Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-10-01 Bd Comm mintesItem Number: 4.a. i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org October 1, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Civil Service Commission: September 26 MINUTES — FINAL CITY OF IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE Thursday, September 26, 2019 — 8:15a.m. HELLING CONFERENCE ROOM Members Present: Rick Wyss, Stephanie Houser Members Absent: Melissa Jensen Staff to the Commission Present: Karen Jennings Others Present: Chief John Grier, Captain Bill Campbell RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL (become effective only after separate Council action): None. CALL TO ORDER: Wyss called the meeting to order at 8:21 a.m. FIRE DEPARTMENT PROMOTIONAL TESTING: After a brief discussion, Houser moved and Wyss seconded to approve the process proposed by staff in the September 20, 2019 memo. All were in favor. POLICE DEPARTMENT PROMOTIONAL TESTING: After a brief discussion, Houser moved and Wyss seconded to approve the process proposed by staff in the September 20, 2019 memo. All were in favor. ADJOURNMENT: Houser moved to adjourn, Wyss seconded, all were in favor and the meeting was adjourned at 8:24 a.m. Board/Commission: Civil Service Commission ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2019 (Meeting Date) NAME TERM EXPIRES 5/16/19 9126/19 O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting Rick Wyss 4/4/20 X X Melissa Jensen 4/5/21 X O/E Stephanie Houser 414/22 X X KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No Meeting --- = Not a Member Item Number: 4.b. AW1I Q- CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org October 1, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Community Police Review Board: August 13 Final/Approved COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD MINUTES — August 13, 2019 CALL TO ORDER: Vice -Chair Galpin called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Sam Conaway, Latisha McDaniel, David Selmer, Orville Townsend MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Legal Counsel Patrick Ford, Staff Chris Olney STAFF ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Erek Sitting and Iowa City Police Captain Bill Campbell RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL None. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by Townsend, seconded by McDaniel, to adopt the consent calendar as presented or amended. • Minutes of the meeting on 07/11/19 • ICPD General Orders 17-03 (Firearms) • ICPD General Orders 01-05 (Officer Involved Shooting/Lethal Incident Investigations) • ICPD General Orders 01-02 (Informants) Motion carried, 5/0. NEW BUSINESS None. OLD BUSINESS City Council Liaison Proposal — Olney informed the Board that the ordinance change was voted on for 1st consideration at the August 6th Council meeting with a vote of 4/3. The 2nd consideration will be at the August 20th Council meeting. After Board discussion it was decided to have Townsend and Conaway attend the next Council meeting to further clarify any questions regarding the role of the Liaison. PUBLIC DISCUSSION None. BOARD INFORMATION None. STAFF INFORMATION None. CPRB August 13, 2019 Final/Approved EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion by Townsend, seconded by Conaway to adjourn into Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that government body if they were available for general public examination. Motion carried, 5/0. Open session adjourned at 5:40 P.M. REGULAR SESSION Returned to open session at 6:00 P.M. Motion by Selmer, seconded by Townsend to set the levels of review for CPRB Complaint #19-02 to 8-8-7 (13)(1)(d), Request additional investigation by the Police Chief or City Manager, or request police assistance in the Board's own investigation and 8-8-7 (13)(1)(e), Performance by Board of its own additional investigation. Motion Carried 5/0. TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE and FUTURE AGENDAS (subject to change) • September 10, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm • October 8, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm • November 12, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm • December 10, 2019, 5:30 PM, Helling Conference Rm Townsend stated he had a question regarding ICPD General Order 01-05 (Officer Involved Shooting /Lethal Incident Investigations). It was decided to table the question until the next meeting when a representative from the Police Department would be present. ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Selmer, seconded by Conaway. Motion carried, 5/0. Meeting adjourned at 6:06 P.M. COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD ATTENDANCE RECORD YEAR 2018-2019 (Meeting Date) KEY: X TERM 9/11/18 10/9/18 11/13/18 12/11/18 1/8/19 2/20/19 3/12/1.9 4/9/19 4/29/19 5/14/19 6/11/19 7/11/19 8/13/19 NAME EXP. Donald 7/1/19 X O X X X X X X X X X King Monique 7/1/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X X Galpin Orville 7/1/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X X Townsend Latisha 7/1/21 ------ X O X X O X X X X X O X McDaniel David 7/1/21 X O X O X O X X X X X O X Selmer Sam 7/1/23 X X Conaway — KEY: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused NM = No meeting --- = Not a Member Item Number: 4.c. i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org October 1, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Historic Preservation Commission: August 8 MINUTES APPROVED HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL August 8, 2019 MEMBERS PRESENT: Thomas Agran, Kevin Boyd, Helen Burford, Sharon DeGraw, Lyndi Kiple, Cecile Kuenzli, G. T. Karr, Quentin Pitzen, Jordan Sellergren MEMBERS ABSENT: Gosia Clore STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow OTHERS PRESENT: Ginalie Swaim, John Christenson, Maeve Clark 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: 513 Grant Street — Longfellow Historic District (second floor rear addition). Bristow explained 513 Grant Street is a four-square, contributing structure in the Longfellow Historic District. It has a rock -faced stone foundation and piers. It has narrow lap siding, corner boards, and double -hung windows — a few of them paired. The house does have an intrusive addition built in the 1970s off the rear. The applicant is currently planning to add to a second -floor addition for a bedroom, bathroom, and closet. Staff worked with the applicant first to see if it was possible to have the second -floor addition fit the guidelines- set in from the corners of the house to preserve that corner, matching the siding, having the roof connect in either a flat roof, like a lot of the four-square sleeping porches are when they are on the second floor, or maybe match the hip roof on the house. One option would have been to have the new addition smaller than the footprint on the current addition. Structurally, that was not going to be possible. So following the existing footprint was most appropriate. The current proposal will revise the existing addition so that it is more appropriate for the house and then add the new second floor. Bristow noted there is an issue with the roofline that is not yet resolved following this approach. She said part of the reason the guidelines recommend additions are set in from the sides is to prevent an awkward condition with the roof connections. Staff has requested either more detailed drawings or a basic 3D model to illustrate how the rooflines will be resolved. The current recommendation from staff is to have the window and door product information approved by staff, or staff and chair after the fact, and also have staff and chair approve the roof condition. Bristow shared a view from the south side, showing how the addition protrudes two to three feet past the side of the house. The radon pipe will be removed. She showed the addition from the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2019 Page 2 of 11 back corner. It has inappropriate siding and a flat roof with a small eave overhang. The windows are also incorrectly proportioned and ganged. The north side of the current addition has no windows. Kuenzli asked if there had been consideration of removing the bottom addition, and rebuilding it set in so it would meet the guidelines. Bristow said it was beyond the scope of the project because it is so fully integrated into the house right now. Bristow shared the proposed plan showing the footprint of the addition.On the second floor, the north side would have one window in it. There would be two full windows on the back and two windows on the south side. Bristow said the two ganged windows in the addition now on the first floor would be replaced with two windows that match the others in the house, with the second - floor windows aligned above them. Bristow described the west side, the area of the addition on the back side. Currently it has a pair of windows. The applicant would like to put in a pair of French doors to let more light in on the west side and to provide direct access to the back yard. There would be one, slightly smaller proportioned window in the bathroom above the French doors. Bristow said because of the interior they only propose to add one window to the north side. Staff finds that acceptable, partly because this part of the addition is recessed so far from the side walls of the house. It is also difficult to see from any direction, and is not visible from the sidewalk or the street at all. Bristow said an original porch was enclosed on the back of the house long ago and has a wide eave and a flat roof condition that could be mimicked in a flat roof on the addition. The other option is a hip roof. The slope of the existing roof and the head of the windows on the second floor in the original house make it difficult to tie in the roofs. This situation in combination with the addition extending past the south wall of the house make the roof condition difficult to resolve. For both floors of the rear addition, all siding and trim conditions would matched the historic house. At least one upper floor window from the house could be reused in the addition. The new windows would be five -over -one double hung windows to match the existing. Boyd explained that now was the time for clarifying questions before opening the public hearing. After the hearing closes, the Commission will have further discussion. Pitzen wondered if this were to be a flat roof with a side exposed, if there were any guidelines for how the roof edge would be treated. Bristow said they would have fascia or some kind of board on any side that did not have a gutter, so we would at least have some kind of a roof edge that had a flat edge. She said the house has open soffits, but it has the gutter, so it would be a matter of combining the roof edge condition. Bristow said a model would allow them to work out the details. Agran thought, if the project timeline allowed, it would be better reviewed once all the roof details had been worked out. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2019 Page 3 of 11 Boyd opened and closed the public hearing with no comments. Karr did not believe the project could be reviewed without knowing how the roofline would look. Kuenzli agreed. Pitzen thought a hip roof would look more appropriate. Bristow said the goal had been to reflect a two-story addition with a sleeping porch, which tends to have a flat roof, but noted that might not be the best choice for this house. She said staff has pushed for the idea of having a model or more detailed drawings because the roof tie-in cannot be determined enough from the drawings to approve it. MOTION: Agran moved to defer the decision for the Certificate of Appropriateness for 513 Grant Street to either the August 19th meeting or the following formal meeting, contingent upon seeing specific information about the roofline of the proposed addition and how it ties into the structure, either in the form of more detailed drawings or a model. Kuenzli seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. 718 East Washington Street — College Hill Conservation District (window replacement for egress). Bristow explained 718 East Washington Street is a contributing property in the College Hill Conservation District. It is a bungalow and was owner -occupied for decades. Bristow noted the part of the application suggesting replacement of the five dormer attic windows had been withdrawn. They now propose to repair them and apply a storm window, as they will be doing with all first -floor windows. The attic was originally an unfinished walk-up. The applicant is adding two bedrooms in the attic — one on each side. They propose to change the second floor east and west windows to egress windows. Each will be a casement window that has muntin bars, so it looks like a double -hung window. The product information they submitted was a Brighton casement window, three -over - one appearance, meeting egress requirements. The guidelines talk about the ability to change a window like this if it's needed by code for a bedroom, which in this case it is. As they are also on the side of the house, Staff finds that appropriate and applauds the owners for repairing the original windows that remain in the house otherwise. Boyd opened and closed the public hearing with no comments. Pitzen asked if there were guidelines for matching muntins on storm windows. Bristow said storm windows and storm doors are not regulated but, if someone were to ask, generally we just like a storm window to be divided into two panes like a traditional storm window. They are not required to match other divided light conditions. MOTION: Karr moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the egress window portion of the project at 718 East Washington Street as presented in the amended application. Kuenzli seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2019 Page 4 of 11 10 South Gilbert Street — Local Landmark (generator installation and screening). Bristow announced that the applicant had requested to defer this discussion. The owner was not able to attend this evening. Since the Staff report did not recommend approval, she said they also wanted to investigate their options. Staff felt the request for deferral until the September 12th meeting was acceptable. Agran saw no reason to defer discussion of this project. Bristow said the applicant was aware the Commission would have to vote to do that. Agran said since their options do not include this site, there was no reason to have it deferred. Boyd stated the Commission would be receptive to a request from a property owner for a specific meeting if noted when submitting their application. DeGraw wanted to know if a motion was made to affirm or deny, would it limit their progress in any way when they come up with an alternative solution. Bristow said it depended what the Commission decides. If the Commission decided the equipment should not be on this site and needed to be removed, then an alternative proposal from the applicant would not need to be heard by the Commission. If the Commission determines the site is okay, but the situation needs to change, that would require an alternative submittal that could be heard again by the Commission. If it's the same site that had already been denied, then the Commission would not hear it again. Kuenzli thought for the sake of clarity the Commission should go ahead and render an opinion so the applicants would know what they must come back with and what they cannot come back with. Boyd made a counter argument to honor the deferment for the sake of being cooperative partners. He said in their motion they could note their intent to vote at the September meeting whether a representative was present or not. If deferred, DeGraw wanted to note issues with the project as is. Pitzen asked if any entity of the City had approved the applicants' request. Bristow said no, the approved site plans did not include a generator anywhere on the project at all. Sellergren asked if the problem was a noise complaint or simply esthetic. Bristow said the problem is that the equipment is for a different building installed on a landmark property. MOTION: Agran moved to defer the decision on the Certificate of Appropriateness for 10 South Gilbert Street to the September meeting to provide the applicant time to further investigate options and to attend that meeting, where a decision will be made regardless of the attendance of the applicant. Burford seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2019 Page 5 of 11 REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF Certificate of No Material Effect — Chair and Staff Review. 714 Ronalds Street — Brown Street Historic District (porch repair). Bristow stated the porch would be repaired to match what was there. There was some rotting likely caused by too much plant material too close to the building. 528 East College Street — College Green Historic District (porch repair). This porch is being repaired. 507 North Linn Street — Northside Historic District (sidinq and soffit repair). 507 North Linn Street was once a Queen Anne. It has had two additions and is a rental property. The porch has been removed. Bristow said right now they are patching the siding. Some of it needs painted and some of the soffit needs repaired. She said the plan is that someday the historic house will all have narrow lap siding and the modern part will have modern, wider lap siding. 613 Ronalds Street — Brown Street Historic District (metal roof replacement). Bristow said the metal roof will be replaced with a new standing seam metal roof with flat panel in between. Minor Review —Staff Review. 309 Fairchild Street — Northside Historic District (porch stair and site stair replacement). Bristow said both sets of stairs would be replaced as they are, with concrete. She did tell the applicants that since they have a wooden porch, the more appropriate material would be wood stairs. The project was approved with that as an option. 809 Bloomington Street — Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (porch floor and stair replacement). There was some rot in the porch floor and some of the railing that will be replaced. Bristow said this is not original. 424 East Jefferson Street — Jefferson Street Historic District (porch step and site railing replacement). The porch stair railing and the site stair railing would be replaced with a simple metal railing. 502 Grant Street — Longfellow Historic District (rear step replacement). The concrete stairs in the back will be replaced with wood. She said there was a simple railing around the side porch roof that will be matched. The stairs will descend in two directions. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2019 Page 6 of 11 603 East College Street — College Green Historic District (porch railing and skirting replacement). The front side porch railing will be replaced with a standard spindle railing. The project included enlarging the corner pier and adding some skirting. 821 North Johnson Street — Brown Street Historic District (metal railinq replacement). Bristow explained this was a project that came through the Commission. They originally intended to retain the existing metal railing. This house is mid-century modern with a black wrought iron railing. The stairs had to change slightly to meet current code, so they must put in a new railing. Bristow said they talked about matching exactly what they had. It was just not going to work out, so they are going to install a simple black aluminum railing with spindles and posts to be as unobtrusive as possible. 318 Church Street — Northside Historic District (rear sliding door changed to French door). Bristow said this house had work on the front porch last year and had an inappropriate addition in back. The sliding door will be replaced with a pair of French doors. Intermediate Review — Chair and Staff Review. 829 Kirkwood Avenue — Local Landmark (porch repair and roof shingle replacement). The applicant will be replacing some of the porch trim and materials around the floor and stairs that have rotted out. She said staff worked with them on the roof replacement project. Currently it has original wood shingles. In the past, under a different owner, this house had been lifted off its foundation for a long period. Animals had been getting into the roof during that time. Ever since, the new owners have not been able to keep the animals out. Currently they eat through the roof shingles. The owners patch the roof and the animals eat through it again. Staff approved asphalt shingles for this roof to prevent animals from getting in. 423 Ronalds Street — Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (fence installation). 423 Ronalds Street is the result of another project. Bristow said the neighbor has a Commission -approved a driveway going in behind the house. That driveway points at the applicants back deck and porch so they are now putting in a privacy fence in the backyard. Bristow explained the taller fence portion will step down and become much shorter in between the two houses. The main purpose of the tall part is to block car headlights pointing at them. 220 and 226 South Johnson Street — College Green Historic District (retaining wall replacement). 220 and 226 South Johnson Street are under the same ownership. Bristow said it has a concrete retaining wall, but it is falling in so they will be replacing it. She said they will be using landscape block. This was the second Willowwind School. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 13. 2019 MOTION: Kuenzli moved to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's June 13, 2019 meeting. Agran seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2019 Page 7 of 11 COMMISSION INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: Commissioner Retirement. Bristow announced that Lee Shoppe had retired. He was moving, so he would not be able to represent the Woodlawn District anymore. His last meeting would have been July. She said she and Boyd thanked him for his service. We hope he continues well in his new location. Boyd pointed out current vacancies in Woodlawn and East College Street. Bristow said if any Commissioners know anyone who lives on Woodlawn or in the East College Historic District, please talk to them about becoming a commissioner. We would love to have them. Election of Officers. Boyd said the election is supposed to take place annually after the new Commission is appointed. All Commission terms are three years staggered and Zach, who was our Vice Chair, is no longer on the Commission, so we need a Chair and a Vice Chair. Boyd said he was happy to continue as the Chair, but if someone else wanted it, he would not object. Kuenzli moved that Kevin Boyd continue serving as Chair. DeGraw seconded the motion. There were no other nominations for Chair. Boyd said he had filled a partial term, and this was the final year of his first full term, so others should start thinking about serving as Chair. Bristow noted if they receive applicants for the at -large positions, Council wants to turn the positions over, so is may be difficult for the at -large positions to get a second term. Bristow explained the State really likes it if the Vice -Chair is being prepared to become the next Chair. Kuenzli nominated Tom Agran as Vice -Chair. Pitzen seconded the motion. Agran said he was not currently planning on renewing his term, but he would be happy to serve until next June. MOTION: Boyd moved to continue serving as Chair, with Agran serving as Vice -Chair. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. Annual Awards Ceremony. Bristow explained the need to revamp how are awards are done because it currently takes too much Staff time. Bristow said she did talk to Stefanie Bowers, who staffs the Human Rights Commission about their awards program. They have both the adult awards and the youth awards. She said there were several things that came up that could potentially be done by this Commission. Some things, if they involve changes to budgets, would take more time. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2019 Page 8 of 11 Bristow noted there were at least three people in attendance from the Friends of Historic Preservation, one of our co-sponsors, as well as a representative from the County Commission. The County Chair had emailed that they think continuing to hold the awards is important and one of the only ways we have visibility within the community. They do want to be involved and Staff suggests getting them more involved. Ginalie Swaim, current President of the board of Friends of Historic Preservation, introduced Dan Matheson and Maeve Clark, also on the board. Swaim also noted Friends had co-sponsored the awards for years and years. She said that last year, and perhaps the year before that, Friends did not carry its load for various reasons. They are now in a better position to carry their load again and hoped to do more. Friends recognize the value of the awards to the community, to the property owners, to the contractors, and to the local preservation movement. It is a well-done event. It has high standards. It's a very educational event. It is a very feel -good event. From her past time on the Commission, Swaim also recognized the awards are a lot of work. She thanked Bristow for her work and said if things cannot continue the way we may like, Friends is ready to help rethink and redo the awards in any way they can with volunteer energy John Christenson spoke. He has been a member of the Johnson County Historic Commission for 13 years. He compared the historic commission from his previous home in St. Peter, MN with the Iowa City Commission. He said St. Peter did not have the same strength and power found in Iowa City. He noted the Johnson County Historic Commission has no working budget, no staff members, and they do not have the authority to approve or deny changes made to properties. Christenson said one of the high points every year was cooperating with the Iowa City HPC to have the awards recognition. He thought it was tremendous to have all these people — contractors, architects, just ordinary people interested in preservation — brought together. Christenson said they want the awards to continue, even though they cannot contribute any money. He said they want to be involved. He believed it was an important public relations device. He said they do come up with some interesting historic sites within Johnson County to be recognized. Boyd asked Bristow what tasks could be shifted from City Staff to the combined historic committee. Bristow said Staff has been thinking about this - how to change it and make it better or more efficient. She said currently there are several major draws on Staff time. One is coming up with the nominees. One of the things that we used to do is look back through all the projects that we've reviewed over the past few years — a few years because maybe it took them that long to get finished, and the projects need to be complete before they are given an award. She said they also would just drive around town. We don't want to restrict the awards just to regulated historic properties. We really like it when we can find those properties that are outside of our historic districts and recognized landmarks. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2019 Page 9 of 11 Bristow said any projects that make it before the nomination committee should be reviewed by Staff. She thought the Commission and other groups could assist in acquiring an overall list of potential nominees and property photographs. Compiling the nominees and getting them ready for the nominating committee takes a considerable amount of time. Beyond that, the biggest time crunch is compiling information on the award winners. Some of that also must be done by Staff because we need to have a letter about an award come from the City. Bristow said in the past we have had the Committee help write the script, but Staff must edit it. Staff doesn't feel that taking the script writing away from the Committee is a good thing, but we do know with the other Commissions, staff completely write the script. Bristow said we could consider not only having a keynote speaker, which we have had in the past, but potentially having some educational moment. Bristow said the Human Rights Commission has never had to pay any speaker, but sometimes they are known people that help them sell tickets, because theirs is a paid event. Bristow said we could potentially have fewer awards. She suggested some light categories, like painting, could have the number of awards reduced. Typically we have many awards, generally 18-19. Attendees numbered around 75 last year, 100 the year prior. She said many of the winners were not the award presentation attendees, so even if there were fewer winners, she thought they could still bring in a crowd. She believed we could also err on the side of too few awards. People like to hear about the buildings, but they also like to hear about the stories in town. Having a speaker that was more entertaining might be a good thing, too. Kuenzli agreed with everything that everyone said about the importance and significance of the awards. She noted it helps create civic pride. It encourages people. It motivates people. It can be inspirational. Kuenzli said she was willing to help in any way she could to keep it going. She thought fewer awards might be a good idea and maybe people would come if it didn't go on so long. Bristow noted they try to limit the awards to one hour. DeGraw suggested four commissioners volunteer to each take on four properties to research, gather information, take photos and then meet back together on a deadline. These would be properties designated as awardees. She said a larger pool of volunteers could help come up with the nominees. Bristow suggested commissioners take stock of their own districts for nominees. Burford asked if there was a contractor list or list of building permits that could be reviewed. Bristow said contractor lists for historic preservation exist. They could be contacted for potential nominees. She advised against sending a blanket email to all general contractors. Maeve Clark spoke. She is on the Friends of Historic Preservation Board, but also works at the Iowa City Public Library. She suggested holding the awards in May, during Weber Days, when the City celebrates local history and preservation. She thought maybe the Library could help find a speaker and include the awards in the promotion they already put out. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2019 Page 10 of 11 Boyd was in favor of tying the awards in with Weber Days and preservation month. He said it would create some great synergy and allow for cross -promotion and bringing greater awareness on both ends of things. Clark noted in the past, they typically displayed the before -and -after pictures of the awardee projects at the Library. She said the pictures catch a tremendous amount of attention. Kuenzli thought people would be more likely to come out in May than in January. Boyd suggested a couple HPC Commissioners and representatives of the other organizations get together to map out a work plan around a May awards date. Then people would be needed to go look for sites and take photos, and someone to draft an email to the contractor list or past award winners. Swaim said that after the last awards in January the Mayor met with her, Agran, and Boyd. She said he thinks the awards are a wonderful thing, but he hoped more opportunities could be found to have more stories and less description of architectural features. After today's discussion, she thought if there were fewer awards, they could maybe have something more of human interest to draw more people in. Boyd believed some of the new landmarks would lend themselves to stories tying buildings and humans together and how they are part of our shared history as a community and as a City. Bristow asked for a list of Commissioners who would be involved with the initial work plan. Boyd named DeGraw, Burford, Kuenzli and himself. Agran wanted to make sure the short-term goal was organization and distribution of tasks, not reinvention of a well -attended event that would cause more work for the upcoming year's award ceremony. Boyd agreed. Boyd and Bristow mentioned research that had already been completed on some projects that could be used to obtain stories for the event. Boyd stated there was consensus to move the next award ceremony to May 2020. He said ideally, a work plan would be ready for the September meeting listing who needs to do what. Bristow encouraged attendees to watch for projects when they are out and about. When they see somebody working on something, write down the address and take a quick photo. Then come back later to check the progress and take more photos. Bristow reminded Commissioners of a special meeting at 6 p.m. on Monday, August 19th. The next regular meeting is scheduled for September 12th. ADJOURNMENT: Agran moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Kuenzli. The meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m. Minutes submitted by Judy Jones HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 8, 2019 Page 11 of 11 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 TERM 9/13 10/1 11/0 12/1 1/10 2/14 3/14 4/11 5/09 5/23 6/13 8/08 NAME EXP. 1 8 3 AGRAN, 6/30/20 X O/E X X O/E O/E X O/E O/E X X X THOMAS BOYD, KEVIN 6/30/20 X X O/E X X X X X X OE X X BUILTA, ZACH 6/30/19 X X X X X X X X X X X — BURFORD, 6/30/21 X O/E O/E X X X X O/E X X X X HELEN CLORE, 6/30/20 X O/E X X O/E X X X O/E X OE OE GOSIA DEGRAW, 6/30/19 X X X X X O/E X X X X OE X SHARON KARR, G. T. 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X KUENZLI, 6/30/19 X X X X X O/E X X X X OE X CECILE KIPLE, LYNDI 6/30/22 __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ X PITZEN, 6/30/21 X X X X X X X X X X X X QUENTIN SELLERGREN, 6/30/22 -- — -- -- -- -- -- — -- -- -- X JORDAN SHOPE, LEE 6/30/21 O/E X O/E X O/E X X X X X OE -- Item Number: 4.d. i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org October 1, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Historic Preservation Commission: August 19 MINUTES APPROVED HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION EMMA J. HARVAT HALL August 19, 2019 MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin Boyd, Gosia Clore, Lyndi Kiple, Cecile Kuenzli, G. T. Karr, Quentin Pitzen, and Jordan Sellergren. Thomas Agran, Helen Burford, and Sharon DeGraw arrived late MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow OTHERS PRESENT: Brianna Wills, Mike Oliveira RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: (become effective only after separate Council action) CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Boyd called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA: There was none. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: 26 East Market Street (Old Brick) — Local Historic Landmark (new monument siqn). Bristow noted that Old Brick is located on the corner of Clinton and Market Street and was fundamental to beginning of the preservation movement in Iowa City. She said numerous projects have been approved by the Commission for this property. The current project is signage for the church. She shared a view showing their current signage on top of the hill. Part of the project involves installing a retaining wall because of some drainage issues. The retaining wall is not tall enough to require either a building permit or approval by the Commission, so it is not being reviewed, though Staff would like to comment that putting in a limestone retaining wall like this would be considered appropriate for this structure. Bristow shared an image of the proposed retaining wall and sign. The sign would be set below the church. There is a hedge on the top of the hill and retaining wall to give a little privacy to a patio they will be installing on the top side of the retaining wall. The sign is set in a little bit from the corner at the base of the retaining wall so there can be some landscaping around. The sign will use a harder variety of limestone than the retaining wall since it will be engraved. Agran and Burford joined the meeting at 6:10 p.m. Bristow said the subject of the sign will be the Old Brick name and a "B" logo that they use on their website. Another view showed the proposed sign set back a little bit from the corner. Bristow said it was not going to be installed on the surface of the retaining wall. It will be installed in front of the retaining wall. Bristow shared the detail of the logo, the name, and the date that will be on the sign. She noted the Commission does review signage. It comes up more often on landmarked properties because most residential properties in districts don't have signage. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 19, 2019 Page 2 of 6 Bristow explained there are signage guidelines for the downtown area, but they tend to relate to either projecting signs or signs in a sign band on a commercial building. She included Preservation Brief 25, regarding new signs, for review. These briefs are put out by the National Park Service. The Brief talked about signs working with a building, rather than against it, often featuring details of the building as a motif for the sign. The sign should not obscure significant features and the material should be compatible with those of the historic building. Bristow said given the fact that the sign is set at the bottom of the hill, in front of the retaining wall, and is constructed of limestone, which would be appropriate with a church like this, Staff finds the sign appropriate and does recommend approval. She said the only other material that would be appropriate would be brick. Boyd asked if there were any clarifying questions, then opened the public hearing. Brianna Wills, Executive Director of Old Brick, came to answer questions. She noted the sign is a small part of a very large project they are hoping to start next week. It started with some water issues they were having with the foundation. She said it is an almost $200,000 project. She noted they went through many design iterations and ultimately went with the limestone look because the front stairs of Old Brick are limestone. They did not go with brick because aged red brick is very difficult to match. She said they would use Anamosa limestone, a natural Iowa product. Kuenzli noted the function of a sign is to convey some information about what the building is or what its function is. In the case of Old Brick, she thought that was important since it was originally a religious structure. Kuenzli believed the proposed sign was hard to read and did not convey enough information about its multiple uses. She thought people would assume it was a church. Wills agreed they were going with a simpler sign. As a marketing piece, she said they are hoping the new sign will pique enough interest and curiosity in people passing by to take out their smartphones and search for Old Brick. That action will get them to their website and social media, where they can explore the history of Old Brick and learn how it is used. Burford thought the date on the sign was barely legible. Wills said the 1856 date would be engraved in dark print and noted that this would be a lighted sign. Agran said they could have a lively and valid critique about the branding of Old Brick, but for the scope of this conversation the actual content of the sign is not something that is within the Commission's purview, just the architecture of the sign. He did not see a problem with the structure, or the materials used, and said he would be voting in favor of the project. Sellergran asked how they decided upon the font. Wills said it was part of the logo that had been adopted by their board. Bristow said Staff also wondered where the design came from. They went to Old Brick's website and found it was their logo. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 19, 2019 Page 3 of 6 Mike Oliveira said he drives by Old Brick all the time and still didn't really know what it was. He asked how its purpose would be described. Wills said it functions as a community center and a nonprofit incubator. She said it currently houses 16 nonprofits. Kiple noted she is a student and uses her smartphone all the time. She said everything she knows about Old Brick came from the marquee sign that was there. She said every day when she would walk by, she would learn something new from the sign, such as when it was built, what it has been used for, and how it is used now. Boyd closed the public hearing. Kiple believed the proposed sign conveys that it is a community building and it is inviting. Boyd said he agreed with Agran, that the Commission is not really looking at what the sign says, but rather just making sure the sign fits the character. He said if this is their logo and that's what they want to do, he was fine with it. Karr agreed. While not something the Commission would vote on, he did think a separate informative plaque, viewed as people would walk into Old Brick, would be an acceptable alternative to adding more information to the sign. MOTION: Karr moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 26 East Market Street as presented in the application. Clore seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 9-0. 527 North Van Buren Street — Goosetown/H o race Mann Conservation District (window removal). Bristow explained this property is on the corner of Church and Van Buren. It is a contributing property in the Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District. She said earlier this year the removal of a non -historic roof canopy and stair entry to a second floor was approved. The house was built as a single-family home, but it had been duplexed long ago. Now, the second -floor entry was going to be removed. The current project is part of returning the house to a single-family home. It does involve some changes in order to make a more functional kitchen. In this case the kitchen has two windows, one facing north, which is on Church Street, and one facing the backyard and the garage on the west, and numerous doors. In order to get some upper cabinets in this kitchen to make it more functional for a family, the proposal is to remove the window that faces west. The upstairs corner room will be a bathroom. In order to have shower space, the proposal is to remove the corresponding window above the kitchen window to create some wall space. She said the windows facing Church Street are original to the house. While the back of the house has had some significant changes, the north side of the house has not had the same kind of changes. Bristow said the windows on the Church Street (north) side would remain. In addition to the two windows proposed to be removed, a cover used to block weather from coming in the back door would be removed. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps show this house always had a one-story HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 19, 2019 Page 4 of 6 bump -out and that it was always enclosed, which is a little bit unusual. Sometimes these were rear porches. Bristow shared a view showing stairs that would eventually be removed. She did not know the status of a window that was presumably removed for the stairs. She thought if the window was going to be opened back up, maybe one of the windows being removed now could be used in that location. Bristow said the house has aluminum siding on it and the applicant has enough aluminum siding for patching. Removing the aluminum siding is not part of the scope of this project. Bristow said Staff recommends approval of this project since there have been significant changes to the exterior rear of the house, and the fact that the house is going to be single-family again. The proposed changes will facilitate the functioning of those spaces. Kuenzli asked if the windows would remain on the bump -out? Bristow said yes. Boyd opened the public hearing. Mike Oliveira with Prestige Properties spoke. He bought this house in the winter. He said it had been a duplex that was owner -occupied on the first floor and the top floor was rented out. He said the house was in pretty bad shape. He said they submitted all the necessary paperwork to convert it from a duplex to a single family. He said the project is currently stalled until they figure out what they can do with the upstairs bathroom and the kitchen. He said the kitchen had approximately five doors and the two windows, making cabinet space very limited. He said he put in a request to the Historic Preservation Commission to take out the two windows and redo the space to make it livable. He thought it was a nice, four-square house. Oliveira thought taking off the back -door entry on the north side was a good thing. He said it would make the property more attractive. He noted they already took off a canopy that used to cover the entire back area. He couldn't remember the details about the window, presumably to the dining room, but said if they could put it back in, they would. Boyd closed the public hearing. Agran thought the project was a positive change for the property and said he supported the application. Boyd also was comfortable with the plan. DeGraw had joined the meeting. Agran said if the dining room window could be opened up and it happened to be the same opening size as the other window, it would be nice if a window removed for the project was installed there, then all the existing windows would match and be of the same age. In the past, Boyd noted the Commission has asked that materials be retained for reuse or salvage. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 19, 2019 Page 5 of 6 Agran said since the dining room window was not in the current application the Commission could only make a recommendation to reuse the window if possible. Kuenzli agreed with Agran and applauded the return of the building to a single-family residence. MOTION: Agran moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the project at 527 North Van Buren as presented in the application. Clore seconded the motion. The motion carried on a vote of 10-0. ADJOURNMENT: Clore moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Karr. The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Minutes submitted by Judy Jones HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 19, 2019 Page 6 of 6 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD 2018-2019 TERM 10/1 11/0 12/1 1/10 2/14 3/14 4/11 5/09 5/23 6/13 8/08 8/19 NAME EXP. 1 8 3 AGRAN, 6/30/20 O/E X X O/E O/E X O/E O/E X X X X THOMAS BOYD, KEVIN 6/30/20 X O/E X X X X X X OE X X X BUILTA, ZACH 6/30/19 X X X X X X X X X X -- -- BURFORD, 6/30/21 O/E O/E X X X X O/E X X X X X HELEN CLORE, 6/30/20 O/E X X O/E X X X O/E X OE OE X GOSIA DEGRAW, SHARON 6/30/19 X X X X O/E X X X X OE X X KARR, G. T. 6/30/20 X X X X X X X X X X X X KUENZLI, 6/30/19 X X X X O/E X X X X OE X X CECILE KIPLE, LYNDI 6/30/22 __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ X X PITZEN, 6/30/21 X X X X X X X X X X X X QUENTIN SELLERGREN, 6/30/22 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X JORDAN SHOPE, LEE 6/30/21 X X O/E X X X X X-- Item Number: 4.e. October 1, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Housing and Community Development Commission: August 15 Date: 09/20/19 CITY OF IOWA CITY MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Kirk Lehmann, Housing and Community Development Commission Staff Re: Recommendations from Housing and Community Development Commission At their August 15, 2019 meeting the Housing and Community Development Commission made the following recommendation to the City Council: (1) By a vote of 6-2 (Fixmer-Oraiz and Drabek dissenting) the Commission recommended to City Council the Tax Exemption Memo dated May 24, 2019 on the condition that the income of beneficiaries be reduced from 60% of the Area Median Income to 40% of the Area Median Income. (2) By a vote of 7-0 (Nkumu absent) the Commission recommends to City Council support for allocating City LIHTC funding to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, subject to additional discussion with the Housing Trust Fund regarding the parameters of how they would allocate funds with the goal of lowering rents as far as possible for as many households as possible. Additional action (check one) No further action needed X Board or Commission is requesting Council direction Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action MINUTES FINAL HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AUGUST 15, 2019 — 6:30 PM SENIOR CENTER, ROOM 202 MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Aguilar, Megan Alter, Matt Drabek, Charlie Eastham, Vanessa Fixmer-Oraiz, Lyn Dee Kealey, Peter Nkumu, Maria Padron MEMBERS ABSENT: John McKinstry STAFF PRESENT: Kirk Lehmann, Tracy Hightshoe OTHERS PRESENT: Ellen McCabe, Sara Barron RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: By a vote of 6-2 (Fixmer-Oraiz and Drabek dissenting) the Commission recommends to City Council the Tax Exemption Memo dated May 24, 2019 on the condition that the income of beneficiaries be reduced from 60% of the Area Median Income to 40% of the Area Median Income. By a vote of 7-0 (Nkumu absent) the Commission recommends to City Council support for allocating City LIHTC funding to the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, subject to additional discussion with the Housing Trust Fund regarding the parameters of how they would allocate funds with the goal of lowering rents as far as possible for as many households as possible. CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Padron called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. APPROVAL OF THE JULY 11, 2019 MINUTES: Kealey moved to approve the minutes of July 11, 2019. Nkumu seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. (Fixmer-Oraiz and Alter absent) PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. WELCOME NEW HCDC MEMBERS AND INTRODUCTORY PRESENTATION: Lehmann had the new members introduce themselves. Lyn Dee Kealey introduced herself noting she moved back to Iowa City in 2006 and she is a social worker at the University of Iowa Hospitals on the burn trauma unit for 24 years. She is interested in affordable housing and wants to work on the Commission to learn and see what can be provided for the community. Peggy Aguilar moved from Iowa City from Des Moines in 2016, while she was in Des Moines for 13 years she was the director of family services with Habitat for Humanity, so affordable housing has been in her Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 2 of 10 veins for a long time and wants the opportunity to see how she can use her knowledge and skills to help make Iowa City a better place for residents. Matt Drabek moved to Iowa City in 2007 for graduate school, graduated in 2012 and never left. He is interested in housing, he is a founding board member of a group called The Iowa City Tenants Union and did some similar work for a different group 8 or 9 years ago. Lehmann did a presentation on the role of the Commission. Lehmann works with grants that benefit low and moderate income households for public services, public facilities, etc. He works mostly with nonprofits but also some small development portion of business loans for low and moderate income individuals. They also do the housing rehab out of the Community Development Division and that includes a number of different funding sources, they also do the UniverCity program which purchases home near downtown, do rehabs and sell them. In Neighborhood Services, the umbrella division Lehmann works under, there is the Housing Authority, housing inspections, rental inspections and neighborhood outreach. Important terms: HUD: Department of Housing and Urban Development CDBG/HOME: Community Development Block Grant/HOME, the two primary grant programs for the City AMI: Area medium income LMI: Low/moderate income FMR: Fair Market Rent LIHTC: Low Income Housing Tax Credit Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County: a nonprofit that allocates affordable housing funds In terms of CDBG it has been around for a long time now and Iowa City has been receiving funds almost since the beginning. The goals of CDBG are providing safe, decent and sanitary housing, a suitable living environment and also expanding economic opportunities. Properties must meet a national objective, which for most cases means it benefits LMI households or individuals. Some funds can be used to eliminate slum and blight and some may be used to meet an urgent need. CDBG can be used for funding public services, facilities, economic development, and it can support housing but cannot develop new affordable housing. So that is where HOME comes in, which is one of the biggest source of federal funds for affordable housing to produce affordable housing. The HOME program has been around since 1990, the City also receives and annual allocation of HOME funds which can be used for construction of new housing, acquisitions, direct assistance to tenants and owners, etc. It has income requirements depending on the size of the project and complexity and type of the project. Both CDBG and HOME, if used to support housing, have fair market rents that the projects have to abide by. To allocate funds every year the City follows the consolidated plan, a five-year plan, that identifies the greatest needs for LMI households in the area, how the City can meet those needs and what are the exact projects to do to meet those needs. The consolidated plan guides CDBG/HOME investment, helps set priorities, and staff is currently working on the new consolidated plan right now and hope to have a draft done by December. Within the 5 -year consolidated plan are annual action plans. Each year these plans lay out the specific set of activities that will be funded. At the end of each year the City submits an annual consolidated plan report (CAPER) to show if they are meeting the needs as identified. Other documents of note: Analysis of impediments to tair housing choice - also known as the Fair Housing Choice Study Citizen participation Plan, how the City uses citizen input and how it is reflected in all plans and actions by the City As a general overview, Lehmann noted the City's fiscal year starts July 1 and the first thing the Commission will be doing in September will be reviewing last year's activities and outcomes in the CAPER. Next will be the Aid to Agencies funding process, which is how the City allocates public service dollars. Applications are open in August or September and the Commission will make their recommendations to Council in January. The annual CDBG/HOME funding round, for public facilities and affordable housing projects, is paired with an Emerging Aid to Agencies funding round, for newer service Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 3 of 10 agencies that need help getting off the ground or for those that hadn't received funding in the past, and applications open in December and the Commission recommends their allocations in March. The Consolidated and Annual Plans must be completed by May. The fiscal year ends June 30. Funding for FY20 will be approximately $659,000 in CDBG and $483,000 in HOME. Those are the primary federal sources of funding, and are the majority of the funding for services and affordable housing. There are also local funds the City uses. The Affordable Housing Fund gets split out for different uses, for FY20 the City allocated $1 million; part of that goes to The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, part goes to LIHTC projects that leverage dollars from the State, some will go towards housing security funds (rental deposits and a landlord risk mitigation fund to help people who have had barriers finding housing before), $75,000 goes into an opportunity fund, $75,000 for healthy homes (bridging health and housing), $50,000 is set aside for emergent situations. Finally there are some funds for land banking for future affordable housing, local Aid to Agencies funds ($555,000), GRIP, the UniverCity program, and The Housing Authority. Lehmann noted this year they will use federal dollars for public services, renovating facilities for nonprofits, neighborhood improvements to parks in LMI areas, housing rehab and other housing programs (acquisitions, buyer assistance, rental rehab), economic development for small business loans and assistance for LMI businesses. Lehmann mentioned income limits that come with federal dollars, and those are used for all the programs depending on how they decide to split them out on any given project and depending on what project outcomes they would like to see. Income limits are based on household size, currently a low income household of four makes $75,000; 30% of the median income is roughly the poverty line. Typically the City prefers to fund lower income households if they can but it depends on the situation. Rent limits are based on fair market rent and currently a fair market rent for a two-bedroom is $902/month and for a three bedroom $1,304/month. HUD also determines modest house prices for home buyer programs, currently the limit is $244,000 for both existing and new homes. Fixmer-Oraiz asked about the opportunity fund. Lehmann stated it is used to fund situations as they arise. There used to be an allocation for land banking; currently the City has around $640,000 in that fund but the opportunities for land are not coming forth so the City is looking for other opportunities to best use those funds as well. Fixmer-Oraiz asked the difference from opportunity fund and emergent funds. Hightshoe explained emergent funds have been used with residents are displaced from their rentals due to new company allocations, etc. (Rose Oaks, Hawkeye Court). Eastham asked what is the greatest need for housing in the community, where do the highest cost burdens lie and with which income groups. Lehmann said there is generally higher cost burden in lower income groups, typically renter families. For example in the less than 30% AMI right now there are 6700 renter households and for less than 50% AMI owner households are around 2000 currently. Eastham asked about the 6700 renter households and what percentage were student households versus nonstudent. Lehmann said that is challenging to figure out, but looking at poverty rates, and you remove students from Iowa City's population, the poverty rate for Iowa City is approximately what it is for other Iowa cities which is around 11 %, so he would guess most of the renter households are students. Eastham noted the census bureau classifies by household type which can separate student versus nonstudent households. Lehmann said if they look at rental households by rental type nonfamily (which would generally be students) is 5000 so that is most of the 6700 but there are some of those 5000 that may not be students. Lehmann noted he prefers to use the poverty rate for students for that reason. Nkumu asked what microloans are used for. Lehmann stated those funds can be applied for by LMI businesses, generally it is microenterprises with less than five employees and as long as half those folks are LMI, it qualifies as an LMI microbusiness. Funds help them start a business. Nkumu asked if it was a grant or a loan they have to pay back. Lehmann stated it is a loan they must pay back. Hightshoe noted the loans are through MidwestOne bank, the City just guarantees the funds. Lehmann noted that helps the business establish a commercial line of credit. Nkumu asked what the maximum amount of loan one can apply for. Lehman replied $10,000 for a single loan. Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 4 of 10 REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON THE TAX EXEMPTION MEMO DATED MAY 24.2019: Hightshoe stated in June 2016 Council adopted an action plan for affordable housing which included 15 different strategies to encourage affordable housing. The memo in the Commission packet discussed the 15 steps and progress to this point. One of the steps Council wants the Commission to review is using a tax exemption policy to encourage the development of new affordable housing. A committee was formed to discuss what it would take for a private developer to construct housing where some of it is affordable for up to 10 years, the maximum allowed by State Code. The committee consisted of City employees from legal, finance, city manager's office, and neighborhood services. From outside the City, there were two developers, an appraiser, a realtor and two lenders. The developers stated for a private developer to do affordable housing they do not want a negotiation process, they want to know the parameters from the get -go. Based on that the committee settled upon a 40% exemption of property taxes for a development for a 10 years. In return, the developers felt that would be a sufficient motivation for them to provide at least 15% of the units in the development as affordable. Affordable was defined as the maximum rent a household at 40% of median income could afford minus the estimated utility allowance for tenant who paid utilities. Based on HUD's income limits effective 6/1/2018 and estimated utility allowances, this would be $805 for a three- bedroom, and $683 for a two- and $578 for a one -bedroom. Drabek asked if the committee did an estimate on what the real rent would be, taking the rent price of $578 plus the 40% tax savings, does that equal the market rental rate. Hightshoe said they did, market rates on new construction rentals are expensive, a one -bedroom in new construction would likely be $900 to $1000 rents. Eastham asked what the difference is between the rent reduction above the market level and the amount of money received as a tax exemption. Hightshoe did not have the analysis with her, the goal was for the developer to have a 10% rate of return but to do that they would have to forgive 90% of the taxes on the whole development. The developers said they were more worried about vacancy so they just wanted a tax exemption for the amount they were losing in rent. Developers noted there was no tax exemption process that would make this viable for downtown because of the rents they can get in the downtown. Hightshoe noted a developer may request different terms than the ones outlined in the memo, however before granting a tax exemption, the City would consider the capacity of the developer/project manager to administer the program, including income certification of households and annual reporting requirements, the number of affordable units proposed in the development, the household income level targeted and the proposed rents for the affordable units as compared to the market rate units. Alter asked about the concern about placing additional affordable housing units in areas the City's Affordable Housing Location Model (AHLM), so geographically speaking what areas are available for this type of application. Lehmann said generally the south and east parts of town would not be allowed under the AHLM. Hightshoe added that because this tax exemption provides a mix of market and affordable units, the AHLM would not apply. Alter asked how it fits into transportation lines and Hightshoe said it wasn't a part of the discussion. Eastham suggested the maximum income limit be changed, which is currently 60% of the area median income, and changing that wouldn't change the financial calculations of the developer, so he suggests 60% is too high. Hightshoe acknowledged the committee discussed 60% being high, however anyone under that amount is also eligible. Sara Barron (Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) encouraged the Commission to think about the fact that every time they start an affordable housing program it is dollars allocated to a specific type of housing, in this case new construction. One thing staff pointed out in their most recent memo to Council about the allocation of the affordable housing fund is that new construction is one of the most expensive ways to create affordable housing and existing housing can make more economic sense to be converted into affordability. She stated the Commission can evaluate this proposal and its merits based on cost and who may be eligible but she encourages them to think more broadly about this being an investment of City resources into creating affordable housing for a 10 year period in new construction where it is more Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 5 of 10 expensive to find units. So it is not just the individual variables of this proposal but how this proposal fits in overall toolkit of making more housing, with better variety, more available to more people in more areas. Fixmer-Oraiz noted the 10 year time frame; why was it set at 10 years? Hightshoe added that is the maximum allowed by State Code, it can be set for less than 10 years but not for more. Padron asked if the rent would stay the same for the 10 years. Hightshoe said it will always be based on HUDs rates so it would probably increase slightly each year. Padron also asked where the 15% amount came from. Hightshoe said the committee discussed and chose to try to match the tax increment finance policy which is at 15%. Additionally the reason they didn't feel the AHLM should apply is because the committee felt like the whole city should be eligible, so when talking about mixed developments and trying to get every development to have a percentage of affordable housing they liked the 15% but wanted no more than 20% so they could have the mixed income. Also because of the AHLM and the concern about concentrating affordable housing in certain developments is why they wanted this incentive to be city- wide, unless other funds subject to the AHLM should be used as well. Fixmer-Oraiz asked about the annual recertification of the tenants. Hightshoe said the developers would have to do that or they could hire a nonprofit to do it but each year when they issue new leases they would have to verify income of the tenant and make sure the tenant is eligible. If the tenant's income goes over the threshold, then that unit is no longer considered affordable and the next unit that becomes available the developer has to rent as an affordable unit. Alter noted that doing the income review disincentivizes one from making a better income because they must have housing and some stability. Hightshoe said that is standard in all HUD and State programs. She also noted that if the income threshold is 60% but then goes up, it is not considered non -affordable until the income is at 80% so it would need to be a drastic income change. Kealey asked if the tax exemption goes away after 10 years do the units have to remain affordable after the 10 years. Hightshoe confirmed they do not, they can then be rented at any rate after the 10 years. Eastham asked if they had a median income table available and asked what 60% of the median income for a three person household. Lehmann said it would be $51,720 and that a two bedroom unit would be around 16% of income. Eastham would like the Commission to lower the maximum income to at least 50% or 40% of median income. Alter feels this program is a short-term idea, at year 10 that tenant has to move and the problem starts over. She noted it is short -sided in the scope of the long-term problem. Nkumu acknowledged that 10 years does go quickly but feels this solution is better than nothing and what is the alternative if there is not this plan. Hightshoe admitted she struggles with the 10 year problem, it is also the same in the Riverfront Crossings affordable housing requirement, it is only 10 years as well. The catch is developers will not provide affordable housing without the subsidy. Drabek noted the 10 year limit is a limit of public subsidy of private development, it does not apply to any program the City runs such as The Housing Authority. Sara Barron (Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) noted other options are to acquire units that have already been built and either they become part of the public housing program or a nonprofit housing provider, so after the 10 years those units would not go away as in this case of new construction with tax exemptions. The tradeoff is if The Housing Fellowship were to buy a building tomorrow that was built 30 years ago and added it to their inventory they would not be interested in raising rents to the market rent. Lehmann noted in the HOME program if it is less than $15,000 it is a five year period of affordability, if it is up to $40,000 it is a 10 year, if more than that it is 15 year and new construction is 20 years. So the way Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 6 of 10 a lot of affordable housing funders talk about it is the turnover number of units; 10 years is an expected annual 10% of units would turnover every year out of affordability. Eastham agrees it is a handicap approach, but the terms of affordable housing, such as in Riverfront Crossings, can be atrocious. He is more interested in trying to reduce the maximum income, 60% of median household incomes are paying 17% of their income for this rent whereas a $30,000 income household would be paying close to 30% of their income. He suggests lowering the 60% down to 40%. Lehmann noted that if it is lowered to 40% then everyone in those units would be cost burdened by definition. Eastham said then to lower the maximum to the cost burden. Hightshoe also noted it has to be easy to explain to a developer, they don't understand by looking at the income table. Eastham feels a developer would just need to look at what the maximum income is for occupants of these units. Hightshoe also added they looked at affordable homeownership and with the Iowa City market and the housing prices a tax exemption alone would not encourage somebody to bring it down. It also was not feasible with rehabs, the rehab would have to raise the assessment significantly to adjust for the tax exemption. Fixmer-Oraiz asked if during the conversations within the committee, did the developers appear interested in pursuing this exemption. Hightshoe said the developers thought it would be viable and something to look at if they saw vacancies increase. If approved by Council, there still may never be a single application for a project. Eastham said it would also be prudent for the City to make sure it this subsidy is worth it — what the net loss or gain would be for this tax exemption. Hightshoe said those numbers were looked at and studied for this proposal. Eastham moved to recommend to City Council the Tax Exemption Memo dated May 24, 2019 on the condition that the income of beneficiaries be reduced from 60% of the Area Median Income to 40% of the Area Median Income. Aguilar seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-2 (Fixmer-Oraiz and Drabek dissenting). Hightshoe asked the reason for the dissent so it could be documented. Fixmer-Oraiz noted it did not seem like a long enough period for affordable housing to justify the exemption. Drabek agreed. REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON ALLOCATING CITY LIHTC FUNDING TO THE HOUSING TRUST FUND OF JOHNSON COUNTY (HTFJC): Hightshoe stated when Council asked staff to develop the 15 -step action plan for affordable housing, they requested it be regularly reviewed and updated. Staff went through a comprehensive analysis looking at the plan and made several additional recommendations for Council. Council wanted input regarding both the tax exemption committee and two other items listed in the memo. One was altering the scoring criteria for CDBG/HOME, which the Commission does every year, and staff's recommendation is to give a higher score to projects that reduce the rent further than just fair market rent because in staff analysis there are areas where rent is lower than fair market rent. In those cases, subsidizing someone for the same unit at the same price the private market is already producing in that neighborhood may not make sense. The second item is regarding the Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County (HTFJC). Right now, the City provides 50% of Affordable Housing Fund dollars to HTFJC to allocate. Many LIHTC projects (the fund also reserves 20% for LIHTC projects), are being funded by both the City and HTFJC. A couple years ago the City combined their application process, but some projects are being funded by both and it is difficult when an amendment comes back because it comes to two different parties. As such, staff thinks there may also be efficiency in just having one entity review and to avoid conflicting reviews. Also, if HTFJC administered all the funds, the City could remove them from the Aid to Agencies pot of money and they wouldn't be competing with other agencies, instead being funded by a 5% administrative fee to build their capacity and have a reliable source of funds for administrative expenses. If HTFJC took on the LIHTC process, there would be another 5% they could also for administration. Hightshoe also noted if the City funds the same projects as the HTFJC, there is duplication of efforts in monitoring. Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 7 of 10 Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) said they have heard they don't know what the point system will be for scoring this year and this past year there were no extra points based on where the funds came from, which was a departure from the past. They are waiting for the LIHTC scoring process to be released. Hightshoe said staff recommendation was to have the set aside and administered through HTFJC and if the scoring criteria is released and there is higher scoring for city contribution the City will take back those funds to try to improve the chances of LIHTC developers in our community of getting funded. If it doesn't matter or HTFJC doesn't get additional points it made sense just to have one entity review the projects. The HTFJC Board is also made up of people who only review housing projects so they have experience in reviewing housing projects. Padron asked if the Commission could do the same thing with other agencies, just give them direct money every year. Lehmann said what they are recommending for HTFJC is similar to what the federal government does for the City, the City gets funds and are told some amount of it can be used for administrative costs, but the allocation of funds every year is not the same and a certain amount of dollars is never guaranteed. Padron misunderstood and thought this was money that would come away from the Aid to Agencies (A2A) funding and Hightshoe explained HTFJC separately administers hundreds of thousands of dollars for the City but cannot access any for administrative expenses, so they must apply through the A2A process for administrative funds. This will fund them without them applying for administrative funds. Padron asked if there would be more money in the Aid to Agency funds to distribute to others then and Hightshoe confirmed that was correct. Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) requested this be considered as a project based fee with the caveat that if this fell apart and the City decided to no longer give funding to HTFJC that they would have five years to apply back and be considered a legacy agency. Hightshoe stated this year the Commission allocated HTFJC $30,000 in A2A and the City would want to make sure they continue to get that $30,000 so if their Affordable Housing Fund contribution was only $25,000, then the City would give HTFJC another $5,000 from Aid to Agencies to make up the difference. Eastham supports this idea and feels it is a good step on staff's direction. He wants to talk about establishing guidelines that will further lower rents for projects with City funds. On page 23 of the packet, this memo's recommendation #2 regarding altering preference in scoring criteria, the staff proposes a good thing which is to give a higher preference to CDBGIHOME projects that have rents lower than the HUD maximum rent. However Eastham does not think the standard should be projects lower than HUD maximum rent but rather projects that reach some percentage of the average housing contribution to their rental costs. Eastham reiterated his goal in life is to eliminate housing cost burdens. Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) stated she cannot speak for The HTFJC Board of Directors but her instinct would be for the City to give them the money and tell them the parameters, not for them to decide. Eastham said every entity gets money with guidelines attached to it. McCabe said they would take their normal process and work with the funding they have with a LITHC developer and then follow the guidelines the City has attached to that funding. Eastham stated a sensible rent target for subsidized units, new construction or acquisition, is some high percentage of the average rent paid by the housing choice voucher system. That group of people have the lowest incomes and are receiving assistance, their average rent payment is standard, so rents should be set at their level to not put them in a cost burden. Sara Barron (Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition) asked what happens to the money after it is granted to the developer because part of this is what happens longer term with the money too. How does that money come back into the affordable housing dollars. If the money is a loan it comes back to the City to fund additional housing projects. Ellen McCabe (The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County) agrees, if the City is giving HTFJC money as a grant or loan. Eastham said to get lower rents is has to be a grant. McCabe noted HTFJC has Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 8 of 10 received loans in the past they have had to pay back to the City. Hightshoe explained to new members that a LIHTC project is a 30 year period of affordability. McCabe added it can be up to 60% AMI as well. Eastham said it can be 60% of AMI but it could also be lower. Fixmer-Oraiz moved to recommend to City Council support for allocating City LIHTC funding to The Housing Trust Fund of Johnson County, subject to additional discussion with the Housing Trust Fund regarding the parameters of how they would allocate funds with the goal of lowering rents as far as possible for as many households as possible. Eastham seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0 (Nkumu absent). REVIEW AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON APPROVAL OF THE FINALIZED 2019 FAIR HOUSING CHOICE STUDY (ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE): Lehmann noted this is just returning to the Commission with changes that were discussed by HCDC, also legal reviewed the document as laid out in in the memo in their packet. This will be presented to Council at the August 20 meeting. Lehmann noted Stephanie from Human Rights was going to present on fair housing enforcement processes but because the recommendation in the plan is to have her do a training for all Boards and Commissions, they decided to wait to combine efforts for that later in the year, especially as a full presentation is expected to take one and a half hours. Lehmann noted McKinstry had brought up during the public comment portion of the discussion mobile home housing and Lehmann added that in the study as an HCDC recommendation. That change specifically is discussed on page 178 of the plan, under education and outreach Strategy 1: Improve Demand -Size Awareness. "The demand side of the housing market includes tenants, homeowners, borrowers, mobile home park residents, and other who need and/or use housing." Lehmann asked if there were any additional recommendations, and if there were none, then no vote was needed. The Commission indicated no vote was needed. AID TO AGENCIES RECOMMENDATIONS FOLLOW UP: Lehmann stated staff (city manager's office and neighborhood services staff) met with the Agency Impact Coalition (AIC) (Shelter House, Prelude, Neighborhood Center, Free Medical Clinic, United Action for Youth and Domestic Violence Intervention Program) on July 30. Fixmer-Oraiz also attended the meeting. Lehmann said staff was there to listen, find out what the agencies needs were, how they saw budgets potentially as well. DVIP talked about the 29% decrease in A2A funding over the last year and were within $14,000 of losing their federal funding match, Prelude talked about how their A2A amount was stable and they have trouble keeping staff because they can't increase salaries, free Medical Clinic discussed how the people they help are having more complex issues and other complications that come with increased immigration populations and cultures. Staff then discussed the budget timeline and how it fits into everything and how agencies can be involved. The kickoff for the budget is August 20 at 5pm, and is open to the public (it will be the City Council work session). During September and October staff looks through capital improvement needs, October through November is when departments submit requests, and budget requests are finalized in December. In January the budget is presented to Council and Council adopts it in March. Staff also looked at what current A2A levels would be if A2A funding had increased over time. At 2% (what most city departments base budgets on) the amount would be $304,000 (excluding CDBG and utility funds), if adjusted by the CPI inflation index it would be around $281,000, and if done by changes in taxable valuation it would be $366,000. The City Manager mentioned he didn't realize A2A had decreased as much as it had over time simply because the City has allocated more funding for public services, just not through the A2A grant. Things like contributions to the Behavioral Access Center, Winter Shelter, etc. The AIC asked to look at funding through what is the need, the City Manager asked what they felt was a fair funding and requested the AIC provide that amount to the City. Fixmer-Oraiz noted the AIC members encouraged City staff and HCDC members to look at their overall Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 9 of 10 impact on the community as an asset that includes economic multipliers and community health. This was in response to the budget feeling like just another line item, and one that could be easily under -valued. She added the discussions were positive. Eastham noted the August 20 Council work session meeting will not be discussion, it will just be setting budget priorities. In the packet released for that meeting, the City Manager is going to suggest an increase of 2% from the base of $250,000 for Aid to Agencies which is not necessarily what the AIC group is going to propose. Fixmer-Oraiz acknowledged the City Manager knew he would not have a proposal from AIC in time for the work session but he is asking for it by Labor Day so it is still early on in the process and can be adapted perhaps. Lehmann added the City Manager wanted to call out A2A in this upcoming work session because it was not addressed in the last one. Padron requested HCDC be informed of the proposal from AIC to the City Manager to see if Council's final budget allocation matches that proposal. Fixmer-Oraiz can reach out to AIC to ask for a copy of their proposal. i-] Ir_1 J K9191 i'il i1iIdi14 k' k 6 Lehmann stated the next meeting of HCDC would be September 19 at 6:30pm, held at the Iowa City Public Library Meeting Room D. At this meeting will be the review of City Steps with nonprofits. It will also be the public meeting for the CAPER and will receive legacy Aid to Agencies funding applications. Eastham asked for an update on the South District Homeownership program and Habitat for Humanity's proposal. Lehmann said because the City actually found a property under their previous application the City will move forward this year with that project and will encourage Habitat for Humanity and HCDC to consider looking at the South District Program as part of the competitive process next year. Lehmann noted the City updated its affordable housing programs summary that has been done in the past, FY15 — FY19, he will send it to HCDC as a follow up item. Basically from FY15 — FY19 $9.9 million has gone to assist affordable housing projects and workforce housing projects. 452 units have been affordable and 66 workforce units, 339 renter projects (mostly from Riverfront Crossings) and 204 rehab projects. Eastham asked if the rent amounts were included in the data for these projects. Lehmann has the target income levels not the rent levels. Hightshoe said most are at fair market rent. Lehmann plans to incorporate that data into the CAPER. Lehmann noted the Fair Housing Choice Study is going to Council on August 20 and the Housing Trust Fund turns 15 this year. IFA's Iowa Housing Conference is in Cedar Rapids this year from September 4 to September 6. It is $270 to attend if anyone is interested. Hightshoe stated Iowa City is hosting the American Planners Housing Conference this year, October 9- 11. The City will do an affordable housing tour. ADJOURNMENT: Eastham moved to adjourn. Fixmer-Oraiz seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0 (Nkumu absent). Housing and Community Development Commission August 15, 2019 Page 10 of 10 Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record Name Terms Exp. 7/11 8/15 O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant Aguilar, Peggy 6/30/22 N X Alter, Megan 6/30/21 X X Drabek, Matt 6/30/22 O/E X Eastham, Charlie 6/30/20 X X Fixmer-Oraiz, Vanessa 6/30120 X X Kealey, Lyn Dee Hook 6/30/22 O/E X McKinstry, John 6/30/20 X O/E Nkumu, Peter 6/30/22 O/E X Padron, Maria 6/30/20 X X • Resigned from Commission Kew X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org October 1, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Human Rights Commission: August 20 Item Number: 4.f. Approved Minutes Human Rights Commission City Hall, Helling Conference Room August 20, 2019 Members Present: Jeff Falk, Adil Adams, Noemi Ford, Cathy McGinnis, Jessica Ferdig, Barbara Kutzko, Jonathon Munoz, Bijou Maliabo, Tahuanty Pena. Staff Present: Stefanie Bowers. Recommendation to Council: No. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 5:34 PM. Approval of the June 18, 2019 meeting minutes: Falk made a motion, it was seconded by McGinnis. Motion passed 9-0. Approval of the July 16, 2019 meeting minutes: Munoz made a motion, it was seconded by Ferdig. Motion passed 8-0. (Pena abstained as he was not in attendance at that meeting date). Johnson County Americans with Disabilities Act Celebration: Falk represented the Commission at the annual event. He noted that event speakers reported it was good turnout compared to prior years. Latino Festival: This event will be held on August 24 from noon to nine on the Ped Mall. Ferdig and Ford will staff a vendor table on behalf of the Commission. Committee Updates: There are four committees that assist in advancing the strategic plan. The four committees are Housing (*Falk, Adams, Pena); Public Safety (*McGinnis, Maliabo, Munoz); Education (*Ferdig, Falk, Kutzko, Pena); and Community Outreach (*Adams, Falk, Munoz). Asterisks designates chairs of the committees. Housing: No report. Public Safety: No report. Education: No large update. Community Outreach: No report. Climate Crisis: Staff briefly mentioned the Climate Crisis declared by the City Council and spoke of ways the Commission could assist. Commissioners Munoz, Pena, Ford, Ferdig, Kutzko, and McGinnis opted out of receiving mailed hardcopy packets. Page 1 of 4 National Hispanic Heritage Month: Ferdig will accept the proclamation on behalf of the Commission at the City Council meeting of September 17. Human Rights Breakfast: This annual award ceremony is scheduled for October 23. Dr. Melissa Shivers, University of Iowa's Vice President for Student Life will be the keynote speaker. Nominations are currently being accepted for honorees. At the next Commission meeting the subcommittee to select recipients will be formed as well as role assignments for the ceremony. Commission Announcements: Falk reminded Commissioners of their strategic plan done in 2018 and asked for the Commission as a group to review it in the near future. Adams family returned from the Sudan after visiting for summer months. He is very happy to have them back. Ford mentioned that a mental health clinic, Iowa Refugee Counseling Center, recently opened in the same location as Iowa City Compassion. Adjournment: Motion to adjourn at 6:14 PM. Page 2 of 4 Member Attendance Sheet Member Term 1/8 1/24 2/19 3119 4/16 5/21 6/18 7/03 7/16 8/20 9/17 Maliabo 1/2021 Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Excused Present McGinnis 1/2021 Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Munoz 1/2021 Excused Present Present Present Present Present Present Excused Excused Present Kutzko 1/2020 Present Present Present Present Present Excused Excused Present Present Present Falk 1/2020 Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Pena 112020 Present Present Excused Present Present Present Present Present Excused Present Adams 112022 Excused Present Present Present Present Absent Present Excused Present Present Ferdi 1/2022 Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Ford 1/2022 Present Excused Present Excused Present Present Present Excused Present Present Item Number: 4.g. i CITY OE IOWA CITY www.icgov.org October 1, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: Description Telecommunications Commission: August 26 APPROVED Iowa City Telecommunications Commission 08/26/2019 Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 3 Minutes Iowa City Telecommunications Commission August 26, 2019 — 5:30 P.M. City of Iowa City Cable TV Office, 10 S. Linn St. - Tower Place, Level 3A Call to Order: Meeting called to order at 5:35 P.M. Members Present: Matthew Brenton, Gina Reyes, Adam Stockman Members Absent: Andrew Austin Staff Present: Ty Coleman Others Present: Recommendations to Council: None Approval of Minutes: Stockman moved and Reyes seconded a motion to approve the July 22, 2019 minutes as presented. The motion passed unanimously. Announcements of Commissioners: None. Short Public Announcements: None. Post -franchise role of the Telecommunications Commission: Coleman said the Telecommunications Commission's proposal had been presented to the Council within an information packet and that they had planned to discuss it at their last work session. Coleman said that the discussion of the proposal was deferred to the Council's next meeting, which would take place on September 3, 2019. He said that work sessions are open to the public, however, the Council does not typically take comments from the public during those meetings. Coleman said he would plan to send the members of the Commission a link to the portion of the meeting video containing the Council's discussion of the topic. Consumer Issues: Brenton referred to the issue described in the cable complaints report involving a customer who was experiencing dropouts in his cable TV service, noting that the customer had not responded to Mediacom's call. Coleman said he had not heard anything new about this issue since his last check-in on August 22, 2019. He noted that this issue had been presented about a year ago from the same person at the same address, but until now, he had not heard from the resident since the issue was resolved at that time. Brenton said that while Mediacom had upgraded its infrastructure, it's possible the problem is due to something between the node and the house or that there could be an issue with the wiring inside the residence. Brenton also referred to the issue in the report that involved an area where Mediacom service was planned to be extended. Coleman said he would be following up on the issue with Mediacom once the estimated completion date had passed. Mediacom Report: Coleman reported that he had not received any information from Mediacom. APPROVED Iowa City Telecommunications Commission 08/26/2099 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 3 Local Access Reports: Coleman said that PAN had submitted a report for the meeting packet. He said he also continues to include staff from the The Library Channel on the mailing list for messages about upcoming Telecommunications Commission meetings. He said that although they are no longer sending staff to the meetings, he would include any information or reports they might provide. Brenton said it would be interesting to hear about any significant milestones or new services they may be offering. Coleman recalled that the last time Bond Drager from the Library came to a meeting, she talked about The Library Channel's efforts to live stream much of their meeting room programs and that they had been putting links to completed videos in the calendar event descriptions within the Library's online calendar. Cily Cable TV Office Report: Coleman said the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) had recently issued an order that allows cable companies to charge back the market value cost of in-kind services provided to municipalities. He said these are services that often have been included within franchise agreements, such as free cable service to public schools and government buildings as well as the local access channels provided. Coleman said that the order is being disputed by many municipalities since it could significantly reduce the amount of franchise fees received. Coleman said he would be tuning in to a couple of webinars on the topic to learn more about the potential impact of the order in the coming weeks. He noted that the City currently receives somewhere between $500,000 and $600,000 in annual franchise fees from Mediacom. Brenton suggested that the issue would likely be contested in court, but that the results of those efforts could take years. Coleman said the City has not yet been contacted by Mediacom regarding the order. Coleman said the Cable TV Office was currently in the process of hiring a new Media Production Assistant, as the former person in the position had recently moved away. He said the person in the position produces video of council meetings, lectures, and concerts, and also creates short videos, such as public service announcements. Coleman said he would be reviewing applications soon. Adjournment: Stockman moved and Reyes seconded a motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment was at 5:55 p.m. APPROVED Iowa City Telecommunications Commission 08/26/2019 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 3 (x) = Present (o) = Absent (o/c) = Absent/Called (Excused) Gowder Brenton Pierce 9/24/2018 x vacant x vacant x Paterson 10/22/2018 x o x vacant x 11/26/2018 Meeting not held due to lack of quorum. vacant 12/17/2018 x o x vacant x 01/2212019 Meeting not held due to inclement weather and lack of quorum. vacant resignation Stockman 02/25/2019 x vacant x x o/c Reyes 03/25/2019 resignation o/c x x x 04/22/2019 vacant x x x o/c 06/03/2019 Meeting not held due to lack of quorum. vacant 06/24/2019 vacant x x x o Andrews 07/22/2019 x x x x resignation 08126/2019 o/c x x x vacant (x) = Present (o) = Absent (o/c) = Absent/Called (Excused)