[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6071064,"mediaKeyId","3048115-4c180a24018ee259264bd9df6aa5a2fe","parentId",3048115,"title","Council asks about ARPA funds; finance staff cites two-year tax lag and state levy changes","audioSeconds",210,"startMs",55000,"endMs",265000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3048115-4c180a24018ee259264bd9df6aa5a2fe&start=55&end=265","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3048115-4c180a24018ee259264bd9df6aa5a2fe/thumbnail_55000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6071064/Iowa-City/Johnson-County/Iowa/Council-asks-about-ARPA-funds-finance-staff-cites-two-year-tax-lag-and-state-levy-changes","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6071064-bea04afa38dad6884d08602e83782f35/orig.mp4?Expires=1771083704&Signature=XpoyqLLzvzldgfpV1XDW0o2w7hlvvWr307T~bh9xupIfwYLVzfikMIptNKK3lkP47~ccEmQnnr23YhSS5eBA15yQ~W9OhzFZb02kOfcRByrO16NAB6hWLqV5o3LpWWDRXS6ElbVFFtmH39UAhiaTo-qICfmIuWKgJPgjkqN6~lWqoF46rXJyLFHcI8QYrkNsKsuXnOqLj9AmRKtGQIknXp3i-agzDQOoyBn45b0Nw2RbLcUPvGnqHbc4mJhtO7DH2cMVEGGF7uItngX-WHEHDWMZOj6PCX5-K5EuxpVU9D2iXQqFP7WeR~s0dQEemJ7PLdXx9KCi0W8cvHuInfwmuw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Iowa City ","date","2025-03-11T00:00:00Z","article","At the Iowa City work session on March 11, 2025, a council member asked whether American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds listed in the information packet were at risk of de-obligation under changing federal guidance. A finance staff member responded that the ARPA funds \"have already been received and they've already been fully obligated,\" and that staff felt \"very confident in this particular grant source.\" The council member followed up asking whether there was a \"de-obligation concern\"; staff said no.

Staff also walked councilors through key points from the city's annual comprehensive financial report. The unnamed finance staff explained that property tax is the city's primary revenue source for many operations and that property taxes have \"about a two year lag.\" That lag means slower periods of building activity feed through to the tax base with a delay; staff said the city is experiencing low growth in the 2023–25 period because development was subdued in 2020–21. The staff presentation noted city operations typically need about a 4% annual revenue increase to maintain status quo staffing and benefits, and that the city has not been achieving that level of growth in recent years.

The finance staff also identified the 2023 state legislative changes to property-tax rules as a further revenue headwind, saying the city \"lost two of our property tax levies — one that supports the library and the other are our emergency levy\" and that those levies are being phased out through 2029, leaving \"about a million and a half to $2,000,000 worth to ... cut out of that levy rate\" before reaching the state's required 2029 levels.

Why it matters: The exchange clarified that (1) the ARPA funds discussed in the information packet are already on hand and obligated by the city, and (2) the city faces continuing revenue pressure from both a delayed development-driven tax base (the lag effect) and state-mandated reductions to certain levies through 2029. Those factors bear on budget planning, capital investment and potential subsidy capacity for large projects.

Speakers and attribution rules
- The question about ARPA funds was asked by an unnamed council member (transcript did not provide a full name in the information-packet segment); the reply came from a finance staff member who is not named in the work-session transcript excerpts. Direct quotes in this article are attributed to the anonymous finance staff member as recorded in the work-session transcript.

Clarifying details
- ARPA funds status: \"already been received and they've already been fully obligated\" (finance staff, transcript). The finance staff said there was no de-obligation concern for the ARPA funds referenced in the packet.
- Property-tax lag: staff said property taxes have about a two-year lag; low building activity in 2020–21 is affecting the 2023–25 tax base and revenue growth.
- Revenue need: staff said the city typically needs about 4% annual increase to maintain staffing and benefits.
- State reforms: staff said two levies (one supporting the library and an emergency levy) are being phased out through 2029 and estimated about $1.5 million–$2.0 million remains to be removed from the levy rate to meet 2029 levels.

Ending
The finance staff's summary framed the city's near-term budget context for councilors as they consider capital projects and large subsidy requests; no formal budget action was taken during the March 11 work session.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Iowa City Council Work Session of March 11, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","At the March 11, 2025 Iowa City work session, a council member asked whether ARPA funds in the information packet were at risk of de-obligation; finance staff replied that the ARPA funds \"have already been received and they've already been fully obligated.\"","taxTitle","Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa","taxId",4187,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6071069,"Iowa City hears two competing proposals for 21 South Lynn; staff urges delay for merged-team analysis",4060,731000,4791000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3048115-4c180a24018ee259264bd9df6aa5a2fe&start=731&end=4791","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3048115-4c180a24018ee259264bd9df6aa5a2fe/thumbnail_731000.jpg","/articles/6071069/Iowa-City/Johnson-County/Iowa/Iowa-City-hears-two-competing-proposals-for-21-South-Lynn-staff-urges-delay-for-merged-team-analysis","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6071069-5d09e401164c2cf7de2791963f5c7e77/orig.mp4?Expires=1771083704&Signature=YMdQr~FOkCo~ku-yuyTNnzTM4axOoMYInr3FXT0ukFuh~fJhu8Gi~r3Rc7xUbFfjSw8u4RsGkFREVFKtjbYHJWBB4iZryJE9V7KHEKDqSXq8xzwPEJ5qXPU1i5WiCoCZz~cfwaQ88nGuLCa4VQMg37IZL~m2LoBQYlqYMDWsvCWwPvOMCEj10s4UkJdCKwIIw3ruhJ1OuvqYkgkPfdd~x4ybVHTp-vCfOdY09yKBVEAni2baWaozSB3e0IVz7iwC5fD64dPBZAULh59A2UF20wfEGGtvnmmUbZHkJTtJMVXM32Tr1MqavACvlmkdzozAQg46eiRzkgGmR91DdGNZXA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Iowa City work-session members reviewed two competing development proposals for the city-owned 21 South Lynn site on March 11, 2025, and staff recommended delaying any selection until a full analysis of a late merged proposal is publicly available.

City Manager Jeff Rohn told council that two respondents — Salida Partners and Iceberg Development — notified staff earlier the same day that they had combined their separate proposals into a single submission. \"Staff has not reviewed any of the details behind the merge proposal,\" Rohn said, and recommended council \"not wait into selection tonight\" and instead allow staff time to analyze the combined submission and publish backing information for public review before a selection decision, which he suggested could come April 1 or April 15.

Why it matters: The 21 South Lynn parcel was purchased by the city in 2023; redevelopment will shape downtown housing supply, arts/entertainment space, small-business retail opportunities and the city’s property tax base. Councilors pressed both teams on housing mix, affordability, financing and sustainability; staff asked that full financial backup for the merged bid be made public so staff and the public can review it before a selection.

What the proposals presented
Salida Partners + Iceberg (merged submission). The merged team told council it combined Salida’s community-benefit and affordable-housing focus with Iceberg’s market-rate and incremental tax-generation approach. Key figures presented by the team:
- Estimated construction cost: just under $42,000,000.
- Proposed purchase price for the land: $2,000,000.
- Total project cost: just under $48,000,000.
- Proposed tax-increment financing (TIF) request: $9,000,000 over 15 years (the team said this would represent 60% of new tax increment for the project and estimated roughly $1,000,000 in new taxes generated annually).
- Housing and program mix the team described: about 91 residential units in total; roughly 50% (about 45 units) described as permanently affordable, including a 33-unit 55+ affordable component and 12 units of non–age-restricted affordable housing; a one-floor market-rate senior living component (12 two-bedroom units described for Western Home Communities) and about 20 market-rate one- and two-bedroom units on upper floors.
- Ground-floor programming presented included a community venue space proposed in partnership with the Englert Theatre, a Stories Project space, four micro-retail units (~500 sq ft each), and shared artist resources/co-working space.
- Sustainability: the merged team highlighted mass-timber construction as a low-carbon strategy, saying it would add roughly 1.4% to building cost and that the project would target LEED Silver-level outcomes and an all‑electric mechanical approach as part of the sustainability strategy.

During the merged-team presentation, Salida Partners’ Steve Long said the two firms \"decided to start talking, and we feel it's best for the community to merge the community benefit and the affordable housing benefit.\" Simeon Talle of Community Development Strategies summarized community engagement results and said the teams had tried to reflect public feedback on \"right-size retail,\" arts activation and affordable units.

Grand Rail / Urban Anchors / OPN (Grand Rail Urban Acres / OPN team). The competing local team described a proposal organized around local partners and local financing and emphasized a smaller subsidy ask. Key figures presented by the Grand Rail team:
- Purchase price in their proposal: $3,000,000 (the team said the price could be revisited during negotiations if market conditions changed).
- Estimated total project cost cited in the presentation: about $40,000,000.
- Residential: an initial concept of about 20 residential units (mix of one- and two-bedroom units presented), with at least 4 affordable units proposed to be sold to the Housing Fellowship to remain permanently affordable.
- The team said it did not include a TIF request in its base proposal and emphasized local lenders (a letter of interest from Hills Bank was referenced) and local subcontractors and suppliers.
- Design: the Grand Rail team described a 6‑story baseline with possible 8‑story options to align with existing taller buildings; they emphasized brick and contextual materials, flexible mid‑block floor plates for offices or cultural tenants and rooftop/commons open space for residents.

Council and staff priorities raised during discussion
- Financial backup and transparency: Jeff Rohn and staff said the merged Salida/Iceberg submission requires the same level of public backing materials (financial pro formas, sources-and-uses, developer commitments) that were posted for the original three proposals before staff completes an analysis.
- Timing: Rohn urged council not to make a selection that night and suggested the April 1 or April 15 agenda for a decision after staff completes its analysis and posts documentation for public review.
- Affordability and program balance: councilors pressed both teams on how affordable units would be structured and managed, unit sizes, AMI targets and whether affordable units would have parking. The merged team said about half the project’s units would be permanently affordable and mentioned the Housing Fellowship as manager/owner for the affordable inventory; the team said the \"12-unit\" affordable band would average about 60% of area median income (AMI).
- TIF and public return: the merged team proposed using 60% of increment to support project costs for 15 years; the teams discussed how much incremental tax revenue would continue to go to the city and schools (the merged team said that roughly 40% of new tax increment — about $400,000 a year in their estimate — would continue to go to other taxing entities during the TIF term).
- Sustainability: councilors pressed for specifics beyond targets (e.g., exceeding energy code by 25%). The merged team reiterated mass timber, electrification and daylighting as elements of the sustainability approach; the Grand Rail team said conventional materials with energy-efficiency strategies would be used and that choices would depend on final massing (timber/concrete/steel options at 6 stories and below; steel with masonry façade if built to 8 stories).
- Public/arts activation: both teams programmed a public/arts anchor (the Englert venue and Stories Project were listed in both proposals), micro retail to support small businesses and shared artist workspace.
- Parking and access: teams discussed one level of below-grade parking with alley access vs. an alternative Lynn Street access; both teams said they would refine vehicle circulation and parking as design moves forward.
- Other funding: the merged team said it was exploring additional sources, including Grayfields/Brownfields tax credits, workforce housing tax credits and other incentives to reduce subsidy needs.

Council direction and next steps
Staff will ask the Salida/Iceberg merged team for full financial backing materials and will add any new information from the Grand Rail team to a revised staff report. Rohn said the staff report and the merged-team backup will be placed in the next available council packet; he advised councilors not to rush a selection and suggested April meetings as potential decision dates. No formal vote or selection took place at the work session.

Clarifying details and numbers mentioned in the presentations
- Salida/Iceberg: ~91 residential units; ~45 permanently affordable; construction estimates just under $42 million; land purchase $2 million; total project cost just under $48 million; TIF request $9 million over 15 years (team estimate: ~ $1M/year in new taxes; 60% to project, 40% to other taxing entities).
- Grand Rail/Urban Anchors/OPN: proposed purchase price $3 million; estimated project cost about $40 million; baseline proposal ~20 residential units with at least 4 units conveyed to the Housing Fellowship as permanently affordable; no TIF requested in base submission.
- Micro-retail: merged team proposed four ~500 sq ft micro-retail spaces to support small businesses.
- Affordability targets: merged team said a subset of units would average about 60% AMI; team said there would be some units below and some above that average.

Speakers quoted in this article spoke during the March 11, 2025 Iowa City work session. No formal action (motions or votes) was taken at the meeting on this agenda item; staff will return with a revised report and the merged-team financial backup for council and public review.

Ending
Staff told council it will request the merged team's financial backing materials and expects to post a revised staff report in an upcoming packet so councilors and the public can review details before any selection decision.","Iowa City work-session members reviewed two competing development proposals for the city-owned 21 South Lynn site on March 11, 2025, and staff recommended delaying any selection until a full analysis of a late merged proposal is publicly available.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council asks about ARPA funds; finance staff cites two-year tax lag and state levy changes

Iowa City hears two competing proposals for 21 South Lynn; staff urges delay for merged-team analysis