Council, department heads take part in city goal-setting

     Over the last few months, the Monticello City Council and city department heads have been conducting goal-setting sessions, facilitated by Jones County Economic Development Director Derek Lumsden.

   During the Aug. 19 council meeting, the council approved the final report, generated from the July 15 goal-setting meeting.

   These goals are not mutually exclusive, and the council can be working toward accomplishing more than one goal at any given time.

   The city previously held goal-setting sessions in the summer of 2020. Now, four years later, most of those goals are either currently in the works or have been accomplished.

   For this updated report, surveys were sent out to the council members and department heads to help generate input in setting new goals. Those surveys included the following categories:

   • Major accomplishments

   • Issues or concerns

   • Significant initiatives or programs

   • Capital projects

   • Teamwork

   • Development/growth

   • Supplemental questions

   Of the 10 overall ideas generated by the surveys, Lumsden "pointed out that most of the surveys were relatively in alignment. While people might have put them in different categories, overall the needs were very similar across the surveys."

   The 10 top ideas were:

   • Housing development

   • City facilities

   • Trail development

   • City services

   • Tourism

   • Equipment

   • Budgeting

   • Training

   • Recognition of accomplishments

   • Miscellaneous

   Housing Development and City Facilities were broken out more broadly for further, in-depth discussions.

   "The most consistent answer across the board for what the city needed to focus on in the next five years was developing housing," Lumsden shared.

   The discussion started with what would work well as a spot for people to live in Monticello. It was mentioned that the city has great services and infrastructure to offer, making it easy to connect to and construct housing. The city has also been trying to find ways to financially incentivize housing development, via TIF funding, to make the return on investment for developers more enticing.

   Survey ideas for housing options included upper-story housing downtown and adding housing to vacant lots in town.

   It was noted that one challenge is location. Monticello is somewhat landlocked. The Maquoketa River cuts off expansion to the north, the airport and Highway 151 to the east. The highway can increase the cost of developing to the south. Ag land all around also makes it hard to expand.

   While housing has increased over the last couple of decades in Monticello, an increase in population did not follow that trend.

   Lumsden asked whether the city, itself, should be involved in housing development. "It was noted by the group that a number of cities do get involved in some fashion and that it can lead to growth, both in people and in the tax base, which allows for services and infrastructure to continue to be upgraded."

   Lumsden followed up with whether the city should fund development or be involved in real estate directly. It was noted that the city has purchased vacant or condemned properties, torn down the structures, which allows for prime real estate in which to build on.

   The City Facilities category included a wide variety of ideas, from parks to buildings, to streets, sidewalks, etc.

   The group found that one strength of the city's is the wide variety of amenities. The city has focused on providing quality-of-life amenities "that make the community more cohesive."

   Another strength is the overall services and utilities of the community.

   A final strength is the maintenance of the city's buildings. "While a lot of money cannot be allocated every year, the city has found ways to do smaller street projects over the years, do small upgrades to the Community Building, add some extra maintenance to the Berndes Center, and do large-scale projects like the current wastewater treatment project."

   However, the strength of services and utilities was also mentioned as an area of improvement. "While the city has worked hard to maintain and improve services, there was an agreement that the process is not as direct or as easy as the community at-large would prefer."

   Another area of improvement was street maintenance. This is one of the most common complaints both the council and city staff receive. It was mentioned that people will complain more about the condition of the streets rather than boast about city amenities.

   In his conclusion, Lumsden asked if the city sees itself as a risk-taker or risk adverse. He explained the amount of risk the city is willing to take on "would be the defining characteristic of any plan or decision made by the city going forward. As leaders in the community, both staff and elected officials would need to decide their comfort level in actually pursuing these priorities."