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)