Taxes & annexation areasBm'fy A. Lindahl, Esq.
Corporation Core, sd
Suite 330, Harbor View Place
300 Main Stceet
Dubuque, Iowa 52001-6944
balesq~mwcLnet
December 10, 2001
Mayor Terranca Duggan and
Members of the City Council
City Hall - City Clerk's Office
50 West 13th Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
RE: Transition for the Imposition of Taxes and Annexation Areas
( Rokusek/Sanford/Pfeiffer Letter)
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
City Manager Michael Van Milligen has asked me to respond to the November 26, 2001
letter from Art and Karen Rokusek, Klm Sanford and Tom and Charlotte Pfeiffer,
residents of Cousins Road, a copy of which is attached. In the letter, the City Manager
is requested to readdress his recommendation to the City Council from April, 1999,
regarding a transition for the imposition of taxes in the annexation area where the
Rokuseks, Sanford and the Pfeiffers reside.
The property where the Rokuseks, Sanford and the Pfeiffers reside was annexed by the
City of Dubuque in 1999. The applicable Iowa Code provision, Iowa Code § 368.7(3),
provides that "[i]n the discretion of a city council, the resolution [approving the
annexation] may include a provision for the transition for the imposition of taxes as
provided in § 368.11, subsection 13." Iowa Code § 368.11(13) allows a provision for a
transition for the imposition of city taxes against property within an annexation area,
which cannot be greater than the following:
1. For the first year, seventy-five (75%).
2. For the second year, sixty-percent (60%).
3. For the third year, forty-five percent (45%).
4. For the fourth year, thirty percent (30%).
5. For the fifth year, fifteen percent (15%).
Service People Integrity Responsibility Innovation Teamwork
The resolution of the City Council approving the annexation of the Rokusek, Sanford
and the Pfeiffers property in 1999 did not include such a provision. The question raised
by the letter from the Rokuseks, Sanford and the Pfeiffers is whether the City Council
may now provide for a transition for the imposition of taxes for their property.
A literal reading of Iowa Code § 368.7(3) would require that the provision for the
transition must be in the resolution approving the annexation. Because the provision
was not in the resolution approving the annexation, it does not appear to be expressly
permitted by Iowa Code § 368.7(3).
Once the annexation was approved and filed with the Secretary of State, the Rokusek,
Sanford and the Pfeiffers properties became property in the City of Dubuque and it
would not appear to be appropriate to now "amend" the resolution and treat that City
property differently than other City property with respect to taxes.
The statutory authority to provide for a transition for the imposition of taxes is probably
intended as an incentive to property owners who may potentially object to annexation.
Once the property is annexed, the basis for that incentive no longer exists.
In conclusion, it does not appear that Iowa Code § 368.7(3) permits the City Council to
provide for the transition for the imposition of taxes after property has been annexed to
the City.
Very sincerely,
Barry Lindahl
Corporation Counsel
BAL/jm
Attachment
Cc: Michael Van Mil!igen, City Manager
2
· ember 26, 2001
Mike Van Milligen
City Manager
50 West, 13m Street
Dubuque, IA 52001
Dear Mr. Van Milligen:
As directed by Mayor Terry Duggan at the November 19, 2001 public hearing, we are writing to
request that you re-address the recommendation you made to the city council in April 1999
regarding our property tax increase.
The State of Iowa law provides c/tizeus involved in an annexation with a graduated m-rate
!chedule option. The city can use th/s provision to lessen the tax burden on non-consenting
incoming property owners.
Since annexation in 1999 our properties have been completely engulfed in proximate re-zoning
and moratorium actions due to IDOT and city sponsored develgpment projects. Due to the
mcertalnty of these projects, we agreed that it makes good investment sense to defer installation
of city water and sewer serdces to these areas. Further, in the planning phases of the US 20
Corridor Preservation and Southwest Arterial Development projects our homes were targeted as
possible acquisition sites on some proposals. All part/es involved agree there is much
uncertainty in what may happen as these two major projects advance over the next few years.
The IDOT has requested the moratorium be expanded and its deadline extended for this area.
Thus, our predicament continues.
Our homestead properties are no longer marketable while the agencies ponder and study
numerous plan variations. Yes, we have in fact attempted to sell our homes. Although them was
great interest, no written offers were tendered due to the fact that no one can determine where
.fiature travel routes would exist. Typical permitted property improvements would be an Unwise
investment and not allowed under moratorium mandates.
Due to the above facts, we feel it fair and timely that the appropriate city staff revisits this option.
Our property taxes have escalated with no real return on the investment We need to do
everything we can to minimize our financial lose.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter. If you require any additional input in
regards to our request, please feel free to call. We appreciate your prompt attention to this
matter.
Most Sincerely;
Art & Karen Rokusek 12101 Cousins Road
Kim Sanford 12155 Cousins Road
Tom & Charlotte Pfeiffer 12033 Cousins Road
Cc: Mayor Terry Dugan
Dubuque City Council