UNESCO board that that the sense of optimism, I think that's a fair characterization of looking at this because that you know, has been an organization that has been stagnant. and the director has actually reduced like basically done a self-imposed furlough to reduce his salary by in exchange for like days off. And so just to keep the budget, you know, active and keep that organization flowing. And, of course, as we know, UNESCO, because it's a UN related thing, is under a variety of different attacks. So well, we haven't I haven't had a chance to, haven't had that meeting since this actually more details came out, but yes, that I would just, I would just support to what the city manager was saying about a sense of optimism with this plan. So cool.

So just to dive a little bit deeper into how we envision this, and this is all subject to change, right? Just like a lot of these last recommendations, I expect you'll get some public input on it. And over time, we may have to evolve this strategy. But as we're thinking about it right now, year one is really a an initial 10% bump for those arts organizations that we've historically funded. And we would seed the endowment at that point, and we would potentially seed that arts alliance in year two. That's when we would step back. We would provide additional direct support for those organizations. But we take a holistic look at how we're funding those. And so there may be a process in which we're establishing metrics that are agreed upon with you all, with those arts organizations, so that we can, have some sort of sense that those dollars are being distributed fairly amongst the organizations. And that's when we would probably recommend that we bring in PS1 as one of those kind of core arts organizations that are working together right now. PS1 has asked for a couple years now to be included, and we've not pursued that. We would see that happening in year two under a more holistic review of our distributions and that three through six period years three through six. That's when we're growing. That's when that endowment is growing. The alliance perhaps, is getting its feet under it. And we're really focused on achieving that long term goal of financial independence from the general fund. And then year six is our projections for when we think we can transition from the general fund. And when that draw on that endowment can, can start to be envisioned and take the place. We also think we can reduce some of those lost dollars. And I'll walk you through a little bit of that here with this same slide deck or same table that you saw before. So the first thing, in these green boxes, you can see when we are providing the organizations more direct

support. So we go from where we're at now, which is $249,000. And we would initially do a 10% increase and then follow that up with another 15% increase. So we're looking at a 25% increase in direct contributions over those first two years of lost. And then we project it would remain stable until that fiscal year 32 to 33. It would jump again. We see an opportunity to to jump it again. There again, depending on where the Arts Alliance goes, these numbers may shift a little bit. the next piece I would point out is on the other side, the funding source side, we just again flag that that 3233 column there. and that shows you where the general fund would no longer be supporting those arts organizations. Also, where our lost contribution can be brought back down. So we go from half half a million to 350,000, and that means the city Council at that time would be able to redeploy those lost funds to other community needs. And how we can do that is because that endowment that we've been investing in for those first six years starts to pay off as we draw off that endowment. the last piece I would note is that there is some flexibility here. So on that funding source side, which would be on the right side of the screen, you can see you can see that between lost and the endowment draw at 4%, we would project about 480,000 to be available. And on the left hand side, we're only projecting those $430,000 worth of expenses. So that gives some flexibility. Right. we could not draw as much down off the endowment at that time. We could add more direct organizational support. We could do any number of things based on the information we have at that time. This is the endowment model. So you can see those lost contributions on the left hand side. Those are those annual contributions from the city. Again, we would envision this to be a fund that anybody in the community could contribute to. So hopefully some people would

be compelled to invest holistically in the arts for our community. And those numbers would just, grow larger. We've anticipated a 7% return, which I think is very conservative, based on the impressive track record at the Community Foundation. And then we've calculated what that spending draw may look like if we're at 4% with the administrative fee as well, and you can just kind of see how that builds over time. And even when we start to draw down how that can still slowly build if we're not pulling more than that 4%. >> is there any precedent for there being endowments like this for arts programs that we've looked into in other cities and stuff like that? And if so, I'm wondering what the precedent of convincing large arts organizations like, I know PS1 a couple years back got a pretty large grant from the Andy Warhol organization. I guess maybe I'm just thinking that we have Grant. Grant writers like County does. Like, have we thought about reaching out to some of those organizations and would is that something that's been done, like grants being put into an endowment like this for the arts?

I would imagine. So I might Shelley may have more knowledge of that. I would think it's I think we're in a little bit of a rare position in which we're using general fund dollars to invest in the arts. I don't think a lot of communities prioritize investment in the arts, like like this community has done for a long time. oftentimes you do see community endowments, but they're not necessarily backed by city funding. so I don't think the, the concept of a community endowment for the arts would be rare at all. perhaps having it completely seated by the city might be a little more rare. Is that kind of looking at Shelley? If that's a fair characterization, I just. >> Made a note to do some research. >> Okay.

And the Arts Alliance isn't I mean, there are examples of arts alliances that, we should be able to look at to see if they have some grants embedded. and however they do their funding, if there's an endowment could look at that as well. Yeah. I just think it would be cool if like score we got $100,000 grant one year and then that money could be diverted or added yeah.

Yeah, absolutely. this slide just kind of reiterates those goals and, and some of the principles I really want to stress. Like, we're at a moment in time when there's good collaboration. That's not always the case. And that's not just arts organizations. Right. That's that's nonprofits. That's government agencies. So, I think we're at an opportunity where we can do this. Now, we may not be able to do it five years from now or ten years from now. We don't know what that landscape's going to look like. So really want to try to strike while we have that good synergy. this is a little bit more about the management of that endowment. and again, I would defer to Shelley to kind of advise you on how that could look like. But essentially this council would be setting the rules for that endowment. Right? You would be describing what the goals and what the purpose is and what the funding constraints would be. And then Shelley and her team would ensure that the distributions follow whatever framework you set forth. So that would be that would be something that would take several months of work with us. And then between us and the community Foundation staff, and then we would present that back to you all and make sure you're comfortable with it. But we can answer those questions if you'd like, and I'd ask for some help with Shelley, since she was gracious enough to attend.

The maximum spending draw is 5% just for any community foundation. Is that correct >> Yes. That's correct. Okay, great. Welcome, Council.

Good evening. Afternoon. Evening. we're the community Foundation is really delighted to be considered as a partner to make this arts alliance. endowment happen. It's a great investment in such a treasured set of organizations that really make the framework of all the great things happening here in Iowa City. I wanted to make a couple clear points about the endowment, so we are able to set up the endowment to ensure that the investment in Iowa City, if it is needed to remain benefiting Iowa City based arts organizations, that we can do that. There's there's communication about wanting this to be a tool for other donors to give. And if it should be a situation where the Arts Alliance is actually Johnson County, and that creates a gray area, we can we can deal with that with a separate kind of Johnson County endowment fund that continues to support maybe broader Arts Alliance organizations outside of Iowa City. another point that was made regarding grants. So partnering with the Community Foundation to have any fund is a wonderful opportunity for grant making. We are a 501 c, three tax exempt organization. Some granting opportunities do not allow municipalities to apply for grant funding, and especially in a situation where we're bringing multiple organizations together to do something greater than one organization, having a community foundation as the applicant, so to speak, pulls all those pieces together in one organization. So we could be helpful in that regard as well. So great opportunity there. we would look forward to being stewards of the resources. And again, we would work together on defining the fund agreement of how the endowment would work. And full discretion on who would

receive the the grants, how they would be distributed, whether it be designated to specific organizations now or perhaps through an application process or whatever the whatever the parameters might be, will work together to ensure that happens. donors also are eligible for the endow Iowa tax credit should they choose to give to an arts endowment fund, similar to any endowment that we hold at the Community Foundation. But an additional benefit to donors who choose to give to an endowment fund. >> The mayor asked a question, and I kind of want to hear maybe a little bit more about the the legal or the statutory requirements for how much we can spend. Obviously, within endowment, we actually want some control, but not complete control to spend it all at once. Can you walk us through what what we get to determine versus what is required by Iowa law? >> Sure.

So what is what is required is funds, endowment funds that are eligible and receiving the endow Iowa Tax credit must not distribute as part of the Endow Iowa rules. More than 5%. And so that's what we've adopted at the Community Foundation as a standard for all of our funds, is to not grant more than than 5% out. So if we would want this to be endow Iowa eligible, we would want to follow those requirements. now, as far as grant making, you know, more than that, technically you could, but the idea is to preserve principle, grow the fund, make grants, and, you know, have it continue to grow over time. >> Okay.

Thanks. >> Bigger principle. That means that 5% becomes a larger. >> Yes.

The investment from the city, the lost dollars kind of come become the principle. It grows. And then the 5% spending, out of that. >> Oh when there have been, endowments made like this in the past I think you were saying that it would ultimately be, our decision, the final strategy for that endowment. I guess when I've talked to try to get some different folks in the arts and culture community talking to them about this, a couple times it came up well, like, yes, the the idea of investing upfront and then getting returns later and it not being out of the general fund is awesome. And it's a regenerative fund. but then they also didn't want to have their arts funded by like, the Raytheon and Coca-Cola fund, you know, like what they're investing in was some concerns that I had. And I told them that I would I would imagine this would be something that, you know, we would be accountable to and not just the community foundation. Would that be fair to say that we have oversight?

So you'd. >> Have the opportunity to provide our finance committee with some guidance, and we would need to figure out what investment vehicles we would use for that. We do have a socially conscious fund that we do have available at the Community Foundation. We just have to look at what the what the council's recommendations for investment that you'd like to see have happen. And ultimately, at the end of the day, the Community Foundation's board of directors, vis a vis the finance committee, sets the parameters for what we can invest in. but I'm I'm sure we can review. >> Yeah, that was just something that. >> Yeah. Was brought up to me a couple times when I've tried to talk with folks about this. >> Sure.

I think I have the same question like, you know, Councilor White Line is, is this going to be like, for example, we say like Alliance? And is it like many of them in the community, is this like in a given year, every organization will get some kind of funding or this is also going to be like through application. Some people might get, some people might not. >> You defer.

So staff's intention is to continue to focus on the organizations that we've funded historically and bring in PS1 and that in that second year. So as we see it right now, we would fund those same organizations with this endowment. we wouldn't envision a competitive application, but that is possible. Should the council want to go a different route and invite competitive applications, whether that's annually or every five or every ten years, however you might want to do it, or a future council might want to do it. I think we could accommodate that, but staff's views right now is we've been funding identified organizations historically for many years. We're trying to we're trying to continue to fund those same organizations plus one and we don't envision it expanding beyond that. >> Yeah, that's what I saw. The goal is just to make those organizations sustainable and, like to ensure that they receive funding every year.

Yeah. And for the thousands of people watching at home, this is part of our economic development efforts of the city, because these are the things that in addition to enriching our culture here locally, also bring in a lot of tourism, a lot of tourism dollars, which helps with the lost funding because that brings in more money that's spent here. And so it's I always see this kind of this kind of expenditure, as well as all the good things that just sort of inherently has. It's also like watering the garden. so. Yeah. >> Oh Related to Councilor Weilein question, are you currently do you currently have any endowments that have ESG or sustainable funds that you manage?

we just have the socially conscious fund available for any donor that has an interest. We actually have one particular fund that came to us that had that interest. otherwise our investment portfolios are all managed locally by four local financial institutions. The finance committee directs the investment policy, and then that's given over to the investment managers to choose their own portfolio.

Okay. And the reason I ask is because I was curious if through your experience, you know, if the drawdown is different if maybe we shouldn't expect a five or a 4% drawdown if we choose different investment vehicles. >> Our our data shows the return is not as great. but it's also. It's a choice we have to make. But I also don't want to look at a chart that's not true to what we think we're going to have. >> Right. It's it's not as favorable as the standard portfolio that we have used, but it's also not an apples to apples comparison to.

Yeah, okay. >> Just on the point, Jeff, of the organizations who would be included, I agree that having that like sustainable operational funding that we've provided in the past makes a lot of sense. I also know from serving on EDC that there there wasn't necessarily any, you know, roadmap to how we got there. So I would ask us to consider, you know, something evaluative as we nail down who all is involved. I mean, I think even just, you know, my exposure to these different organizations and experience and engaging with them in the community, you know, I like I think PS1 does great work. And why do they have to wait just as an example. Right. So I would appreciate if we could consider some some rhyme or reason for what we're including and how organizations might seek to be included in the future. I think a lot about all the very agonizing conversations we've had in the aid to agencies and whose legacy and who's not. And how do you prove that? And what does that mean? I don't want to create a complicated structure, and I know there hasn't been a lot of intention behind which organizations and how much per year in relation to each other, which I think having everything, you know, sort of in this alliance or funding them out of the endowment might that maybe we should do that. >> I think was that part of the second year, year two plan that you've presented with us?

Yeah. We would we were recommending we do that in year two. And part of it is just because of the amount of work that's going to go into getting the endowment set up correctly. knowing that the Arts Alliance is going to be in its infancy, if they if they pursue that. We just thought that that second year might be a better time to pursue that. It can be done in the first year. It's just prioritizing the staff time to to focus in on that. And we'd be up for that challenge. If council would prefer to do that. Holistic review. in year one.

I mean, I wouldn't want to wait too long, but it seems like if we still have some big question marks, we could do a lot of work now, have the Arts Alliance form and then have to start over. So I don't know if that's very efficient either, unless I'm reading the potential potential things that could happen in the next two years, differently or incorrectly. >> I know this is a little bit Rachel's lane, but has the Arts Alliance consultant report been fully returned? And so we don't really know the recommended shape of that organization even yet. No, you can.

Okay. >> The consultant met with the, or the orgs invited to participate in the potential forming of the Arts Alliance just on Friday. I feel like I'm stepping too close to the microphone.

No. You're good. >> got final feedback from committee. I was there, Rachel was there, and we're getting very close. I have to say. I'm just so proud of all of the arts organizations. They're really standing together shoulder to shoulder, putting down silos and really collectively wanting to uplift all the work that's happening. And I can say it really does seem like they want Johnson County. all organizations in Johnson County to benefit from the work of the Alliance in whatever form that might, might take. >> I'm really interested.

Sorry. Just one clarification. Whether the Arts Alliance moves forward or not. We still believe the endowment is the correct vehicle to pursue. So for us, the endowment could meet could, could and should go forward regardless of what shape the alliance takes. but.

Sure. >> One of the things I appreciate about that plan is it does give you know, we look down five, six, eight years down the path. It gives some of our arts funding, makes it. I don't want to jinx anything by calling it bulletproof, but it does make it a lot more stable. And that's one of the things, too, that I've heard from from some of the UNESCO and other folks that are, that are interested in this, and, you know, should we continue to have all of the challenges we face with our property tax and all the stuff coming from Des Moines? But at the same time, should that situation ever improve, there's nothing in this plan that says, you know, one off projects. But but for an ongoing operating fund and having this solid, I just have again, several years now hearing those conversations and that shakiness and that uncertainty, doing away with that and doing with it long term is just I just I really like that. I really appreciate that kind of a plan. >> All right. Well thank you all. >> Thank you.

All right. So we have maybe a few more things that we need to touch on before we leave off the Arts Alliance. Is there anything Council kind of want to wrap up with that for now? It sounds like the proposal is, by the staff is to go the endowment route. I and wait to see what happens to the Arts Alliance, but.. For the purposes of our budget, I'm very supportive of this plan >> Agreed.

I just have a broader question that might be a segue into more of our last conversation. is there just internally, Jeff, are there conversations around, like using the endowment vehicle for any other kinds of granting that the city does? Or is there a reason that we're, you know, picking this is are we like piloting it? What have you?

I would say in the back of staff's mind, there's a pilot element to this you could imagine, if it's successful, that it could go to any number of other types of support. You mentioned aid to agencies, which could be worthy of consideration. We think about public art funding different from the arts organizations, but how we fund public art, that's a general fund expenditure. that could be an endowment. So we felt like this was the best place to start again, trying to capitalize on the collaboration and the Arts Alliance discussions. But yeah, I think if it's successful, a future staff and councils could look at taking some of those dollars and doing the same thing for other purposes. And at least at this stage, I think that'd be pretty wise.

Yeah, I was thinking that too. I just wanted to say, before we move on that I'm really, really happy that Public Space one is getting on this funding train. I think they've done so much good work for so long. Have really I used to be on the board, so I, the board of Public Space one. So I used, you know, I, I would see how it really, you know, sometimes especially with them expanding and doing all the good work they do in the community, like work that I think a lot of the community doesn't see. how some of those financial conversations, I feel like I'm just happy that it'll be a little bit less of a hard conversation each year when they do budgeting. So I'm just really happy about that. Thank you. >> All right. So if we looked at the memo that we received from our assistant city manager, there are, just recapping about four, topics, shall we say that we wanted to continue discussions on, I think number one is going to be take a lot of discussion on that one, potentially. but that is recommendations by the staff with some metrics, related to affordable housing. And there was an attachment or is an attachment number two, that is in our information packet. and then we somewhat had conversations surrounding number two, the human rights grant. We didn't touch base on that. but other than that we did the kind of the community partnerships. >> Actually, mayor, if I may, I just I have a question that is a clarifying question because we've talked about it outside of session. just as an overview. So I just want some clarity on the

childcare piece, which is in the community partnerships. and then it might be something to carry forward a little bit, but it is not on the on this summary. So I just wanted to see if at some point I just want to get some clarity on the specific line item.

And again, I'm just listing all the things right now so that council can think about, with our remaining time, which is just a little less than an hour, to touch some of these topics. and so community partnerships is absolutely one of those, childcare is in there. human rights grant is another one that we would like to another topic that we can talk about. and then when it comes down to item number three, which is just the state mandated property tax relief and the number for the public infrastructure and facilities. So those are kind of the things that we still wanted to circle back to, and if you want to start with number two community partners, I think that we can certainly start wherever council wants to >> Sure.

I cover them all. So. >> So actually I'm just going to take the the mic for the moment. I just wanted clarification because I don't remember the details. on the slide for community partnerships. there is for FY 27, $75,000 for the child care wage enhancement program. And then in FY 28, it is $100,000. remind me, is that to keep the payout for the child care workers at $2. >> no. In fact, I think it would be I think it would be difficult to to be able to maintain that $2 stretch. It depends a lot on who else is supporting this. If there's great private sector response, if other public sector entities contribute, then that may be possible. But the the 75 and the 100,000 probably would not be able to maintain the $2 wage enhancement alone. There may have to be some program constrictions or some, Lowered enhancement amounts $1.50 or $1. instead of $2. This is going to need some more conversation with those partners that are that are really running this program. So the county is doing that. Now. There's some discussions about shifting that to United Way. And if that transition takes place, I think the whole program would be evaluated. I think the 75,000, up to 100,000 in year two would be a very significant contribution. Perhaps the biggest contribution that anybody locally may be making. But I couldn't, tell you that it would maintain that that $2, unless there's additional outside funding supplementing that. >> And if I remember right, you had also mentioned that at the end of two years, again, so much of this depends on private partnerships,

that the program might cease. >> I think, without with our our contribution, it would I think, yes, I think there's some questions about how it can be maintained. I think the public sector is going to have to invest in this for it to, for it to be sustained. we only show two years here. It's not that because we see it as a two year investment. When you make this type of investment, you're really kind of committing long term unless the program's not delivering the results that are satisfactory. what we tried to show between fiscal year and 27 and 28, when that investment goes up, it's because that initial fiscal year, we're we're not expending all of the expected revenues that we get. You see, the $525,000 at the end of fiscal year 27 there. That's a little bit of conservative budgeting, not knowing what that sales tax revenue is going to look like. And also we're hoping to use that fund balance to seed that capital reserve that we talked about on the in the budget work session. When you get to year two, we don't feel the need to budget that conservatively. We think we'll have a much better feel on what those revenues are. And we do feel, that we could bump that up to 100. And you'll see that in a number of them where they get a bump in year two. >> And has their. Sorry. Go ahead. >> Just specifically on the wage enhancement. When we first started that fund in that program, I know we talked about, asking for contributions from private partners to be like on a per employee basis and setting some number. Is that reflected at all in this 75,000? Okay.

No, I don't know that that really took took hold in the community. so this this number is what staff felt was needed to make a meaningful contribution that can keep the program going. it was not intended to be the sole provider for that entire fund. If you go much lower than this, I think there's more risk that this thing falls apart. And if you go much higher, I think the than the pressure on everybody else to contribute to a community wide objective starts to dissipate. So we try to find that magic number. It could be that in discussions with those folks that are directly working on this program, they may encourage or advise you to to shift those numbers around a little bit more. but from where we sit as staff today, this was this was the best number that we could target. >> I think there's a lot of moving parts when it comes down to childcare. there's some legislation being discussed, right now relating to it, of course, it would be great to know what community partners have committed in the past. Just to get a refresher on that and who might be signaling that they're going to continue to contribute. but I guess for us, what would be helpful to this council? Do we want kind of a memo relating to this, a little more specific as to what, you know, who has contributed, what things are at play right now, or are we comfortable, you know, just stating that this is the contribution that we're going to give right now, realizing that there are a lot of moving parts that we can't control. >> I think the only thing that

concerns me is the fact that, and I certainly appreciate that this is in an earmarked for this through lost. I think what concerns me, though, is the fact that there are so many moving parts with child care and that there might be other opportunities or other innovative ways to be able to address our local childcare needs. And just, you know, there's so much need, not enough money to go around. So everybody needs to come and spend their money in Iowa City. but I would love to be able to think creatively at a certain point. about being able to allow for projects, set money for projects that we don't yet know about. whether it's specifically within childcare or others. Right now I'm focusing on childcare just because it's top of mind. But as we move forward in, in talking about the ways that we'll a lot, lost, I think that one of the things that I'd like so much was that there are these placeholders, both or projections about let's build up some reserves for specific things where it's absolutely needed for the capital reserve for the build partnership. It would be fantastic if we could figure out a way to start to do that for other programs, because in the big scheme of things, $175,000 for two years for wage enhancement, for $2 more an hour no one else is is is stepping up, which is a shame. and I'm glad the city is, but I would like to be able to see us think more expansively and maybe again, work with our other. Other

entities that could help in this endeavor, whether private or, at a county level. I know they've been instrumental in it. So kind of on my soapbox, but it just seems right now that that's a really small amount for it actually to be going down in terms of the lived wages. and so that's. what it.

So right now we have a very specific a child care wage enhancement. do we think that, change in the language where it just says childcare in parentheses? I wage enhancement gives us more a little more flexibility. and also signals that, as you mentioned, if there's other opportunities coming down the pike we, we could shift with decreasing public expectations a little bit because right now it's very specific that we're going to use it for wage enhancement. I'm not suggesting that we change, you know, the $2 an hour, but, maybe there's a program that comes from the state, you know, that, does that enhancement. And maybe there's another opportunity. But if we are if a specific right here, then I think it could kind of signal that that's what we're going to use it for. But if we kind of change it to child care, for example, wage enhancement, then it could give us a little more wiggle room with all of the moving parts. >> Can I.

I have kind of a foundational question about the program. So without debate when we were talking about the Arts Alliance, I know in the back of my mind and probably in some of the back of your minds, we were thinking, you know, is the city funding this? And the reason I was thinking about that is because it's a regional effort and wanting to see that our Iowa City dollars gets paid on Iowa City things. It's my understanding that child wage enhancement program was a regional effort. Is it diminishing to being just an Iowa City funded effort, yet we're funding a regional priority. Is is that that's not fair characterization.

No. Our dollars are restricted to child care centers in Iowa City. That was part of the Arpa requirement when we did it. And I would envision that to be the case here. So the question is whether a Johnson County or a United Way would want to operate a program if only one community is participating at some point they may say, well, Iowa City, this would just be your program. So there's definitely value in the regional program, but our dollars are staying local. >> Yeah, I mean, obviously this is all good, but I also want to think strategically. Absolutely. And, you know, is our best place. Wage Karen wage enhancement. Or maybe as Mayor Teague was suggesting, some other way to help daycare centers like help them build facilities in Iowa City. >> That you need workers to work in them. >> Right. They need all the above. Right? Like so. >> I mean, it's just it's such the number one thing that childcare centers need. They're mandated to have. people a lot of people, and they're paid horribly. So I guess for me, I, I'm okay with actually having it be specific because we have a setup program that's proven to work. and actually, as far as a memo goes, if we just wanted to get think Iowa City's data, Michael Chen has it all at his fingertips. I think it was more to say, as we think through lost and obviously we can't we don't. This might be a very different conversation, and I hope, one, that we get to have a year from now when we see what we're getting in right now, we don't know how much. And so rightfully so. We're our staff is being conservative and it's the smart move I would love in a year from now to say, okay, so this is what we got. And can we feel comfortable with a slightly larger estimate of dollars that are going to be coming in? And therefore, can we start thinking about how do we actually take some money for opportunity funds? Right.

At this juncture, though, I don't want to just put this into a random, not random, sorry, a more generalized bucket of childcare things, because we have a program that has been proven to work on a lot of different metrics. I'm just

yeah. >> Was remembering, as Jeff confirmed, that this is actually going to even the amount that that we're putting in in the next two years is going to potentially and likely diminish the wages, because it's just not enough. so I would rather it stay at wage enhancement while also offering up to council. Let's think about how we might be able to create some wiggle room for additional specific programs or pilots or, you know, all of the above. When we know better what we're working towards. But I just don't want this to become like the arts pre endowment, where it's always. Given the need, it's always a pittance that we're getting. So that's that's my soapbox. and I'll say it again later. >> No I, I really appreciate that. And if there is maybe one thing that I admittedly might naively think that the state legislature might have some shriveled shred of humanity about its child care. And, you mentioned that, Mayor Teague, that there was legislation being talked about. I don't know if any of our staff has heard anything about that. I mean, that would be wonderful. I mean, I don't think we should expect anything, but, I guess the other thing, I would like to I don't know if it needs to be a memo to all the councilors. If you all were, most of you were there. If not all of you were there when, you had the initial, Arpa funding to put to this program, but maybe it might give me more context if I just have a sit down with Jeff and talk about how that is all set up and so I can have a better understanding, but I don't know if I necessarily think you all need a memo. I could just do that on my own.

Although I will say that I said I said there is one prepared. I said, no, I said it, I think I said, I think I said, I meant to say Greater Iowa City. but the data that they have been able to collect is also incredibly useful. And I think it would be great as a part of the information packet, just more broadly. >> Yeah, I would certainly have to defer to those community partners that are administering the program, and that includes the Johnson County staff. and Michael Chen and Greater Iowa City team. But I can connect you. I can get a memo and give it to you all. All of the above. >> Okay

All right. Where would we want where do we want to go from here? There are a lot of topics. >> Are we still going to keep it in number two for now? >> Or we can.

Just want to clarify one thing to council. There's there's you're probably feeling a little bit of pressure to kind of sign off on this for the budget purposes. Outside of what is replacing general fund dollars, you have time to perfect this post budget adoption. So, let's take the child care wage enhancement piece and you layer in the UI labor center pre-apprenticeship program and you layer in, you know, the Capital reserve dollars. Those are three examples of things that aren't replacing general fund dollars. They're new programs. the the budget is going to have all of these expenditures outlined. So you're going to have the authority to expend these dollars. But if you decide to move them around and these numbers want to shift a little bit, or even if you want to change and say, you know what, the capital reserve was a good idea, but let's not pursue that in year one and you want to switch that. You'll have the ability to do that post budget adoption. So I just don't want you to feel the pressure that you have to solve all of these complex issues and funding decisions right now. there is that slide that we shared with you on what's replacing general fund dollars. If you want to make those changes, we'd like you to do that before the budget adoption, because we've got to get the budget authority back in the general fund. Unless you want to drop those programs. >> Thank you for that reminder.

A follow up on that, Jeff. for when we're looking at the budget document for those items that are general fund relief, I guess I kind of expected something in the revenue portion to say, like local option sales tax is this chunk. And because it says like transfer from general fund in the revenue section within a given department so I didn't know if the general fund relief like that's in addition to what's currently shown in the revenue section. Right. Like that, it's not reflected in our budget book, I guess, is what I'm saying. >> Right.

So for almost all of the things that was removed out of the general fund completely, so it's it's planned to be expended out of the lost fund. So it's not in the general fund budget at all, other than the grip piece, because it was going to be too complicated with repayments. So that is the only piece that is still like the expenditures are physically in the general fund. So what I'm getting at is like for different departments, like whether it's NDS or whatever, it is like having the knowing that the revenue that we expect that is expended in the lost expenditure part of the budget. Right. But the revenue that is supporting a department isn't shown in the revenue, like the lost revenue isn't shown separately.

Right. Because the lost revenue is also in the lost fund. So the expenses are just moved before there wasn't necessarily like the aid agencies. There wasn't a set funding that was paying for that. That was just the overall property taxes. So it's those expenses really are just moved out that the revenue is still all there to be used for all of the other things, which in this case is mostly going to wage and benefit increases throughout the general fund. >> So maybe my question, which I can follow up separately if other people don't care, is sort of for each of these general fund relief. What where would they have been in terms of the departments. Right. Like that that part I'm having a hard time reconciling. Yeah. >> We'll just have you identify yourself. For the record, please.

Nicole Cole Davies, finance director. Thank you. >> Yeah, we could do it in 15 seconds here. So support for the winter shelter and street outreach is ends. Budget grip is ends. Human rights grants out of human rights. Climate action grant is out of the climate Action division. the community mental health liaison program was out of the police department. Aid to agencies is out of NDS, and the Schmid is out of the city manager's office budget. >> Okay. That was easy. >> Thank you. Thanks. >> Yeah.

Great. >> All right, so we don't have to make all the decisions now, but certainly, there's a few things that we need to do because of, dates and such. so just want to still open up the floor to any council that want to focus in on anything right now And if anyone want to talk about number one, let me know. I have a conflict with one of them. That's why I have to recuse myself. >> Okay. I don't care which topic we take on mayor. Just.

Dive in. >> We got to get to all of them eventually. >> Sure. Is there anything else? Is there anything that anyone is feeling that is time sensitive? Just with our for our dates of when we have to approve certain things along the budget cycle?

I was hoping we could reopen the conversation about the levy reduction. so I know what's proposed is a 20 cent reduction in the debt service levy. And this is somewhat a question about the potential anticipated legislation relating to property tax reform. But just a very, very general like, am I thinking about this? Right question if they're going to cap our future revenue, we think is the most likely is that kind of. Property tax revenue? >> So.

Yeah, growth. >> If if we reduce the levy and it can't, it can only grow a certain amount. Right. Like it doesn't seem like this would be the year that we would want to reduce it, because then we'll we can't like our growth in the future will be set at that reduced level. Am I thinking about that wrong. >> That's what I was trying to say last meeting, but I think you just said it correctly instead of me. >> Well, Nicole shaking her head anyway, so please enlighten us. >> So Nicole Davis, finance director it doesn't quite work like that. And from that and again, we've got three pieces of legislation. We don't know exactly what the end result is going to be. It's going to cap the growth. But it's probably going to do that by reducing the levy. So from what I saw from what they proposed last year, our levies are probably never going to be stagnant. Right? I think we're going to see our levies just kind of bounce around. It doesn't impact the debt service levy. So we're not. Right. That's what we're dropping. So it's not like we're going to be capped. There. More than likely our other levies are going to get pushed down and we probably will increase the service levy to try and balance that out. But you're just not ever going to see. I don't think if any of this legislation passes, I don't think you're ever going to see it. It's going to be really hard to compare what the levy was to what the levy is going to.

All right. And there's never a limit on the debt service levy. There's just like the how much debt can we carry that informs that. >> As of now. That's correct. >> As of now. Thank you. >> I'm sorry. I probably have another question for you. Nicole. are we with these new property tax reform bills? Are we also still obligated to get our general levy tax rate down to 810? I mean, that doesn't change, right? We still have to. >> I do think that piece was going away. And some of. >> The we just don't we just don't know. >> But that's the current environment. So if nothing if reform stalls out this year, we still have to get it to 810 and it could be forced below 810. before we get to that fiscal year 29. And it's 29 fiscal year 29 is the 810. Two more years, right? >> Two more. Okay. Yeah.

And that is not the general. TAC property tax amount. That is just the property tax element. Not debt. Not debt levy. Just general. >> Just general. Yeah. >> Okay.

Is the 810. >> Yeah. There's multiple levies. that that equal to our total rate. So and the different legislations cap, you know, different ones and treat them a little bit differently. So for example, the growth cap affects transit levy. it affects the general fund levy, but it doesn't affect the debt service levy. So we just kind of have to see where that, where that shakes out. >> I do think you bring up a good point. Councilor Bergus just for me, I'm thinking about loss option sales tax. When we had that conversation and had we did it years ago, right. All the opportunities one we would have had in the fund. But some of the changes in that, you know, the legislation surrounding it also affected us. And so I guess given some of what's happening at the potentials of what's happening at the state, I would just maybe ask the staff if council agrees, just look at what's happening and see if you do have a different recommendation. or if you if you're very confident that what you've recommended to us now is the best situation, then so be it. But if there is some some change in thoughts that have put us in a long term better position than I would rather have that coming from you all at this point and talk through it. And for us to really consider it.

Yeah, I don't think we need time to discuss that. The legislation that's being proposed this year in a lot of ways, is very similar to what was proposed last year and worked on until the very last day, when they then they threw in the towel. So we make this recommendation knowing what we think is inevitable this year that one of these three bills will, in some shape be adopted. And we feel confident that this levy reduction is not only manageable, but prudent, given the state's legislation. And, given that relief requirement. So our recommendation doesn't change based on what's been introduced.

Great. Thank you. >> Yeah, I guess my my thoughts I partially articulated last time about this is I mean, there's $14 million in loss and we could have put all of it towards property tax reduction as I understand. Obviously not what we talked about, not what we're doing. I was like $2.80 and we're doing $0.20. It's kind of small. The property relief component is 50%. We're doing relief, not reduction. For the most part. Like could be, you know, a buck 40. Again, we're doing $0.20. Like it seems pretty modest. Is that my thinking about this the right way? Like like the percentage of reduction or the amount of reduction we could be doing is a lot. And what a lot of communities do, we're not doing that. We're we're really small in our reduction. One of the 7 million.

One of the 7 million. Correct. Right. Which is 20. >> $0.20. $0.20. >> Yeah. And I think we also know that our option is to like I think North Liberty and Coralville both are increasing their levies, even though they have lost. And, you know, are very comfortable with the. They think they're going to get away with it. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. >> So I'm not worried about the getting away with it part is what I'm saying. And I think I think staff told us that pretty unequivocally. I'm looking at our city attorney who's smirking. And I'm curious, has any has anyone else done this yet in the state where they pass lost and also increase property taxes and call it with a straight face property tax relief?

Well, I'm. >> Aware that there are other communities who have engaged in the same exercise of characterizing what they've done as relief. I guess I haven't looked deep enough to see whether they have. you know, had new local option sales tax subject to the 50% minimum requirement, which wasn't always the case. Of course. Right. And raise their, levy, even despite that, I'm not sure the answer to that question. That would give me pause.

One question that I have and let me know if I'm thinking about this in a wrong way. the the debt levy diversion, which is kind of like what we envision for the vast majority of this 50% to be, what if for some reason, at the end of the year, we just don't have that many projects to divert the levy from? And we have all of this money that's supposed to go towards diversion. but we just don't have the projects to do that. Then at the end, would we just be forced to reduce or.

No. So, so every year we're averaging over $15 million per year in our CIP. That's that's how much we're bonding every year. actually, your CIP shows a higher average, closer to 17 or 18 million. so, so for example, if on on the list of projects that we would be using these property tax relief for, let's say the highway six trail expansion, we bid that it comes in way over bid. We decide not to do it so that, 1.5 million doesn't get spent. We would simply reprogram that into next year's budget. And we have ample projects, especially when you think of Dodge and Taft and the Burlington Bridge. there's no shortage of projects that could benefit from that. It's just going to reduce our borrowing amount. And I don't think there's any issue in carrying over funds one year and reprograming them. Remember, we're not getting all these funds in in fiscal year, in calendar year 26. Anyway we're not going to get the majority of the funds until calendar year 27. So we've got we've got ample time.

I guess for some reason I was that makes so much sense in my brain. I was thinking perhaps, I don't know why I was thinking this, but perhaps the the 50% property tax relief would have to go towards something done by the other 50% of our. So the projects would have to be from these other things, but that makes way more sense. Yeah.

So I guess one one final point and I totally cool if nobody's interested in entertaining the not reducing the levy, but we do have a set date by which we have to have the maximum. And that includes the debt service levy that we can't raise it. And that's pretty soon. One of the early dates. Sorry, Nicole, I'll keep I'll keep talking while you're running up here, but just the property tax relief portion, the 1 million of the 7 million. Like, we could, for example, put 3 million towards the pavement improvement project and not lower the levy. Correct. >> So that's the kind of thing I just want to make sure people are on board with, like, this is this is the the premise. >> Correct.

So Nicole Davis, finance director, it assuming you don't have a special meeting, you'd have to decide that at your next meeting because we have to give that information to the county by March 5th. In order for that awesome mailing to go out to everyone. >> Okay. I'm down to entertain that that notion that I think I brought it up especially since this wouldn't be an increase. This would just be not a decrease. you know, so we're not doing what North Liberty and Coralville would be doing if we decided to. We're not. I don't think you're proposing. You know. Increasing, the levy, but, I think maybe I just and I, and I understand the time constraints, but I think it would be a worthy conversation looking at these other things like the annual pavement rehab, I the fire station, highway six trail expansion. if we think more money directly towards them or any of these projects would be better than just the million dollar reduction that's a conversation that I would be interested in having.

I have a I have a question. So is there a proposal for because you're I thought I heard Councilor Weilein say reducing the levy, but I understand you're wanting to increase the levy. >> Yeah. Sorry if I misspoke.

Yeah. >> I feel like I understand that. Not like reducing. Not increasing it. Leave it the same by using the $1 million for something else, not paying the tax, am I right? >> Correct. You're understanding that correctly. >> And I also another question I when I ask you, is it when you send that will be reduced. Is this the same thing 20 cent from the like. Also 20 cent reduction from last year per $1,000. Right? Correct. >> So the total levy that was 1563 would go down to 1543. and per thousand.

And if we break that out, this comes out of the debt service part of that levy. Correct. Correct. >> Of that. 15 and we've been at 1563 for five. Three years. I think this I think that's about right. Three years. >> Three.

Yep. >> I mean I, I, I want to build buildings and roads and do things I and my heart feel like the right thing to do is some small token of property tax reduction. It's just the smallest amount that has been recommended by staff. So in my judgment, I think the budget that's been proposed to us makes sense. But I, I see three heads that are like, no, I want something different. So I'll just get like to hear what the other councilors think. >> I suppose maybe it would be helpful if we can imagine, any other project, any projects listed here on the list recommendations. if we could get options in front of us or hypotheticals, like, instead of doing this, this million dollars or this $500,000 or this $250,000 could go to these things, I think that would be a great way to make an educated decision other than 1 million extra dollars towards vibes. and.

I definitely would want staff's recommendation. So, I mean, I'm interested in having that conversation. I understand that it needs to be a quicker conversation that isn't waiting until April, but yeah.

Yeah. >> So I think if if, you know, the state has this property tax relief, 50% requirement, certainly all the things that are being proposed are allowable within that certainly we can take away the property tax rate reduction. And this is specific to property owners. for me, I, I think some element of having what their ultimate proposed intent was be represented in some way. 20 cent per, you know, I think this is reasonable. and I think our, you know, I don't know what all the thoughts went through the staff's head. And I also recognize that you all are saying, can we, you know, do something with this? absolutely. But I feel comfortable having something that is a direct property tax relief for those folks that have property taxes.

Yeah. And sorry, just one one quick thing. I think that like I was saying, like, getting options, getting things on the table, like, even if it's not $0.20, even if we say, okay, well, what if it's $0.10 and we put $500,000? we've we've seen that the library, carpet and furnishings replacement is great. But here's a couple other things that this could make up the difference for. That's a hypothetical situation. but I could see you know, our engineers being like, actually, if we had an extra 500 K or 250 K for immediately for highway six trail expansion or something like that, a situation like that, I don't know.

I, I, I come back to what I was kind of harping on before where it's like on the one hand, thank God we've got this money. On the other, it just doesn't seem to be enough. but I, I was actually in the Housing Authority report of how many homeowners there were versus renters. It's only about 5% difference. It is a majority of renters. It's like 53.4 or something like that. And the homeowners who also voted for this are 47.6. And we have very high property taxes. And while this is not a reduction per se, I mean, it's not relief. It's not a it's. >> Not a check. >> Back, right?

It's not a check back. I just I, I feel like this is proportional in terms of saying we're trying as a city to help better the city as a whole. Among them, 47.6 people or, sorry, 47.6% are homeowners. And some portion of those voted on this. And so I feel like it's proportional as a response in terms of coverage for why people voted for this when I was out campaigning, I heard from, I would say, 1 in 2, three houses. It was about when talking about lost, it was about property tax relief. so. >> I, I think like to your point, 47 that means 53% are the renter are the people who really hit hard by these laws. And I think if we show that reducing the property tax will reduce the rent, we will do it definitely. But I don't see that happening. 20% reduction will make them also reduced. But we can use this money for something that we need to do that will be benefit for everyone. The 47% and 53% to I think there's I think. >> I think there's some truth to that. but I also kind of and Mayor pro Tem alter kind of touched on this too, like just many of those doorstep conversations last year, last summer and last fall. this came up a lot. And so there were a fair number of people. Some people were like, you know, yeah, let's, let's you know, let's spend on all

these all these. Yeah, all these kinds of things. but there were a fair number of people, especially people people who are on fixed incomes for various things or homeowners, but are struggling to stay in their homes, which is a part of the affordable housing piece. you know, they were interested in this, you know, the idea of property tax relief, right? And actually, I didn't come across really anybody that said, oh, we need a refund check or anything like that. But as describing the various benefits of lost and what this 50% property tax relief was, at least when I was talking about it with people, one of the points of the conversation was, okay, so if we borrow less, this means that that we will have to charge less on the bill to pay back that amount of borrowing. and so to kind of to that idea of proportionality. So I would you know, the fact that this is a fairly small proportion of the overall pie, does give something back. And, you know, honestly, this you know, because housing values, the values of our homes keep going up. It's not like it's actually going to be the, the dollar. The check is probably going to be surprised because they're probably still going to write a bigger check year over year. it just won't be as much of an increase, which is kind of how I, you know, those conversations I had, but also in some of the conversations, some of the lost supporters, when asking people to vote for it, and getting property owners who maybe don't have the same completely aligned with our 100% with our sets of values, but are willing to to still support this, knowing that we were going to be using a lot of this money for all of the 50% of the various things, the affordable housing, the community partnerships. but there's a chunk of the population that was really more into this, this other 50%, this, this property tax relief. And so I find myself being, I think if it would have been a much bigger number, I probably would have I would have more. I'd probably agree with the hesitation on this. But again, the

proportionality of this I think, is in the ballpark of where I would be comfortable because it is, you know it's a proportion for me, it's proportional to, to kind of what we should be be looking at. So I actually don't have a problem with this. but I would if it was if it was bigger than this. Is it possible to have a reserve for the property tax relief, or it has to be named? >> What do you mean?

I don't even know what a reserve would look like. I think. We'd be treading in unchartered waters. If you wanted to create some reserve in this, in this area, I would suggest that on the relief side of things, that's the capital project side, not the levy reduction that you intend to spend all of those dollars the within a year of taking those in. And that's why we've suggested projects that are queued up and ready to go. I wouldn't suggest keeping a reserve. >> Okay. In this particular 50% category. The other ones. Absolutely. >> Sure. go right ahead. Oh. >> Stay with you.

Oh, I mean, I so I hear everybody's point of view and I agree that there all true. And I guess for me, is there something specific that folks are thinking? Because if this is being proposed, yes. You know, 500,000 can go somewhere else. or 750,000 could be what is the property tax rate reduction at $0.15? I guess my question is, is there something specific that, was hoped for? >> Yeah, I guess maybe it and I don't know, Jeff, how these conversations would go or if there has been, like, conversations like this in regards to these named projects that we have, if we talk to the folks directly involved in these and asks if we can get an idea of what, more upfront help would look like and just get a report back options. if they say, like, you know, like, actually $250,000 would really put us across the line in this particular endeavor and make it really a lot easier for us to do this. Then I think we would be having, like, a better conversation. >> I mean, there's we heard there's no shortage of projects. >> That.

More of. >> I would say.

A lot of those there's no shortage of projects. You're correct. You can look at the unfunded list on the CIP and see dozens and dozens of projects, but but they're not queued up and ready to go. And that's the tricky thing with this. These these dollars should be spent within the year of receiving them. So, in terms of what staff would recommend if you didn't want to reduce the levy, I'd look at the CIP the current year CIP, and we would probably just reduce borrowing and shift it over to lost, I don't think I don't think we would add anything else. Perhaps what Councilor Bergus said about, adding a million to the annual pavement rehab. We don't we don't bond for that pavement rehab. That's road use tax. We could we could do that. We're already doubling that budget. We spend 2 million a year. This would take us to 4 million. So you could go from 2 to 5. but otherwise we're just probably going to replace borrowing with lost dollars. >> Okay? I mean, I would be okay with just kind of like between now and next meeting or between now and next meeting, having discussions, looking through the CIP, if anything catches our eye of something just like, wow, this could really use some some more immediately. and then making a decision next meeting. I don't know, I think >> I guess have a question. Like every year we anticipate the 50% whatever from loss will be increased like this year and next year. Maybe we have more money. That's what it is, right? >> Correct.

What about if we reduce it this year like ten? Like ten, ten, 20, 1010 I mean, yeah, which is $500,000. And see next year like how we're going to be and how much you want to because we have to do the same thing next year, keeping maybe reducing it. And we can just build gradually each time we have more money, we go more. I don't know.

I guess I would ask in the same way that Councilor Bergus said last meeting, would we be willing to raise it, that we would have to be willing to raise it? Would we be willing to decrease it, to keep that right? I mean, you were saying $0.10 now this year, $0.10 next year, would the council's will actually be to do that. Like, you know what, it's fine. People aren't banging on our doors. They're, they're they're complaining, but they're not banging on our doors to. Right. I guess I just wonder about it's the inverse of the same conversation that we've been having about would the council have the will to say, yes. You know, what actually to look at property tax relief? Will we now say yes, we should lower it another $0.10. >> Yeah I.

Would we I mean I guess that's my question. And I mean it is a. >> Rhetorical point, I guess. I mean, like this year we are testing everything. And I think one of the goals is to allow it. And and if we allow it like by $0.10 this year and next year, like things if we need to lower it sometime, maybe we don't need to buy anything because a crisis happened or we need the money for something else and the voters will understand that. The residents will understand that. But I think just like now, this year, we can do it that way And keep in mind we're going. Our goal is also to reduce it unless something really bad happened that we need to use that money for something else. What I really

Mean. >> Yeah, I don't know if it would be helpful to ask like staff to yourselves look through the CIP because you know more about the day to day operations of everything, and to come to us with a hypothetical, just like if you were considering doing something, this would be something. This particular CIP project is something that I would like done sooner rather than later. I think it's of higher importance. just to give us that I, I don't know. Because I feel like me just going through and looking through the CIP stuff, I wouldn't have all the context. I would be like, this sounds great, but it's actually. So. >> Yeah, if that's the will of the council, absolutely. We would come back and we'd say, if you wanted a ten cent reduction or a zero cent reduction, here's how we would recommend you spend that. Absolutely. We could do that. >> And I guess I haven't heard the it articulated that the reason why.

So we have $1 million to spend because we're always talking about the budget problems. And I believe we can do it within the law. We're not talking about raising the levy. We've been reducing. I mean, you know, does anybody know what the levy was ten years ago $16.58. Like we've been we've been doing this and our share of the overall that, you know, of our overall burden for taxpayers has been reducing too. So I'm not trying to like increase people's tax bills, but we're talking about the levy rates staying the same would give us a million extra dollars. >> And I think great point. But also this went to the voters. Right?

Sure, absolutely. >> And I really like just today I learned that I like I said, I think Coralville and North Liberty both are raising their levies. So like that's what made me think about it. And that's why I think we're having our first conversation in a work session since the presentations. Right. So knowing that we have this deadline, I just wanted to make sure we actually vet that. And, you know, just say, do we really want to have this million dollars go that direction instead of to us? >> Yeah. Do you know I hadn't seen that. Thank you for sharing that. Do you know, was that increase coming from their debt levy or some other, or was it the stuff you read? I know their transit levy is going to go up. I don't know if other people know what. >> I'm just curious if it's it might be a little bit of apples to oranges if.

Yeah. >> Well, all I'm talking about is this idea of communities that have just adopted law. So the 50% tax, I'm not saying we need to do the same as those communities. It's just like they're in the same boat as us. And it's a question that I think we need to discuss.

And we could come to the decision after hearing staff's recommendations of what we could potentially do with 500 K or $1 million and say, you know what? Actually, I think this is still the best option of this direct million dollars worth of, reduction. but I just think we at least should have that conversation in like a productive way. instead of us. Like I said earlier, just $1 million for vibes. If we have anything actual, like concrete things in front of us. then we can have a better conversation. >> And I guess when I ask you if we. You said maybe we don't have, like, enough project to use this money for. But you said also, this could be paid for, like just pay debt. Right? >> Correct. We've we have plenty of uses for the dollars. but it might just be replacing another funding source. So for example we might have a road project. I think we're still bonding for Court Street. maybe for Dodge Street is a good example. we would just reduce the borrowing and, replace that borrowing with the local option sales tax dollars >> Or.

Or we'd add it or we'd add it to the roads. I mean, it's probably it's going to be an infrastructure project. That would be our recommendation. You don't want to put anything in an operating type of use in this situation. So it's going to be an infrastructure project of some type. And it would have to be a one time expenditure, that we would look at. So it's probably not, you know, I wouldn't, I wouldn't come to that meeting expecting a memo of, here's a bunch of new projects that you can fund. It's more here's how you can fund the existing projects differently. >> And if we, just, you know, finishing my thought, if we use that for, like, infrastructure buying and reducing the debt, if there is a way also, if we want to borrow the money for something completely different that otherwise cannot be paid by this 50% plus, and that will be is that something can be done.

yeah. I mean, I think that there's probably ways to, to do that. you're thinking something different than infrastructure. yeah. I mean, like, the library furnishings is a good example. I'm sure the rec center could use additional equipment. a senior center could replace their tables. Or, you know, we could think of any number of potential uses like that. that may not be an infrastructure. my mind goes to the infrastructure first. But if you wanted something different, we could give you options

I think for me, I would like to, because the project isn't really the question. The question is, is, you know, is it the will of this council to change this property tax rate reduction? And I think and the four minutes that we have left, it might be helpful just to lay that, you know, make a determination as to where we want to be. I mean, there are some great points being made all over the place. you know, at least for me, I go back to what is, you know, what is you know, we said we were going to, you know, have loss. And of course, there's 50% property tax relief, which if a lay person heard that, they're thinking, wow, I got 50% off. You know, there's going to be a reduction in my tax that I will kind of feel and at this moment, you know, even at the 20 cent it is a reduction. But it is not significant per person. >> I guess my ask isn't us to make that decision right now. My ask is to get options suggestions with if we went that route of not doing this direct there. >> There's a number. I mean, I mean, there's there'll be a number of things that they can come back with, at least for me. so the question is, do we want to go down? I think that's the question for me. I don't know what other people are.

Real clarification for the next meeting. We just we don't necessarily have to answer maybe the question that Councilor Weilein is, we just have to say what our levy rate is going to our maximum potential levy rate. Right. That's kind of what we have to decide for. >> That's our fundamental question. >> For our fundamental. And that that gets mailed to the voters or to to. the levy. We submit that to the county. The county has a legal requirement to put mailings out to everybody with with that tax rate. >> For the. April 7th meeting. >> But we wouldn't necessarily have to say that if, say, we cut it in half, this 500,000 will go here or this if we get rid of this at all, we don't.

You can lower the tax rate. After that, you can tell the community 1563 is our maximum. And then in a subsequent meeting say, well, we've decided to go down to, you know, 1543. You can't go the other way. Whatever you tell the communities you're sealing. >> Thank you. Jeff, that's what I was trying to make the point. As far as the mayor's question of timing. >> Yeah. I'm okay with having a conversation at a future date about and having staff come to us with some options or giving them time to how this money, if we decide to go that route, would be best used. and then we can make that decision when we come to it. I don't know.

Okay. All right. So again, next meeting we will have a portion. I don't know if we'll have the entire time really dedicated to our budget discussion. There are still things on our pending list that we have to attend to. But. I guess the question is for staff. Next meeting if, let's say the council wanted to go down by 500,000, do you have do we have to identify a project because the next meeting, which is the 5th of May on March.

I think what we need from you tonight is direction on how to prepare the action item for the the maximum levy. Do you want that at the staff recommended. 1543 or would you like us to put that at the what's been thrown out here is not incorporating that $0.20 to leave it flexible for you so that you can make that decision down the road. So it's really what do you want to advertise to the, to the public as your maximum rate >> By next meeting? Or you need us to leave this meeting? >> We're going to have to prepare that action. Does that does that come come in? It's not it's not a resolution. We just need that informal direction okay. So we would just need informal direction from you at at your next meeting on what you want that to be. So we don't have to prepare anything. I take that back. I'm sorry. so you can handle this discussion any way you want. You could finish it now and close it. Or if you could have staff prepare a memo on some options and carry it on to your next work session. That's complete. Either one is okay with us.

the latter sounds good to me, but I don't know how everybody else is feeling. I'm just one guy. Yeah, I can agree to the latter. And we'll go with the latter and we will, >> What was the latter? I'm sorry. >> That we're going to have the conversation about options. Sure. And then make a determination. >> To next meeting. Okay. Just want to make sure. >> I Okay. >> Before we adjourn, I have one, I think very very short question. Okay. >> item four on the discussion is funds allocated to public infrastructure and facilities. I really don't know what debate we were having on that particular issue.

my recollection, and it could have been foggy at that point in the afternoon was that you wanted to discuss whether to incorporate a facilities master plan using those funds or not Okay. >> And we'll come back to that. All right. we're going to save council updates, boards, commissions and committees at the end of our formal meeting. At this time, I'm going to adjourn this meeting and see you back here at 6 p.m. >> Thank you. Thank you.

Mike. Sir. >> On. All right. Welcome to your city hall. Today is February 3rd, 2026. And I'm going to call the City of Iowa City meeting to order. Roll call, please. >> Alter. Here. Bergus. Here. Harmsen. Here, Mo. >> Here Sally is here. >> Here.

Here. >> All right. Again. Welcome to your city hall. So happy to see all of you here today that are in Council chambers, as well as welcome to anyone that is joining us virtually. We're going to move on to item number two, a proclamations to A as Black History Month. Whereas the city of Iowa City recognized the significance of Black History Month, a time to honor and celebrate the rich culture, heritage, achievements and contributions of African Americans to our city, state and nation. And whereas African Americans have been integral to the development and progress of Iowa City from pioneering community leaders to contemporary innovators, artists, educators and public servants. And Whereas, Black History Month serves as a reminder of their enduring struggle for civil rights and social justice, acknowledging the historical and ongoing challenges faced by African Americans and their resilience in the face of adversity. And whereas it is imperative to educate our community, especially the younger generations, which there are a lot of you here in Council chambers today, the younger generation about the pivotal role African Americans have played in shaping our society and to foster an inclusive environment that celebrates diversity and equality. And whereas the city of Iowa City is committed to promoting equity, understanding and unity among all its residents and to ensuring that the contributions of African Americans are recognized, appreciated and celebrated. Now, therefore, I. Bruce Teague, mayor of the City of Iowa City, do hereby proclaim the month of February to be Black History Month in Iowa City and acknowledge and encourage all residents to join and celebrating the achievements and

contributions of African Americans. Let us engage in meaningful activities, educational events, and community discussions that honor the legacy of black history and inspire a future of equality and justice for all. And we have a couple of groups receiving proclamations here today. elevate eight. we'll start with Bill, and I'll ask everyone when you come up, or are you all going in any as you come up? How about you introduce yourselves and your role and then we'll, after you all speak, will be asking up the Banat Mindy Club to come and speak as well. So we'll start with elevate eight.

My name is Vanessa Shannon. I am executive director of elevate. Thank you First, I'd like to give thanks to God for giving me the strength to stand before you today. I would like to thank my family for their unwavering support as well as Fred Newell, Laura Cottrell, and Mayor Bruce Teague and of course, my elevate Family. Service is my is in my blood and I strive to lead with purpose so that other black girls who look like me can see themselves in spaces like this. Thank you.

My name is Alicia Austin. I am the chief financial officer of elevate. It's an honor to be able to accept this proclamation. And I'd like to take this time to thank those who have helped me get to this point. Laura Cottrell, Fred Newell and Dream City Mayor Bruce Teague. My family and elevates executive team, thank you so much for believing in me and motivating me to move forward

Great. >> Hello, my name is Ramon Babikir and I am a co-founder and vice president of elevate. I want to take this moment to speak a little bit about leadership. Thank you so much for giving us this honor. And I want to remind us that this month invites us to honor leadership in all its forms, as history isn't shaped only by the most visible leaders, but also but also by the people who show up quietly, who listen, who support and make space for others. Black History Month reminds us that leadership can mean stepping forward, but it can also mean stepping back, sustaining the work, and caring for ourselves and one another along the way, especially during trying times. I accept this proclamation with gratitude and with a commitment to honor the past by continuing the work ahead. Thank you. Iowa City Mayor Teague and the City Council for this honor. Thank you all.

Thank you. >> My name is Courtney.

Bill and I am co-founder and National President of elevate. I'm honored to receive this proclamation today, and I'd like to give a special thanks to God. Pastor Frederick Newell and Dream City Lord. My family Mayor Teague and my elevate team. I cannot accept this proclamation without acknowledging what's going on in the world currently. To those watching at home, sitting in front of me and behind me, we see you and we hear you. Elevate is here to bring a voice to the voiceless and make it our duty to fight for the rights of all people. And remember, nobody is illegal on stolen ground that was built off the backs of slavery. Stay tuned. This is only the beginning of elevate. >> Thanks to everybody from elevate that came. Really appreciate your words. Today we're going to bring up The Mindy Club. At this time.

You are our first speaker. >> Yeah. All right. You get that. Thank you. Hello. >> My name is Mazahir Salih. And Mindy is basically like a family to me. And it gave me a lot of good opportunities to realize that I really like helping out the community. Before Mindy, I wasn't really big in helping out the community, but now I really love, like helping out other people. And I feel like I have a really good thing in my heart. Because of Mindy >> Great

Welcome. >> Hello, my name is Aya and Mindy is really like a big, big group of females that really care about black people. And it's just like any gender, any, any any race. It's not just black people. It's every every single race. Right >> Welcome.

Hello. I am Naheed Rahim. I'm very glad to to join Vonette. Mindy and. I and I'm very glad that we've we've been helping out the community and Helping out other people and I'm really glad to like to to be in the group. I'm. And I'm really thankful for all the other members in the group >> Great

Welcome. >> Hi, I'm Irene Adam. I'm very I'm very thankful for all the group members. And it showed us how to care for other people, how to be responsible with money and how to have fun, but also not be too reckless. Yeah. >> All right.

Welcome, Miss Sarah. >> Hi, everyone. My name is Sarah Harun. I'm a director for Bennett. Mindy Club. we are in club. We're trying to empower young women. to create the safe space for them. We have been being out there for almost three years, helping the community. volunteers and educating. We are kind of like being everywhere we are. We are so glad today to be here, to accept the proclamation. Because, excuse me if I say it wrong. we are honored. We are really honored to be here. And, serve the community. And thank you. Yeah. And thank you for everyone being here.

Thank you. And thanks. >> To all of you that came to share in this proclamation. All right. We're going to move on in our agenda to items number three through seven, which is our consent agenda. Could I get a motion to approve, please? So move. Salih. >> Second alter. All right. Anyone from the public like to address anything on our consent agenda Seeing no one in person or online council discussion. Roll call please. Mo. Yes. >> Yes. Teague. >> Yes. Wilson. >> Yes. Alter. >> Yes. Bergus. Yes. Harmsen. >> Yes.

Motion passes 7 to 0. We're at item number eight, which is our consent agenda. community comment. is there any one that would like to speak during the community comment? Please raise your hand if you're wanting to speak on items that are not on our regular agenda. I see two individuals. I see three individuals for I'm going to have you raise your hand a little higher. All right. I'm going to give everyone three minutes, to speak on items. Just know that the council cannot engage with you all in any discussion or debate due to open meeting laws. there is a sign in at the back that you can sign up and just drop it in the basket. Otherwise you'll have to sign your name. here at the podium, I'm going to ask those that are wanting to speak to come forth. And you can also start a line in the middle, and we'll allow you three minutes and there'll be a timer right here. So welcome at this time. Welcome. Please state your name and city you're from. >> Yes My name is Andre Tandu. I'm staying in Iowa City.

Yes >> Yes. Good evening, mayor and city council members. As I say, my name is Andre Tandu. I'm a member of Congolese community here in Iowa City. I want to speak today about why the community ID is important for people in my community. Many people in the Congo, Congolese community have lived through war, violence and persecution because of that fear. Stay with us. For a long time. Even when we are safe without identification, people are afraid to speak to the to police, afraid to report crimes and afraid to come forward. As witnessed. They worry that asking for people could bring trouble instead of protection. The community ID helps reduce that fear when people know they can show an ID that is recognized locally, they will. They feel safer interacting with police, school and the city services. They feel more confident calling for help and speaking up when something is wrong. I know people in my community who will never speak publicly, publicly or cooperate with authority in the if they did not have this ID with

it, they feel seen and protects. Has member of the city. Community ID do not make Iowa City less safe. They make it safer because people are no longer hiding I respectfully ask the the city Council to stand with communities like mine and to support the community ID program by reaching out to Iowa legislators. Your leadership helps people feel safe enough to speak. Thank you for listening. >> Thank you. And I'm going to ask that we hold our applause. Thank you. Welcome. Please state your name and city you're from. >> Thank you. My name is Peter. I'm from Iowa City. I'm a teacher, so they teach us to, sandwich our criticism in between two compliments. So I want to give kudos to the public Works Department. There's a during the Rochester reconstruction, there was a transformer placed at the top of Ashwood Drive that was right in the line of sight, and that was probably not a big deal to a lot of people, but somebody would have died there eventually. And I went out there today and they're moving it. this is a year later or whatever, but that's really important, and I'm really glad that's happening. the main thing I wanted to talk about today was the local option sales tax. I don't think it's any surprise to people that people don't have a lot of confidence in government right now. international bodies, federal government, state government. This a lot of confusion and lack of transparency, lack of good governance in general. So, like, you guys are the last bastion we have of, like, something that I personally really believe in. I think that this government here

in Iowa City, in the 14 years I've lived here has always been excellent. on balance. So I want to read you the ballot language that I voted for for the local option sales tax revenues from the sales and services tax shall be allocated as follows 50% for property tax relief. et cetera. et cetera. So what's actually happening that I just read in the information packet is that like, I don't know, 10% is going for property tax relief and the other 40% or something. I'm making these numbers up is going for parks, projects and roads projects, which you can say, well, it would have been offset in the general fund if we would have, you know, so we can kind of call that property tax relief. But that's not what it is. If the Parks Department needs more money or the roads department needs more money, they need to ask for more money in the normal budget, 50% of the local option sales tax was sold in very plain language on the ballot. as property tax relief. And so now you guys are going to vote to not use it for that. And I think that's a bait and switch. And do I care that much about the property tax levy? I do I care about parks. Yes. Do I care about roads. Yes. The the problem is that that's bad governance because anyone who's paying attention feels like we were lied to in that regard. So I would encourage you to do that differently and, and go back and say, no, this was supposed to lower the levy rate and we should go through the budgeting process process some other way. And I'm not familiar with the details. but, I think it's important to, to really protect that faith and that trust that people have in you guys. I'm running out of time. So my other compliment is I was on my walk today, and the recycling guy, there was a bin that was halfway up someone's driveway and an older person lives there. He literally jumped out of his truck and ran up to the bin to see if they had forgotten to bring it out, and there was no recycling in it because they must be on vacation. But I just thought, there is a public servant who comes to work every day and

says, let's go, and I really. >> Appreciate you. Thank you. And I want to make sure. Did you sign in? I put my. >> Thing here. All right. Perfect. And the first speaker, did you sign in? Yep, yep. and then I'll encourage anyone that is still waiting that in the back. There is a sticker or a sheet of paper that you can fill out and just drop it in the basket. You can do that. Yes. All right. Welcome. Please state your name and city you're from.

Yes. Hello. Good evening. My name is Mohammed and I am a member of the Sudanese community here in Iowa City. I'm here tonight to just clarify what community ID is and most importantly, what it's not. There has been confusion about this program, and I want to be very clear that the community ID is not a driver's license and it's not a state or federal ID and cannot be used to vote or register to vote. It also cannot be used to access state or federal benefits, and cannot be used to board to board an airplanes or prove immigration status. The community ID is a local limited form of identification designed to help people identify themselves in everyday situations, especially when interaction with local situations or emergency services. For many people, this ID is the only way they can safely identify themselves if they are a victim of a crime. A witness, or some sometimes just calling for help When people understand the limits of the community ID, it becomes clear that this program is about safety, dignity and trust, not politics. Right now, this local program is being challenged by legislation at the state level because Iowa City has firsthand experience with how this program works. Your voices as city leaders is important. I respectfully ask City Council to support the community ID by the following. First, communicating with the state legislators about the true purpose and limited scope of this program. Second, asking legislators to allow Iowa City and Johnson County to keep a tool that improves local safety. And third, continuing to stand publicly behind this program as local situations that meets real community needs

Keeping the community ID helps people feel safe enough to come forward, speak up, and cooperate when it matters most. Thank you for your time and listening. Thank you And we'll ask that you hold applause and reactions. Thank you Welcome. Please state your name and city you're from.

Amy Hernandez, North Liberty, Iowa. I am here on behalf of the Immigrant Welcome Network of Johnson County. My name is Amy Hernandez, and I am a first generation daughter of Salvadorian parents. I am here speaking on behalf of the immigrant community who cannot speak out due to fear and safety concerns. I'm here to speak about community ID, which directly impacts Johnson County and Iowa City, and to respectfully ask for your support in protecting a locally approved program that has benefited our community. On January 21st, community members and advocates from Immigrant Welcome Network of Johnson County and Iowa Immigrant Migrant Movement of Justice traveled to the state House to testify on House Bill 552. This bill wants to prohibit local government from issuing community ID cards. Approximately 75 community members testified, including immigrants, service providers, and advocates. Every speaker opposed the bill, sharing how community ID improved public safety, trust, and cooperation. Despite this, strong community opposition, the subcommittee voted to advance the bill to the full committee. This legislation matters deeply to Johnson County and Iowa City because Johnson County currently is the only county in Iowa City with a community ID program, many people assume community ID are only for immigrants. In reality, this program serves a wide range of residents, including seniors who no longer drive people who lost documents due to fires and other emergency individuals experiencing homelessness, and young people without access to state issued IDs. The Johnson County Community ID is a limited local tool. It does not grant federal benefits, does not replace state or federal identification, and cannot be used for federal purposes. Its purpose is practical to allow residents to safely identify themselves in everyday interactions with local institutions, emergency services, and law enforcement.

From our direct experience working with community members, the most significant impact of the community ID programs have been improved. Public safety. When people feel safe identifying themselves, they are more likely to report crimes and cooperate with law enforcement. When fear increases, people are more likely to stay silent and silent makes communities less safe for everyone. For this reason, I respectfully ask the City Council to take the following action. First, I respectfully encourage City Council members to communicate directly with state legislators and your lobbyists to express concern about HSB 552 and its impact on Iowa City residents. Second, I invite the Iowa City Police chief and officers to there to share their professional perspective with legislators, particularly on how community ID supports cooperative corporations reporting and community safety. Thank you for your time, leadership and consideration. And I invite the members of the Immigrant Welcome Network of Johnson County to rise and stand with me. Thank you. >> Thank you, and thanks. We have one more. Speaker, two more speakers. Oh, I'm sorry, we weren't supposed to clap, but welcome Iowa. Welcome network. All right. Welcome. Yes. >> okay. Good evening, mayor and members of the city council. My name is Badri Farajallah, and I am a part of Sudanese community in Iowa City. I want to share why the community ID matters to us and how your leadership can help protect it. Right now. Sorry. in my community, many people have experienced and deep disturbed of authority because of what they live through. Before coming to the United States like me, three years of war. I am serving with USAID for 20 years. I have. I received this SIV to come here after I came here more than 2 or 3 months, I was waiting for my

documents. So I am very fear of going out of home. Okay the community ID changed that. It gives people confidence that they can identify themselves and be treated with dignity. It helps people trust between the community, and it builds the trust between the community and law enforcement. And when trust exists, people come forward to report crimes, to cooperate and to help keep everything safe. Iowa City is safer when everyone feels able to speak up. That is definitely right. Right now, this program is being threatened by state legislation. Being considered as the capital. Because of that, your voice as city leader is very important to us as a community. I respectfully ask the City Council to support the community ID in three ways. By communicating directly with the state legislators about why this program improves public safety in Iowa City. As my colleague said before, by inviting our by inviting by inviting or encouraging the Iowa City Police chief to share their professional perspective with the legislators about how community ideas support cooperation and trust. And lastly, by continuing to, publicly to publicly affirm the city's support for this program as a local decision. That means local needs your leadership, helps protect programs that allow people like me and my neighbors and my colleagues to feel safe enough to speak. Thank you for your time, and thank you for listening to our voice. And God bless you. >> Thank you.

Welcome. Please state your name and city you're from.

Thank you. >> My name is malleable. I am a leader in a Congolese community, in French speaking Swahili and Lingala. Speaking of African descent, I'm also a former central worker justice board member. Through my work there, I firsthand saw the program. That's the community ID helped people. I was directly involved advancing community ID program in Johnson County at the center for justice. We work with people from Latino Americans, African descent like Congolese Sudanese community and many other communities. People were working, raising family and contributing to Iowa City. yet live in fear because they lack identity. That fear had real consequences. People were afraid to report crime. I was with those people when they were afraid. Afraid to speak with the police. I was with those people. I spoke on their behalf and afraid to come forward as witnesses. That silence made our entire community less safer. The community ID changed that. It reduced fear, build trust, and made people more willing to cooperate with law enforcement and access local services that benefit immigrant community. And it's threatened public safety for everyone. Community ID do not create danger, fear does. And this program reduces fear. As this program is being challenged at the state level. Iowa City must continue to lead like you guys are leading. I urge you, the city, the city of Iowa City City Council to firmly stand

behind the community ID community ID communicating its public safety value to the state legislative. Please speak up and support law enforcement voices. Who knows? This program work. This is a local solution to a real local need. I have to say a work. We have to see work and we have to work together. Thank you. >> Thank you. And thanks to everybody that came today to speak during public comment. Thank you so much. >> All right.

We're going to move on in our agenda with nine planning and zoning matters. Nine a zoning code text amendment, state preemptions ordinance amending title 14 zoning to ensure compliance with changes in state law related to home occupations. Consumer fireworks sales, exterior building materials, variances, and accessory dwelling units. This is the second consideration and staff is requesting expedited action. >> I have a card. I get to do it this time. Josh.

Who was. >> Going to. play chicken? >> I move that the rule requiring the ordinances must be considered and voted on for passage at two city council. Two council meetings prior to the remaining at which is at which it is to be finally passed, be suspended that the second consideration and vote be waived, and that the ordinance be voted on for final passage. At this time. >> Moved by Wiley.

Second. >> Seconded by Moe. All right. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? If so, please come forth. If you're online, please raise your virtual hand. Seeing no one in person or online. Council discussion. Roll call please. >> Salih. Yes. >> Teague. Yes. >> Yes. Alter. Yes. >> Bergus. Yes. Harmsen. Yes. Mo. >> Yes. Motion passes 7 to 0. Could I get a motion to pass and adopt? So moved. Alter. >> Second. Bergus. All right. Roll call please. >> Teague. Yes. >> Yes. Alter. Yes. >> Bergus.

Yes. >> Harmsen. Yes. Mo. Yes. Yes. >> Motion passes 7 to 0. All right. We are on to our item number ten, which is our Regular Formal Agenda ten. A is city Park shelter replacement resolution, approving project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the City Park Shelter Replacement Project. Establishing amount of bids. Security to accompany each bid. Directing City Clerk to post notice to bidders and fixing time and place for receipt of bids. I'm going to open the public hearing and welcome.

Hi. Julie Seidel Johnson, director of Parks and Recreation. here to talk about the City Park Shelter project. This is going to be a rehab of basically all of City Park or most of it. I'm excited to move forward with this. With the changes happening both at City Park Pool and Terrel Mill skate park. so basically what this does, is it renovates most of the shelters in Lower City Park. It's going to remove six shelters, replace them with five shelters and renovate one restroom and then an upper. And I'll go through this on the next slide in more detail in the Upper City Park. It'll remove four shelters and replace them with three shelters, one large and two small. And then there's several bid alternates. the shelters were chosen based on the amount of use that they've gotten. of whether they're being replaced with smaller or larger sizes. So basically, the best way to describe this in Upper City Park by City Park Pool, there are three currently or there were three shelters to the west of the pool and one restroom. The restroom was already taken out as part of the City Park pool project. Because the restrooms are now going to be attached to the pool building, there were three large shelters there, and one by the by the historic cabins. One of those shelters was taken out for us by an errant Karr who overshot the parking lot. so we have now have two, but so two of those will be replaced on the west side of the pool. One the larger one will be placed closer to the pool, taking advantage of the paths from the pool to give us better Ada access and have the larger of the two shelters closer to the pool and then shelter what was previously shelter one is replaced on the far west side by the parking area, and then there'll be a shelter, replaced by the city park cabins. once again, a smaller shelter closer to the parking area to give it better Ada access. So as

we bring this shelters back that we're putting back in, they say stay similar locations to where the shelters were, but they are slightly moved for a couple reasons. First of all, in a lot of cases, moving them closer to the road or the parking gave us better access and shorter amounts of ground to have to pave to give us paved access. We're also very cognizant of all the large, mature trees in Upper City Park. So in order to minimize the amount of construction damage that might happen with any kind of construction under those trees, some of them have moved to more of the open spaces. So that's Upper City Park, lower City Park. The first thing the three things that aren't changing there is, first of all, the restrooms and shelter by the Riverside Festival stage and then shelter six, which is the large green roofed shelter. And then there is a new, smaller shelter that's by the adventure playground area. So those three remain the same. The shelters that potentially go away are a smaller one that was close to where the carnival rides used to be, and then another one by the boat ramp, or where the bocce courts used to be with the city park master plan. From 2016, we've been gradually moving everything, shifting it away from the river and up towards the hillside. Hence why carnival rides are no longer there. The bocce court is no longer there. So those are the two that potentially would go away. There is an indoor shelter kind of by the central part of the lower city park, by the lake that is going away, but it's being replaced by the indoor room or community room that's going with the indoor pool or with the city park pool, sorry, city park pool above. So that shelter goes away and it essentially moves to Upper City Park. and then the other shelters remaining would be replaced. The restrooms near the adventure playground area will be renovated. so they will stay the same as a historic building, one of the I think it's the last building left from the old zoo

that used to be in the park. so we're going to renovate that, keep the restrooms there. And then one of the the alternates, one of the alternates is to replace the other restroom in Lower City Park. Not the one by the stage, but the one kind of by the horseshoe courts. That's an alternate. If we don't do the alternate, that restroom would stay and we'd keep it as serviceable as long as we possibly could. So just a lot of moving parts in this one. A lot of different alternates depending on how the bids come in, how much of it we can do. But I think overall it's going to give the whole park just a really nice facelift. and really create a nice, you know, updated atmosphere. This is how the restroom will be. changed by the the adventure play area. Estimated cost 1.3 million. schedule bid letting March 3rd contract award March 10th. And then construction over the summer.

So can I don't know if I heard this correctly. Are you is it are you replacing the park restroom facilities next to the stage? >> No, nothing. Nothing happens. No modification. No modifications to the restrooms or the little shelter that's by the stage. >> Okay, that remains the same. They got a new sewer sewer line with the pool project, though. >> But.

Okay. Yeah. >> That'll help. Julie, you mentioned that the sizing of the new replacement shelters and the question of, like, reducing or, you know, taking out a couple, understanding the one replacement of the interior, one moving up to the pool, building. You said that was based on, like, just user statistics. Can you say a little bit more about that, like what you looked at.

And yeah, so it's not an exact science, but we look at two different two different things. First of all is our actual rentals of the shelters. And we know which ones are most popular in City Park and by and large is very popular throughout. Our other one is the trash and garbage. we can tell how much a shelter has been used by how much garbage we're taking away from it on a regular basis. So not a perfect measure, but we think it's pretty accurate. We also look at where the heavier user areas are in the park with, like the new adventure play areas. We've got people playing there more. along the paths and trails. All those things come into play. We had a public meeting I should mention back in August 13th in the park, the residents surrounding the users that came thought that the ones we chose were accurate as far as using and not using at that time too.

Thank you. >> To the. Replaced or updated park structures get electricity I do not remember off the top of my head how many? Some do and some do not. Basically, if they have them now we would keep it. I don't think we're adding any at this point. And then I had a it's kind of really related to the stage park, but do you put bike racks at these park shelters? That is as part of the alternate. But it's also another thing that we look at adding as we renovate each facility is where we can put more bike racks. It's great to have a bike rack by that stage.

But the that wouldn't be part of this project. But we could certainly look. >> We could drag it over right Thanks. >> Here are no more questions. Thank you. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? If you're online, please raise your virtual hand Seeing no one in person or online council discussion. >> Need to close the public hearing. Mayor. >> Oh yes, I'm going to close the public hearing. Can I get a motion to approve, please? >> So moved.

Second Harmsen. >> All right. Council discussion. >> In spite Julie talking about not having that particular piece of information about the electric whether it was electrified. I'm pretty much just staggered that you ran through that entire thing without notes. So it says this is deeply embedded in what you have been focused on. So I appreciate that. Absolutely Roll call please. One line. >> Yes. Alter. Yes. Bergus. >> Yes. Harmsen. Yes. Mo. Yes. >> Yes. Teague. >> Yes.

Motion passes 7 to 0. We're at ten. Be termination of Lord TIF District ordinance. Repealing ordinance number zero four, 4024. Providing for the division of taxes levied on taxable property in the Lower Muscatine Road and highway six urban renewal area in the city of Iowa City, Iowa, pursuant to section 403.19 of the Iowa Code of the of the Code of Iowa. This is the first consideration. Can I get a motion, please? So moved. >> Second alter.

All right. And welcome, Jeff. >> All right. Council, I'm going to present on both of these items at once because they're very similar. We're just talking to the same action on two different geographic areas. so urban renewal areas and TIF districts, these often get these terms often get used interchangeably, but they are very different in urban renewal areas, defined as a geographic area in which you would city would like to see various urban renewal projects take place that could be private public partnerships, infrastructure and such a TIF district is an area defined within that urban renewal area that provides a financing tool to help you achieve those goals. So an urban renewal area could have multiple TIF districts within it. when you're creating an urban, when you're creating a TIF district, if that's your goal, you start with the urban renewal plan, which defines the urban renewal area, and then you can locate the the TIF district within that. we are here tonight on both these items, doing the reverse. so we are taking a couple of urban renewal areas as our ultimate goal off the off the books. And you have to do this in reverse order. So we start by terminating, the TIF district, which is, what you have in front of you. So when it comes to TIF, there's multiple types of TIF. You may hear this as the legislature talks TIF reforms, there are some TIF districts with no statutory sunset periods in which they can live forever. If a if a city wants to allow that a lot of other tiffs are set on 20 years. Those are the ones based on an economic development designation as opposed to a slum and blight designation. And we're talking about in both these cases tonight, economic development, designations for these TIF districts. So the first one is the determination of the Lower Muscatine Road highway six TIF

district. this was adopted in 2002, based on economic development. And it appears to us as it was a prospective type of action. So the city did this without having a specific project in mind, but at the time felt like it could be needed to enhance, the economic activity in that area. this district was never put to use. There was never a project in there. and staff sees no reason to maintain it. at this point it's been well over 20 years, although there's never any debt certified there. And the second one is just to the east. It's the Industrial Park Road TIF. This was adopted at the same time, again as part of a larger strategy at that time to bolster some of the industrial activity at the city again, this TIF district was never put to use. There was never any certified debt, never any projects contained. And staff is comfortable taking it off, off of the books at this time. this is the schedule. And the last point on this slide is what we want to reiterate. this doesn't take Tiff off the table forever. If we eventually were to identify a need for that, we will create a new urban renewal area with the city Council's blessing, we would bring a new TIF district and ultimately present you with whatever project that may be. We don't foresee that happening in the near future, but this action does not preclude you or a future council from doing that. years down the road. Happy to answer any questions. >> Does this have any impact or will it have any impact on some of the work that Greater Iowa City is doing? with that Sycamore Mall area being kind of designated zone? >> Yeah, this this map is taken from the plan. It's a little older, but you can kind of see the hash marked area here. This sits,

just to the east of that main corridor and the Strategic Investment District. that greater Iowa City has been working on. So we are already planning to create a new urban renewal in that area that's going to shift the boundaries to more of the commercial side of things, as opposed to the industrial side, which this focused on. so there are plans in place to accommodate that. But this action does not inhibit us from achieving the goals outlined in their Strategic investment district. Is there any reason other than just good bookkeeping and cleaning up our districts to get rid of them, to sunset them?

I think it's I think we came to the conclusion that it's the appropriate thing to do. although, you know, what the the statute says is that it's 20 years after debt is certified. It's been more than 20 years and we haven't pursued a project. We don't have any in the in the queue. So we think it's appropriate. You may call it bookkeeping. and that's largely what it is. But to have these hanging out there for extended periods of times when really the intent is for short term, urban renewal is probably in our view, it's not the best thing. So we'd like to clean them up and revisit it in the future if we feel like we need it. >> Thanks.

All right. Thank you. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online council discussion Roll call. Please. Alter Yes. Bergus. Yes. Harmsen. Yes. Mo. Yes. Yes. >> Teague. Yes. >> Yes.

Motion passes 7 to 0 ten C. Termination of Industrial Park Road TIF district ordinance repealing ordinance numbers zero two through zero two. Dash 4025. Providing for the division of taxes levied on taxable property in the industrial park road, urban Renewal Area and the city of Iowa City, Iowa. Pursuant to section 403. 19 of the Code of Iowa. This is the first consideration. Can I get a motion, please? >> So moved.

Second. Moe. >> All right. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online council discussion. Roll call please. Bergus. Yes. Harmsen. Yes. Mo. Yes. Yes. >> Teague. Yes. >> Yes. Alter. >> Yes.

Motion passes 7 to 0. Item ten D is assessment schedule resolution. Adopted an assessment schedule of unpaid mowing. Cleanup of property. Snow removal. Sidewalk repair and stop box repair charges and directing the city clerk to certify the same to the Johnson County Treasurer for collection in the same manner as property taxes. Can I get a motion to approve, please? >> So moved.

Second alter. >> Anyone from the public like to address this topic? If you're online, please raise your virtual hand. Seeing no one in person or online council discussion. >> I guess I have a question when when we send this to the treasurer and the owner came and said, oh, I can pay it now. Is that possible? Or after it be referred? That's it. >> certainly the property owner can pay at any time. and that would be welcome. But we've communicated with the property owners numerous times leading up to this point. So one would assume that if that was their intent, they would have already done so.

But there is opportunity for that. Yes. When they see, for example, this one being referred to their tax. And now, like this is serious and I'm going to go and pay it. So it's not going to come to my tax right. >> Then they could choose to either pay it separately if they wanted. I assume that that would still be an option with the county treasurer, or they could just simply pay their property taxes with this extra assessment as they would otherwise do. >> All right. Roll call please. >> Harmsen. Yes. >> No. Yes. Yes. >> Teague. Yes. >> Online. Yes. Alter. Yes. >> Bergus.

Yes. >> Motion passes 7 to 0. We're at item number 11. Announcements of vacancies. New 11 A is going to be Historic Preservation Commission. One vacancy for an East College Street representative to fill an unexpired term upon appointment through June 30th, 2027. And applications must be received by 5 p.m. Tuesday, March 31st, 2026. Can I get a motion to accept correspondence? >> So moved. Second. >> All in favor, say aye.

Aye. >> Any opposed? Motion passes 7 to 0. Number 12 is. Announcements of vacancies. Previous 12 a and we have the Civil Service Commission. One vacancy to fill a four year term. Human Rights Commission one vacancy to fill an unexpired term. Library. Board of trustees one vacancy to fill an unexpired term. Applications must be received by 5 p.m. Tuesday, March 3rd, 2026. Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment one vacancy to fill a five year term. Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment one vacancy to fill a five year term. Board of appeals one vacancy for a Licensed Electrician to fill a five year term. Court of appeals one vacancy for HVAC professional to fill an unexpired term. Historic Preservation Commission one vacancy for a Brown Street representative to fill a three year term. Historic preservation Preservation Commission one vacancy for a Jefferson Street representative to fill a three year term. Historic Preservation Commission one vacancy for Woodlawn Avenue representative to fill a three year term. Vacancies will remain open until filled We are on to item number 13. This is city Council information and updates And any board or commissions that you, were on that you want to report on at this time.

The Iowa City Assessor Evaluation Committee meets shortly before our meeting today. The information you received is pretty consistent with what we got. just a longer version of that meeting where we could sort of see, both the good work that our assessor does, our city assessor does also. Why we have a city assessor. we don't have to have one. That was a choice long ago. and also just some interesting work that they do. tracking property tax and property tax form reform over the years and how it impacts the city. So, it was instructive for me. And if you guys get a chance to be on this, committee in the future, it's kind of helpful to understand the mystery of assessment. >> Yeah.

I think all of us were in the MPO meeting. Most of us was not there. >> Sorry. I Karr trouble. So not planned. >> Yeah, yeah, of course, I don't know. >> I was able to attend my first meeting and in that it was actually very robust. It was like two hours long. but the big takeaway that I think is really relevant here is that we got a legislative update from a gentleman, and he was sort of talking about what the legislative climate is right now. And he said as much as property tax reform is, what, you know, is in the papers and is the priority, he said that the amount of tension that is going on with the carbon capture and the pipeline actually rises above and could stymie because there's so many moving parts and there's like three different plans, none of which are close to one another. that actually the results of what happens with carbon capture could impact property tax reform. So that was the takeaway. And there was a lot of other stuff. But I just kind of zeroed in on that and was like, oh, whoa. So just something for us to keep an eye on. >> as the student government liaison, I feel like, I don't know if right now is the time to talk about the. Well, I'll, I know we were already reminded, but we, have the town hall coming up. I don't know how many folks are planning on attending. If we can't have a quorum or if we can't have a quorum.

We can have a quorum. We typically notice it up like any other public meeting. >> Okay. I just wanted to make sure about that, because. >> That's a good question. I'm glad you asked. >> Okay.

Yes. Council information. I was in the not like a reporting rate. Oh, I myself and a lot people we went to Des Moines and attend the community ID and unfortunately it passed the subcommittee and now it's coming to the full committee. And as you see, a lot people come today and talked about that and how this is important. So I encourage you to reach out to those 22 members of the committee and encourage them to keep something that really was unique to Johnson County. And, it being created by, elected officials who know their county very well and the needs. So that's why this community ID being you know, approved a long time ago and people are using it for like now, many years. And it make our community safer. It make the people, you know, feel like belonging. And it makes them just a simple thing. They can identify themselves. >> And, and I'll just say, like what other folks said about community ID, it's not just for immigrants. I mean, it's for anybody in many different situations. But one thing years ago that it was kind of called out to the community is even if you don't need one, go get one and normalize it. I've had one for years, and I love using it. So yeah, yeah, yeah.

Okay. All right. I can comment on that. But I want to make sure we're not doing open meetings, law violating that. so I had the opportunity to go to Washington, D.C. this past week. mayor pro tem also I went to the US Conference of Mayors, as well as MIT, which is the Mayor's Innovation project, and Mayor pro tem was able to join. she went to the, MIT great conversation throughout. I won't, talk about all that happened, but there was a lot of great conversations between big city mayors and mayors that have similar fields to Iowa City that are university communities. And I can tell you that there are so many similarities that it was totally shocking. the things that folks are talking about just a few highlights that I wanted to mention. And I know Jeff certainly want to you know, keep us abreast. Anything that happens with housing. so Senator Elizabeth Warren came to talk to the, the group, and she talked about, the Road to Housing Act. that is happening in, in, in that if it does pass now, it passed the Senate, but it is kind of held up in the House, but there will be some great things coming through that. And it really is comprehensive. when you think about, the lifespan of housing, from prevention true prevention to all types of housing opportunities, including manufactured housing, where folks can access federal dollars for loans because that's something that they can't do right now. but it was a lot of great things. They talked about plan books, which for me, I'm thinking that's foreign based code where you can go in and, you know, pick out some,

some some, some housing types or projects, developers would probably love that. There's a lot of things that happen when it came down to. Dollars. we heard from Ohio what they're doing with theirs. Durham, North Carolina. what they're doing with their funds. And I want to say that Durham, North Carolina, they had a community safety link that they showed us, and it really had a full gamut, kind of a one stop shop for social services is the best way that I can describe it. And so they use some of their opioid dollars towards that and some innovative programs that came through that data centers were also a big topic. throughout this convention in various ways. you know, I think there is a lot of conversations happening around it. my walk away is that data centers are going to happen. throughout our nation. And, you know, I think, cities just want to make sure that they're having conversations. And from the, from the beginning. putting up some guardrails as well as understanding how can they benefit the community? other than that, there are a lot of great things happening, but a lot of the conversation did center around ice and what's happening. I can tell you that I was among a bunch of Democratic mayors. and so, there was a lot of similarities and thoughts and, hopes for getting beyond this, and for the damage that is doing to communities throughout our nation. So there are great opportunities through this, conference and really enjoyed the opportunity to go and

represent the city of Iowa City. All right. We're going to move on to item number 14, which is report on items from city staff, city manager's office, city attorney's office. Nothing for me. Thank you. >> All right. City clerk. Thank you. >> And we're at item number 15. Can I get a motion to adjourn, please? Moved. Second. >> Seconded by. All in favor, say aye. Any opposed? We are adjourned. He beat you? 659. not 70. Oh, I like.