Candidate Forum Answers

Are you for or against the "One University Place" development project?

I am for the development and the benefits, both tangible and intangible, that it would bring. Easily enough to quantify is the benefit of the community room, the improvements to the Sunset/Melrose intersection and the opportunity for increased tax revenues. It is more difficult to quantify the diversification of neighbors, increasing commercial opportunities, or having a “downtown”. Imagine the opportunities and programs the community room alone would open up! I understand that those may not be seen as benefits to everyone, that some would like to keep University Heights a sleepy bedroom community. Frankly, I am not one of those: I find the opportunities a business district would offer exciting and evolutionary.


What kind of development is most appropriate at the St. Andrew Church site?

The church has been a wonderful neighbor and I would not be disappointed if they decided to stay. But they have been blessed with a growing congregation, and if they decide that a move is necessary for them, I am in favor of the property being used to advance the community, both financially and evolutionary. Financially, it is important to recognize what is economically feasible given today’s

Budgets and Local Option Sales Tax

Before running for council in 2009 I spent time going over city budgets to familiarize myself with what U-Heights financial history was. I noted during that campaign we ran a $39,000 deficit in the year ending June 30, 2009, but was able to cover that with carryover.

In July 2009 we started receiving Local Option Sales Tax (LOST) money.  That money seems to be hard to track since it is considered general revenue and resides in the general fund of our budget. Below is a snapshot at year end of our last 4 budgets. Two budgets without LOST, two with:
 

Budget Category	6/30/2008	6/30/2009	6/30/2010	6/30/2011
Total Income (minus LOST)	668,511.91	703,523.24	838,780.24	1,130,333.03
Total Expense	858,864.18	742,664.64	853684.96	1,221,674.74
Net Ordinary Income	-190,352.27	-39,141.40	-14,904.72	-91,341.71
Other Income/Expense
Sale of General Obligation Bond	240,000.00
Local Option Sales Tax			101,475.67	123,014.41
Repay Sidewalk Project Loan				-150,000.00
Loan Draws for Sidewalk Project				150,000.00
Total Other Income	240,000.00		101,475.67	123,014.41
Net Income	49,647.73	-39,141.40	86,570.95	31,672.70

I purposely separated out LOST from ordinary income so make it effect easier to track.

In each of the last four years our ordinary expenses have outpaced our ordinary income. In 2008 in our Other Income we had $240K in bonds to pay for the Highland Ave. street repairs. In 2009 we had no sources of other income. In 2010 and 2011 we have had local option sales tax money.

Watching our budget will be critical for our next city council.

Candidate Forum Answers

1. Are you for or against the "One University Place" development project?

Let me begin by saying that I believe St. Andrew has been a wonderful neighbor to our community and none of us like to see wonderful neighbors leave, so if the church decides  stay I will be pleased.

If they do decide to move I do support the One University Place Project. This Smart Growth development with Leed Certification will provide a community center for our city and support a walkable, liveable community impression. The resizing of the two units, minimal impact on the ravines and the exit only on to Melrose have helped to alleviate many prior concerns of citizens. Traffic congestion will be reduced and safety will be improved at the Sunset and Melrose intersection.

The diversity of housing being offered by the development and the limited, but appropriate commercial establishments will enhance the attractiveness of our

St. Andrew Church's Right of First Refusal

I met with a resident who asked me about the right of first refusal agreement that the University of Iowa has with St. Andrew Church that Amanda Whitmer mentioned at the Forum on Tuesday evening. This is best described by a letter University Heights received from St. Andrew Church in 2009. Here is a link to that letter.

February 20, 2009 Letter to City of University Heights

The gist of that agreement is that if any other developer would make an offer for the St. Andrew Property, which the Church feels is acceptable, then the Church would have an obligation to go to the University of Iowa to see if they would want to match the offer and purchase the property. The University of Iowa declined to match Mr. Maxwell’s offer in 2007 when the Church went to the University officials. Would they do so now since we have had the floods of 2008 in Iowa City and the University now owns the University Athletic Club plus the land north of the church? I would expect this high and dry land adjacent to their other properties to be desirable to them.

Since Mr. Maxwell has dropped all his contingencies and will own the property if the Church decides to sell then I doubt if the University will need to be asked. However, is pretty clear to me that there is little chance of any other private developer being able to purchase this land before the University would step in and purchase.

Candidate Forum Answers

1. Are you for or against the "One University Place" development project?

St Andrew has been an important part of University Heights for fifty years.  It’s fine with me if they decide not to move.  But in the event they do decide to move, the next use of this parcel needs to be a tax paying proposition.   There has been much discussion about what type of project should be supported here, but the city does not set the value of the property and the value of the property will drive the type of development.

We have all heard that Maxwell has offered the church $4 million dollars for this property.  The “One University Place” development is based on this value.   At the present time the final design is still not decided.  There have been many changes made to the original plan, many of them at the request of the community such as the height of the building, the setback, the number of units, the number of parking spaces.

When the plans for the “One University Place” development are agreed upon by the developer, the council and members of the public, I will be for this project.  I did not come to this decision lightly. I gave it a lot of thought.  Like it or not, our community is at a turning point.  I want the

Candidate Forum Answers

Below were my notes from the Candidate's Forum. While my answers may have been slightly different, this is the gist of how I answered each question.

1.  Are you for or against the "One University Place" development project?

I am for this for several reasons. Some “hard” reasons are we have a small budget and are both landlocked and have nearly no empty buildable space left to develop. We have the oldest average aged housing stock in the county, and residential tax valuations are projected to be flat. If the church decides to move, a nearly 5 acre parcel on the intersection of our two arterials is the best place for a slightly more dense mixed commercial and residential development. Some “soft” reasons are that without significant commercial or public space we have no place to easily congregate and become a true community. In the absence of an identified sense of University Heights “SELF” we are basically just another Iowa City neighborhood. The benefits of this development will help to guarantee the financial independence as well as the high quality living standards that make University Heights a treasured home.

2.  What kind of development is most appropriate at the St. Andrew Church site?

As I said in my first answer, the intersection of our two arterials, one of which is a major arterial for the greater metropolitan area, is a good one for mixed commercial and multi

The Use of Tax Increment Financing

I am generally not in favor of TIFs. I do not like the idea of subsidizing free enterprise with public funds, and forcing businesses to pay taxes to their competitors. I also feel that if a project won’t be profitable without public money, it’s not a worthwhile project.


However, there are some facts that are unique to our situation that mitigate these concerns. For the first concern, our community has only two other businesses that might be affected, and I would be in favor of requesting that no businesses go into the development that compete with our existing commercial properties. As a landlord, I am not particularly concerned with rental competition: I feel my location and property are not in direct competition with any rentals the condo might contain, and they would fall into a higher price range than Grandview.


For the second concern, I think it’s important to ask if THIS developer will go ahead with the project if the TIF is not offered. This question is important because if Maxwell does not do the project, the right of first refusal falls to the University. If the University buys the property, it definitely falls off the tax rolls and many of the benefits associated with developing the property are lost. It will continue to be exempt from the tax rolls, and you can be sure the University will not solicit the amount of input into whatever project they decide to build that Maxwell has. While there is no way to know for sure the answer to “will it go ahead without public money?”, my guess is “no” because despite the amount of money Maxwell has already spent in development to date, he has disclosed his profit margins to us with and without the financing. If I were Maxwell, I would use my time and resources to complete a project with a margin more consistent with industry norms instead of this one if the TIF is not granted.


What are we receiving in exchange for TIF? This is difficult to quantify, because we would receive both tangible and intangible benefits from our investment. Easily enough to quantify is the benefit of the community room, the improvements to the Sunset/Melrose intersection and the opportunity for increased tax revenues. What else are we receiving? It is more difficult to quantify the diversification of neighbors, increasing commercial opportunities exponentially, or having a “downtown”. I understand that those may not be seen as benefits to everyone, that some would like to keep University Heights a sleepy bedroom community. I am not one of those: I find the opportunities a business district would offer exciting and evolutionary. How much I am willing to part with my tax dollars to fund those opportunities is a matter for consideration and will be based on the numbers.


As a landlocked community with limited opportunities for growth, I feel that TIF is a tool to purchase a much-needed benefit. The current structure limits the City’s liability upfront by refunding only the tax revenues generated, and I believe there is enough public good in this for-profit enterprise to justify the use.

OUP: How Big is the Back Building?

To continue the look at the One University Place project's buildings started in an earlier post, OUP How Big is the Front Building? we can now focus on the back building.

At a city council meeting, during public comment, it was  stated that the back residential building is as large as the Levitt Center on the UI campus.Let's compare those two buildings

One University Place:

http://www.university-heights.org/

Levitt Center:

https://www.uifoundation.org/lcua/

Here is a breakdown of their comparative sizes:

Building	Height	Width	Length
OUP back bldg	Reception room 62’ 5th floor 50’	83’	280’
Levitt Center	Peaks- 92’ Parapet 84’	Office- 62’ Rotunda-102’	274’

In length and width One University Place is similar to the Levitt Center. The significant difference is in the height. The top of the major horizontal line at the Levitt Center is at 84', while the major horizontal at the top of One University Place is 30 feet lower.

Another good visual comparison is that the top of the cross at the current St. Andrew Church is 57'.

The closest home to the back building is at Birkdale which is 240 feet away.

Given that the building is sited at the back of the property and that ravines and mature trees are found on both the east and west sides, it seems to me that the back building is not over-sized for its surroundings.

University Heights Needs to Move Forward--Press Citizen Guest Opinion

This Guest Opinion appeared in the Iowa City Press Citizen on August 29, 2011

As a citizen who attended the recent work session for the University Heights City Council, I would like to offer my observations.

This work session was called after discussion of the 34 points in the Maxwell Developer's Agreement was deferred at the Aug. 9 regular council meeting. Based on the progress that occurred at this work session, I feel the citizens of University Heights have finally received a great deal of clarity about One University Place and what it will offer.

Candidate Forum Updated 10/21/11

The eight city council candidates and one mayoral candidate will all appear at a forum on October 25th, from 7:00 to 9:15 pm at the University Club, 1360 Melrose Ave.

We strongly encourage you to please attend this highly informative program.

Here are the questions to be answered by all the candidates:
UPDATE 10/21/2011 : The organizers for the University Heights Candidate Forum have modified the questions in response to public input.

1. Are you for or against the "One University Place" development project?
2. What kind of development is appropriate at the St. Andrew church site?
3. Are you in favor of TIF financing for development at the St. Andrew church site?
4. How do you view the financial condition of University Heights and how would you monitor and make adjustments in the future, if necessary? Are you in favor of the City using the PUD process, development agreement, TIF and/or other means as a way to prevent ownership of the church property by a tax-exempt entity?
5. Do you think city services and city infrastructure are adequate in University Heights? How do you view the financial condition of University Heights and how would you monitor and make adjustments in the future, if necessary? Do you think city services and city infrastructure are adequate in University Heights?
6. What are your favorite things about University Heights?

Candidates answers are to be no longer than 2 minutes each.
The candidates will rotate in their order of answers.
There will be a break after question 3.
Candidates will be available to speak with individuals after the forum.

Property Tax 101

While talking to people in town I get asked "Why can't we just raise taxes if the city  budget is tight?"

The largest portion of the city’s revenue comes from property taxes.  In Iowa, property tax is to be used only by government entities: schools, cities, counties.  Local assessments can also be made for hospitals, and taxing districts (water districts, fire districts, recreational lake districts, to name a few) can be formed to collect taxes that pay for the provided service.      

Government entities are permitted by state statute to impose a tax on real estate.  Residential and commercial real estate includes land and buildings.

    

A city is permitted to impose a property tax levy rate for its general fund not to exceed $8.10 per $1000 of assessed value.  Other supplemental levies are also permitted and the rates are specified by Iowa Code section 384.12.¹

Some levies must be authorized by ballot.  An example of this in University Heights is the library levy. 

A city can only impose those permissible levies to which it is entitled.  In University Heights these levies include the regular general levy ($8.10) and supplemental levies for transit, insurance, emergency levy, FICA and IPERS, and employee benefits.  I sometimes call these supplemental levies “stealth levies” because the city is able to impose them without voter approval. 

Until as recently as ten years ago, University Heights was able to meet its obligations using only the regular general levy ($8.10).  Today the regular general levy and every one of the supplemental levies that the city is qualified to receive are imposed.

This is why the city can’t “just raise taxes” when more money is needed.  We simply do not have the authority to assess any additional levies. 

Here is our city's budget sheet with notes that I've added to it. Click on the yellow boxes to find out more:

UH BUDGET SHEET

For further information about property tax in Iowa, see the “Legislative Guide to Local Property Tax”

Additional information can be found at the Iowa Auditors website.  

Grandview Neighbors

Reading Pat Yeggy’s post about the original discussions on Grandview in the 50’s was very interesting. The concerns expressed by University Heights Residents at that time on the Grandview Development reminded me of the current discussions about the St. Andrew Development. Fortunately the concerns expressed about Grandview endangering the sense of community have not developed. The young professionals living in Grandview are bringing energy and diversity to our community and I am proud to call them neighbors.

I’m confident the future residents of the St. Andrew Development will bring more positive improvements to our University Heights Community . We will all be pleased to call them neighbors.

OUP- How Big is the Front Building?

A frequent cricitism of the One University Place project is that it is "too big." I've spent a fair amount of time looking at the size of the buildings and tried to put them into perspective of their space and surroundings.

A good comparison for the front commercial/condo building is Oaknoll on Benton St. Visually  the new section of Oaknoll and One University Place front building are rather similar.

One University Place:

  
http://www.university-heights.org
 Oaknoll

http://www.oaknoll.com/

Here is a breakdown of their comparative sizes:

Building	Height	Width	Length
OUP front bldg	38’	62’	240’
Oaknoll	43’	225’	437.5’

Oaknoll is slightly taller and much larger than the front building.

Another good comparison is the distance from the front building to the neighboring houses. These are a measurements from structure to structure.

	Nearest Koser	Nearest Sunset	Nearest Melrose	Nearest Birkdale
OUP Front Bldg	170 ft	200 ft	200 ft	220 ft
	Nearest George	Nearest Benton
Oaknoll	75 ft	100 ft

The nearest Koser address houses are measured through their backyards, which generally already have privacy fences and mature plantings screening Melrose Ave. The nearest Sunset and Birkdale addresses will have significant plantings screening the view of One Univesity Place. These will be planted at the developer's expense. The nearest Melrose address is on the south east corner of the Melrose and Sunset intersection.

Both the Benton St. and George St. homes have their front doors opening on to Oaknoll.

My final comparions are of how far the buildings are set back from the street:

Building	Set back from street
OUP front bldg	33’
Oaknoll	25’

I don't think Oaknoll overwhelms its surroundings and it would appear that the front building of One University Place won't either.