Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2019-02-14 Info Packet
i � 1 n i ,p'> *x CITY 01 10VVA CITY www.icgov.org City Council Information Packet IP1. Council Tentative Meeting Schedule February 19 City Conference Board February 14, 2019 IP2. Conference Board Agenda and Meeting Packet February 19 Work Session IP3. Work Session Agenda IP4. Memo from Senior Planner: Development of a new Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City IPS. Pending Council Work Session Topics Miscellaneous IP6. Email from Mayor: Winter Meeting Recap IP7. Memo from Robert Decker, Axiom Consultants: Updates to the Pre-App/SOI submitted to City Council on 12/4/2018 IP8. Memo from Library Director: Fine free Children's and Teen collection information for City Council IP9. Memo from City Clerk: KXIC Radio Show IP10. Planning and Zoning for Local Officials Workshop: Spring 2019 IP11. Joint Entities Meeting minutes: January 14 IP12. Civil Service Entrance Examination: Digital Communications Specialist IP13. Civil Service Entrance Examination: Senior Maintenance Worker - Horticulture Draft Minutes IP14. Airport Commission: January 17 IP15. Board of Adjustment: December 12 IP16. Historic Preservation Commission: January 10 IP17. Human Rights Commission: January 24 February 14, 2019 City of Iowa City Page 1 Item Number: 1. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule ATTACHMENTS: Description Council Tentative Meeting Schedule r City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule M6011 � AW Subject to change ON • Mw=IGQ CITY IOVVA CITY February 14, 2019 Date Time Meeting Location Tuesday, February 19, 2019 5:00 PM Iowa City Conference Board Emma J. Harvat Hall Work Session 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, March 12, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, April 2, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Monday, April 15, 2019 4:00 PM Reception ICCSD 4:30 PM Joint Entities Meeting TBA Tuesday, April 16, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 7, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 21, 2019 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Item Number: 2. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Conference Board Agenda and Meeting Packet ATTACHMENTS: Description Uonierence Lioard Agenda and Meeting Packet OFFICE OF THE IOWA CITY ASSESSOR JOHNSON COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING BRAD COMER ASSESSOR MARTIN BURKLE CHIEF DEPUTY MARY PAUSTIAN DEPUTY February 13, 2019 Dear Conference Board Member: The meeting of the Iowa City Conference Board for the public hearing on the Iowa City Assessor's FY 2020 budget is scheduled for Tuesday, February 19, 2019 at 5:00 P.M. at the Iowa City City Hall. Enclosed for your review before the meeting are: 1. The Agenda. 2. A copy of the January 22, 2019 minutes. 3. A copy of the FY20 Itemized Budget. Please contact me if you have questions about individual items or wish to see any of the supporting documents for this budget. Sincerely, Brad Comer Iowa City Assessor bcomer@coJohnson.ia.us (319) 356-6066 913 SOUTH DUBUQUE STREET • IOWA CITY IOWA 52240 TELEPHONE 319-356-6066 JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA CITY IOWA CITY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY SCHOOL BOARD The Iowa City Conference Board Agenda Tuesday, February 19, 2019 5:00 PA A. Call meeting to order by the Chairperson (Mayor). B. Roll call by taxing body. C. Motion to approve minutes of January 22, 2019 Conference Board meeting. Action: D. FY20 Budget Comment — The purpose of this meeting is to hold a public hearing on the Iowa City Assessor's proposed budget for FY 2020. 1. Public Hearing on proposed FY20 Budget. 2. Discuss proposed budget (Possible closed session, pursuant to Iowa Code Section 21.5(1)(i), to evaluate the professional competency of individuals whose appointment, hiring, performance, or discharge is being considered. A motion must be made to adjourn to executive session.) 3. Motion to adopt FY20 budget. Action: E. Other business. F. Adjournment. Action: The Conference Board votes as three voting units, with a majority of the members present for each unit determining the unit's vote. At least two members of a voting unit must be present in order to vote. A quorum is reached when at least two members from two units are present. IOWA CITY CONFERENCE BOARD MINUTES January 22, 2019 Iowa City Conference Board: January 22, 2019, at 5:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers at the Iowa City City Hall, Mayor Jim Throgmorton presiding. Iowa City Council Members Present: Cole, Mims, Salih, Taylor, Teague, Thomas and Throgmorton. Johnson County Supervisors Present: Green -Douglass, Porter, Rettig and Sullivan. Iowa City School Board Members Present: Hemingway. Others Present: Comer, Fruin, Monroe, Dilkes and Fruehling. Digital Recording: January 22, 2019. Chair Jim Throgmorton called the meeting to order and Clerk Brad Comer called roll and state that a quorum was present. The County (Sullivan) moved to accept the minutes of the last conference board meeting, February 20, 2018, the City (Salih) seconded and the motion carried unanimously 2/0. The Iowa City School Board, having only one member present, did not have a vote recorded. Iowa City Assessor Brad Comer presented his FY '20 Assessment Expense Fund budget. The increases are $12,249 for a 2.25 percent cost -of -living increase in salaries/wages, $10,221 for merit/step, $2,095 in FICA, $5,547 in IPERS, $7,221 in health insurance, $4,200 in Board of Review to be prepared for the possibility of a fall session, $100 in life insurance, $200 in bonds and worker's compensation, $23,000 in legal fees and expert witnesses and $4,000 to the auto replacement reserve fund. The increases are offset by a $5,700 decrease in postage, an alternate year expense, a $2500 decrease in printing, also an alternate year expense and a $100 decrease in dues. Comer stated that although the amount budgeted for the office will increase, the amount to be raised by taxation will actually be lower than the previous year due to unspent funds carried over. Also, the proposed assessment expense levy of .19747 will be the lowest rate for Iowa City since fiscal year 1999. Comer mentioned that the Assessor Evaluation Committee consisting of Phil Hemingway, Bruce Teague and Lisa Green -Douglass met on January 9, 2019 to discuss the budget and review a self-evaluation completed by the assessor. Throgmorton commented on a part of the self-evaluation relating to income and expense questionaires for commercial property owners. He asked if property owners can be required to submit the income and expense information that the assessor requests. Comer doesn't believe that this can be required. City Attorney Dilkes will check into this. The City (Mims) moved to accept the proposed budget for publication and to set the public hearing for February 19, 2019 at 5:00 P.M. at the Iowa City City Hall, the County (Green - Douglass) seconded and the motion carried unanimously 2/0. It was moved by Sullivan of the County and seconded by Mims of the City to appoint Mike Hahn to a six-year term on the Iowa City Assessor's Board of Review ending December 31, 2024. The motion carried unanimously. The City (Thomas) moved to re -appoint Chace Ramey to a six-year term on the Iowa City Examining Board ending December 31, 2024. The County (Rettig) seconded and the motion carried unanimously. The City (Mims) moved to re -appoint Brad Comer to a six-year term as the Iowa City Assessor beginning January 1, 2020. The County (Douglass) seconded, and the motion carried unanimously. There being no other business, it was moved by the City (Salih) and seconded by the County (Green -Douglass) to adjourn at 5:20 P.M. Motion carried unanimously 2/0. Brad Comer Clerk, Iowa City Conference Board IOWA CITY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ITEMIZED BUDGET - ASSESSMENT EXPENSE FUND EMPLOYEE EXPENDITURES FY 2019 FY 2020 INCREASE SALARIES Current Proposed CITY ASSESSOR 112,755 116,983 3.75% CHIEF DEPUTY ASSESSOR 97,953 101,994 4.13% DEPUTY ASSESSOR 90,910 94,660 4.12% OTHER PERSONNEL 242,820 253,971 4.59% STEP INCREASE (APPRAISER - NEW CONSTRUCTION) (1,000) (700) MERIT INCREASES (have been added to salaries above) 8,676 (10,221) SUBTOTAL $544,438 $567,608 4.26% Proposed salaries include merit increases, cost of living adjustments and a step increase. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS EMPLOYER SHARE: FICA 44,476 46,571 4.71% EMPLOYER SHARE: IPERS 51,905 57,453 10.69% HEALTH INSURANCE 158,630 165,851 4.55% SUBTOTAL 255,011 269,874 5.83% TOTAL EMPLOYEE COST $799,449 $837,482 4.76% OTHER EXPENDITURES LEAVE CONTINGENCY $20,000 $20,000 0.009'0 BOARDS BOARD OF REVIEW 16,800 21,000 25.00% BOARD OF REVIEW EXPENSES 200 200 0.00% CONFERENCE BOARD 0 0 EXAMINING BOARD 30____________________ 0.00% SUBTOTAL $17,030 $21,230 24.669k OFFICE EXPENSES MILEAGE & AUTO 4,500 4,500 0.00% OFFICE SUPPLIES 3,500 3,500 0.00% POSTAGE 8,100 2,400 -70.37% TELEPHONE 1,300 1,300 0.00% PUBLICATIONS & SUBSCRIPTIONS 700 700 0.00% PRINTING 4,000 1,500 -62.50% INSURANCE 4,700 4,800 2.13% EQUIPMENT PURCHASE 3,400 3,400 0.00% EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 200 200 0.00% UNEMPLOYMENT 2,000 2,000 0.00% DATA PROCESSING SERVICES 18,000 18,000 0.00% SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE 18,000 18,000 0.00% BONDS & WORKER'S COMPENSATION 1,700 1,900 11.76% COMPUTER REPLACEMENT 2,500 2,500 0.00% SUBTOTAL $72,600 $64,700 -10.88% PROFESSIONAL EXPENSES SCHOOLS & CONFERENCES 13,500 13,500 0.00% DUES 2,400 2,300 -4.17% SUBTOTAL $15,900 $15,800 -0.63% TECHNICAL SERVICES LEGAL FEES & EXPERT WITNESSES 52,000 75,000 44.23% AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY 10,000 10,000 0.00% APPRAISAL SERVICE 1,000 1,000 0.00% SUBTOTAL $63,000 $86,000 36.51% TOTAL OTHER EXPENDITURES $1885530 $207,730 10.18% SUBTOTAL EXPENDITURES $987,979 $1,045,212 RESERVES AUTO REPLACEMENT 12,000 16,000 TOTAL RESERVES $ 12,000 $ 16,000 TOTAL ASSMT EXPENSE FUND BUDGET $999,979 $1,061,212 6.12% UNENCUMBERED BALANCE $140,008 $317,694 126.91% TO BE RAISED BY TAXATION $859,971 $743,518 -13.54% IOWA CITY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE MAXIMUM LEVY ALLOWED MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT EXPENSE FUND 3,765,219,654 X.000675 $2,541,523 IPERS & FICA FUNDS $103,897 UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION & TORT LIABILITY $4,000 MAXIMUM ALLOWED WITHOUT STATE APPROVAL $2,649,420 MAXIMUM EMERGENCY FUND 3,765,219,654 X.00027 $1,016,609 (requires State Appeal Board approval) MAXIMUM THAT COULD BE RAISED BY TAXATION FOR FY 2020 $3,666,029 PRIOR YEARS LEVIES AND RATES SPECIAL APPRAISERS FUND ASSESSMENT EXPENSE FUND FY AMOUNT LEVIED LEVY RATE 1996-97 319,513 0.20450 1997-98 318,270 0.19946 1998-99 318,699 0.19269 1999-00 341,910 0.19784 2000-01 359,341 0.19823 2001-02 396,829 0.20636 2002-03 403,136 0.20694 2003-04 412,379 0.20818 2004-05 470,398 0.22926 2005-06 472,050 0.22525 2006-07 529,702 0.23164 2007-08 603,916 0.25868 2008-09 611,955 0.24917 2009-10 600,013 0.23848 2010-11 621,785 0.23147 2011-12 680,786 0.24538 2012-13 700,997 0.24164 2013-14 769,744 0.25873 2014-15 732,073 0.23866 2015-16 754,689 0.24325 2016-17 804,099 0.24339 2017-18 859,971 0.25141 2018-19 838,975 0.23187 2019-20 743,518 0.19747 SPECIAL APPRAISERS FUND TOTAL LEVY AMOUNT LEVIED LEVY RATE 17,000 0.01088 0.21538 52,834 0.03311 0.23257 184,357 0.11146 0.30415 352,508 0.20398 0.40182 180,293 0.09946 0.29769 6,442 0.00335 0.20971 4,426 0.00227 0.20921 10,051 0.00507 0.21325 15,728 0.00767 0.23693 25,995 0.01240 0.23765 0 0 0.23164 4,792 0.00205 0.26073 1,540 0.00063 0.24980 0 0 0.23848 8,730 0.00325 0.23472 2,608 0.00094 0.24632 8,384 0.00289 0.24453 N/A N/A 0.25873 N/A N/A 0.23866 N/A N/A 0.24325 N/A N/A 0.24339 N/A N/A 0.25141 N/A N/A 0.23187 N/A N/A 0.19747 + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Work Session Agenda ATTACHMENTS: Description vvorK 6esslon Agenda Item Number: 3. IMF .� CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org City Conference Board Meeting 5:00 PM - Separate agenda posted City Council Work Session Agenda Tuesday, February 19, 2019 Emma J. Harvat Hall - City Hall Following 5:00 PM City Conference Board Meeting • Review the Johnson County Fringe Area agreement [I P4] • Clarification of Agenda Items • Information Packet Discussion [February 7, February 14] • Council updates on assigned boards, commissions, and committees Item Number: 4. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Memo from Senior Planner: Development of a new Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from Senior Planner: Development of a new Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City -.® CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: February 19, 2019 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Anne Russett, Senior Planner, Neighborhood & Development Services Re: Development of a New Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City Introduction The Johnson County Board of Supervisors recently submitted a letter to the City Council requesting that the City Council direct staff to review the current Fringe Area Agreement and coordinate with County staff on the development of a new Fringe Area Agreement [Attachment 1]. This memo provides a general overview of the Fringe Area Agreement [Attachment 2], outlines issues with the existing agreement, and the next steps to be taken regarding an update to the agreement. Overview of Fringe Area Agreement Land use regulation is under the authority of County governments for land outside of city limits. However, State law allows cities to establish an extraterritorial area, known as the fringe area, within two miles of city boundaries for the purpose of reviewing and approving subdivisions. State law also grants cities the authority to require that subdivisions within the fringe area adhere to the City's subdivision regulations, unless the City establishes alternative standards set forth in an agreement between the City and the County. In 2006, Iowa City and Johnson County executed a Fringe Area Agreement to clarify the policies related to land development within the fringe area. This agreement enables both the City and the County to cooperate for their mutual benefit through coordinated land use planning. The Fringe Area Agreement is a component of the City's Comprehensive Plan and categorizes land within the fringe area into three areas: Fringe Areas A, B, and C. These areas are further divided into two categories — land within Iowa City's growth area and land outside the City's growth area [Attachment 3]. Per the existing agreement, the fringe area is fixed, and does not adjust as land is annexed and the City grows. Table 1 outlines how projects are reviewed per the Fringe Area Agreement. February 13, 2019 Page 2 TABLE 1. Summary of Review Authoritv per Fringe Area Agreement Fringe Area Commercial Zoned Properties in Fringe Area B Developments >2 acres, No Subdivision Required Rezonings Subdivisions Inside Iowa - Subject to - County has control - Review & approval City review by both - Review & by both City and Growth the City & recommendation County Area County in from the City - Subject to City's accordance subdivision with each regulations (Urban jurisdiction's Design Standards) requirements Outside - Subject to the - No review by - County has control - Review & approval Iowa City City's and City unless - Review & by both City and Growth County's site associated with recommendation County Area plan review a rezoning from the City - Subject to Rural requirements Design Standards (most restrictive standards apply) The agreement also includes a conflict resolution policy for when the City and County disagree over a proposed subdivision, rezoning, or annexation. The policy was invoked recently with the proposed rezoning located in unincorporated Johnson County south of American Legion Road and west of Wapsie Avenue SE (CZ18-00002). The Fringe Area Agreement renews automatically on an annual basis unless the City or the County object to the renewal. The agreement also includes a provision related to the review of the agreement. With the County's recent letter, the County has initiated that review. Issues with Current Fringe Area Agreement The Fringe Area Agreement has not been updated since it was adopted in 2006. Since that time the City updated its comprehensive plan (adopted 2013), and developed several new district plans. Specifically, the South District Plan and the Southeast District Plan, which abut the fringe area, were adopted in 2015 and 2011, respectively. In addition, the County has updated its comprehensive plan twice since 2006. The most recent update was in 2018. Based on the land use policies in the recently adopted County plan, there are inconsistencies between the policy direction identified in the plan and the Fringe Area Agreement. These inconsistencies will need to be addressed as the City and County work together on an updated Fringe Area Agreement. Policy Issues and Analysis In terms of analysis, Planning staff will coordinate with Public Works staff to determine existing infrastructure needs and issues at the edges of the community. Planning staff will also review the current growth boundary and conduct a build -out analysis to determine the existing development potential of land within the City and outside of the City, but located within the City's growth boundary. The results of the build -out analysis can then be compared to the City's growth rates to better understand if the City is prepared to meet its anticipated growth. As the City moves forward with the development of a new agreement, staff anticipates that several policy issues will arise, such as: • Based on the City's current growth boundary and zoning map, does the City have the existing capacity needed for anticipated population growth? If not, where and how should the City grow? • Which local jurisdiction's land use regulations apply within the City's growth boundary? Which apply outside of the growth boundary? February 13, 2019 Page 3 Does the City want to review more land use proposals (e.g. site plans, conditional use permits, divisions/lot splits) within the City's growth boundary? Next Steps Staff will continue to coordinate with County staff. In addition, Planning staff is examining the City's current growth boundaries and coordinating with Public Works staff on infrastructure constraints and opportunities related to the current growth boundary. Attachments: 1. Letter from the Johnson County Board of Supervisors, December 27, 2018 2. Fringe Area Policy Agreement between Johnson County and Iowa City, Adopted 2006 3. Fringe Area Map w Jo�ln.sont County AML_ December 27, 2018 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Mike Carberry, Chairperson Janelle Rettig Lisa Green -Douglass, Vice Chairperson Rod Sullivan Mayor Jim Throgmorton and City Council City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mayor Throgmorton and Iowa City City Council, Pursuant to Section IV of the existing Fringe Area Agreement (FAA) between Iowa City and Johnson County, initially adopted in 2006, please accept this as notice that the Johnson County Board of Supervisors requests leadership of the City of Iowa City to review and jointly undertake consideration of needed modifications to the FAA. In May of 2018, the Board adopted the Johnson County 2018 Comprehensive Plan. This is the second iteration of a comprehensive plan for unincorporated Johnson County since we agreed to the FAA. The 2018 plan includes a Future Land Use Map which anticipates non-agricultural development in areas of the county that were not designated as growth areas over a decade ago. This has caused—and will likely continue to cause—conflict in reviewing development requests within the Fringe Area. The language in the current FAA references land use documents in effect in 2006 and does not allow the necessary flexibility to account for evolution in comprehensive planning over time. It is important to the Board that this process be initiated in the near future and progress to completion in a timely manner. Please direct City staff to take appropriate steps to review the current Fringe Area Agreement and the City's future land use plans with a goal of both City and County staff meeting to begin initial work on a new Fringe Area Agreement no later than March 1, 2019. Sincerely, atdar� —aa� Lisa Green -Douglass Vice Chairperson 913 South Dubuque Street # Iowa City, Iowa 52240 ♦ 319-356-6000 ♦ www.johnson-county.com FRINGE AREA POLICY AGREEMENT BETWEEN JOHNSON COUNTY AND IOWA CITY WHEREAS, Chapter 354, Code of Iowa (2005) allows the City of Iowa City to establish an extraterritorial area, known as the fringe area, within two miles of the city boundaries for the purpose of reviewing and approving subdivisions; and WHEREAS, Chapter 354 further grants the City the authority to require that subdivisions within the fringe area adhere to the City's subdivision standards and conditions, unless the City establishes alternative standards and conditions for review and approval of subdivisions via a 28E agreement between the City and the County; and WHEREAS, Chapter 28E of the Code of Iowa (2005) enables two or more local governments to enter. into agreements to cooperate for their mutual advantage; and WHEREAS, the Johnson County Land Use Plan adopted December 31, 1998 calls for the preparation and adoption of development plans and agreements between the County and the City regarding the municipality and its environnwt and WHEREAS, the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan Update adopted in December, 1997 oubines ,the extent of urban development expected within the next 20 years; and WHEREAS, it Is in the interest of Johnson County (the "County') and the City of Iowa City (the "City") to establish policies for the orderly growth and development within the City's fringe area; and WHEREAS, Johnson County and the City of Iowa City mutually agree that such policies are necessary to more effeGtiveiy and economically provide services for future growth and development and to protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and its environmentally sensitive features. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. FRINGEAREA DEVELOPMENT POLICIES The parties accept and agree to the following development policies regarding annexation, zoning, and subdivision review for the Iowa Cfty'fdnge area as authorized by Chapter 354, Code of Iowa (2005). Purpose: The Fringe Area Policy Agreement Is intended to provide for orderly and efficient development patterns appropriate to a non -urbanized area, protect and preserve the fringe area's natural resources and environmentally sensitive features, direct development to areas with physical characteristics which can accommodate development, and effectively and economically provide services for future growth and development. In light of time- objet Lives, the City. and the County examined the development capabilities of the Iowa City fringe area and determined that development within this fringe area is to occur in accordance with a) the Land Use Plan attached to this Agreement, b) development standards contained In Section 8 of this agreement, and c) the fringe area development policies contained in Section C of this -Agreement. The development policies of this Agreement are intended to be consistent with the policies of the adopted Johnson County Land Use Plan and the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan. A. land Use. Plan The Land Use Plan, attached to this Agreement as Attachment 1, illustrates the land use patterns for the fringe area. B. Development Standards The following general standards apply to unincorporated development in the fringe area. 1. Discourage development In areas which conflict with the Johnson County Land Use Plan which considers GSR (Com Suitability Rating), high water table, wetlands, floodplain, non -erodible soil, and road suitability. 2. Protect the public health by requiring developers to meet or exceed minimum standards for water and wastewater systems in all developments within the Iowa City Fringe Area pursuant to Johnson County Public Health Department Regulations. 3. Encourage cluster development which preserves large tracts of open space including environmentally sensitive areas and farm land; results in compact development which requires less infrastructure, and is more efficient for provision of services. C. Fringe Aren Deygloament Poficles The parties agree to apply the following fringe area development policies. FRINGE AREA A 1. Land within Iowa City's Cir ll. Land in Area A which is presently zoned for residential development, and within Iowa City's growth area, may develop in conformance with existing zoning, provided subdivisions and development projects shall conform to City Urban Design standards contained in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City, including but not limited to City specifications for streets and roads, sanitary sewer lines, stormwater management facilities and water lines. Developments which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to ' be served by a package sanitary sewage treatment plant and common wells, with sanitary sewer and water collection and distribution systems which are constructed to City standards and can be connected to municipal systems upon annexation. Subdivisions and development projects which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be duster developments with a minimum of 50% of the development designated as an outlot for open space, agriculture, or future development upon annexation. Prior to annexation, any zoning changes in Iowa City's projected growth area shall be consistent with the City's adopted land use plan. 2. r 4 eW LsWe Iowa Cites Growth Area but in tie County's Nofth CoEidor. Residential uses are the preferred use In this area. Any re -zonings in this area will be considered on the basis of conformity with the Johnson County Land Use Plan and other related policies. On a case-by-case basis, proposals to rezone land In this area to RS -3 (one dwelling unit per three acnes of lot area) may be considered. RS zoning will be considered if the application to rezone includes a concept plan showing a minimum of 500 of the property designated as an outloi for open space or agriculture. Development must comply with City Rural Design standards contained In Appendix A. On ". balance of land outside the North Corridor, agricultural uses are preferred. .3- 3. Any development on property governed by the Iowa City/Coralviile Agreement Providing for Future Annexations and Extraterritorial Review of Subdivision Plats (Sept. 1999) shall be consistent with said agreement. Such agreement shall take precedence over this Fringe Area Policy Agreement. 4. If land is annexed within Fringe Area A. the City agrees that it will not automatically extend its hinge area authority to review and approve all subdivisions, which it exercises pursuant to Iowa Code §354.9 and Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. The City will review the extension of its fringe area as a result of annexation on a case-by-case basis in consultation with Johnson County. FRINGE AREA B As Be forth In Iowa City's adopted growth policy, the City will likely annex land within one mile of Iowa City to the east and within two miles of Iowa City to the south in the short-range. It is therefore rxmslstent with the purpose of this agreement that rural subdivisions within these areas of high annexation potential be required to meet City Urban Design Standards contained in Appendix A. I. Land within Iowa Citv's Growth ,&M4 As applications are received to develop land contiguous to and within the growth limits of the city, the City will give favorable consideration to the voluntary annexation of this land and its development at an urban density In conformance with the City's adopted land use plan. Prior to annexation, any zoning changes in Iowa City's projected growth area shall also be consistent with the City's adopted land use plan. Subdivisions and development prolwts within Iowa City's projected growth area shall conform to City Urban Design Standards contained In Tide 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of tows City, including but not limited to City specificadons for streets and roads, sanitary sewer lines, stormwater management facilities and water lines. Developments. which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be served by a package sanitary sewage treatment plant and common wells with sanitary sewer and water oollectlon and distribution systems which ere constructed to City standard and can be connected to municipal systems upon annexation. Subdivisions and development projects which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be duster deveiopmerrts with a minimum of 50% of the di0opment designated as an outlot for open space, agriculture, or future development upon annexation. 2. Land outside love City's growth Area. On the balance of land in Area B that lies outside Iowa City's projected growth area, agricultural uses are preferred. Until otherwise changed by amending this agreement, this area shall be restricted to those uses consistent with a Rural/Agricukural area as indicated in the Johnson County Land Use Plan, and as designated for a RuraVAgricultural area In chapter 8:1.6. Class A District of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance as amended. Farmstead splits are permitted per Chapter 8:1.6.1.4.c of the'Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance, Given the existence of commercially zoned property and the demand for commercial uses at the i-80/Herbert Hoover Highway Interchange, rezonings to County CH -Highway Commercial District of property abutting the interchange, as shown on the attached fringe area map, will be considered. However, the only uses that will be allowed will be: Auto and truck oriented uses„ Hotels, motets, and convention facilities, Office buildings and -4 - studios, restaurants, and any accessory use normally associated with the permitted principal use. All existing commerdaAy zoned property and any properties rezoned to CH-Hlghway Commercial shall be subject to the City's and the County's Site Plan Review Requirements with the most restrictive standards applying in instances where the two standards differ. 3. Upon annexation of land within Fringe Area 8, the City agrees that it will not automatically extend its fringe area authority to review and approve all subdivisions, which it exerdses pursuant to Iowa Code §354.9 and Tide 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, The City will review the extension of its fringe area as a result of annexation on a case-by-case basis In consultation with Johnson County. FRINGE AREA C 1. Land within lows Citv"e GrA 8, Land in Area C, which is presently zoned for residential development and within Iowa City's growth area, may develop in conformance with existing zoning, provided subdivisions and development projects shall conform to City Urban Design standards contained in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City, including but not limited to City specifications for streets and roads, sanitary sewer cines, stormwater management facilities and water linos. Devet;ipmerft . wh_ich ere approved prior to annexation shall be required to be served -Ey a package sanitary sewage treatment plant and common wells with sanitary sewer and water collection and distribution systems which are constructed to City standards and can be connected to municipal systems upon annexation. Subdivisions and development projects which are approved prior to annexation shall be required to be duster developments with a minimum of 5D% of the development designated as an outlot for open space, agriculture, or future development upon annexaton. Upon annexation to Iowa City, commensal and/or Industrial development is encouraged south and southwest of the Iowa City Municipal Airport as shown on the attached Land Use Plan and In the portion of Section 20 of Wast Lucas Township that is located in the east and south quadrants of the Highway 1 and Highway 218 interchange. it is consistent with the purpose of this agreement notta ppmye commercial and/or industrial within this area prior to annexation.Aq mnT' y Use Pian, oom u . will be encouraged to locate in the interchanges of paved roads. Commercial andlor Industrial development will be discouraged in all other areas of Fringe Area C. As applications are received to develop land contiguous to Iowa City and within this portion of the Citys growth area, the City will give favorable consideration to the voluntary annexation of. this land and its development for uses consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. Land outside Iowa Cilv`s Growth Area. In the portions of Area C which are not within Iowa City's growth area and which are zoned for non-farm development, development may occur in conformance with Johnson County's.Unifled Development Ordinance and City Rural Design Standards. Until otherwise changed by amending this agreement, this area shall be restricted to those uses consistent with q Rural/Agricuttural area as Indicated In the Johnson County Land Use Plan, . and as designated for a Rural/ Agricultural area in Chapter 8:1.6 Class A District of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance as amended. Farmstead splits are permitted per Chapter 6:1,8.1.4.c of the Johnson County Unified Development Ordinance. ZZ 3. Upon annexation of land within Fringe Area C, the City agrees that it will not automatically extend its fringe area authority to review and approve all subdivisions, which it exercises pursuant to Iowa Code §364.9 and Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of the City of Iowa City, Iowa. The City will review the wdenslon of Its fringe area as a result of annexation on a case-by-case basis In consultation with Johnson County. SECTION Il. PROTECTING AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS Any regulations In the Fringe Area Agreement will not InUdere with the Right to Farm, as contained in the Code of Iowa Chapter 335.2, Farms Exempt: and as noted in the Johnson County Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 8.2, Protecting Agricultural Operations. SECTION Ill. ADIUiINIILRATIVE POLICIES As a rule, zoning regulation Is the county's prerogative if a county has adopted a zoning ordinanoe. The City, however, exercises authority over subdivision regulation in a city's fringe area. Annexation Is also primarily under exclusive rule of cities. Each of these activities, however, affects both jurisdictions and produces a dear need for coordination and joint administration. To that end, the Cfty of Iowa City and Johnson County agree to the following procedures .for administration of land use regulations. A. Zonfrw Reaulation: 1. Zoning regulation for all unincorporated territory will remain under the authority of the Johnson County Zoning Ordinance and the provisions of Chapter 335, Code of Iowa (2005), the enabling legislation for the County's zoning powers. 2. Pursuant to Section 8:1.23 of the Johnson County Unifled Development Ordinance, any person may request a variance to the lot area regulations of the zoning ordinance or appeal the decision -of any officer of the County as that decision relates to enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The County will forward each request for rezoning of property within the Fringe Areas specified in this Agreement to the City for review and comment prior to the public hearing before the County Planning and Zoning Commission. Any zoning change will conform with the policies. identified for the Area in which the property Is located. 4. Properties zoned for a classification which Is inconsistent with this Agreemerd, at the time this Agreement is executed, shall retain the rights under that zoning, unless and until such zoning Is changed through due process. B. Subdivision Reoul4120: 1. Subdivision of land within Iowa City's fringe area will be required to conform to either City Rural Design Standards or the City Urban Design Standards in accordance with the policies specified in this Agreement. 2. Persons wishing to subdivide land within the fringe area specifled in this Agreement shall be required to simultaneously fire a subdivialon application with both the City and the County. The City and the County shall coordinate the processing of the application to ensure concurrent review by both the City Planning and Zoning Commission and the County Planning and Zoning Commission. 3. Subdivisions of land Into fewer than throe lots will continue to be regulated by the County. M-2 NNW =151-7177137G. �tlt l �• ! �.a l� = .•.1 Any development projects larger than 2 acres within the City's growth area shall be subject to review by both the City and the County In accordance with the procedural requirements of each Jurisdiction. j I 1. Iowa City will annex territory only in accordance with the policy statements specified to this Agreement. 2. The Citywill, upon receipt, forward applications requesting annexation or severance (de - annexation) of .property within the fringe area specified in this Agreement to the County for review and comment prior to consideration by the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission. 3. As appropriate and necessary, the City may extend the two -milia extraterritorial subdivision plat review area. Prior to any such extension, the CIV will forward to the County a proposal which Includes the extension of the City's plat review authority for any distance up to the two mile limit provided by State law. The County will have a specified time within which to respond In affirmative agreement, negatively or with an alternative proposal. The City will take the County's response under advisement when determining the extension of extraterritorial review. E. Conflict Resol&n: If the City and County are In conflict over a proposed subdivision, rezoning application, or annexation that may violate this agreement, a review committee, comprised of members of the City Council, Board of Supervisors and. staff, shall be established to negotiate a resolution prior to final action being taken by either body to subdivide, rezone, or annex property. SECTION IV. AGREEMENT )NEVI At any time during the term of this Agreement, either the Chair of the Johnson County Board of Supervisors or the Mayor of the City of Iowa City may initiate review of the pollcies of this Agreement by cordacdng the other party to this Agreement. Both parties to this Agreement shall consider modifications of this Agreement, as appropriate. SECTION V. CIFFECTIVE PERIOD This Agreement shall become effective upon acceptance and execution by the parties, and shall be In effect far five (5) years after the date of execution of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be automatically renewed unless the County or the City objects to such renewal prior to the renewal date. SECTION VI.. RECORDATION This Agreement shall be fired with the Secretary of the State of Iowa, and with the Johnson County Recorder in compliance with Chapter 28E, Code of IM (2005). Dated this _2. day of 0 o 4-s- y- . 2008. -7 - JOHNSON COUNTY By: Chairperson, Board of Supervisors County Auditor Dated this 13 '`_ay of o 4 ,0. 2006 %CORPORATE RAL CITY OF IOWA CITY Attest �%A CR'' CORPORATE SEAL Apprmed by: ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Land Use Map for the Iowa City Fringe Area. 2. Append'A A: Definition of Standards APPENDIX A Definition of Standards City Urban Design Standards: Those standards enumerated in Title 14, Chapter 7 of the City Code of Iowa City which the City imposes on any subdivision within the corporate limits of Iowa City. City Rural Design Standards: 1.0 Streets 1.1 Streets shall be designed for a minimum surface width of 22 feet. Curb and gutter will not be required. 1.2 The right-of-way for local streets without curb and gutter shall be 60 feet to enable retrofrt of -sewer, water, and sidewalk In the future as necessary; otherwise, the right - orf -way for local streets with curb and gutter and storm sewer shall be 50 feet. The right-of-way for arterial, industrial, and collector"streets for the developed area shall be determined in conjunction with the Planning and Zoning Commission. 1.3 The maximum street grade for local streets shall be 12%. 1.4 The pavement cross section for all pavements will be a 2% parabolic crown. This cram slope Is equivalent to'/. -Inch per foot. 1.5 The pavement slab shall be constructed of a 6" rolled stone base and a 22 -foot wide chipseal surface. 1.6 Minimum comer radii shall be 20 feet. 1.7 The minimum ditch grade shall be 1.0%. In addition, it will be necessary to place a 124nch diameter (minimum) culvert, either reinforced concrete pipe or corrugated metal pipe, through all drive approaches constructed over a drainage ditch. The exact size of pipe required will be a function c f the area to be drained. 1.8 Drive approaches shall be hard surfaced within the right-of-way. ater Ulstribution System 2.1 Well(s) shall conform to the requirements of -the Johnson County Health Department and the distribution system, if installed, (water main). shall be either ductile cast Iron pipe (ANSI A21.50 manufactured in accordance with ANSI A21.50) or poly vinyl chloride pipe (PVC -ASTM D1784, Type 1, Grade 1.200 psi design stress and SDR of 17 or fess). 2.2 It shall be the responsibility of the Developer's Engineer to establish a fire rating for the area being developed. Prior to plat approval, there shall be a letter of transmittal from itte - appropriate Fire Protection District approving spacing, location, number of fire hydrants, size of mains, pressure, etc. 2.3 Connection to the City of Iowa City Water Distribution System is subject to City Council consideratlon based on availability. Generally, annexation is a criterion which must be met. 2 3.0 Sanitary Sewer All methods of sanitation shall conform to the 1989 Johnson County Board of Health Rules and Regulations Governing On-site Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems and to the 1990 Iowa City Wastewater Treatment and Disposal System Policy. 4.0 Storm Sewers 4.1 With the exception of developments located in the Old Man's Creek watershed, the City Storm Water Management Ordinance shall apply to new developments located outside the City limits of Iowa City but within the City's area of extraterritorial jurisdiction. 4.2 All storm sewers shall conform to revised Section VII (Storm Sewers) of the Design Standards for Public Works Improvements in Iowa City, Iowa. 4.3 Culverts shall be a minimum of 12 Inches in diameter; either reinforced concrete pipe or corrugated metal pipe (minimum gauge 18 and corrugations 2'. x 'W, 20' x Ya", and 3"x1") shall be used. Culverts shall conform to the §tandard Specifications for Highway and B e Cons rtion. Series of 1977. Minimum cover overt#he top of culvert shall be six inches. .0 Underground Utilities 5.1 Whenever a subdivision shall be laid out such that a new street is required, telephone and electric utilities shall be underground. It is not intended that small subdivisions which would use an existing county road would follow this requirement since overhead utillties are probably direly adjacent to the property. ppdrdMnmeUlarwtappdo� 53 Johnson County/Iowa City Fringe Area Map 2006 L.9.nd I.— M Fdr g.A- mwch,iPwahun;m bwcrv,Mw AledA aPwnxe. _ IPw Ck.MS APMEe OmrBi - bw CRY, Mee Bln,Vtle OIOMM1Me - bw Ch,Rw BPWaWe QoiN bw Cly, Mee Cl�mNb BmNM1 Mw _ bw Ch,Mm CaJtlOf goWh NdlM1 Cortitlar Frtlge Mee _ HeNeB Hoover HgMVYMleltlw�9e atle.06PL55 POLY Item Number: 5. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Pending Council Work Session Topics ATTACHMENTS: Description Henning Uouncil Work Session Topics IRS .'� CITY OF IOWA CITY UNESCO CITY OF LITERATURE PENDING CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION TOPICS February 13, 2019 Strategic Plan Actions Requiring Initial City Council Direction: 1. Through cooperation with the Iowa City School District, Iowa Workforce Development, Kirkwood Community College, Iowa Works, and others, increase opportunities for marginalized populations and low- income individuals to obtain access to skills training and good jobs 2. Improve collaborative problem -solving with governmental entities in the region on topics of shared interest 3. Explore expanded use of a racial equity toolkit within City government, embedding it within city department and Council levels 4. Review the preliminary traffic accident analysis and related set of recommendations and hear from University of Iowa Professor Jodi Plumert on her related research. Discuss approach to on -street parking regulations for narrow streets. Other Topics: 1. Joint meeting with the Telecommunications Commission 2. Review alternative revenue sources 3. Consider a plan for rubberized surfacing at park playgrounds and develop strategies to address equity gaps noted in the Parks Master Plan and plan for the equitable distribution of destination parks within an easy and safe distance of all residents. (request Parks Commission to discuss first) 4. Review of RFC Form Based Code, including density bonus provisions and height allowances 5. Discuss future City actions in response to the home at 101 Lusk 6. Discuss Northside Marketplace Form Based Code 7. Review drink special regulations Item Number: 6. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Email from Mayor: Winter Meeting Recap ATTACHMENTS: Description Email from Mayor: Winter Meeting Recap Kellie Fruehling From: Sent: To: Subject: Fellow Council members, Jim Throgmorton Friday, February 08, 2019 12:17 PM Council FW: Winter Meeting Recap The email forwarded below contains information about the Mayors Innovation Project meeting that Bruce Teague and I attended a couple weeks ago. Mayor Jim Throgmorton Iowa City City Council, At -Large From: Mayors Innovation Project, Ceri Jenkins [Mayors_Innovation_Project_Ceri_J@mail.vresp.com] Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2019 5:40 PM To: Jim Throgmorton Subject: Winter Meeting Recap Ehttp://img- ak.verticalresponse.com/social — sharing/social_sharing.placeholder.facebook.png] <https://protect- us.mimecast.com/s/HevQCADrkEf'xVmf24Hiu> [http://img- ak.verticalresponse.com/social_sharing/social_sharing.placeholder.twitter.png] <https://protect- us.mimecast.com/s/F4ltCBBvoGiMxAZtrdkI6> [http://img- ak.verticalresponse.com/social_sharing/social_sharing. placeholder.linkedin.png] <https: //protect- us.mimecast.com/s/bcMRCDkxnKFn7M6f8LAae> [MIP_4c_final_horizontal] Winter Meeting Recap We had a fantastic Winter 2019 Policy Meeting, with over 75 mayors and civic leaders joining us in DC. View presentations here<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/tO-NCERyoLtgwnAt4daaI> and briefing book materials and resources on each topic here<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/6SctCG6AgNiorgyHXElov>. Read on to learn more: [Women's Health Panel]We kicked off the meeting by exploring the roles cities can play to protect and promote women's health. Leaders from Detroit and DC shared the importance of making system -level changes to prioritize women's health, and the importance of impact data in scaling programs for targeted needs. Hartford's Mayor Bronin shared more on their efforts to ensure a range of health options are available to women by regulating "crisis pregnancy centers." [Climate Change & Transportation Panel] Our second panel presented a range of ways to reduce transportation emissions, one of the most significant contributions to climate change. Speakers agreed that while promoting electric vehicles, fleets and infrastructure are a step, they are not sufficient. Minneapolis' Mayor Frey and Oakland's Mayor Schaaf are each tackling thoughtful approaches to vehicle mode shifts, investments in infrastructure and housing, and zoning. One of the most anticipated parts of our meetings is the Innovation Showcase, where city leaders highlight ideas - big or small — that move their communities forward. We learned about Brockton's expanded use of the Opioid Overdose Narcan toolkit in Brockton; enhanced services for homeless populations in Boulder and Oakland; and energy-saving upgrades to streetlights in Takoma Park. As ever, we were impressed by the many creative solutions shared throughout our meeting. [Mayor Michael Nutter]We wrapped up the first day with an inspirational keynote from former Mayor of Philadelphia, Michael Nutter. He shared thoughtful insights from his career in local government and his reflections on the tremendous value of mayoral public service to our cities and residents. [Community Engagement Panel] Day two began with a dynamic panel on city approaches to community engagement, including grassroots and collective processes, participatory -budgeting, and increased uses of apps and data mining of social media. Roanoke's Mayor Lea discussed how his city is engaging the community through a robust social media presence. Jackson's Mayor Lumumba shared his philosophy that, "When I become mayor, you become mayor," and how initiatives originate from that lens. [Local Business Panel]The final panel made a persuasive case for public policy investments in and support of small businesses - notably a decrease in income inequality in communities with stronger local businesses. Taunton's Mayor Hoye and Charlotte's Mayor Lyles presented strategies for targeting such investments towards small, local, and minority owned businesses, including rent rebates, downtown revitalization, and a citywide business inclusion program. [Evicted tour]Following the close of the meeting, 25 attendees went on a tour of the Evicted Exhibit at the National Building Museum. Curator Sarah Leavitt shared how the exhibit was developed, in close collaboration with Eviction author Matthew Desmond. Did you miss our Winter Meeting? Mark your calendar now for the Summer Meeting<https://protect- us.mimecast.com/s/LTpeCJ61wkiikY4tmd_ve>, hosted by Mayor Steve Benjamin in Columbia, SC, August 1-3. Topics include opportunity zones, income volatility, violence prevention and youth leadership. Click to view this email in a browser<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/VLkhCxkY4WFgpBGCwD_Zn> If you no longer wish to receive these emails, please reply to this message with "Unsubscribe" in the subject line or simply click on the following link: Unsubscribe<https://protect- us.mimecast.com/s/ogpWCyPzgWHoGJj HN5A8A> Mayors Innovation Project 118o Observatory Dr. Madison, Wisconsin 537o6 US Read<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/p95lCzpAjgtxXnPuwSe5O> the VerticalResponse marketing policy. [Non -Profits Email Free with VerticalResponse!] <https: //protect- us.mimecast. com/s/j PFhCKrGx1S BQgAFyAeoJ> [http: //cts.vresp.com/O.giP5ff36e6474/4da496cbda/mlpftw] Item Number: 7. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Memo from Robert Decker, Axiom Consultants: Updates to the Pre- App/SOI submitted to City Council on 12/4/2018 ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from Robert Decker, Axiom Consultants: Updates to the Pre-App/SOI submitted to City Council on 12/4/2018 AxIOMCONSULTANTS CIVIL - STRUCTURAL - MECHANICAL - ELECTRICAL - SURVEY - SPECIALTY MEMORANDUM PROJECT: 12EC (12 East Court Street Pentacrest Garden Apts) DATE: January 14th, 2019 SUBJECT: Updates to the Pre-App/SOI submitted to City Council on 12/4/2018 TO: Geoff Fruin, City of Iowa City - City Manager PRIOR SUBMITTAL December 01, 2018 Our previous submittal to the City Council on the 4th of December was meant to serve as a path forward for the Development Team and the City. The intention of this document was to provide clear information about what our team intends to do on the site and how we intend to achieve those goals. Included was supplementary information about benefits for the City and the required steps and timeframe that will be involved for the overall effort. A number of discussions have been held by the Council regarding the project since that time and it is clear that differences of opinion remain in terms of supporting the project as proposed or supporting something which represents significant changes to the proposed size and scope. The biggest topics of discussion were the height/density of the buildings as well as how the affordable housing requirements for the project would be delivered. MOViNG �OkWAKii Next Steps for the Team Over the past two months our team has been working diligently to determine the best path forward. We have significant and substantial challenges ahead of us in terms of design, scheduling, coordination and pricing. This memo is being provided to inform the council that our original December 4th, 2018 document, page 53 "Affordable Housing" section should be fully replaced with the following information: The developer of 12 East Court Street (the current Pentacrest Garden Apartments) intends to pay the FULL Fee -in - Lieu of payment to the City of Iowa City. This would be done in accordance with City of Iowa City Code: Article G — 14 -2G -8 -C -2-c. Our team is actively moving into the design phase of this project and will submit design review documents to City Staff this Spring. We look forward to speaking with you during the height bonus vote phase shortly thereafter. Thank you. Robert A. Decker, MSE, CPG, CPII PRINCIPAL Project Lead Item Number: 8. + r , • yyrrmr�� CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Memo from Library Director: Fine free Children's and Teen collection information for City Council ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from Library Director: Fine free Children's and Teen collection information for City Council I OWA CITY PUBLIC LIBR/1 123 S. Linn St. • Iowa City, IA 52240 nisecron Elsworth Carman • mow 319-356-5200 • rix 319-356-5494 • iepl.org Memo To: Geoff Fruin From: Elsworth Carman Date: February 12, 2019 Re: Fine free Children's and Teen collection information for City Council Message: The Iowa City Public Library leadership team continues to see removing fines and fees from Children's and Teen materials as an important step in making our collections accessible to everyone in our community. Attached is an information sheet (and a brief article) designed to clarify the context, intent, and impacts of this change for members of City Council. On behalf of the entire library staff, I would like to thank you for supporting the exploration of this idea, joining us in imagining a future with fewer barriers to service for our community, and celebrating ways we can increase the reach of City services through solutions -focused policy and practice. Please do not hesitate to request additional information or documentation if needed. What will change? IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY Fine and Replacement Fee Information Updated 2.11.2019 The Library is proposing to eliminate late fines for overdue materials in the Children's and Teen collections beginning June 1, 2019. Late fines were identified as a barrier to library access and use through the City's Equity Toolkit initiative and was impacting residents of the City of Iowa City. National research shows that fines are a barrier to accessing library collections (Johnson, 2017). What is an overdue fine? Overdue fines are charged when items are returned after the item due date. The Iowa City Public Library currently charges 25 cents per day, per item that is returned late for most items with the exception of Express DVDs ($1 per day) and circulating equipment ($1 to $5 per day depending on the value of the item). What is a replacement fee? The Library charges a one-time replacement fee when materials are not returned or if they are returned with damage. The replacement fee is the cost of the item plus a processing charge. If this change is implemented, the Library will continue to charge a replacement fee for children's and teen materials damaged or not returned by patrons. How do fines and replacement fees impact use of the Library? Library Cards are blocked and can no longer be used once an account reaches $10 in fines and replacement fees owed. Patrons may continue to access materials and services in the Library but may not check out physical or digital collections until the amount owed is less than $10. When will this begin? If approved, late fines will not be collected on materials in the Children's and Teen collections beginning lune 1, 2019, the start of the Library's Summer Reading Program. The Summer Reading Program marks the end of the school year and the busiest time of year for youth using the Library and reading for pleasure. The Summer Reading Program greatly benefits participants by encouraging reading to maintain literacy skills over the summer, drawing in reluctant readers through a variety of activities, and developing reading as a lifelong habit. Why are we making this change? As a part of the City's Equity Toolkit project, staff reviewed community data reflected through heat maps that showed the most blocked Library Card accounts were in neighborhoods furthest away from the Library and had a higher proportion of students eligible for the school district's free and reduced lunch program. It became clear that Library fines are an equity issue; they create a barrier for student use of the Library. Research has shown that fines do not positively influence on-time return of library materials. Some say fines are punitive and teach children libraries are not a welcoming place. Overdue fines are a regressive method of raising revenue—they hurt most those who can afford them the least, create stress -filled interactions, and require significant amounts of staff time to manage. For many, overdue fines are a barrier preventing children and families from accessing and benefiting from the resources the Iowa City Public Library offers. With this initiative, the Library hopes to increase access to books and reading, boosting literacy and removing barriers for all children in Iowa City. The Library's strategic plan, as part of the City of Iowa City's Equity Tool Kit program, has identified the reduction of barriers to library services as a major goal for the organization and we look forward to implementing further changes to accomplish this goal. Research shows that materials are generally returned on time and the lack of fines encourages children and teens to check out more books. The library will continue to charge replacement fees for all lost, missing, or damaged items. How much will this cost? In 2018, the Library collected $52,737 in fines on materials in the Children's and Teen's collections. This money went to the City's General Fund and not to Library operations. By making this change, the Library will not collect this money. To help support this initiative, it was recommended the Library direct the Lost and Damage account of $16,167 to the City's General Fund to help offset the total. The net impact on revenue would be a negative impact of $36, 570. When will the Library review? After one year, a findings report will be presented to the Library Board and City Council. Have other libraries done this? Yes, this is a national trend in libraries that are looking at equity issues related to library access. Many cities have stopped collecting fines on all materials, not just Children's and Teen's materials. These cities include Denver, St. Paul, District of Columbia Public Library, Minneapolis, Oak Park (IL), Nashville, Miami -Dade, Salt Lake City, and Fargo. Iowa public libraries that collect no fines include Burt, Atlantic, Donnellson, Thompson, Dunlap, Carroll, Glidden, Earlham, DeWitt, and Griswold. A number of libraries in Clinton and Scott counties are considering eliminating fines beginning in the next six months. Other Iowa libraries offer amnesty weeks or months where they waive fines from everyone's card as they come into the building. Dubuque instituted an amnesty period for 6 months. Other libraries, such as North Liberty Community Library, collect food for local pantries for payment of fines. What's next? A logical next step would be to eliminate all late fines on library materials at the Iowa City Public Library. Community engagement and national research reveal that fines create a barrier to library use for people of all ages. While many library users incur late fines, the ability to pay them depends greatly on income. Those who are able to pay can keep using the library, whereas those who are unable to pay cannot and lose the ability to use the collection. This runs counter to our public mission of providing access to all. • Johnson, M. (2017). Removing Barriers to Access: Eliminating Library Fines and Fees on Children's Materials. Colorado State Library. Colorado Department of Education. Retrieved from http://hermes.cde.state.co.us/drupal/islandora/object/co%3A25676/datastream/OBJ/view MEG JOHNSON DEPRIEST, MLIS, MSSW PREPARED FOR THE COLORADO STATE LIBRARY i1�0��00D0 COLORADO Department of Education j&7 ::::loxado SSatc Library INSTITUTE of Museuma,dLibrary SERVICES The Supporting Parents in Early Literacy through Libraries (SPELL) research revealed that library fines and fees for overdue, damaged, and lost materials are barriers that prevent low-income parents and caregivers of young children from using public libraries. After reviewing the academic and professional literature regarding library fines and fees, including qualitative research, quantitative studies, and editorial pieces, as well as using finding from the two studies with parents and public libraries in Colorado, the Colorado State Library (CSL) recommends public libraries eliminate fines and fees on children's materials. The scant research on the value and impact of library fines and fees does not indicate a clear benefit of administering these policies, and they may be costly to enforce. Library governing authorities that develop policies to remove fines and fees on juvenile material find it effective in building a positive relationship with families with young children. 3 Public libraries play a vital role in the development of early literacy skills of children and families in the communities they serve; storytimes and other programming give librarians an opportunity to teach parents of young children the importance of reading, writing, singing, talking and playing with their children. Thoughtfully developed children's collections are available for borrowing by families, particularly those that might not have the household income needed to purchase them. Unfortunately, while children's librarians encourage all parents and their children to avail themselves of the collection, the policies of many libraries are doing just the opposite. The threat of accumulating fines for overdue materials and the fees associated with damaged or lost books is keeping low-income families away from libraries, or from checking out items to take home (Zhang, 2013). Whether the intended function of library fines and fees is to encourage the prompt return of materials, to supplement the library budget, or to teach patrons responsibility, overdue fines and replacement fees on children's materials can negatively affect the borrowing habits of members of our community who need the library the most (Zhang, 2013). This white paper reviews the scant research on the costs and benefits of library fines and fees, summarizes the professional editorials on the subject, and asserts that these financial costs, particularly for children's materials, may be M more detrimental than beneficial to libraries with goals of meeting community literacy needs. Early evidence from Colorado libraries that have changed policies to be more accommodating of late, lost, and damaged materials offers additional evidence to justify these recommendations. Librarians have been discussing, and in some instances debating, the propriety of charging fees for late, lost or damaged materials for decades. A review of the professional and academic literature reveals only a handful of small-scale studies of the effect of library fines on the borrowing behavior of library users (Breslin & McMenemy, 2006; Hansel, 1993; Burgin & Hansel, 1984; Burgin & Hansel, 1991; Reed, Blackburn & Sifton, 2014; Smith & Mitchell, 2005). In absence of empirical proof of the effectiveness of fines and fees, there exists a largely philosophical conversation in the literature with many authors in favor of eliminating fines and fees --at the very least for children's materials --and focusing on the inequitable access to materials for low-income families (Caywood, 1994; Chelton, 1984; DeFaveri, 2005; Holt & Holt, 2010; Livingston, 1975; Venturella, 5 Library Fines and Circulation Rates While it is challenging to study the effect of library fines and fees on circulation patterns, a few researchers have attempted to do so. In 1981, Hansel and Burgin (1983) sent a survey to all public libraries in North Carolina to discern which circulation activities affected overdue rates over three years. They found no significant difference in overdue rates between libraries that charged fines and those that did not; and libraries that did not charge fines tended to have higher overdue rates in the short run, but lower overdue rates in the long term. Reflecting on their research, the authors stated "with overdues, as with so many aspects of librarianship, there are no easy answers --that seems to be the primary finding of the study" (Hansel & Burgin, 1983, p. 350). Perhaps unsatisfied with the "no easy answers" conclusion in their first attempt, Burgin and Hansel replicated their study in 1983 and 1990. The 1983 study revealed much the same data as the 1981 survey, but added a new result: the amount of the fine charged by a library had a significant correlation with the overdue rate --low fines did not reduce overdue rates, but steep ones did (Burgin & Hansel, 1984). In the third study, the authors concluded "In short, it appears that few strategies used by the libraries in the present survey had any significant effect on overdue rates" (Burgin & Hansel, 1991, p. 65). As diligent as they were, in three research projects over fifteen years, these authors could not uncover data to support the assumption held in the profession that the existence of nominal fines is a successful incentive to patrons to return materials I. on time; and only very steep fines seem to have had any significant effect on overdue occurrences. While not conducted in a public library environment, Mitchell and Smith's (2005) experiment in an academic library is worth noting. They attempted to determine whether rewards, rather than punitive fines, affected the timely return of academic library materials. Even the presence of rewards as incentives did not influence the promptness, or lack thereof, of students in returning materials. Also in academia, librarians at Vancouver Island University removed fines to determine if this might improve use of the physical collection by their student population of non-traditional, adult and first generation students (Reed, Blackburn & Sifton, 2014). The authors reported the removal of overdue fines did not increase circulation, but the collection wasn't "pillaged," and there was no increase in overdue items. The authors believe "fines are a contentious topic among librarians, with many strongly held beliefs about their effectiveness backed by little evidence" (p. 275). In seeking to determine why borrowing rates were down in libraries in the United Kingdom, Breslin and McMenemy (2006) conducted a survey of patrons and found that library rules, restrictive hours and "not feeling welcome" were all factors in the decline. Clayton and Chapman (2009) reported on a survey of public libraries in England and Wales. Like Burgin and Hansel, these authors found a lack of published research on the attitudes toward, and the effectiveness of, fines and fees in public libraries. Instead, they highlighted a 7 lack of consensus in the profession as to the effectiveness of charging fines. They reported that over 81 % of the libraries responding to the survey did not charge fines for children's materials and concluded "it is difficult to reach any definite conclusion as to the impact of fines on library usage and image. There is an urgent need for more research in this field, particularly studies which investigate the opinions of library users and nonusers" (Clayton & Chapman, 2009, p. 15) . Colorado State Library's (CSL) SPELL research (Zhang, 2013), funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services, included distribution of surveys in 2013 to caregivers of young children in low-income urban and rural areas of Colorado. In addition to learning about library habits among this group, CSL was interested to learn what barriers prevented low-income families with young children from visiting the library. Along with transportation and scheduling issues, respondents to the survey identified library fines as a one of the "things that get in the way" of their use of the library (Zhang, 2013, p. 17). Further anecdotal stories in focus groups with low-income parents in the study reveal that both fines for late items and fees for lost or damaged books make parents reluctant to check out books and to have their children enjoy library books at all. Neuman and Celano (2004) conducted a study examining the influence of school and public libraries on young children's literacy skills. They found libraries in economically disadvantaged areas of the community had significantly lower circulation rates than middle class neighborhoods. Using ethnographic research methods, including interviews and observation, they discovered "many families in low-income areas did not own a library card, or if they did, family members were reluctant to check out books because they feared having to pay overdue fines" (p. 83). The traditional practice of charging late fees has left a lasting impression on the very people who most need libraries: community members who are economically disadvantaged, many with young children at home. In summary, the library profession lacks data to support the argument that the presence of fines for overdue materials positively influences return rates on materials. In addition, a few research studies conclude that circulation rates among low-income families are lower due to the presence of library fines and fees. With such inconclusive evidence of the value of fines and indicators of the negative effects, the 1984 Library Journal editorial titled "What Are Fines for?" could have been written today: In the absence of circulation, delinquency, collection turnover, and collection loss rates by age group, it is impossible to say whether any particular library is achieving this goal or not, especially if there are no data showing trends in these rates prior to the implementation of a fine system. Discussion of the spurious issues seems to rise in direct proportion to the absence of data to examine the third (Chelton, 1984, p. 868). One is left to conclude that policy decisions surrounding the collection of late fees from patrons cannot be supported by hard data. Policies surrounding overdue materials, especially children's materials, must be based on careful consideration of the role of libraries in the community and the lives of its I members. There is no shortage of articles, editorials and other opinion pieces on this subject in the library profession's literature. Library Fines and Civic Responsibility Some community members, including librarians, staff, administrators, and users of libraries, believe that fines for late materials function to provide equal access to materials by encouraging patrons' sense of civic responsibility. Their philosophy is that the threat of fines teaches borrowers to return material on time so that others may access the collection. In his Library Review editorial "On Library Fines: Ensuring Civic Responsibility or an Easy Income Stream?", McMenemy (2010) examined both sides of the argument, and he concluded "It seems to me they serve a vital function for any library that requires efficient and equitable circulation of stock" (p. 81). Jerome (2012) addressed the issue with passion in "Occupy the Library. Fines: A Manifesto." When she was a younger librarian, she believed that libraries should not charge fines, but she now believes that not charging for late material, or adjusting them for certain portions of the population, has lead to a sense of entitlement in patrons. By waiving fines for some borrowers, libraries are denying other community members access to those materials that are late. She asks "How 'right' is it to let a a few essentially take advantage of the rest?" (p. 7). Both authors emphasize that the collection is for all members of the community, and the threat of fines serves as an incentive for the prompt return of materials that can then be used by other community members. Many opponents to library fines disagree with the socialization argument. They believe it is the job of parents, not libraries, to socialize children, and charging fines on children's materials is punitive and a barrier to access. In her article "Penny Wise, Pound Foolish," Caywood (1994) emphasized this point: Some librarians argue that fines teach children responsibility. This is an ironic view since it often is the parent --if not the child --who decides if they can return to the library by the due date. I have watched some parents become so incensed over a child's fines that they forbade library use. I don't know whether these kids are learning responsibility, but I'm certain they are not learning to regard the library as a welcoming place (p. 44). In an analysis of this topic, faced with a hypothetical situation in which a librarian feels uncomfortable about collecting late fees from an adolescent borrower, Galloway (1984) asked "Since when is it the duty of librarians to teach kids responsibility?" (p. 869). In the same discussion, Chelton (1984) cast doubt at the "predictable, spurious socialization arguments" with the query: "if the purpose of fines is socialization, how does one justify fines for adults, who are presumably already socialized?" (p. 869). At a time when the role of libraries in the community is under examination, it is time to move away from the traditional notion of libraries as quiet institutions with authoritarian rules of behavior where children learn to fear incurring fines. Instead, library staff can leave the socializing of children to parents, and provide the tools parents need to foster literacy skills in their children without threat of financial retribution for small infractions to rules. Fines, Fees and the Library's Budget In some library systems, funds generated by fines and fees supplement library budgets. McMenemy (2010) highlights income generation lessening the tax burden on the community as one of the reasons people advocate for these charges (p. 79). Those who disagree with this notion argue that administrative costs associated with collecting fines and fees can surpass the revenue they generate. Vernon Area Public Library (Illinois) is just one library that has eliminated overdue fines and fees that amounted to less than one percent of their budget and cost far more to collect (Pyatetsky, 2015). High Plains Library District (Colorado) eliminated late fines on library materials and found the financial repercussions to be "neutral" because they were able to eliminate costly credit card technology on their self -check machines (J. Reid, personal communication, April 26, 2016). Staff time and money -collecting technology are expensive, and when the amount generated by charging fines is compared to the costs associated with collecting them, it becomes clear charging fines for revenue may not make sense. IV, Fines, Fees, and Low-income Populations In 2012, the ALA issued a policy statement, "Library Services to the Poor," that called upon libraries to acknowledge the important role they can play in "enabling poor people to participate fully in a democratic society" (ALA, 2012, para. 1). Libraries are encouraged by the ALA to promote "the removal of all barriers to library and information services, particularly fees and overdue charges" (para. 2). The ALA joins many members of the library community in the opinion that charging library fines for materials, while equal treatment, is not fair because the practice disproportionately affects low-income members of our society. The idea that charging fines is unfair to children, especially those who are from low-income families, is not new. In 1975, the King County Library System's Children's Services Department Committee on Fines presented a proposal to eliminate fines for overdue materials to the King Country (Washington) administration. They advocated for removing fines on children's materials, discussed other libraries that had removed fines without negatively affecting circulation patterns, and they were adamant about the negative effect on borrowing among low-income families: We feel that fines are not justifiable theoretically or practically for either adults or children, however we feel that they are particularly damaging to children's attitudes to and use of the library. We believe that children have a right to use the library independent of 13 their parents' financial pressures and that fines discourage library use particularly among children (Livingston, 1975, p. 80). The administration rejected the proposal, despite the passionate support of committee members and librarians. Over forty years later, the library profession is still divided on fines (and fees) on children's material, and the policies of many institutions still include these practices. For example, in San Jose, California, libraries raised their fines to 50 cents per item, per day. In poor neighborhoods, almost one-third of the residents were barred from using the library because of unpaid fines (Pogash, 2016). An elementary school principal interviewed about the San Jose libraries' policy stated that fines are a "slap on the wrist" for middle income families, but if forced to choose between paying library fines "and putting food on the table and a roof over the children's heads, it's a no-brainer: it's better not to check out library books" (para. 18). Thus, treating all library patrons equally by assessing a fine for late materials is inequitable: it disproportionately affects low-income families. With regard to fees for lost items, in "Breaking Barriers: Libraries and Socially Excluded Communities," DeFaveri (2005) described a situation in which a mother was charged $25.00 for a lost picture book. The author asks members of our profession to contemplate the long-term consequences of choosing to collect $25 in the short term: Will this family be comfortable returning to the library? 14 If the library does not charge for the damaged book, it loses about $25.00. When the library fails to recognize situations where charging replacement costs means losing library patrons, it loses the opportunity to participate in the life of the patron and patron's family. By choosing to make a $25 replacement cost more significant than the role the institution can play in the social, developmental, and community life of the family, the library forfeits its role as a community and literacy advocate and leader. It will cost the library more than $25.00 to convince this mother to return to the library. It will cost the library more than $25.00 to persuade this mother that the library is a welcoming community place willing to mount literacy programs aimed at her children, who will not benefit from regular library visits and programs. And when these children are adults, it will cost the library more than $25.00 to convince them that the library is a welcoming and supportive place for their children (DeFaveri, 2005, para. 20-22). DeFaveri also discussed the ingrained nature of fines, and she called for librarians to understand that they affect different populations differently: Fines, replacement costs and processing fees are affordable for the middle class, but represent significant and often overwhelming costs for poor people. As a result, poor patrons with fines over $10.00 who cannot pay the fines are excluded from accessing library resources. This barrier to library use has short and long-term consequences for the library and the community it serves" (para. 17). In agreement with DeFaveri, Venturella (1998) emphasized the leadership and advocacy roles of libraries. She argued that overdue fines are a burden to low- income library users, and she insisted "It is a moral imperative that we be responsive to the needs of the community" (p. 33). The ALA urges libraries to play a significant role in supporting low-income users as valued members of our society. Children's librarians encourage parents to use the library and teach them how to grow early literacy skills in their young 15 children. Yet, as Holt and Holt (2010) observed, "Reacting to fines and the cost of lost books, or just fearing such expenses, parents and caregivers in poor families may make a rational decision to not allow their children to a get a library card or to check out books that might get lost" (p. 51). The SPELL research (Zhang, 2013) confirms this assertion. Removing Fines and Fees in Public Libraries Some public libraries across the United States are changing their policies and seeing little difference in their circulation statistics and, more importantly, improving the library experience of community members. In Pyatetsky's (2015) opinion piece "The End of Overdue Fines?' she suggested the act of eliminating library fines is becoming more widespread and accepted. Algonquin Public Library (Illinois) removed fines; at the one year anniversary of the policy change, they saw no negative effects. Witnessing this, Vernon Public Libraries in the northwest Chicago suburbs followed suit (Pyatetsky, para. 2, 2015). After determining that charging fines was costing more than the revenue it brought in, Gleason Public Library (Illinois) stopped charging fines and saw no significant difference in the amount of time people were keeping materials (West, 2012). The library director, Angela Mollet, said having a "fine -free" policy was in keeping with the library's mission: "What role do fines play in a library? I want to encourage people of all ages to read, to discover, to be curious, and it doesn't make sense to put up any barriers that might prevent that" (West, 2012, r. para. 29). The staff and trustees at Gleason Public Library placed emphasis on removing obstacles to accessing materials, especially for children. Some libraries offer innovative programming along with policy changes. For example, The New York Public Library, which does not charge fines for late children's books, waived the outstanding fees for lost materials on children's accounts as part of their summer reading program on the condition that children participate in the program and read. The library subtracted one dollar off of their fines for each 15 minutes each child spent reading (Allen, 2011, para. 2). Another creative program can be found at the Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County. While this system does charge fines, the rate is five cents per day for children and 20 cents for adults (The Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County, 2016). Regardless of the status of their accounts, children and teens in this system could ask for their own cards, issued immediately upon request, that allow them to check out a set number of books at a time during the summer. When one book was returned, they could check out another. "The timing on these new cards was key to encouraging and enabling kids and teens whose regular cards have been blocked because of fines or losses, or whose parent were too worried about them running up fines and fees to be able to participate in the Summer Reading program, and to keep up their reading skills over summer break" (Keller, 2011, p. 14). The staff and governing entities of both of these libraries recognized the importance of 17 removing barriers for young children and developed innovative programs and policies to address the library fines problem for children. The High Plains Library District (Colorado) participated in a second SPELL research project in which recommendations for the initial research, including removing fines and fees on children's materials, were tested in eight communities. Upon learning that parents and guardians of young children reported library fines to be a barrier to visiting the library, the district eliminated fines on all late returns of materials (excluding DVDs). The main objective of the policy was to increase circulation of children's materials, and the board and administration wished to bring new users into the library. Six months after fines were eliminated, overall circulation was up, and 95% of their materials were returned within a week of the due date (J. Reid, personal communication, April 26, 2016). Staff members of libraries are pleased with the policy change, as they have far fewer unpleasant interactions with patrons about fines, and have more time to accomplish their other duties. The financial effect on the institution, as indicated earlier, has been labeled "neutral." In order to determine if late return of items was affecting the experience of patrons waiting for items, the district examined circulation data and found no increase in "patron disappoints." While patrons might be slightly slower at returning items, this is not negatively affecting the experience of other users of the library. Other Colorado libraries participating in the second SPELL project have policies regarding children's materials that support early literacy in their community. Pueblo City -County Library District does not charge fines on picture books and board books, and Denver Public Library has no fines for juvenile and young adult items. Guided by SPELL research findings, Garfield County Public Library District no longer charges fines on picture books, waives fees for damages to board books, and has become more lenient about damages to picture books in the interest of encouraging families to make full use of the materials. According to the library's director, Amelia Shelley, "The library district believes the financial impact will be small, but the impact on children will be immeasurable" (Shelley, 2014, para. 4). There are no fines charged for overdue materials checked out from the Montrose Regional Library District's bookmobile: The reasoning for this is two -fold. First, these patrons can struggle to have consistent access to the library, so getting materials returned on time can be a real challenge and we want to make using the library as easy as possible for these patrons. Secondly, many of our target families are low- income and having library fines could prevent continued use of the Bookmobile if they weren't able to pay them off (Lizz Martensen, personal communication, May 26, 2016). Moving away from the traditional practice of charging library users for late, lost or damaged children's materials has allowed libraries participating in the second SPELL project to focus on nurturing early literacy skills development in low-income households. Removing the financial barrier to library use aligns them with their missions and the ALA's position regarding library services to economically disadvantaged members of our community. a The Colorado State Library recommends public library administrators and governing bodies eliminate library fines, and reconsider fees for lost or damaged items, on children's materials, and other items as deemed appropriate for local service. Fines are punitive, not educational incentives. Damaged and lost material is an inevitable aspect of library use, particularly with very young children, and needs to be considered the cost of doing business with the library's young patrons. The profession has little empirical evidence that charging fines results in greater circulation of library materials, or indeed the return of items in a timely manner. The administrative costs, including equipment rental, collection contracts, and staff time associated with collecting funds from patrons, often equals or exceeds the revenue earned from library fines and fees. At a time when libraries struggle to remain relevant and increase library use, it may be counterproductive to enforce policies that are punitive in nature and further the stereotype of libraries as authoritarian institutions to be feared. Librarians have an opportunity to play a meaningful role in the lives of children and families in their communities. By eliminating library fines and fees, particularly on children's materials, public libraries become more welcoming to 20 children and families. Early literacy skills are crucial to school readiness, so it is important that parents and caregivers from all income -levels in our society have access to materials they can use daily in the home to practice reading, singing, talking, writing, and playing with their children. Children's librarians are thrilled when they see families checking out a stack of picture books, and families should be encouraged to do so, rather than be fearful of the late fines and book damage fees that might accrue. Based on the research, these user- friendly policies will bring more community members into the library, especially the low-income populations who need libraries the most. FRI References Allen, J. (2011). New York scheme for 143,000 kids to work off library fines: Read. Reuters. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/us-library-fines- newyork-id USTR E76O525201 10725 American Library Association. (2012). ALA policy statement: Library services to the poor. Extending our reach: Reducing homelessness through library engagement. Retrieved from http://www.aIa.org/offices/extending-our- reach-reducing-homelessness-through-library-engagement-7 Breslin, F. & McMenemy, D. (2006). The decline in book borrowing from Britain's public libraries: A small scale Scottish study. Library Review, 55(7), 414-428. doi:10.1 108/00242530610682137 Burgin, R. & Hansel, P. (1984). More hard facts on overdues. Library & Archival Security, 6(2-3). 5-17. Burgin, R. & Hansel, P. (1991). Library overdues: An update. Library & Archival Security, 10(2). 51-75. Caywood, C. (1994). Penny wise, pound foolish. School Library Journal, 40(11), Chelton, M.K. (1984). What are fines for? Library Journal (109). 868-869. Clayton, C. & Chapman, E.L. (2009). Fine tuning. Public Library Journal, 4(1), 12- 15. 22 DeFaveri, Annette. (2005). Breaking barriers: Libraries and socially excluded communities. Information for Social Change. Retrieved April 14, 2015 at http://Iibr.org/isc/articles/21/9.pdf. Hansel, P. (1983). Hard facts about overdues. Library Journal, 108(4), 349. Holt, L. E. & Holt, G. E. (2010). Public library services for the poor: Doing all we can. Library Journal, 135(1 13), 92. Jerome, J. A. (2012). Occupy the library. Public Libraries, 51(6), 6-7. Keller, J. (2011). New library cards mean no fines in Cincinnati. Public Libraries, 50(4), 13-16. Livingston, C. P. (1975). Removing fines. School Library Journal, 21(7), 80. McMenemy, D. (2010). On library fines: Ensuring civic responsibility or an easy income stream? Library Review, 59(2), 78-81. d o i :10.1108/00242531011023835 Neuman, S. B. & Celano, D. (2004). Save the libraries! Educational Leadership, 61(6) , 82-85. Pogash, C. (2016, March 30). In San Jose, poor find doors to library closed. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/31 /us/in-san- jose-poor-find-doors-to-library-cIosed.htmI?-r=0 The Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County. (2016). Table of fines and fees. Retrieved from http://www.cincinnatilibrary.org/policies/tablefinesfees.pdf 23 Pyatetsky, J. (2015). The end of overdue fines? Public Libraries Online. Retrieved from http://publiclibrariesonline.org/2015/1 1 /the -end -of -overdue -fines/ Reed, K., Blackburn, J. & Sifton, D. (2014). Putting a sacred cow out to pasture: Assessing the removal of fines and reduction of barriers at a small academic library. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(3/4), 275-280. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2014.04.003 Shelley, A. (2014). Libraries support early literacy through no -fines initiative. Retrieved from http://www.gcpld.org/news-and-events/featured- news/libraries-support-early-literacy-through-no-fines-initiative-0 Smith, F. & Mitchell, W. (2005). Using rewards to minimize overdue book rates. Journal of Access Services, 3 (1), 47-52. doi: 10. 1 300/J204v03n01 _04 Venturella, K. M. (1998). Poor people and library services. Jefferson, N.C: McFarland. West, N. S. (2012, March 25). Late? No, fine: More public libraries are dropping fees for overdue materials, after deciding the extra revenue isn't worth the aggravation. Boston Globe. Retrieved from http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2012/03/25/some_greater_b oston_libra ries_are_dropping_fines_for_overdue_materiaIs/ Zhang, D. (2013). SPELL research methodology and findings. Retrieved from http://spellproject.weebly.com/uploads/1 /5/3/3/15331602/spell-research _methodology_and_findings.pdf 24 COLORADO Department of Education Colorado State Library Colorado State Library 201 E. Colfax, Room 309 Denver, CO 80203 303.866.6900 www.ColoradoStateLibrary.org •.;•,i INSTITUTE of •••••• MuseumandLibrary • :•� SERVICES • � s The SPELL Project and other projects administered by the Colorado State Library are made possible in part by grant funds from the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). Item Number: 9. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Memo from City Clerk: KXIC Radio Show ATTACHMENTS: Description Memo from City Clerk: KXIC Radio Show -.f ---r. -4 CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM Date: February 6, 2019 To: Mayor and City Council From: Kellie Fruehling, City Clerk Re: KXIC Radio Show At your February 5 work session, Council Members agreed to the following schedule for the Wednesday 8:20 AM radio show. Wednesday February 6 — Assistant City Manager, Ashley Monroe (2020 Census) February 13 — Thomas February 20 — Parks & Recreation Director, Juli Seydell-Johnson February 27 — Cole March 6 — Throgmorton March 13 - Mims March 20 (spring break) — Taylor March 27 — Salih April 3 — Teague April 10 —Thomas ** Please remember that KXIC is very flexible with taping the sessions ahead of the show. &CIk/Council KXIC Radio Schedule/radioshowasking.doc Item Number: 10. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok 10WA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Planning and Zoning for Local Officials Workshop: Spring 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Planning ano Z-oning for Local Officials Workshop: Spring 2019 WHATYOU WILL LEARN Elected officials and citizen -led boards and commissions make up the backbone of the local planning and zoning process. Unfortunately, the issues surrounding land use, and the tools and techniques available to address them, are becoming increasingly complex. At the same time developers, landowners, and residents are increasingly likely to litigate over unfavorable decisions. The Introduction to Planning and Zoning workshop is designed as a "basic training" for local elected and appointed officials on the land use issues facing them today. Using case scenarios in a highly -interactive format, it will provide participants with an overview of the roles and responsibilities of the planning commission, the board of adjustment, and the elected council and board of supervisors. It also will highlight legal issues frequently faced by local officials, such as variances, special uses, nonconforming uses, spot zoning, hearing procedures, and conflicts of interest. The workshop is intended primarily for local officials new to planning and zoning issues, though it also will serve as a refresher for veteran members. 0a r. _ r�l■ * ' ''� z - a ■ p _.i'9 w Ld� N. ■ � U_N i ' � m r 1 � OO o Lu 000 _..1... .� o o 0 0 ti"....... z r 3 o © Z N ° NQ Iowa League of Cities Iowa's Regional Councils of Government Iowa State Association of Counties ISLI Extension County Offices 2019 LOCATIONS : e • ► ► • : ri i ► REGISTERLONLINIllJ The Introduction to Planning and Zoning for Local Officials workshops are offered annually across the state. Locations change from year to year so that city officials can attend a location near them at least once every two years. April 16 ...__ Fort Dodge Tue Triton Cafe 100 & 101 Iowa Central Community College April 18 -- :-.Watedoo Thur Scholz Room I Waterloo Center for the Arts 225 Commercial Street April 23 Johnston - Tue Ballroom 3, Hilton Garden Inn 8600 Northpark Drive April 25 Councl,Bluffs Thur Wabash Rm & River City A, Hilton Garden Inn Omaha/East Council Bluffs 2702 MidAmerica Drive May 2 Dubuque-- Thur River Room, Hotel Julien 200 Main Street May 9 Fairfield Thur Fairfield Arts & Convention Center 200 North Main Street The Introduction to Planning and Zoning Workshops will be held in eight locations throughout Iowa in April and May 2019. All programs will begin with registration and a light supper at 5:30 p.m. The program will begin at 6:00 p.m. and conclude by 8:45 p.m. The registration fee is $65 per individual. This fee is reduced to $55 per individual if a city or country registers 5 or more officials to attend. This fee covers supper and the workshop materials. �r s •r �� T Certification Credits The workshop has been pre -approved by the Iowa Municipal Finance Officers Association and the Iowa League of Cities for credits toward certification. Iowa State Univan,i y Extension and `).,traach does nut discriminate on the basis of age, disebdiry, ethnicity, gentler ideniiiY. genetic information, May 14 Davenportanal t t s p g r. a color, reign,, ,ex, sequel air t t i t t us veteran,other Tue The River's Edge to ole as Net II p oh hed bazar npply to all p grm r qg iae 700 West River Drive agars e. dsor,m t Ices y- d uccdi tf,ooverety Advisc 75 Feardsh..r H II 515 Momill Road, Ani I a 50011, 515`294-t 462, extdiveuitv@?iestate.edu. All other inquiries may be directed to 8062823600. To download additional brochures and link to registration page please visit http://dogs.extension.iastate.edu/planningBLUZ We have moved exclusively to an online registration system for the Planning and Zoning for Local Officials workshops. Click here to reaister: (hftp://blogs.extension.iastate.edu/ planningBLUZ) Click on the "Intro to Planning and Zoning Workshops" tab at the left of the page, then click on the "Register Online Here' link. When you register you will have the option to pay by credit card, or to be invoiced via e-mail. To receive a meal you must register at least one week before the scheduled date of the workshop you wish to attend. You may register and pay at the door on the day of the workshop if you cannot register by the one-week deadline; however, no meal will be provided. If you have registered but find you cannot attend you may send a substitute or cancel your registration; however, no refunds will be made for cancellations received less than 3 business days prior to the workshop. No exceptions. For registration questions please contact: Registration Services 515-294-6222 registrabons@iastate.edu For other information about the workshops please contact: Eric Christianson 515-231-6513 e'chr@iastate.edu GaryTaylor 515-290-0214 gtavlor@iastate.edu Amanda You ngquist 515-294-8707 amvouna@iastate.edu Item Number: 11. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Joint Entities Meeting minutes: January 14 ATTACHMENTS: Description Joint Entities Meeting minutes: January 14 Johnson JOHNSON COUNTY IOWA 44 County BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING MINUTES • MONDAY, JANUARY 14, 2019 Conference Rooms 203 B/C Joint Entities Meeting 4:30 PM HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES BUILDING 855 SOUTH DUBUQUE STREET IOWA CITY, IA 52240 PHONE: 319-356-6000 www.JOHNSON-COUNTY.com www.JOHNSONCOUNTYlAlOM2.com Meeting preceded by 4:00 PM reception A. Chairperson Green -Douglass called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. Attendee Name Title Status S Arrived Pat Heiden Supervisor Present Lisa Green -Douglass Chairperson Present Royceann Porter Supervisor Present Janelle Rettig Supervisor Present Rod Sullivan Supervisor Present ; B. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON AGENDA 100Grannies members Miriam Kashia, Aaron Silander, and Katharine Nicholson, and resident Lynn Gallagher spoke against concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs). C. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Elected Officials present: City of Coralville (Coralville) City Council Member Meghann Foster; City of Hills City Council Members: Mayor Tim Kemp, Cathy Kriebel; City of Iowa City (Iowa City) City Council Members: Mayor Jim Throgmorton, Susan Mims, Mazahir Salih, Pauline Taylor, Bruce Teague, John Thomas; City of North Liberty Mayor Terry Donahue; City of Swisher Mayor Chris Taylor; City of University Heights Mayor Louise From; and Iowa City Community School District (ICCSD) Board Members: President Janet Godwin, Shawn Eyestone, Steve Murley. Staff present: Coralville Assistant City Administrator Ellen Habel; Iowa City: Manager Geoff Fruin, Assistant to the Iowa City Manager Simon Andrew, City Clerk Kellie Fruehling; and Johnson County: Auditor's Office Confidential Administrative Secretary Emily Way, Board Office Executive Director Mike Hensch, Emergency Management Coordinator Dave Wilson. D. DISCUSSION/UPDATE 1. Confined Animal Feeding Operation Policy Johnson County Iowa Submitted by the Auditor's Office Page 1 Minutes Board of Supervisors Monday, January 14, 2019 Iowa City Mayor Jim Throgmorton said he and P. Taylor have heard complaints regarding CAFOs from Iowa City residents and they would like to know what action the County is taking regarding the matter. Board members and officials spoke about the matter including the limits of County authority, adopting the master matrix resolution annually, and the legislative priorities. 2. Legislative Priorities Andrew reviewed Iowa City's 2019 Legislative Priorities, Green -Douglass reviewed the County's 2019 Legislative Priorities and Issues, and Eyestone reviewed ICCSD's 2019 Legislative Priorities. 3. Project Updates The following individuals provided an update on projects in their various entities: Habel, Fruin, Donahue, C. Taylor, From, Godwin, Green -Douglass, Sullivan, and Heiden. 4. Set Next Meeting Date and Time The Iowa City Community School District is scheduled to host the next Joint Entities Meeting scheduled for April 15 at 4:30 p.m. 5. Other Throgmorton said there is on ongoing controversy regarding benches in Iowa City. Earlier this afternoon at a protest, a flier was distributed targeting Fruin and Shelter House Executive Director Crissy Canganelli using offensive language and imagery. Officials expressed their anger and disgust with the flier and commented on the bench controversy. Porter asked for an update on recycling in Iowa City. Fruin spoke about recycling options for Iowa City residents. E. Adjourned of 5:26 p.m. Attest: Travis Weipert, Auditor Recorded by Emily Way Johnson County Iowa Submitted by the Auditor's Office Page 2 Item Number: 12. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Civil Service Entrance Examination: Digital Communications Specialist ATTACHMENTS: Description Civil Service Entrance Examination - Digital Communications Specialist � r CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.1cgov.org February 4, 2019 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination ,. Digital Communications Specialist Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Digital Communications Specialist. Zachary Berg IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OKA Rick Wyss, Chair Item Number: 13. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Civil Service Entrance Examination: Senior Maintenance Worker - Horticulture ATTACHMENTS: Description Civil Service Entrance Examination: Senior Maintenance Worker - Horticulture I pill ZE CITY OF IOWA CITY 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 (3 19) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org February 6, 2019 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Senior Maintenance Worker Horticulture Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Senior Maintenance Worker - Horticulture. Steven Erickson IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Rick WY6"s", Chair Item Number: 14. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Airport Commission: January 17 ATTACHMENTS: Description Airport Commission: January 17 January 17, 2019 Page 1 MINUTES DRAFT IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION JANUARY 17, 2019 — 6:00 P.M. AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING Members Present: Warren Bishop, Minnetta Gardinier, Derek LaBrie, Christopher Lawrence, Robert Libby Members Absent: Staff Present: Eric Goers, Michael Tharp Others Present: Matt Wolford, Carl Byers, Ron Roetzel, Jared Wingo, David Hughes, Doug Schindel, Carol Freeman, Mike Fagle, Matthew Wilke, David O'Loughlin, Melissa Underwood, Bob Cohrs, Shawn McMahon, Paul Anderson RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (to become effective only after separate Council action): None. DETERMINE QUORUM: The meeting was called to order at 6:09 P.M. 2019-2023 ENGINEERING RFQ INTERVIEWS: Tharp noted that this evening will consist of them interviewing the finalists for the engineering RFQ. This would be for the consultant who would be doing the engineering and design services forAirport projects, both State and federally -funded projects. Continuing, Tharp explained what the schedule is for each consultant to give their presentation. He added that they do have three firms participating in this process. AECOM: Presentations began with AECOM and David Hughes. He stated that AECOM has been with the Airport for 15 years and that they would really like to continue in this role. Hughes then introduced AECOM team members Doug Schindel, Carol Freeman, Mike Fagle, Matt Wilke, and David O'Loughlin, adding that this is the team that would be involved in the work at the Airport. In his presentation, Hughes stated that he will show why AECOM should remain in the engineering role, especially with their in-depth knowledge of the Airport and its facilities. Sharing some history about AECOM, Hughes noted that they are the second-largest engineering company, with 87,000 employees worldwide in 150 countries. The AECOM team has regional airport experience, as well as both national and international airport experience. Hughes stated that AECOM has had several name changes over the years, but that their experience has only grown stronger, developing such entities as the Aviation Design Center in Des Moines. Hughes then spoke to the various areas of expertise within their organization. He January 17, 2019 Page 2 also spoke to various projects in the Midwest that they have worked on, from O'Hare Airport to Des Moines. Speaking to airport design experience, Hughes noted the Waterloo Regional Airport and various projects they have worked on there. Along those same lines, he listed many of the projects that AECOM has been a part of over the past 15 years. AECOM's knowledge of both FAA and DOT requirements is a positive factor, as well. Hughes continued, stating that AECOM is committed to providing quality services. He then spoke further to some of the most important projects that have occurred at the Iowa City Airport — obstruction mitigation, runway rehabilitation, apron reconstruction and expansion, and taxiway improvements. Hughes wrapped up his presentation, reiterating that AECOM is committed to providing quality engineering services to the Iowa City Airport. Hughes then opened it up for questions from the Commission. Member Bishop asked for some clarification of AECOM's role in the Airport seeking FAA grants. Hughes explained how he works directly with Tharp on the various grants, using adopted plans, such as the master plan and the layout plan, for guidance. Libby then asked what type of vision AECOM has for the Airport. Hughes responded that projects like lengthening runways would give the Airport even more growth, for example, as would more hangars and paved areas. Gardinier then spoke, thanking AECOM for all of the work they have done for the Airport. She brought up how five years ago when they were doing these same type of interviews, she was the one who really questioned AECOM and the work they were doing. She asked Hughes what he feels they have done differently over the past five years in terms of improving AECOM's service to the Airport. She added that what she felt was problematic over this time were the pavement issues and the issue of a 5,000 -foot runway that came to light during the master plan process. She questioned why AECOM was not aware of this issue and why they did not bring it to the Commission's attention if they did know. Hughes responded by giving some background information on why the runway issues played out the way they did. He explained the battles they faced with the FAA in getting funding. He stated that at the time the Airport was a Category C airport and the runway extension became a safety improvement, thus allowing approval by the FAA. Hughes also addressed the issue surrounding the pavement problems and how this was resolved. Another question asked revolved around projects that have gone over budget or over the expected completion date, and how they can work together to prevent these things from happening in the future. Hughes addressed this, noting that AECOM has the knowledge and expertise to work with the Commission in all of these important areas. Several otherAECOM representatives also spoke to their in-depth knowledge of the Airport and their ongoing ability to help them grow and expand. Bolton & Menk, Inc.: Tharp introduced Ron Roetzel, Carl Byers, and Jared Wingo with the firm Bolton & Menk. The presentation began with Roetzel speaking to Bolton & Menk's history. Byers then spoke to his background, noting that he has attended several of the Airport Commission meetings. Wingo then introduced himself, noting that he would be the Planner for the Airport. Roetzel addressed Members again, speaking to their corporate philosophy of 'client first, client focused, and for the long-term relationship.' Bolton & Menk has a strong presence in Iowa, serving 60 municipalities and 15 airports. Byers then spoke to pavement projects at the Airport, and he shared an inspection report, a pavement condition index, which shows that there are no serious problems detected. With the regular inspections that are done, he believes they can then use those FAA - funded projects when maintenance issues arise. Speaking to the ongoing obstruction mitigation project, Wingo gave a brief history of where Bolton & Menk come from. He spoke to the GIS capabilities they have and how this web GIS could benefit the Airport greatly. Continuing, Byers then spoke to the goal of the Airport with the obstruction mitigation project — to get more runway January 17, 2019 Page 3 and better approaches. He pointed out ways to do this, speaking to the thresholds and how they could make changes there. Wingo then spoke to a key area — the ability to coordinate with `flight procedures.' He stated that Bolton & Menk would propose they utilize Wingo's experience as an instrument procedure specialist, as well as his FAA contacts, to get into that queue and start looking into the actual project that would be needed to achieve such a goal. He continued, giving further detail on how they would tackle such a project. Byers continued from here, noting how important the approaches are for the Airport and how they could possibly move forward in 2020 with such a project. He added that being pilots themselves, they completely understand the impacts such issues can have on an airport. Byers wrapped up by telling the Commission that Bolton & Menk would really like the opportunity to work with them and he thanked everyone for their time. Members then asked questions of the Bolton & Menk team, starting with their progress on the Le Mar's project. Wingo and Byers responded, detailing what was accomplished before the weather turned, adding that the government shutdown has also hampered progress here. The importance of 'flight procedures' and a PAP[ was reiterated, with Wingo and Byers answering Member questions. Both brought up the importance of communication with flight checks. Gardinier asked for some clarification on such a project and what type of costs might be associated with it. Byers spoke to the typical requirements when relocating an approach and where the costs usually lie. The Bolton & Menk team continued to speak to the importance of a PAPI being in use. Flexibility was another key element that the team touched on, speaking to the changes that will be coming in the future of aviation. They wrapped up by responding to questions on the web GIS system and the various uses of it. Short Elliott Hendrickson (SEH) Inc.: Tharp introduced Melissa Underwood and her team from SEH and they began their engineering presentation. Bob Cohrs began, giving a brief history of SEH and his career to date. He noted that he is also a pilot, with his expertise in planning and environmental issues. He introduced each team member, as well as Paul Anderson from MMS Consulting, who would be overseeing the surveying and construction inspection portions. Underwood then spoke to Members. She noted that she has 16 years experience in the planning and aviation field. She noted that she was part of the team that worked on the Airport's master plan a few years ago. She too is a pilot and has worked on general aviation airports all over Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Dakotas. Shawn McMahon spoke next, noting that he has been with SEH 11 years now. He served as a pilot in the Air Force on a C-17 aircraft. Paul Anderson with MMS Consulting then introduced himself. He stated that they would be the local contact for the team, if they are chosen for the contract. Some history of SEH was then shared with the Commission. They work in six different markets — transportation being one of them, which includes aviation. SEH has served over 120 airports through the years. The SEH team continued, giving the Members a more in-depth history of their organization and the breadth of their organization's expertise and knowledge. Underwood then spoke to the master planning process and the various steps they worked through to come up with the completed product. Referring to the Airport's CIP, Underwood spoke to how they would suggest moving through these important projects. McMahon also spoke to the CIP projects, again noting how SEH would move through these to completion. Underwood wrapped up her presentation by stating that SEH is very dedicated to being the consultant for the Iowa City Airport. Members then asked questions of the team, with the first centering around the minimization, or elimination, of downtime on runway 2-5 with respect to approaches with the PAPIs being moved, etc. The SEH team responded, briefly outlining how such a project would proceed. January 17, 2019 Page 4 They also spoke to similar projects that they have been a part of, noting that weather-related delays tend to be the biggest concern. Gardinier asked how they navigate using drones to check for cracks in pavement without causing flight disruptions. The SEH team responded and further explained how they use the GIS system to keep this type of information up-to-date. Tharp stated that the Commission can make the decision tonight if they wish, or they can defer to the next meeting. Gardinier stated that she is open to making the decision this evening and others agreed. Members began their discussion, with Lawrence asking for some history on the projects that AECOM has overseen in the past. Gardinier responded, stating that she did like tonight's presentation by AECOM; however, in remembering the last time they went through this process, she again questions using their services. Giving some history to the newer Members, she stated that the negatives for her are that AECOM is almost too large of a firm and that the Airport is often `not in their sights.' She believes there have been some gaffs in certain projects, oversights on what was done or not done. Gardinier also spoke to the runway issue, where the master planning process showed how the runway could be extended. Other Members agreed that fresh eyes might be just what they need. After further discussion, Members agreed that the preferred consultant is Bolton & Menk, Inc. Goers reminded Members that they have not yet addressed the financial side of such an agreement. He therefore recommended that the motion not reflect certainty in who gets the contract, but rather who they are choosing as their preferred consultant. LaBrie moved to have staff move forward in negotiating a master agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc., as their preferred consultant. Lawrence seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes from the December 20, 2018, meeting were reviewed by Members. Bishop moved to accept the minutes of the December 20, 2018, meeting, as presented. Gardinier seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/ACTION: a. FAA/IDOT Projects: AECOM / David Hughes i. Obstruction Mitigation — Hughes stated that the revisions have been made in the contract and that it was signed about a week ago. ii. Terminal Apron Rehab — Tharp noted that they need to set the public hearing now on this, another DOT -funded project. 1. Consider Resolution #A19-01, setting a public hearing on plans, specifications, and form of contract — Lawrence moved to consider Resolution #A19-01 to set a public hearing. LaBrie seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. b. FBO / Flight Training Reports I. Jet Air — Matt Wolford began with the monthly maintenance reports. Gardinier asked about the light bulbs needing to be replaced after crews have cleared snow on the runway. Wolford responded to questions and concerns, noting that most of the tasks have been routine this past month. January 17, 2019 Page 5 Wolford stated that with a slowdown in business this time of year, they have been sprucing things up and doing some cleaning. C. Airport Operations L Management — Tharp stated that he will be out of the office on January 31 It for the Transportation/Aviation/Rail/Transit Day on the Hill in Des Moines. He also spoke to the City budget process, noting that he went through the operations budget on January 5th and then through the CIP earlier this week with the City Council. He felt his presentations went well. Speaking to a recent request that he received, Tharp noted that there is a corporate hangar coming open soon that Tom Snell would like to obtain. Tharp explained how he would like to handle such requests. ii. Events — Tharp stated that there are currently no events planned at the Airport. In regards to events this summer — the Young Eagles will be sometime in June. Tharp added that he is working with other City departments regarding the possibility of having the Monarch (butterfly) Festival at the Airport this summer. In previous years, it was held at the Terry Trueblood Recreation Area. d. Commission Members' Reports — None. e. Staff Report — None. SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING FOR: The next regular meeting of the Airport Commission will be held on Thursday, February 21, 2019, at 6:00 P.M. in the Airport Terminal Building. Tharp reminded Members of the public hearing at this meeting and therefore they will need to be present. ADJOURN: Lawrence moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:50 P.M. LaBrie seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. CHAIRPERSON DATE January 17, 2019 Page 6 Airport Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time TERM o 0 0 0 0 0 Cl .. NAME EXP. s � s j s s e� co -� N � 00 00 ao 00 0o 0o 00 00 co w to Warren 06/30/22 0/ Bishop NM NM NM NM NM NM NM E X X X M i nnetta 07/01/19 O' Gardinier X X X O/E X X X X X E X Robert 07/01/20 O/ O/ Libby X O/E X X X X E E X X X Christopher 07/01/21 Lawrence X X X X X X X X X X X Derek 07/01/22 0/ LaBrie NM NM NM NM X X X X X E X Key: X = Present X/E = Present for Part of Meeting O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = Not a Member at this time Item Number: 15. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Board of Adjustment: December 12 ATTACHMENTS: Description Lioaro ol' Adjustment: December 12 MINUTES PRELIMINARY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DECEMBER 12, 2018 — 5:15 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Gene Chrischilles, Connie Goeb, Ryan Hall, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Susan Dulek, Sarah Walz OTHERS PRESENT: CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:15 PM. ROLL CALL: Walz announced the member Bryce Parker was deployed to Germany and therefore has resigned his position on the Board. The City Council has selected one new member (to replace Chrischilles), Amy Pretorius, and they will now have to select another member to replace Parker. Walz noted in January they will do some Board training since there will be two new members. At the January meeting they will also nominate a new Chair and Vice Chair, traditionally they have gone with seniority which would make Goeb the new Chair and Weitzel the Vice Chair but that can be changed and it will be discussed next month. A brief opening statement was read by Chrischilles outlining the role and purpose of the Board and the procedures that would be followed the meeting. CONSIDER THE AUGUST 18, 2018 MINUTES: Goeb moved to approve the minutes of August 18, 2018. Weitzel seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried 4-0. REVIEW BOARD PROCEDURES: Walz explained that every year they review the Board procedures and noted there were some updates that were made in 2018 like language changes (i.e. the name of the Neighborhood Services Office). Walz handed out current Board procedures and asked the Board to review and noted Staff are not requesting any updates or changes at this time. Walz said another recent update had been to clarify the recusal process and how that works as well as if somebody wanted to abstain from a vote. Chrischilles said he reviewed the document and doesn't see anything that needs updating. Board of Adjustment December 12, 2018 Page 2 of 2 Weitzel agreed. Hall noted he doesn't think the document online is the updated version as it is dated 2012 and Walz said that would be corrected. Hall said the information regarding the temporary alternate for the Board is not in the document online. Dulek said that is not in the Rules of the Board but rather in the City Code and was codified by ordinance. Chrischilles noted that when his term is done he is willing to be on the alternate list when needed. Dulek stated the language regarding the alternate that is in the City Code could be added to the end of the Board Procedures document as well. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS: Walz said they have one application they are working on they believe will be ready for the January meeting. Dulek noted the application will have a conflict with their office so the Board will be represented by Ryan Moss who is an Assistant County attorney. Dulek stated in the past when there was a conflict with the City Attorney's office they would hire outside council but the decision has been made to now use the City of North Liberty attorney or Johnson County Attorney's office. Walz thanked Chrischilles for his service on the Board and presented him with a certificate. Walz introduced Jessica Lile who will be the staff contact for the Board moving forward. ADJOURNMENT: Goeb moved to adjourn this meeting. Weitzel seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-0 Board of Adjustment December 12, 2018 Page 3 of 3 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ATTENDANCE RECORD 2017-2018 NAME TERM EXP. 10/11 12/11 2/14 5/09 6/13 8/18 12/12 CHRISCHILLES, T. GENE 1/1/2019 X X X X X X X GOEB, CONNIE 1/1/2020 X X O/E X X X X HALL, RYAN 1/l/2023 -- -- X X X X X WEITZEL, TIM 1/1/2021 X X X X X X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Not a Member Item Number: 16. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Historic Preservation Commission: January 10 ATTACHMENTS: Description Historic Hreservation Commission: January 10 MINUTES PRELIMINARY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL January 10, 2019 MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin Boyd, Zach Builta, Helen Burford, Sharon DeGraw, G. T. Karr, Cecile Kuenzli, Quentin Pitzen MEMBERS ABSENT: Thomas Agran, Gosia Clore, Lee Shope STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow OTHERS PRESENT: None RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS — CONSENT AGENDA: 803 Church Street — G oosetown/H o race Mann Conservation District (porch reconstruction). Bristow explained this property is near Ace Hardware and was built originally as a two-story gable. She said the side addition was added later and there was a whole back addition with a two -car garage underneath. The front porch will be replaced with this project. Bristow shared slides showing fish scale shingles in the gables and vinyl siding and soffits on the porch. She said the porch has its original roof structure but everything else below has been replaced. The roof has been failing. Because of this and failures in the newer parts of the porch, and the fact that it is an enclosed porch, which is discouraged in an historic district, staff recommends demolition of the existing porch. Bristow showed a 1926 view obtained from Sanborn fire insurance maps that shows the first section of the house, the one and one-half story gable to the side with two porches. She said the porch being discussed faces Church Street. Bristow said Staff had to look at some of the houses in the neighborhood to come up with a replacement plan. She showed porch examples to help explain the proposal. She said the owner proposed a solid railing because she has had an enclosed porch for the entire 30 or 40 years that she has lived there so she does not want an exposed front porch. It will be a little porch in the corner of the L of the house. Bristow shared one example with a very ornamental and spindled porch, believed to be more accurate to the original on this house. She said because the porch is being replaced completely, not retaining anything original, this kind of ornament would not be used, but it shows the roof line and how it fits with the house. It is a pretty flat roof that comes into the corner of the meeting of the two gables. There would be a pilaster orengaged column back against the wall that supports the back of the porch and a few columns out along the front. Bristow said this project would have a more simple, basic column. It would fit in the corner of the L and extend the same depth as the current porch since we know that roof structure is original on the porch. She said the overhang is known and there would be a pilaster orengaged post at the side wall and one at the outer corner and, just to keep it simple, there would be only one column in the span. Bristow displayed slides of the porch now and what it could look like. She said Staff looked at reference materials for simple ways to replace some of these porch elements. She displayed a drawing with a simple, 6 x 6 column that a contractor could make and it would look appropriate with the house. Bristow said the project would remove the existing porch, which probably has an original roof that is heavily deteriorated, but nothing else that's original. She said the porch would be rebuilt completely with a new roof with external gutters instead of an internal gutter, and new floor structure, new columns, and a solid baluster. The owner is being encouraged to leave the exposed lap siding that is in there already without trying to cover it. Bristow thought the owner's goal down the road would be to remove the vinyl siding from the rest of the house. Kuenzli said she understood the reason for the solid panel enclosing on the front porch, but noted it was related more to a Craftsman style than a Queen Anne style. She wondered about instead using square spindles to keep it simple, spaced closely together, with the space between the spindles equal to the width of the spindles, to still maintain a sense of privacy but be stylistically more accurate for the period of the house. Bristow said the owner is very hesitant about not having an enclosed porch anymore. She knows the porch needs to be rebuilt because of its deterioration but her intent, originally, was to rebuild it as a closed porch, which cannot be done according to the guidelines. Bristow said they are getting rid of the hedge in front of the porch and it will look a lot better. Once the porch has been opened up, the owner may be comfortable with leaving it open or with putting in a simple square spindle railing instead. Bristow hoped the owner would decide to forgo the solid baluster but, knowing her hesitation, Staff proposed this plan as a compromise. DeGraw asked if the ceiling was salvageable. Bristow did not know the extent of the damage yet. She would suggest they salvage anything they could. She also wasn't sure about the floor and whether any of it could be salvaged. Kuenzli asked why it was acceptable to use K-style gutters instead of specifying half-rounds. Bristow said Staff did not specify gutters. She noted half-rounds would match what the owner has on parts of the house, but they also have K-style. Because of the history of additions on this house and some of the siding, there is a bit of a mixture. She thought the owner could go with half-rounds, but it might depend on budget. MOTION: DeGraw moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 803 Church Street as presented in the application with the following condition: Porch flooring is either vertical-grained Douglas Fir, pretreated decking with gaps under 1/8 inch, or Azek porch flooring with an eased edge. Builta seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Aaran. Clore. & Shoae absent). 738 Dearborn Street — Dearborn Street Conservation District (porch reconstruction). Bristow explained this property is about midblock between Center and Sheridan. It is a 1924-ish bungalow. It has had some additions and changes, but it does have an original stucco coating on the walls. She said her documents state the walls are tile construction but did not know if that's what was found in the work that had been done in the past. Bristow shared slides demonstrating the front porch currently has wrought iron railing and columns. The porch floor structure has been redone and the skirting around the porch is a decorative concrete block. She said the applicants came in because the columns were starting to deteriorate. It was time to replace them and to get something a bit more appropriate to the home. Bristow said she looked at the porch and shared a picture noting remnants from the past that were still there and that would be retained. By looking at the remnants, Bristow felt the original porch had a kind of paired column not often seen in Iowa City, something a bit more ornamental and more expensive to build. Staff ended up going with a taller masonry pier that extends above the porch floor and has a battered column that rests on top of it. Bristow shared an example that has been used for a few other projects, including at 741 Grant Street. She pointed out the masonry has a cap and the battered column has its own base with its own capital and will be the model for this project. Emerson Andrishok did both the sketches and the rendering for this project. Bristow shared the drawing of the column, which will have a masonry base. She said the existing skirting, the decorative concrete, will be cut back so that the piers can be attached into the corner of the porch with the battered column above. The railing is a square spindled railing with a little bit of a solid area in the middle, which is found on a few other bungalows like this. It also alleviates the long run of the railing. Bristow shared Emerson's rendering of the porch. She said given the substantial change this will make to this porch, Staff finds it appropriate. MOTION: DeGraw moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 738 Dearborn Street as presented in the application. Builta seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Aaran. Clore. & Shoge absent). REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF Minor Review —Staff Review. 1205 Sevmour Avenue — Longfellow Historic District (front entry step reDlacement). Bristow said this is not an historic landing and it is being replaced similar to the way it is. There will be no skirting because it is pretty close to the ground. She said it was probably originally a little concrete step like all the neighbors, but there is no real reason to do that again because it is a little cost prohibitive. She said it will be painted or stained this time so it will last longer. Along with this, the owners have a rotten window sill they are replacing and a storm door. While not regulated, they are having a new custom one remade. 530 Summit Street — Summit Street Historic District (rear breezeway column and frieze reconstruction). Bristow said there is a breezeway in the back of this house. The property has been for sale for a while. She said she received a call stating things had been removed without permission.. They are going to put back the columns, but in a more substantial and accurate size. They will do the arches again because it could have originally had the arches. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 13. 2018 MOTION: Kuenzli moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's December 13, 2018 meeting. Karr seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 7-0 (Agran, Clore, & Shope absent). COMMISSION INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: 2018 Historic Preservation Awards. Bristow reminded everyone to come if they could. She said the only thing not decided is what to get for refreshments and welcomed suggestions. A few were given. Costs and funding options were discussed. Bristow noted the award ceremony is a way for the Commission to reach out to the public, show what has been accomplished, and gain support. Previous Agenda Items. Downtown District. Boyd said the City Council is going to have a work session to talk about the Commission's recommendations to move forward on the National Historic District and to create some kind of working group. The Downtown District, which spoke last month in favor of the National Historic District, is preparing to write a letter from their board stating the same. Transfer of Development Rights. Boyd said Council decided not to do this. 410/412 Clinton Street. Boyd said 410/412 Clinton Street needed six votes on Tuesday night and got five, so it will not be a local landmark. Susan Mims and Mazahir Salih were the two no votes. Market Street. Bristow said staff has been working with a structural engineer and historic architect as a consultant to evaluate sites, moving, rehabilitation, and are working on the budget. Bristow said she had thrown together a very basic budget at one point. The City Manager wanted a memo about it so it could go into their work session for the budget. The numbers included the move, but then also making it structurally stable on its new site and moth -balling it, as well as the cost for someone to rehab the property. Council had a work session about it on Saturday and Bristow was at their follow-up work session Tuesday to answer questions. She thought their overall feeling was that the rehab number was astronomical, but it is also not something that the City needs to do unless the City rehabs it. Bristow said originally the University wanted to buy all those houses, take them down and build an entrepreneurial business center, but they are not doing that. Now they are going to take them down and retaining it as open space. Because that situation has changed, the Mayor has proposed that he and the City Manager meet with the University to discuss leaving it in place. The Mayor feels that as the oldest residential house left in town, it is important to save it. Bristow said the consultant is developing an official draft report which will include the costs so those costs can be explained a bit more for Council. Since all of the costs change a lot depending on the site, it will be an estimate. Bristow said if Council can come up with a budget placemark and then pick a site, the final version could have real numbers related to that site. Bristow thought the official draft of the architect's proposal would be available before the end of the month. Bristow thought the University wanted the house gone by August 1 st but hoped that date could be negotiated. DeGraw asked for the estimated cost to move the property. Bristow did not have the numbers with her, but thought the original place -holder estimate was $330,000. The updated numbers added $182,000 to that. She pointed out the numbers are high because the site and route with transformers and poles is not known. Bristow noted keeping it in its current location would be the best option. If that cannot happen, further budget discussion with Council will be needed. If Council thought the costs were too high, they might choose not to move it, which means it will come down. Annual Report. Bristow said next meeting the Commission's annual report to the state would be ready for review and a vote to approve. The report will show what we have done this past year. She also said, depending on scheduling, their planning session could be held. ADJOURNMENT: Kuenzli moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Builta. The meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Minutes submitted by Judy Jones HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 TERM 218 3/8 4/12 5/10 6/14 7/12 819 8/23 9/13 10/11 11/08 12/13 1/10 NAME EXP. AGRAN, 6/30/20 X X X X X O/E X X X O/E X X O/E THOMAS BAKER, 6/30/18 X X X X X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ESTHER BOYD, 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X KEVIN BUILTA, 6/30/19 O/E X X X X X X X X X X X X ZACH BURFORD 6/30/21 -- -- -- -- -- X X O/E X O/E X X ,HELEN CLORE, 6/30/20 X O/E X X X X O/E O/E X O/E X X O/E GOSIA DEGRAW, 6/30/19 X X X X X X O/E X X X X X X SHARON KARR, G. 6/30/20 X X X X X O/E X X X X X X X T. KUENZLI, 6/30/19 X X X X X O/E X X X X X X CECILE MICHAUD, 6/30/18 X X X X X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- PAM PITZEN, 6/30/21 -- -- -- -- -- X X X X X X X X QUENTIN SHOPE, 6/30/21 -- -- -- -- -- X X X O/E X X O/E LEE SWAIM, 6/30/18 X X X X X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- GINALIE WAGNER, 6/30/18 X X X X X FRANK Item Number: 17. + r ui �1 lat • yyrrmr�� CITY Ok IOWA CITY www.icgov.org February 14, 2019 Human Rights Commission: January 24 ATTACHMENTS: Description Human Rights Commission: January 24 Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission January 24, 2019 Emma J. Harvat, City Hall Members Present: Jeff Falk, Cathy McGinnis, Bijou Maliabo, Jessica Ferdig, Barbara Kutzko, Tahuanty Pena, Adil Adams, Jonathon Munoz. Members Absent: Noemi Ford. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers. Recommendation to Council: Yes By a vote of 7-0 the Commission recommends to City Council funding the below organizations for the Social Justice and Racial Equity Grant as shown below for FY19. Agency Request Recommendation Iowa Harm Reduction $10,577.00 $10,577.00 Refugee and Immigrant Association $12,000.00 $12,000.00 University of Iowa Labor Center $15,200.00 $15,200.00 Inside Out Reentry $7,000.00 $7,000.00 University of Iowa Mood Disorders Center $11,460.00 $11,460.00 Shelter House $10,600.00 $10,600.00 Access 2 Independence $5,260.00 $5,260.00 Neighborhood Centers of JC & South District Neighborhood Association $2,324.00 $2,324.00 Total 1 $74,421.00 1 $74,421.00 Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 5:47 PM. Approval of January 8, 2019 Meeting Minutes: Munoz moved to approve the minutes; the motion was seconded by Falk. A vote was taken, and the motion passed 7- 0. (Maliabo not present). Social Justice and Racial Equity Grant: (McGinnis steps away from the dais and does not participate due to a conflict of interest with one of the grant applicants). Falk gave an overview of the rubric used and the ranking sheet used to evaluate each grant. Grants were scored based on a total 100 point scale, the organizational information is worth 10 points, the proposal itself is worth up to 60 points and the funding amount requested is worth up to 30 points. The rubric serves as a guideline. Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission January 24, 2019 Emma J. Harvat, City Hall The Excel spreadsheet used for this process calculated each Commissioner's point totals for each applicant so that the application with the highest points ranked as number 1 and the lowest point ranked 26. For the overall ranking it went the opposite way. The grant application with the lowest average amongst Commissioners got ranked 26 and the highest average got ranked 1 (last in line to get funding request recommended). There are six top ranked applications that if fully funded fell under the $75,000. Iowa Harm Reduction 26 $10,577.00 Refugee and Immigrant Association 25 $12,000.00 University of Iowa Labor Center 24 $15,200.00 Inside Out Reentry 23 $7,000.00 University of Iowa Mood Disorder Center 22 $11,460.00 Shelter House 21 $10,600.00 Total $66,837.00 Munoz asked who had received funding in the past two grant cycles. FY17 Organization Amount Inside Out Reentry $3000.00 Iowa Legal Aid $2200.00 JC Affordable Housing Coalition $2500.00 World of Bikes, IC Bike Library, City of Iowa Cit $3250.00 Sankofa Outreach Connection $13,500.00 Total $24,450.00 FY18 Organization Amount Healthy Kids School Based Health $12,300.00 Shelter House $5000.00 Center for Worker Justice $10,900.00 Total $28,200.00 Ferdig asked if Shelter House had received funding for this specific program in FY18, to which staff replied no. 2 Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission January 24, 2019 Emma J. Harvat, City Hall The current FY19 rankings leave $8163.00 remaining to be allocated. The sixth ranked lowest average, Successful Living, requested $16,320.00, which if recommended would go over the $75,000 allocated. Munoz thinks the Commission should spread the wealth, instead of continuously funding Shelter House. Ferdig commented on this as well. To encourage diversity of applications and in a year when the funding has been increased to $75,000, Munoz believes the Commission should not allocate to the Shelter House who would under the current rankings receive funding for FY19 while still receiving funding for FY 20. Kutzko pointed out that the FY19 proposal from Shelter House is a different program than was funded in FY18. Adams suggested asking the City Council to increase the funding from $75,000 this year to allow for Successful Living to be fully funded. Munoz pointed out that the Shelter House is ranked at #21 and so it would be the last of the top six to push out of the top rankings and reiterated that Shelter House had received funding in FY18 even if it was for a different program. Munoz asked Commissioners to think about consecutive funding for a well -endowed organization. Falk asked him to further explain his concern. Munoz pointed out that his problem is not with the Shelter House application but that there is an increase in money from $25,000 to $75,000 for FY19 and funding the same organization did not seem prudent. It would be better to provide funding to organizations with more diverse representations. Kutzko agreed with Munoz's comment to be a little more diverse in selection and the Commission may want to consider spreading the wealth a little more by not giving the full asking amount to applicants who have received funding in the past. Falk looks upon it differently, he sees it as giving the money for an activity and not to an organization. If the activity is new, then in his mind that is worthwhile or a consideration. This is what he tried to pay attention to, whether the proposal was something new or not. Munoz thinks that the Commission keeps recommending funding to well -endowed organization and does not pay attention to newer organizations that were established in Iowa City that have more diverse board members. He believes that if the Commission does not give them a chance, who will, and that concerns him. Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission January 24, 2019 Emma J. Harvat, City Hall Falk noted that Munoz's concern might be a good concern but that as Commission members they have no idea of the diversity of an applicant's board. Munoz concurred but pointed out that the application does ask for the year the organization was established, its annual budget, and whether it has received funding from the City in the past. Pena asked if the Commission wanted to move Shelter House further down on the list. Pena, like Falk, looked at the idea and the execution of the idea, not the organization. But he noted Munoz made a valid point, in that resources should not be focused on the same organizations. Falk is not in favor of changing the current rankings but thinks the Commission should take into consideration in communicating with the City Council that they need to be more explicit in terms of what they are looking for because the message he got is that it should be a new program and not a new organization. Munoz finds Falk's comment to be an unfair shifting of responsibility, to say that the City Council needs to direct the Commission to decide what to do. It is the Commission's call on what to recommend. Further it is the Commission's responsibility to make decisions that promote social justice, race and equity concerns. Munoz does not think that $10,600.00 should be going to an organization that got funding in FY18. Munoz moved that Shelter House should not be funded and that the Commission should go to the next highest ranked applicant. (Motion lacked a second). Falk inquired as to whether there are any other applicants that, based on Munoz's concern, should be singled out Munoz said he singled Shelter House out because it was sixth ranked (#21) and the only organization out of that six that got funding in FY18 and would get it for FY19 too. In terms of the diversity of board members, and all those considerations, he was pointing out his thought processes as far as rankings and does not know the actual racial demographics of the Shelter House board. The major concern for him was that Shelter House was funded last year. Pena asked if Shelter House should be taken out in an informal poll. Munoz in the negative, remarking that if the Commission doesn't start emphasizing lesser known organizations, the Commission will never progress in terms of the goals of this City Council. Ferdig mentioned that because the rules at this time do not prohibit an organization from being funded for two consecutive years that it would seem harsh to deny Shelter House's request, Ferdig will vote in favor of Shelter House being recommended funding 4 Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission January 24, 2019 Emma J. Harvat, City Hall but would ask in the future for a restriction to be added that an organization cannot be funded in consecutive years even if for a new or different proposal. (Maliabo present) Falk pointed out the disparity in the rankings and that it is the average that winds up being used. He thought perhaps next time he should include the average and the standard deviation. Ferdig asked fellow Commission members whether they felt the population that will be served by these programs reflects diverse populations, specifically do the funding recommendations represent a diversity of populations of persons served. Pena felt most the applications were targeting the same groups. Adams wanted to know whether the Commission is interested in changing the policy so that organizations only get funding once every five years, because the community has new organizations and we need all the organizations involved to serve a diverse community. Adams also would like to make a recommendation to the City Council to get more funding for the grants because $75,000 is not enough. Falk finds that questions with procedures come up when you are involved in doing the procedure instead of thinking about it before hand. Falk suggested that Commissioners keep in mind what some of their challenges were in this process and that a meeting be held in the future to go over things and make a list and shift to the City Council to improve the process. If there are things they think the Commission needs to make a good decision, they need to be placed in the rubric as additions or observations. Munoz responded that there is a difference between a rubric and discretion. Judgments are based on the Commission's discretion and the Commission does not need a rubric to tell them what is right from wrong. Munoz does not need City Council to tell him that he should emphasis diversity of an applicant's board as far as making recommendations on allocating funding. Pena agrees that if there are restrictions moving forward on consecutive funding it would create more opportunities to new organizations. Munoz moves to recommend the top six ranked applicants for funding for FY19, Maliabo seconded, motion passed 7-0. This leaves $8100.63 left for funding recommendations. The seventh ranked applicant (Successful Living #20) is over that amount by $8084.31. 5 Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission January 24, 2019 Emma J. Harvat, City Hall Pena mentioned that these are good proposals and would like to recommend for all to be funded but ultimately, he believes the Commission should stick to the amount allocated by the City Council and to stay within that budget. Munoz proposed to skip over Successful Living and to fully recommend funding for Access 2 Independence #17 and Johnson County Neighborhood Centers and South District Neighborhood Association #16. Munoz's reasoning is that it would fund two different projects for two different organizations and would create diversity of populations being served. Any organizations ranked higher than these two could not be fully funded because there is only $8100.63 remaining. Ferdig pointed out that Successful Living's proposal only included expenses for the entry fees for their clients to events without any other overhead costs to consider. Because of this it would only cut the scope of the project but still make it possible and proving a worthwhile endeavor for the organization that ranked next in line. Falk concurred with Ferdig. Falk spoke on finding it difficult to look at organizational budgets and comparing that to what they want funding for and whether it is an appropriate amount. Falk has little idea on how to evaluate any of that and if he had a better idea, he would want a lot more information than the organizations have been asked to supply. Falk also does not want to decide whether an amount lesser is appropriate for an organization. Falk recalled last year that the Commission decided it wasn't going to fiddle with amounts and just recommend funding an organization for what they ask. Falk did not mention this as an argument against doing things but just noting how he operated in this process. Munoz asked if Falk is proposing for Successful Living's funding request to be slashed in half. Falk responded he was not slashing it in half, he is recommending giving it half as opposed to giving it zero. Ferdig said she was proposing this reduction in allocation to Successful Living because its proposal is only for entry fees for their clients and that is something that could be cut in half. Staff mentioned that some of the discussion could be assisted by looking at the applications. As part of the process those applying must answer questions on whether they have received City funds, and whether the proposal could succeed if partially funded. Staff reported that those questions are intentionally asked because of past challenges in evaluating how funding should be allocated. Munoz, regarding his proposal for recommending funding for Johnson County Neighborhood Centers and the South District Neighborhood Association and Access 2 Independence, mentioned that Ferdig had asked about the diversity of the populations Draft Minutes Human Rights Commission January 24, 2019 Emma J. Harvat, City Hall being served and that in his opinion not many applicants adequately addressed disability and that is why he liked Access 2 Independence and that it would be more prudent to fully fund two organizations than to fund only one at half. Ferdig pointed out that the Commission could opt not to use the remaining $8100.63. Pena feels that cutting the budget for Successful Living, acknowledging the valid rationale, would be based upon assumptions. The Commission did not create its budget and do not know all the operation behind it. Pena feels more comfortable following Munoz and likes the idea of recommending the funding for more projects. Ferdig replied that she did not assume anything. It is stated in grant proposal by Successful Living --the funding will go towards entry fees. Ferdig followed this up by adding that she had ranked Access 2 Independence two in her overall rankings. Munoz moves to totally fund Access 2 Independence and the Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County with the South District Neighborhood Association, Adams seconded, the motion passed 5-2. Falk and Ferdig in the negative. Falk noted that he had ranked Access 2 Independence as his number one in overall rankings. Staff will set up a Commission work session to discuss opportunities for improving the grant process in the future. (McGinnis returns to dais to participate). Black History Proclamation: Munoz will accept the proclamation from the City Council at its February 5 meeting date. Reports of Commissioners: Maliabo participated in two classrooms at Liberty High School for its Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. One of the classrooms provided Black history to students who were immigrants and not as familiar with King and his legacy. Falk also participated in the Liberty High School event and mentioned he learned a lot more on King's anti -war stance than he knew before. Kutkzo attended the City's Martin Luther King, Jr., Celebration. She and her husband also participated at the West High School Martin Luther King, Jr., Day. They discussed their personal experiences living through the civil rights movement. Adjournment: Motion to adjourn at 6:48 PM. 7 Member Attendance Sheet Member Term Exp. 118 1/24 2/19 3/19 4/16 5/21 6/18 7/16 8/20 9/17 10/15 11/19 12/10 Maliabo 1/2021 Present Present McGinnis 1/2021 Present Present Munoz 1/2021 Excused Present Kutzko 112020 Present Present Falk 1/2020 Present Present Pena 112020 Present Present Adams 1/2022 Excused Present Ferdi 1/2022 Present Present Ford 1/2022 Present Excused KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 #40 #41 #42 #43 #44 #45 #46 #47 #48 #49 Sankofa Outreach Connection IC Compassion United Action for Youth #50 University of Iowa Mood Disorders Center #51 Dream Center, Center for Disability & Development, IC Parks and Recreation #52 Sudanese Community Center #53 Houses into Homes #54 Rape Victim Advocacy Program #55 Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County, South District Neighborhood Association #56 Fifth Ward Saints North #57 Boys and Girls Club Cedar Rapids, Iowa City Unit #58 Emma Goldman Clinic #59 Domestic Violence Intervention Program $14,000.00 $10,000.00 $24,800.00 $11,460.00 $15,365.00 $40,550.00 $25,000.00 $27,600.00 $2,324.00 $4,500.00 $17,000.00 $9,980.00 $8,080.00 Total $387,612.60 Requested Amount Organization Successful Living $16,320.00 Iowa Harm Reduction $10,577.00 Humanize My Hoodie DBA Born Leaders United $37,045.00 Center for Worker Justice $12,951.60 Access 2 Independence of the Eastern Iowa Corridor $5,260.00 Big Brothers Big Sisters of Johnson County $15,000.00 South District Neighborhood Association $10,000.00 Sankofa Outreach Connection $10,000.00 University of Iowa Labor Center $15,200.00 Refugee and Immigrant Association $12,000.00 NAACP Iowa City Adult Branch $15,000.00 Shelter House Community Shelter and Transistion Services $10,600.00 Inside Out Reentry Community $7,000.00 Sankofa Outreach Connection IC Compassion United Action for Youth #50 University of Iowa Mood Disorders Center #51 Dream Center, Center for Disability & Development, IC Parks and Recreation #52 Sudanese Community Center #53 Houses into Homes #54 Rape Victim Advocacy Program #55 Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County, South District Neighborhood Association #56 Fifth Ward Saints North #57 Boys and Girls Club Cedar Rapids, Iowa City Unit #58 Emma Goldman Clinic #59 Domestic Violence Intervention Program $14,000.00 $10,000.00 $24,800.00 $11,460.00 $15,365.00 $40,550.00 $25,000.00 $27,600.00 $2,324.00 $4,500.00 $17,000.00 $9,980.00 $8,080.00 Total $387,612.60 Rankings for Social Justice and Racial Equity Grant Submissions FY19 Requested Amount Average Rank Adams Falk Ferdig Rutzko Maliabo Munoz Pena Organization #34 Successful Living $16,320.00 11.14286 20 1 2 7 26 17 21 4 #35 Iowa Harm Reduction $10,577.60 4.857143 26 9 4 3 1 9 1 7 #36 Humanize My Hoodie DBA Born Leaders United $37,045.00 19.28571 2 17 19 19 14 21 24 21 #37 Center for Worker Justice $12,951.60 13.71429 13 21 3 20 23 4 20 5 #38 Access 2Independence of the Eastern Iowa Corridor $5,260.00 12.42857 17 12 1 2 25 19 11 17 #39 Big Brothers Big Sisters of Johnson County $15,000.00 15.57143 7 22 22 11 11 16 15 12 #40 South District Neighborhood Association $10,000.00 18.42857 4 8 15 13 24 20 26 23 #41 Sankofa Outreach Connection $10,000.00 12.71429 15 13 10 9 4 26 9 18 #42 University of Iowa Labor Center $15,200.00 9.428571 24 23 7 i5 6 12 2 1 #43 Refugee and Immigrant Association $12,000.00 8.714286 25 16 6 6 3 10 7 13 #44 NAACP Iowa City Adult Branch $15,000.00 14.28571 10 24 11 26 20 1 10 8 #45 Shelter House Community Shelter and Transistion Services $10,600.00 11 21 6 5 22 2 2 25 15 #46 Inside Out Reentry Community $7,000.00 9.857143 23 10 8 14 16 3 4 14 #47 Sankofa Outreach Connection $14,000.00 20.42857 1 20 14 21 21 24 19 24 #48 IC Compassion $10,000.00 11.57143 18 14 13 16 12 8 8 10 #49 United Action for Youth $24,800.00 14.28571 10 25 12 1 5 18 14 25 #50 University of Iowa Mood Disorders Center $11,460.00 10.57143 22 7 17 12 17 15 3 3 #51 Dream Center, Center for Disability & Development, IC Parks and Recreation $15,365.00 11.57143 18 15 20 4 13 7 13 9 #52 Sudanese Community Center $40,550.00 19.14286 3 5 24 25 22 13 23 22 #53 Houses into Homes $25,000.00 13 14 4 9 10 15 25 22 6 #54 Rape Victim Advocacy Program $27,600.00 16 6 19 23 8 19 6 17 20 #55 Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County, South District Neighborhood Association $2,324.00 12.57143 16 3 21 17 8 14 6 19 #56 Fifth Ward Saints North $4,500.00 14.85714 8 18 25 24 7 23 5 2 #57 Boys and Gids Club Cedar Rapids, Iowa City Unit $17,000.00 17.14286 5 11 26 23 9 22 18 11 #58 Emma Goldman Clinic $9,980.00 14.57143 9 26 16 5 18 5 15 16 #59 Domestic Violence Intervention Program $8,080.00 13.85714 12 2 18 18 10 11 12 26 Total $387,612.60 Funds Available $75,000.00 Social Justice and Racial Equity Grant Iowa Harm Reduction Iowa Harm Reduction Coalition (IHRC) addresses health inequities with a program that focuses on vulnerable and minoritized communities that are disproportionally affected by HIV and hepatitis C (HCV). The program improves accessibility to prevention services for HIV and HCV, increases testing services for individuals at the highest risk for infection, and improves treatment engagement. IHRC will purchase 200 rapid test kits for HIV and HCV and provide confirmatory testing, counseling, and treatment referral for any individual with a reactive result. IHRC provides peer -led services that are offered from 5 P.M. — 5 A.M. in a community setting to help lower some of the barriers to accessing health care that exist for individuals who are at higher risk for contracting HIV/HCV. The goals of the program are to expand community-based HIV/HCV testing and risk reduction education by providing test services and risk reduction to 200 Iowa City residents and engage 100% of identified individuals with HIV/HCV into treatment using patient navigator. The program will administer 50 HIV and HCV tests each quarter. These goals will be measured through data that will be collected at every mobile outreach event, risk questionnaires filled out by each program participant, data that will be collected to determine each participant's progress through the program, and a post -engagement survey Access 2 Independence of the Eastern Iowa Corridor Access 2 Independence (A21) will use a program called Vis -Ability where participants take photographs that illustrate their disability experience in Iowa City. It creates information sessions and a photography class that give individuals the skills necessary to participate in the project. They will use the photographs to create a traveling exhibit that will facilitate discussions on the project. Using the discussions, A21 will create policy recommendations that concern health equity in Iowa City. This project empowers individuals with disabilities to develop and use advocacy skills and bring awareness to local disability issues. The program provides education on advocacy and photography skills to participants, education and community building during discussion sessions, and facilitates discussions on accessible housing, healthcare, and employment for individuals with disabilities. A21 will provide a program that could assist the 4.7% of Johnson County residents that have disabilities. The program will measure community interest through attendance numbers. They will use surveys at the end of the program, after the first meeting, and at all the exhibits to measure awareness and determine ways to improve the program. University of Iowa Labor Center The University of Iowa Labor Center will create a program called The Corridor Apprenticeship Opportunity Network that will link unemployed or underemployed Iowa City residents from underrepresented groups to assist them in enrollment in Iowa's Registered Apprentice Programs. They will achieve this by organizing outreach events and workshops to recruit participants, create a well- publicized kick-off, provide free skills -based pre -apprentice education for participants, connect participants to training coordinators, and provide a leadership development programming to support the women and people of color in the registered apprentice programs. The program advances social justice by supporting the entry of women and people of color into high-quality apprenticeship opportunities where they have been traditionally underrepresented. The goal of the program is to reach 120 local workers through outreach efforts, enroll 20 participants in the pre -apprentice program, and include at least 28 participants in leadership development programming. To measure their goals, they set benchmarks based on an initial survey. They will partner with local non-profit, labor, and faith -based organizations and with the IowaWORKS office to achieve their goa Is. Refugee and Immigrant Association The Refugee and Immigrant Association will establish a program called The Awareness and Prevention of Social Conflict Initiative to address cultural challenges facing refugees and immigrants living in Iowa City. They will achieve this by establishing Together We Groups, Learning and Growing Presentations, and Community Collaborators, Together We Groups include the Parenting Group, Women's Group, Men's Group and a Youth Group. These are groups of individuals experiencing unique challenges that will be addressed through mentorships and training and education. Learning and Growing Presentations will be given by experts in their field on topics that are critical for refugees and immigrants. Lastly, Community Collaborations will be established to facilitate discussions between immigrants and refugees and members of the Iowa City Community to help program participants understand community institutions and expectations. The program will serve an essential role in assisting immigrants and refugees and will help facilitate integration. The program will reach over 1,000 refugee and immigrant community members. The program aims to hold monthly group meetings with attendance increasing over the grant year, hold monthly presentations with attendance increasing over the grant year, and show an increase in collaborative partners. They will measure the success of the program by recording attendance at meetings and presentations, provide pre- and post -surveys to participants at presentations, create a list of collaborative partners, and work with law enforcement to track calls for refugees and immigrants. Shelter House Community Shelter and Transition Services Shelter House wants to update the clinic space located at the 429 Southgate emergency shelter which serves individuals experiencing homelessness or at risk of becoming homeless. The clinic is an on-site nurse -managed health clinic that provides general health care to residents and drop -ins. The funds will be used to revitalize the clinic and replenish needed supplies. The program addresses education by educating participants on a range of health topics. The program builds community by fostering partnerships with strategic health providers. It also addresses housing and employment because poor health can often be a barrier to securing housing or employment. Last year, Shelter House served 887 individuals by providing emergency shelter and assisted 385 individuals through the drop-in center. Any individuals staying at the shelter or using the drop-in center are eligible to receive care at the clinic. To help serve these individuals, Shelter House partners with University of Iowa nursing students, volunteers from Johnson County Public Health, and professors from the University of Iowa College of Nursing and University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine. To measure the success of the program, Shelter House records the number of clinic visits. Inside Out Reentry Community Inside Out (10) will create a 2 -day summit and quarterly forum series about reentry and cultivating a supportive community for returning citizens. The project will include a keynote speaker, a panel of returning citizens, a workshop to organize around voting rights for formerly incarcerated people, a parole/reentry simulation and discussion, a workshop for landlords and employers to combat discrimination in housing and employment, a discussion on mental health needs and special needs of people of color and women returning, and a workshop for returning citizens focused on leadership and empowerment. The program fosters community building by creating a supportive community through education and criminal justice. The program also brings attention to the barriers faced by returning citizens when looking for housing or employment. Inside Out hopes to serve at least 300 people across 5 days of events but it could indirectly serve and influence the 52,000 Iowans who are disenfranchised returning citizens. They will measure the success of their programs by the number of attendees and by getting feedback from a survey taken by attendees. They also hope to gain 10 new volunteers because of the program. University of Iowa Mood Disorders Center The Mood Disorders Center proposes an initiative that provides psychoeducation to individuals with mental illness and develops a standardized curriculum that can be disseminated to Iowa's Judicial Districts. The psychoeducation program would be for parolees and probationers in Iowa's Sixth Judicial District who live with a mental illness. The program will either be a 6 -week intervention with 90 -minute sessions or a 1 day, 8 -hour intervention. The intervention would utilize Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. The standardized curriculum would include scripted talking experiences, instructions for group activities and individual assignments, videos that demonstrate concepts, and necessary handouts. The curriculum would be developed with the help of six focus groups. The program addresses areas of criminal justice and health. The proposed outcomes of the program include a decrease in mood disorder symptoms and increase in psychological flexibility in parolees and probationers in Iowa's 6 t Judicial District. Performance of the facilitators and satisfaction of the with content of the curriculum will be measured using the Group Satisfaction Scale (GSS). They will measure the success of the program with quantitative data analysis obtained from the Groups Satisfaction Survey that will be reviewed after each of the 4 delivered programs. Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County, South District Neighborhood Association The Neighborhood Centers of Johnson County (NCJC) and the South District Neighborhood Association (SDNA) will coordinate three large events: National Night Out, Thanksgiving Feast, and Taste of Broadway. National Night Out aims to strengthen the relationship between law enforcement and communities. Attendees will also be encouraged to participate in a school supply drive at this event. Thanksgiving Feast is an opportunity for South District residents and other community members to come together. This event also establishes a "Giving Tree" where attendees can choose to "Adopt a Leaf" which has a specific need or desire of South District members. Taste of Broadway helps link local resident chefs with groceries and restaurants to prepare dishes that reflect cultural diversity in the district. The program advances social justice and racial equity by making the South District a destination for Iowa City residents live, work, and play. They strive to increase the social capital of the South District and build relationships to increase employment opportunities, improve health outcomes, and decrease involvement in the criminal justice system. The program hopes to reach approximately 300 community members in the first year with the goal of nurturing relationships with the South District, residents, local businesses, South District service agencies, and local government and law enforcement. To measure the success of their program, they will collect attendance at events, collect information of South District businesses' direct and indirect participation in the events, South District service agencies' direct and indirect participation in the events, and attendees' volunteer commitments as a result of the events.