A Hard Fought Campaign

Unofficial results from the Johnson County Auditor:

Candidate	Early Vote	Election Day	TOTAL
McGrath	145	141	286
Hopson	145	138	284
Leff	141	135	276
Haverkamp	94	179	273
Lane	97	171	268
Stewart	139	128	267
Yeggy	88	161	249
Whitmer	89	156	245

Speaking on behalf of Amanda, Jim and Pat we are gratified by the tremendous support we received while campaigning. It is a testament to the spirit and concern of our citizens  to have 60% turn out for the election.

Both Jim and I are humbled by your trust and will certainly work with everyone in city government to the best of our abilities.

Due to the one vote difference for the final seat on the council, a machine recount by the auditor's office is likely, before results of the election are certified.

Please Vote

U-H Polling Site:

St. Andrew Church
1300 Melrose Ave.

Polls open at 7:00 a.m.

Polls close at 8:00 p.m.

This is a request for you to participate in the greatest privilege in a democracy, and vote in our city election.

University Heights is at a crossroads and your vote is critical. In the 2009 election the margin of victory for the final seat on council was 2 VOTES. To say that your vote is important is not idle chatter.

One of the important things that makes University Heights great is that we participate in our local government to a degree unparalleled by our neighbors. A total election turnout of 60% of registered voters would not be surprising to any of us. Please do your part to contribute to our community.

And also remember that ALL NINE CANDIDATES for office in this election SUPPORT THE LIBRARY LEVY. VOTE YES TO SUPPORT LIBRARY SERVICES!

A "Right Sized" Campaign for U-Heights

Until the 2011 special election no candidate in University Heights had ever had to file a finance report with the Iowa Campaign and Ethics Board, because no one had ever had spent over the state regulated $750 limit.



In a report filed today, November 3, 2011, WeR4UH has raised $3,290.00 for the 2011 campaign and through October 19th had  spent $1,593.00. Their major expenditure was for 300 yard signs.

In addition to the above, four separate committees for Hopson, Leff, Stewart, and McGrath have also been created. These individual groups, will not have to report if they EACH stay under the $750 limit. 

To see all contributors and expenses so far, download the filed
We Are For UH Election Report

For the 2011 Special Election the Committee to Elect Rosanne Hopson raised $2,535 and spent $2,500

To see all contributors and expenses, download the filed Hopson Special Election Report

We believe that spending  $5,825 dollars for two elections, plus potentially up to $3,000 more ( from the 4 individual candidates) in a single year is too much.

As this blog shows, the candidates of "We Are University Heights Moving Forward" have tried to be informative and creative in explaining the complicated issues in this city election to members of our community.

What may not be quite so obvious is that we have also made a conscious effort to be frugal.

The decision for the five of us to work together in this election was not taken lightly. When it became apparent that we were faced with an organized, well funded campaign, we made a commitment to form a single group and not exceed the $750 expense limit that would require documenting expenditures and donations. We did this, not because we didn't want to disclose this information, but because our belief was that spending the equivalent of no more than 75 cents per resident was appropriate. We also consciously limited contributors to University Heights residents.

Our biggest expense has been 50 yard signs at $6 each.

However, the cornerstone of our campaign effort costs nothing. We have been going out door to door to residents and talking with them, as campaigns in a small town should. When demand for yard signs exceeded what was available, we took and re-made old signs left over from earlier elections. We have printed our own materials.  We have used "free" media such as this blog to express, expand and illuminate upon the ideas and facts behind the issues. Through these efforts we have tried to give as much detail as possible in order for U-H citizens to make informed decisions.

We have tried to campaign in a cost-conscious way. These skills should come in handy as we govern in the future, given the city's tight budget. We hope that you appreciate those efforts.

Just the Facts, Ma'am

Here are some additional answers to the recent letter sent out by the opposition about One University Place and our Community.

1. The Opposition indicates that the developer will have “10 years before he has to start construction, with no time limit on when he must begin construction on the second building”. This time frame is not acceptable to the four councilors who want to Move University Heights Forward and will be voted on by the next city council since it has not been approved by the present city council. The developer has every incentive to complete construction. The longer a project goes on, the worse the profit margin.

2. All council candidates agreed at the recent Candidate forum that there needs to be a clause in the agreement with the developer that he cannot sell to a non-tax paying entity. Again nothing has been approved by the present city council.

3. The Opposition talks about a smaller development and used the term “moderately priced condos” in the candidate’s forum. A cost analysis of a smaller development is needed to prove that it would be profitable, but one has never been presented. “Moderately priced condos” would be in the same price range as the 90+ Grandview condos and would compete for sales with Grandview residences.

A Measured Endorsement

In what I thought was a well written summary of one of the major issues in the City Council campaign, the Iowa City Press Citizen endorsed the candidates of We are University Heights Moving Forward. Here is the text of today's editorial:


We usually avoid backing one-issue candidates in city council races, but in University Heights, the one issue on everyone’s mind seems to be developer Jeff Maxwell’s proposed One University Place.

If the members of St. Andrew Presbyterian Church decide to move from their property at 1300 Melrose Ave., Maxwell has proposed to build two buildings — one five stories and strictly residential, the other three stories and residential/commercial. The total

Candidate Profiles

Here are links to the our candidate profiles that were run in the 11/1/11 Iowa City Press Citizen.

Mike Haverkamp: Haverkamp running to finish what he started

Jim Lane: Lane calls for better understanding of the budget

Amanda Whitmer: Whitmer says she offers city financial expertise

Pat Yeggy: Yeggy wants to focus on independence

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

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.

Congratulations, Amanda!

You may have noticed that Amanda has not posted for a while. That is because in spite the the importance of the upcoming election, there are other things even bigger than the University Heights city council races.

Congratulations to Joe and Amanda, married last Saturday, October 8th, 2011!

Why I'm Running- Amanda

I've lived in University Heights for 10 years, the first three as a renter, the last seven as a landlord. I have an extensive background in finance, with nine years of experience in public accounting and having served on several non-profit boards as Treasurer.

I admit to not having paid a great deal of attention to the St. Andrews project. It was only after I visited the model in the City office that I started to delve into the issues and became aware of the deep divide in the community over this project.

I am running for City Council because I think my financial expertise would be a beneficial addition. We are currently paying for outside assistance in this area, and while I believe having a source of unbiased advice is valuable, I also believe that having someone on the Council with this background is essential.

I am interested in helping move the community past the division, and do what is best for the City. If the development is built, I want to help ensure that the City is enriched by the addition, both financially and evolutionary. If this development is not built, then I would like to add my experience in budgeting and cash flow analysis to help alleviate the choice to forgo a source of revenue.

The Limitations of Cash Projections

Terry, Lockridge and Dunn was hired by the City of University Heights to provide some perspective on the financial viability of the City, and whether the additional taxes to be generated by a commercial entity like One University Place is necessary for the continuted financial health of the City. TLD's conclusion was "no, it is not necessary, but with some caveats" (starting on page 6). Unfortunately, the message heard was only the "No" and the caveats were largely ignored.

The caveats are extremely important, because cash projections are by nature speculative and simplistic, because it's very difficult to build in all the different things that might affect the final results. The further you try to project, the more likely your scenario won't happen because of intervening factors. Growth rates are not steady over the years, and that alone affects the end result. I did a spreadsheet assuming 2001 as a base year and used TLD's average growth rates calculated for that exact period, and ended up with a reduction in the cash reserve of over $2 million. Decision-making and other factors kept the cash reserve in the black over that period.

Maxwell Financials

I can’t speak to the exact engagement Jeff Maxwell has engaged Dennis Craven for, but the limitation in allowing distribution of the financials he speaks of is legitimate. My guess is that these financials are extremely speculative in nature because of the current status of the project. When an accountants work product requires an intimate knowledge of the goings on of a company and the risks involved in order to understand the numbers presented, professional accounting standards require that Users (capitalized because it is a professional definition) be limited to the people with that intimate knowledge for business decision-making process only. If one does not have that knowledge, the numbers can be misconstrued and so the work product does not fulfill the purpose for which it was intended. If the accounting firm releases those financials knowing they will be used by anyone other than the defined User, it can jeopardize their professional licensing.

One University Place

Because it is such a contentious issue, I will state my position here first.

Should the St. Andrew congregation decide to sell their property, I support the One University Place development for two main reasons:

1) Financial Stability
University Heights is relying on approximately $125,000 in yearly local option sales tax to help keep its $910,257 budget in the black*. However, this sales tax sunsets in 2013 and will have to be voted on again to remain in effect. While we have benefited greatly from our share of the taxes generated in other jurisdictions, it is not prudent to rely on other cities’ tax policies to fund our budget. Facilitating generation of commercial property and sales taxes in our own jurisdiction (especially on a property that does not currently pay any taxes) will help keep our City fiscally sound.

Who ARE the Candidates?

EXPERIENCE EXPERTISE VISION

Louise From Mayor since 2006, council member from 1994-2005. Louise has served as president of the Johnson County Council of Governments and is active in county-wide governmental organizations




Mike Haverkamp on council since 2010. Chair of the eGovernment Department. Former president of Friends of Historic Preservation, Iowa City Arts Festival, Iowa Friends of Old Time Music, Iowa City Education Association.


 Jim Lane on council 2010. Former Plant manager at Proctor & Gamble, President of United Way of Johnson County Board, Chairman of Construction Consulting Committee of Iowa City School District.


Amanda F. Whitmer Licensed CPA, with 9 years experience in public accounting. Currently in Treasury Operations at UI. Treasurer of the Iowa City Downtown Association.



Pat Yeggy on council 2006-2007, and since 2010. Pat is chair of the Streets and Sidewalks Department. She served  formerly as the UH city clerk. Pat is also the city historian.