HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-09-19 Transcription Page I
Council Present: Bergus,Dunn (via Zoom),Harmsen, Taylor, Teague, Thomas
Council Absent: Alter
Staff Present: From,Jones, Goers, Grace, Platz,Davies, Ogden, Sitzman, Russett,
Lehmann,Knoche, Sovers
Others Present: LeFevre,USG Liaison, Monsivais,Alternate Liaison
1. Call to Order
Teague: Well, it is 6:00 P.M. and today is September 19, 2023. Welcome to your City Hall and
we're going to start-uh,we're going to call the meeting to order. Roll call please. (Roll
Call)
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 2
2. Consent Calendar:
5.c.Bus Rapid Transit Feasibility Study—Resolution authorizing the procurement
of consulting services to develop a Bus Rapid Transit Feasibility Study.
Teague: All right. Well, it look like we have a full house, so we'll get started right away. Item
Number 1 is- I'm sorry, Item Number 2 is going to be-through seven is our consent
agenda. Could I get a motion to approve please?
Taylor: So moved, Taylor.
Thomas: Second Thomas.
Teague: Would anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or
online,this is for the consent agenda items. Roll call please-well, Council discussion.
Bergus: I'm super excited about Item 5C,which is the Bus Rapid Transit Study proposal contract
-contract that we're finally signing. So hopefully by June of next year we will have the
results of that bus rapid transit feasibility study.
TeagueYes. All right. Roll call, please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 3
8. Community Comment
Teague: Item#8 is Community Comment. This is an opportunity for anyone that would like to
speak on an item that is not on our agenda,uh,to speak at this time. I want to get a raise
of hands of who all would like to speak. So I see four people who want to speak on- so,
um, I see you. Yep. So I think I see about five or six. All right. I'm going to allow,um,
for three minutes each. If that number should change,uh, of the individuals that want to
speak, I might change that. But we'll go ahead with,um- anyone that wants to speak we'll
ask you to come up to the podium. There is a sign in sheet here. There are also sign in
stickers at the back of the room,which you can place in the basket. But everyone will be
allowed three minutes. And we ask that you state your name and city you're from.
Ross: Brandon Ross. I'm from Boston. Oh- I live in Iowa City. Sorry.
Teague: Welcome.
Ross: Uh,uh,we're in the, uh-we're in a year and a half now of uh- of being out in Ukraine,US
is, and there's about 400,000 people who have died,uh,Ukrainians, about 55,000 Russian
people who have died. US citizens have had to pay tax money for $135 billion in
weapons. The only winner in this game is the arms company: Raytheon,Boeing,
Lockheed Martin. They're the only winners in this game. Everybody else loses. And,uh,
over the weekend there was 100,000 people who protested in Czechoslovakia,which is a
NATO country, against NATO and their actions. They do not want to send weapons in.
There have been mass protests in Sweden, and Norway, Spain, Italy, Ireland, Scotland,
uh, and- and many other countries. And these are all NATO countries. I don't have to
mention the ones that are not. All the BRICS countries are against this. The US right now
is basically supporting a right wing nationalist rogue government attacking Eastern
Ukraine and it's not helping. Over the weekend,there was a poll taken in France and
Germany. Amongst those people,these are NATO nations,who is to blame for the
Ukraine crisis? In France and Germany both voted USA. USA is the one who is
responsible. Can you imagine that?You can look this up,uh,that the US is responsible.
In 2014,the US helped overturn a president who was democratically elected,Victor
Yanukovych. Uh, a rogue government of nationalists were put into power and they armed
fascist neo-Nazi militias who attacked Eastern Ukraine for eight years. Eight years, okay.
"The US was arming those people. During Donald Trump's four years he was arming
Ukraine. Okay?And so was the-the Obama administration, and so is Biden's
administration. Uh, in 2019,uh,Zelensky was,uh-was voted in to stop the attacks on
Donbas. He did not and it instead escalated. The US could have negotiated because
Russia asked to negotiate in late 2021. However,uh,the US said no,they would not
negotiate to put in the means to agreements. Uh,then in- in March of last year,Russia
and Ukraine came to the,uh,bargaining table and the US said that-that negotiations
would not be accepted. What I am asking Iowa City people is to call your-your senators
and congressmen in the White House,write them,be in the streets and demand that we
have negotiations. We are-right now,we're just- we're just playing with oblivion right
now. Russia is a fellow nuclear power. We are in their backyard. We have something
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 4
called the Monroe Doctrine. It means that people,you know, other countries,will not arm
the borders,uh, of the USA. Russia has the same right. They went in there on a security
issue. And,uh,right now,we should be telling our country to negotiate,negotiate,
negotiate.
Teague: Thank you.
Ross: Thank you. Please do it.
Teague: Whoever else wants to come up and speak,you can just,uh, start a line right here.
Welcome Senator Weiner, former Councilor.
Weiner: I've never done community comment before. Hello, everyone. Janice Weiner, Iowa City.
I just wanted to come up to raise awareness about the bankruptcy proceedings regarding
Mercy Hospital. Mercy is an important asset to this community. It's a true community
hospital with an ER and about 180 beds. At the end of this process,we cannot afford for
it not to be a hospital. We need the healthcare workers,we need the staff. They are all
incredibly important to this community. UIHC's role is that of a regional hospital that
serves all of southeast Iowa. It's also a resource truly for the entire state. And it's really
hard to imagine what it would look like in addition to the 65-70,000 ER visits UIHC
already gets every year, if they had to absorb somehow the 30,000 that Mercy gets. It
wouldn't be good for this community, it wouldn't be good for healthcare outcomes. So as
a community,we really need Mercy to remain as a hospital,whoever runs it,not as real
estate to be divvied up. We need the access to care and we value the healthcare
professionals and staff who run it. Thanks very much.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome.
Vollenweider: Good evening. My name is Megan Vollenweider. I live in Iowa City. I'm here
tonight in my capacity as Vice President of AFSCME Local 183,the union that
represents non public safety and non administrative or confidential staff here at the City. I
come before you with a few colleagues and supporters—you can wave if you are here to
support AFSCME 183,thank you-with an invitation to collaborate with us in addressing
a pressing matter that resonates deeply with our shared values and the essence of the
City's identity. Our values are anchored in the belief that public services are inherently
valuable. They are what make Iowa City not just a city,but a destination within the state.
From our beautiful parks to our efficient public transportation, our services reflect our
commitment to enhancing the quality of life for all residents,visitors, and businesses in
the city. Our City employees take pride in our role as stewards of Iowa City,knowing
that our work directly impacts the lives of our friends and neighbors. The existing
contract between the City and union is something to be proud of,but also happens to
have been negotiated prior to COVID 19 and everything that came with it. The City
employees are now grappling with wages that have failed to keep pace with the shocking
inflation rates of the past few years and the increased health insu-health care insurance
costs that have hit families particularly hard. The gap between our earnings and the cost
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 5
of living threatens our ability to make ends meet. It's a challenge that affects not just our
livelihoods,but the quality of the services we provide. High turnover is compounding this
issue. With fewer hands to bear the load, our dedicated employees are stretched thin,
compromising the excellence we strive for. Moreover,they are missing out on precious
time with their families, a loss not just to them but-but to our community. The City's
Strategic Plan calls for the City to be an employer of choice, one that values its
employees, invests in their well being, and recognizes their dedication. Our request today
is simple. Let's make good on that commitment. Let's work together to ensure that City
employees receive the support they need to thrive. As we discuss this request, let us keep
in mind our shared values and the extraordinary challenges we face. Let us unite to work
towards this common goal, affirming our commitment to our employees and to our city,
together,we can ensure that Iowa City remains a place where everyone can thrive,where
our public servants can provide for their families, and where the work we do reflects the
values we hold dear. Thank you.
Teague: Thankyou.Welcome.
Sterling: Thank you. Greetings,uh,David Sterling from Iowa City. Uh, I feel a bit nervous. I'm
not used to speaking on my own behalf like this,but,uh, I'm here to stand with my fellow
City employees and AFSCME bargaining unit members. Uh, I'd invite the Council to
imagine the life of an employee who over the past five years has been forced to uproot
their family and home not once,not twice,but three different times. Picture an eight-
year-old child,who instead of finding stability in their environment, faces constant
change and uncertainty. This is the harsh reality that some of as City employees have
been living. The cause of this upheaval is the growing disparity between our wages and
the ever increasing cost of housing in Iowa City. As a result, families like mine are
caught in a relentless cycle of moving,trying to find affordable accommodations, or
moving entirely out of the very city they work for. It's not just about finding a place to
live, it's about seeking stability and security for our families. For that eight year old,
moving could mean changing schools, leaving behind friends, and adapting to new
surroundings. It means missing out on the sense of belonging and continuity that every
child deserves. It's a burden that no child should bear. Additionally,these persistently low
wages have helped to fuel high turnover among City employees. When talented
individuals leave for better paying opportunities elsewhere,they take their skills,
knowledge, and experience with them. Those of us who remain face burnout as we take
on additional responsibilities to compensate for the loss of our colleagues. This in turn,
hampers our capacity to effectively serve the public and implement the City's long-term
goals and initiatives. It's a cycle that affects not only our individual lives,but also the
collective progress and vision of our city. So as we discuss the pressing matter of wages,
let us remember the real human stories behind these statistics. Let us recognize the toll it
takes on our employees,their families, and our ability to shape the future of Iowa City.
It's not just about numbers, it's about the lives and well being of those who serve this
community. Thank you for your consideration.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 6
Shoppa: Hello?
Teague: Hello.
Shoppa: Oh, can we all hear me?
Teague: Yes.
Shoppa: Perfect. My name is Vincent. I've lived in Iowa City my entire life. Uh, I've walked
downtown hundreds of thousands of times. And I particularly love walking past Ralston
Creek. For those of you who don't know,that's the little creek that runs right by this
building, also through Hickory Hill and Riverfront Crossings Park. What I don't love is
the tremendous amounts of trash I always walk past in it.Not just that, it's the same trash
that remains unmoved for months at a time. It's unbelievable to me that the Council
members sitting here who walk past the same creek,have plans tonight to discuss the
allocation of tens of millions of dollars towards capital improvement projects,when our
City's Public Works department budget,which is supposed to cover the sanitation of our
natural resources, sits at $3,200,355. Cleaning up the creek would take a small fraction of
that money. How much would it really cost for two to three full-time employees to be
dedicated towards making sure our ecosystems are clean, $500,000?Not only is that the
small fraction of the amount planned to be put towards these capital improvement
projects, it's also the same amount of money we'd like to increase our police budget from
the year 2023 to 2024. This budget currently sits at a whopping $16,391,387. When I
reached out to City Council over email about this, I was given a reply that stated,the City
is actually "investing dollars and staff time,maintaining,preserving, and enhancing
natural areas and resources around the city." I was told about the Parks and Rec Forestry
Division that has plans to get more money towards gear and staff. Even if we would like
to push this problem off to our Parks and Recreation department,their budget is still only
two thirds of our police departments. Why does a Department that infringes on our
citizens rights deserve more than both the Parks and Rec and Public Works Department
combined while there is a constant flow of trash that is threatening our ecosystems
around us. All my points have been stated,but I would like to share one more part of the
email response I was given from Council Member Harmsen. He sympathized with me
about how he too was frustrated by "people who do things like litter and don't respect
nature around us."He encouraged me to contact the City when I personally see people
littering. While I appreciate the sympathy,this is the government's job.No citizen should
feel as compelled as I have to do this themselves. Cleaning a creek is easy, even I could
do it,but I shouldn't have to. I shouldn't have to grow depressed and disheartened by my
City's government's lack of environmental action. Ignore my pleas and others about the
environment, if you will. But I assure you it will not change the quick and concerning
decline of our city's ecosystems. Thank you for your time.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 7
Dahinden: Thank you. Good evening Council members. My name is Brian Dahinden. I'm a 12-
year Iowa City resident. I'm here this evening to advocate on behalf of municipal
employees and also City employees. Basically the whole lot. We've been hearing some
testimony already this evening about the plight that those workers are in. I happen to also
be a member of the Electricians Union Local 405,which services Cedar Rapids and Iowa
City area. I'm actually currently working on the North Liberty Hospital at the University's
building,which is great. I love this community. I've lived here for 12 years and I think
one of the things, as we've already mentioned this evening,that makes this community
great is the services that Iowa City offers. It's great, great services here, a really
wonderful town. And I think a big part that you've already heard this evening of a way
we can support and continue to really build our community is to address the needs that
our municipal and City employees have. So as a member of a building trades private
union, one of the things that I still have available to me is to collectively bargain on all of
the issues of conditions that apply to my working environment. And not that many
legislative sessions ago,the state,the majority group there, and also our governor,took
heinous action to significantly limit the ability for public workers who are both working
under collective bargaining and, let's be candid,most agreements follow collective
bargaining agreements because they're inherently intended to be fair. The baseline of a
quality healthy economic system is allowing the people who do the work for money to
negotiate fairly on all the conditions that they work under for the people who pay the
money to respect that. And right now with the given landscape in this state,that's not
available,people can only really bargain wages only. And so I mentioned that detail
because as the Council moves forward, I would hope, I would implore you actually,to
reach out to AFSCME members,reach out to union leadership and ask them what's fair.
What are these people who do this work for us, for our City,what do they need to not
just,you know, get by,right? To live a quality life that reflects the values of being a
member of this great community of Iowa City. I would implore the Council to please
reach out to union members to use all of the tools that you have available to you right
now. We don't have to wait for another collective bargaining agreement. You all could
reach out right now and make a very impactful change to increase the wages for
municipal and City workers. And I really hope that you all choose to do that. Thank you
for your time this evening.
Teague: Thank you. I'm going to have you sign in though.
Dahinden: I have already signed in.
Teague: Oh,thank you. I appreciate it. Welcome.
Sherer: Good evening. My name is Jennifer Sherer. I am also an over 25-year now Iowa City
resident, and I'm here tonight both as a very proud and grateful Iowa City resident and in
my role as President of the Iowa City Federation of Labor,which is the local branch of
the AFLCIO,the federation bringing together unions representing private and public
sector workers across Johnson and Washington Counties to address issues of shared
concern. So on behalf of Iowa City Federation of Labor, I want to start by acknowledging
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 8
the important leadership that Iowa City City Council has shown in maintaining
productive bargaining relationships with City staff. You heard Brian allude a little bit to
this. This is important at any time, but has become especially important since 2017 when
as you all know, our state legislature took a wrecking ball to workers rights,nullifying
our local minimum wage increase,which was just beginning to bring some of our lowest
wage workers in our community out of poverty, limiting workers compensation benefits,
and trampling on public employees collective bargaining rights. So these and other state
law changes have created a very unlevel playing field across the state for workers and
also placed new discretion in the hands of local elected officials like all of you. So on
behalf of City Fed, I want to be very clear that we are grateful for your continued
leadership in negotiating in good faith with your City employee unions on a full range of
workplace issues. And unlike, as Brian was alluding to, some jurisdictions in the state
where folks have really,uh, lost their entire contract language,uh,we are proud to be,uh,
in a community where you have made sure, along in partnership with the City unions,
that those contracts have remained largely intact. Tonight, I'm excited to be here to
support members of the Council and AFSCME 183 members who are here in kicking off
an important new round of discussions,particularly to address lagging wages and ensure
that Iowa City can meet its Strategic Plan goals,to become an employer of choice in the
region with pay benefits and flexible options that attract and retain high quality and
motivated public service employees. I love that part of your Strategic Plan and kudos to
all of you who crafted that language to ensure that all city employees feel welcome,
informed, involved, and engaged at work and to build a diverse talent pipeline,which is a
challenge for all employers right now in our tight labor market,but particularly a
challenge for folks who are working to recruit and retain diverse staff in public service.
So I want to be clear. These are three goals that our Federation of Labor shares on behalf
of all the unionized workplaces represented in our organization,but we feel a special
responsibility to support our City Council in modeling best practices for employers across
Iowa City. So tonight we are here to acknowledge that action on staff wages is needed to
ensure that the City can move toward these goals. Like local government workers all over
the country, Iowa City front-line staff kept critical services running safely through the
pandemic. From transit to wastewater, library, streets, parks, and so much more,while
their wages continued to fall behind the rising cost of living.
Teague: Thank you.
Sherer: So looking forward to further discussion with all of you.
Teague: Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else like to address Council at this time on items that
are not on our agenda?
Teague; Seeing no one else in person or online, I'm going to close the public comment period.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Pate 9
9. Planning& Zoning Matters
9.a. Zoning Code Amendment—Housing Choice, Supply, and Affordability -
Ordinance amending Title 14,Zoning Code,to improve housing choice, increase
housing supply, and encourage housing affordability (REZ23-0001).
Teague: We're going to move on to Planning and Zoning matters 9.a. Zoning Code Amendment-
Housing Choice, Supply, and Affordability- Ordinance amending Title 14,Zoning Code,
to improve housing choice, increase housing supply, and encourage housing affordability.
I'm going to open the public hearing and welcome-well,before you,maybe we'll have
our City Attorney,Eric Goers,just kind of start us off.
1. Public Hearing:
Goers: All right. Thank you,Mayor. I thought I'd take the opportunity to have a quick reminder
on procedure for something like this. This, of course, is uh, a zoning code text
amendment,not a map amendment. However,the same rules apply in-so-far as taking
action either consistent with or contrary to the Planning and Zoning Commissions work.
And so procedurally what we'll have is opening the public hearing,which the Mayor has
just done, staff presentation followed by questions for staff from the Council,then public
comment will take place, and then there will be an opportunity for an informal consensus.
Either the consensus appears to be to approve the zoning matter as recommended by
Planning and Zoning, in which case you move forward to Council discussion and
ultimately a vote, or if that consensus is not present,then a deferral for a consult with
Planning and Zoning at your next Council meeting. Great,thank you.
Teague: Thank you. And now welcome,Danielle.
Sitzman: Thanks Mayor. Danielle Sitzman,Neighborhood Development Services. This
presentation is a shorter summary of the detailed information that was presented both to
the Planning and Zoning Commission in multiple meetings that began in February and
proceeded through August, and most recently,what you all received at your City Council
work session on August 16. Joining me this evening is also our Urban Planning staff,
Anne Russett and Kirk Lehmann, and so as we go through this presentation at the end, if
you have questions, I will definitely rely on their expertise to help answer those. So why
these updates? This slide is from one of our poster boards that we recently used at an
open house and is a great summary of why these updates. Housing affordability is a
complex issue. In Iowa City is influenced by continued growth driven by high quality of
life and strong economic base and a housing supply that is not meeting the demand
generated by the growth that results in an unmet demand for housing,high prices and
high rents. How did we get here?For these specific code changes tonight, it started with
City Council adopting its fust ever, its first Affordable Housing Action Plan in 2016.
That plan identified 15 action steps, including changes to zoning regulations. The
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 10
changes in the zoning regulations were the only remaining action item not yet completed,
and so it's been on our worklist. In 2019,the City adopted a Fair Housing Choice study,
which reviewed impediments to accessing housing because of protected class such as
race, gender or disability, as codified in the Federal Fair Housing Act. That study
included recommendations and actions to affirmatively further fair housing in our
community. It did include an extensive public input,targeted feedback from stakeholder
interviews, a focus group,Fair Housing Survey,public events and a public adoption
process. One of the most significant fair housing issues identified was a lack of
affordable rental housing and improving housing choice is one of the many strategies
recommended to help address that issue. The City did update its Affordable Housing
Action Plan in 2022 and built off previous efforts in support of affordable housing. A
number of public input sessions were held through that process, including a survey,
general outreach activities, and targeted stakeholder meetings and other events. At the
end of 2022,the City Council did adopt, as you know,your Strategic Plan, and one of the
action steps included in the Strategic Plan is advancing and prioritizing recommendations
out of the 2022 Affordable Housing Plan,which did have specific zoning code changes
recommended in there. So as I said,we've been working towards this and have had
several meetings leading up to this one. The proposed amendments are tied to the City's
core values, shown here in the graphic for racial equity, social justice, and human rights,
removing and addressing systemic barriers present in all facets of City Government. It
does include our land use decisions and our land use regulations. The specific impact area
of housing and neighborhoods,updating the zoning code encourages compact
neighborhoods and diverse housing types and land uses, and addressing the unique needs
of vulnerable populations and low to moderate income households. Again,the City
Council's action plan specifically recommend advancing prioritized recommendations
from the 2022 Affordable Housing Action Plan. As mentioned,there are multiple plans
that support the proposed changes. The most important among them is the
Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendments tonight do align with the adopted land
use policies of Iowa City 2030 Comprehensive Plan direction. Meaning that they can be
adopted through a text amendment process. Other zoning code changes with more wide
ranging impacts could be considered in the future. But we have identified as staff that
those would require a more extensive engagement with the public and community
because they would need to have Comprehensive Plan tie-ins that are not currently found
in the code. The primary finding for adopting a code amendment is the consistency with
the Comprehensive Plan. The Iowa City Comprehensive Plan encourages a mix of
housing types within each neighborhood to provide options for households of all types
and people of all incomes. It encourages development on smaller lots that conserve land,
and allows for more affordable single-family housing options and promotes identifying
and supporting infill development and redevelopment opportunities in areas where
services and infrastructure are already in place. The City's Zoning Code implements the
vision of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as the adopted policy direction, adopted
actions, and recommendations of the studies that I've mentioned. So why didn't you
engage with neighborhood associations is a question that we fielded? The proposed
changes are based on existing policies and goals, and plans and studies reviewed and
adopted by Council over the course of several years. These plans were developed after
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 11
multiple rounds of outreach, including surveys,public meetings, focus groups,
interviews. They were also reviewed and adopted through a public process. So the
proposed amendments are meant to execute these adopted policies and goals. Why talk
about zoning? Obviously,zoning is not the only tool available to the City, as we discuss
things like housing choice and housing affordability. But it is a tool and it has a very
specific process in which to be amended. Zoning regulations can restrict development
and act as a barrier to creating a diverse housing stock or they can support and allow a
diversity of housing options for our community. We are proposing amendments to the
code that help ensure we have a zoning code that doesn't act as a barrier,but instead
allows and encourages a diversity of housing types. The approximate 14 proposed
changes included in this amendment can be grouped into five categories. The categories
of the proposed zoning amendments include increasing flexibility for a range of housing
types. By removing those barriers for housing types, it generally cost less than single-
family detached homes. Things like townhomes, duplexes, accessory apartments, or
dwelling units. They incentivize the development of income restricted affordable
housing. Some of our proposals do talk specifically about income restricted housing and
addressing fair housing issues to ensure persons with disabilities have equal access to
housing. Um,there are-these are a prerequisite to enable the construction of housing
units that are more affordable than what is currently allowed. The zoning changes
complement other programs and directly- other programs that directly subsidize lower
income households, including direct subsidies. There are still other barriers to affordable
housing, such as cost,but what is proposed in this group of amendments tries to make
sure that the zoning code is not one of them. So how does this help affordable housing?
We're thinking about affordable housing in two different ways. First,housing
affordability is a wicked problem. There's no one solution to the housing crisis, as there
are many factors that contribute to it. Wages, cost of healthcare, cost of transportation, as
well as the cost of housing. Although not the only factor,housing supply is one major
contributor to the housing crisis. The construction of housing in Iowa City is not keeping
up with demand. Some of the proposed amendments tonight are specifically focused on
making it easier to build housing to help with the supply issue. The types of units that we
are encouraging, like duplexes and attached single-family, are typically smaller units and
cost less than the typical detached single-family home. Second,while we're proposing
regulatory incentives for income restricted housing units is the other way sorry. These
incentives,which come in the form of more units, i.e., density, increased heights and
reduction in parking,will most likely be utilized by developers who specialize in building
affordable housing. In our experience in other communities, density bonuses and other
regulatory incentives for affordable housing are used in multifamily zones for
multifamily projects where they can take advantage of the density bonus more fully by
getting more units and the height is typically needed to accommodate those extra units.
And the parking, again,reduction helps with the overall cost of the project. So let me
walk get through those five different types of housing changes. You've seen these before
in more detail, so I'll probably go through them more superficially than before. Um,but
the fust round-the fust group having to do with increasing flexibility, includes four
subcategories that include allowing duplexes more in mid block locations. Currently,
they're restricted to corner lots only. Allowing townhome style multifamily uses where,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 12
um,townhome single-family uses are already allowed. Increasing the ability for second
story multifamily and more commercial zones. And making the process to allow ground
floor residential and commercial zones easier. And finally, treating assisted group living
more similarly to multifamily uses. So these might look a little familiar. This is talking
about duplexes. Again, as I said,we-the proposed amendments would allow these in mid
block locations. Staff feels that these would likely be most readily utilized in greenfield
development,meaning where there is no existing development now. A developer could
include more duplexes in their proposed developments. Talking about townhome style
multifamily,this is a, uh, apartment essentially which emulates,uh, attached single-
family or a true townhome style development. Um, from these pictures, it's virtually
impossible to tell one from the other just by simply looking at them. So the proposal
encourages the development where it would have virtually no impact on what's already
allowed to be built simply under the single-family style. So is the City proposing to get
rid of single-family zoning and therefore single-family neighborhoods?Most single-
family neighborhoods in the city already allowed duplex units and accessory apartments,
also referred to as accessory dwelling units. However,the standards that need to be met
to build these housing-to build these housing types are part of the reason we don't see
many of them being built. We're proposing modifications to the standards for duplexes
and as you'll hear later on in another meeting, accessory dwelling units to help-to help
ensure that the City's zoning regulations, again, are not a barrier to these housing types.
In short,we want to make it easier for these housing types to get built to help increase
this housing choice and options in our community. Why aren't you restricting rentals?
Zoning provides the rules for how land can be used and developed. It outlines what
structures can be built and where. For housing,zoning regulates the type of housing that
can be built. For example,zoning identifies where apartments, duplexes, and single-
family homes can be located. Zoning does not regulate who occupies the units and
whether they are owner-occupied or rented. In other words,zoning can regulate the use
but not the users. The concerns staff has had around rentals are specifically regarding
student rentals. Regulations aimed at restricting rentals in our community could have the
unintended consequence of having a disproportionate negative impact on persons with
lower incomes, special needs,persons with disabilities, and others. We want to make sure
that our land use regulations advance inclusive policies that address housing needs for all.
As I mentioned, one of those changes in this group has to do with assisted group living.
Um,these are commonly called nursing homes,that,uh,the non jargon zoning term for
those. This would simply be changing our regulations to regulate them more like the
housing type that they are. The second group of standards have to do with modifying
design standards,um,there's three main,uh, changes in this category. One of those is tied
to duplexes,the middle one here. If we're going to change the standards about where
duplexes can be allowed,then we need to also change the design standards that regulate
which way the doorways face. If you're not on a comer lot, our current code would not
make sense. It would also be eliminating,uh, some of the design standards for building
materials while still retaining the design standards for building materials that actually
have the most impact on a- on a building's design, ones that more directly address visual
interest. So while we would be changing the base building materials for some multifamily
buildings,we would retain the large number of other standards that are already in place.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 13
And finally,we would simplify the waiver for townhome style multifamily parking
standards. Um,this graphic shows where parking is limited currently. It would basically
be changing those internal parking stalls amongst all the units to be treated equally
instead of the end unit having additional regulations on it. The third category includes
two proposed amendments. Um,they're largely related to lot width and sizes, as well as
bedroom limits. Um, lot width and sizes--we have the intended impact of this code
change would be to reduce some of the non-conforming lots that have-that are in
existence now by changing the conventional zoning standards to be more similar to the
form-based code zoning standards that we've most recently been adopting. So it would be
slightly reducing lot sizes, lot widths, slightly reducing setbacks and changing and
making those changes. In areas outside of the University hnpact Zone,there would be an
increase in bedroom- on the number of bedrooms allowed in structures. The number of
bedrooms are limited for duplex, attached single-family, and multifamily uses. Um,this
would allow construction of additional bedrooms outside of the area closest to the
University. Don't these changes undermine the City's neighborhood stabilization efforts?
The City has invested a significant amount of resources and created all sorts of
regulations to help stabilize neighborhoods within close proximity to the University.
These efforts focused on the root causes of issues that may affect neighborhoods. Things
like noise,upkeep, etc. The proposed changes do not affect those regulations, and there's
actually an extensive list of things the City has engaged in over the last decade or so to
address stabilization.Not least of which has been investing money in housing directly
through the UniverCity Program to help reestablish owner occupancy in some
neighborhoods. Um,we've also seen the historic-historic and conservation districts as a
way to stabilize and,uh,preserve neighborhoods. There's been code changes related to
parking, code changes related to the caps on number of bedrooms, also code changes
regarding requirements for minimum open space and rear setbacks in districts most
impacted. There's been code changes regarding the definition of bedroom sizes to ensure
that minimum sizes obs- are observed in bedrooms. There's also been changes to the
housing code. Um,the housing code is what regulates building and rentals. So annual
inspections for many rental properties requiring,uh,permanent physical separation and
duplex units,um,required shared living space for household living uses, and again, some
of the other nuisances that can be generated are being addressed in the nuisance code for
things like exterior maintenance. So that's just a short summary of the many things that
also go into addressing those issues. The next category is the one most closely,um,
associated with,uh, affordable housing when it is income restricted. This would be
creating a bonus for affordable housing units in conventional zoning districts. A
conventional zoning district would be the ones that are not form-based code districts.
They're the ones that have been in existence the longest. Um,things like single-family,
uh,zoning districts. This would be creating,uh, a bonus,uh, available in that district uh
where there isn't currently one. Uh, it would be a bonus for allowing increased density if
a certain number of units are provided as affordable housing for a certain period of time.
So it's a 20%bonus for 20% of the units when they are reserved for 20 years. It would
also be eliminating the minimum parking requirements for affordable housing. So is the
City proposing that no new-that new housing no longer needs to provide on-site parking?
We're proposing that income-restricted affordable housing units would not need to
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 14
provide on street parking. The market rate units would still be subject to the on-site
parking requirements in our code. So,uh, in previous meetings,Kirk walked you through
the math on these. Essentially, as I said, these are for conventional zoning districts to
have an option for utilization for increased density if- if affordable housing is provided,
similar to what we've seen and implemented in Riverfront crossings and in our form-
based code districts, andnd again,reducing the parking to eliminate the need for parking
provision and the impact that has on a bottom line that makes-perhaps makes a project
that was not affordable to a developer to undertake to actually undertake. And the fifth
category has to do with fair housing. Uh,there are two standards here proposed to
change. One is to create a simpler request for reasonable accommodation,which is a
federally mandated uh,process that cities have to observe. And also to reclassify
community service long term housing as a residential use. As I mentioned,reasonable
accommodation is a federal process. We currently do allow for these in various ways
through our code,but this would standardize it and make it more apparent as an option,
and then reclassifying community service. So community service long term housing
operated by a nonprofit currently are treated as institutional even though their actual
function is actually just as a residence for someone to live. Finally, we're not-we're not-
not only were the proposed code amendments identified in our local action and Strategic
Plans,but they fit with national best practices,which have been tested and refined in
other cities and counties, as well as being supported by research from multiple po-public
policy institutes. What will happen if these changes are made?As we know,no one can
predict with 100% certainty what will happen in the future. The analysis of the proposed
changes included possible impacts of each based on a comparison with current
regulations and a knowledge of past trends. Allowing a use does not necessarily mean it
will be selected. By design,none of the proposed changes are expected to motivate
drastic change to neighborhoods,they do increase opportunities and possibilities. As they
occur gradually,there will be time to adjust standards as needed. For example,the City
already has a single-family zone that currently allows duplexes throughout the block,
that's the RS-12 zone. Staff recently have reviewed redevelopment within that zone to
identify how the proposed change is related to dupex- duplex and attached single-family
zones might impla- impact redevelopment in other single-family zones, especially those
near downtown. What we found is that over the past 30 years, five single-family homes,
which represents roughly 1% of lots zoned RS-12,were redeveloped into duplexes.
That's similar to the number of properties in the same zone redeveloped from single-
family to larger single-family. Over the same time period, 51 duplexes were converted
back to or into single-family uses, compared to 31 single-family uses converted to
duplexes across the entire city. In short,within the RS-12 zone,which is a zoning district
that only exists in the core of the city,we've seen very few conversions. The consistency
with the Comprehensive Plan, as I mentioned, is the primary factor or finding for a
review of code amendments. The vision of the Comprehensive Plan supports creating
attractive and affordable housing for all people,housing that is the foundation of healthy,
safe, and diverse neighborhoods throughout our city. To that end,the plan discusses the
need for a mix of housing types within neighborhoods to provide residential opportunities
for a variety of households, along with integrated affordable housing options,that infill
development should add to the diversity of housing options without compro-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 15
compromising neighborhood character or overburdening infrastructure, and that narrow-
narrower lot frontages and smaller lot sizes are important to create opportunities for more
moderately priced housing. Reinforcing those policies,the Comp Plan future land use
category on the future land use map,which is the lowest density of residential class in an
urban environment, does allow up to eight dwelling units per acre. The proposed changes
to allow uses and a minimum lot requirements support that vision. The plan also
mentions that when interpreting the future land use plan map, a diversity of housing types
should be considered as one of the neighborhood design principles that applies to all
developments. Overall,the proposed amendments are consistent with the City's current
policy direction, including the Comprehensive Plan. So as far as development steps. I
know-I'd like to show you guys this slide when it comes to all of our zoning actions,
keeping in mind that IC2030 was adopted in 2013. The blue highlights this code change
suite that we're proposing right now. Looking ahead,the City does anticipate revisiting
the Comprehensive Plan in a more holistic way, and that's tentatively scheduled to kick
off later this year or early next year and take a couple of years to complete. Obviously, as
I mentioned,zoning is the implementation of Comprehensive Planning. So we would
anticipate, if there's a Comprehensive Plan,there might be additional zoning code
updates that would follow. So grounded in the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and
directly supported by input received through actions as Strategic Plans, staff proposed the
code changes as presented tonight. The Planning and Zoning Commission at their August
2, 2023 meeting,reviewed the zoning code amendments and recommended approval by a
vote of 5-0. There were proposed changes to accessory dwelling unit regulations initially
discussed,but the Planning and Zoning Commission has separated those out and those
regulations would be considered at a later date under a separate ordinance.And that
concludes my staff report, and I'm happy to answer questions.
Teague: Thank you so much. And staff- councilors just jump right in.
Harmsen: First of all, thank you for all the materials and the details. I just wanted to clarify,you
had mentioned, I think you mentioned this in your presentation, I had it down as a
question to ask, about the process that started back in February. Do I remember that right
from my notes, I was scribbling pretty fast. So, could you speak a little bit more or could
somebody speak a little bit more to that, like where these started and how they've gotten
to here tonight.
Russett: Um, sure, we can speak to that. Um,this actually started back in 2016 with the adoption
of the Affordable Housing Action Plan,which identified action items related to zoning
code changes to improve housing in our community. So that's where we,kind of, see this
starting. And that was several years ago. But since then there were more plans that were
adopted;the Fair Housing Choice Study in 2019,the update to the Affordable Housing
Action Plan in 22,the Council Strategic Plan. But in terms of the meetings with the
Planning and Zoning Commission, our conversations with them started in February of
this year,where we introduced the proposed changes. We got more specific at a meeting
in August, I believe, and then there was another meeting in wait,not October, July-July
and August.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 16
Harmsen: Thank you.
Thomas: Thanks for your presentation. One question I had would be-would be with the
University Impact Zone. When was that map,the limits of that area last evaluated?
Russett: Was it 2005?
Lehmann: It was a little later in 2005. I want to say it might have been around 2012, it might
have been slightly before that. So it was after 2005 when the initial zoning code was
adopted. It was adopted in one of the suites of neighborhood stabilization efforts that the
City adopted after that point. So it could have been 2008, it might have been 2012. But it
was around the time that the City Council increased parking standards for properties
within that area specifically. That's really what it was focused on at that time,were the
parking issues affiliated with it.
Dunn: I got a quick question for you guys, a couple of them actually. The fust one is for you,
Eric. And it's just to better understand the boundaries of our discussion today. Given that
the proposal for ADUs started out in this whole tranche of changes but has now been
removed, is discussion about the pros and cons of ADUs and all the technicalities of that,
would that be considered germane to our discussion?
Goers: Only if it relates to the ordinance that is presently before Council for consideration. I
would say the more-the bulk of the substantial considerations for that will follow once
that item comes through Planning and Zoning separately, as Planning staff has
mentioned.
Dunn: So for the most part,no?
Goers: I think that's a fair characterization.
Dunn: Yeah-yeah. The second question I have is in relation to the bonuses for affordable
housing. I'm interested in getting a better understanding on how affordability is defined in
this proposal.
Lehmann: Sure. So we are using the terms of affordability that are generally used for most of our
federal programs that we administer. So for owner-occupied properties, it would be 80%
of the area median income. Usually I've got a feeling for what that number is and I can't
think of it off the top of my head, so I apologize for that. For renter-occupied households
would be right around 60% of the area median income. And then depending on the
property type, it would affect either a price that housing would have to be sold for, for
owner-occupied housing, or there's a rental cap that they would have to abide by that
would include both rent and the price of utilities as well. So it's basically using what we
use for our federal programs as standards.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 17
Dunn: Do we have any authority to-to change that number or is there a reason for why that
number particularly was chosen or those standards were particularly chosen?
Lehmann Sure. So we wanted to stay consistent with our other federal programs. Um,those are
maximums within federal programs. Uh, I know that that's been discussed before. As far
as I understand,those are the federal maximums for those generally.
Thomas: I have another question on the 4A,the create density bonus for affordable housing units
in conventional zoning districts. The 20% density bonus,when 20% of the units in a
development are income restricted,um,how would that apply to a duplex?
Lehmann: Sure, so 20% of the units would have to be affordable. In the case of a duplex, it
would be defined on the size of the project. If it's a duplex,then one of the units would
have to be affordable, one of the units,uh,would not be affordable. So that 20%would
be the minimum. Of course,they could always go above that if- if that was part of the
project.
Harmsen: Also, a question of 4A,uh, 20% for 20% for 20 years is kind of what I got from that.
But as I was going through,um, some of the other materials,the county's report, I forget
the exact name of it,uh,but they actually had mentioned I'm pretty sure I saw in there
something that more typically 30 to 39 years,uh,was a number that that threw out, if I
read that report correctly. So where does the 20 years come from?
Lehmann: Sure. So there's a number of different ranges that different communities use. Many
communities are also able to mandate a percentage of affordable housing,which is
something that's not possible in Iowa. Uh,when it comes to affordable housing incentives
like this that are voluntary, it is the case that you do need folks to opt into it. Developers,
whether they be nonprofit or for profit would be opting in to use that incentive. So it
needs to be an incentive that people will actually voluntarily use. Otherwise, it does not
produce affordable housing. So it's a delicate act of balancing more of an art than a
science. Uh, so at this point,uh,that's what we think might be an attractive bonus for
those uses. Um, it could be changed in the future or at some other time as well.
Teague: I have a question for Eric,uh,related to that. So,the affordability period that we have
typically is 20 years. If we were to engage-well,we already have some contracts with
some developers that are abiding by that-is there any,uh,possibility that the state could
come and change that,um, language in an existing contract and have us remove it.
Should they preempt us from affordability?
Goers: So are you asking whether the State could come in and change the law mandating or
essentially eliminating some aspect of a currently in place contract we have?
Teague: Yes.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 18
Goers: Well, in- in incumbent with any contract is that it's legal-that is that it's legal to enforce.
And if- if I understand your hypothetical correctly,the State were to essentially make it
illegal for us to enforce that provision, I think that the other party to that contract would
have a pretty good argument that they no longer had to do so. Yes.
Teague: Okay.
Dunn: I had another question. Um,this one is specifically relating to the whole concept of public
engagement. And I apologize sincerely if- if this was, uh,what was discussed in response
to Councilor Harmsen's fust question. I was digging into some of our zoning code to get
a better understanding of 4A and the changes that it brings about. But that is just to say,
um, I'm interested in hearing a little bit more about the public engagement that was gone
through to this point. We have a lot of folks, I presume, in the audience there and in the
community who feel as though,um,this is something that has come out of nowhere,that
they have not been consulted. Um, and I just want to have a better understanding of your
perspective on how that's gone,whether or not there are things that can be improved on in
the process in the future. General thoughts from you.
Russett: Yeah, I can take that one. Um, I guess the -the position that we're coming from is that
we have adopted several plans since 2016 that have included their own,uh,public
outreach process. All the plans that Danielle spoke of. The Affordable Housing Action
Plans,the Strategic Plan,the Fair Housing Choice Study, all of those plans were adopted
by Council and had a public outreach process, either through,you know, surveys
attending events,uh,the public process itself before Council. And there were specific
action items and policy goals within those documents that were identified as important
and as City Planners,you know,we're kind of responsible for our zoning code,we felt it
was important to move those action items forward. So that's why we are proposing the
changes that are before you tonight.
Dunn: So my understanding is,uh,that essentially,the outreach has been done in years prior. So
in the immediate term, and I'm not trying to characterize this in any particular way, I'm
just trying to understand. Uh, so in the immediate term,there was less public outreach
done because of that prior outreach in years past?
Russett: Yeah,that's accurate. We're-we're kind of seeing this as implementing those plans and
moving forward with those action items through these proposed changes.
Dunn: Okay. Thank you.
Taylor: Several times, uh,the parking requirement came up in your discussion and presentation.
I had a couple kind of a two part question related to that. Was there any correlation with
the transit department as far as how that might affect available routes if you're not
requiring, if they're parking on the streets, and we all know parking is at a premium in
Iowa City on the street parking. If you're encouraging them to take the bus, is that really
truly going to be an option?Did you kind of assess that and look at that?And the other
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 19
part would be that we've had a number of multi units built over the last few years with
parking included. Have you noticed a lesser need for folks in those buildings to have
parking? Is there any way to track that?
Lehmann: Well, I mean, I can speak from the perspective of for this parking reduction, it would
only be for those units that are affordable and regulated for 20 years. So in most cases,
you might see a Li-Tech project, a low-income housing tax credit project that might
utilize the parking reduction. Ah, if you're building a multifamily building,that's market
rate,there would be no parking reduction affiliated with it. Ah, if they provided a certain
percentage as affordable, like 20%to get the bonus, for example, and then 20% of those
affordable units wouldn't need to provide a parking reduction,um,you know, it is
generally the case that those affordable units are less likely to, ah,to have independent
vehicles or need those parking spaces that are on site. There is still on-street parking
that's available in many circumstances. Ah, it's also the case that those are the users who
are most likely to use transit and that we would want to encourage to use transit and so
we really see this is, um,you know, allowing those developers who are providing those
income-restricted units as a way of saying this is the parking that we know we need. We
know that the minimum standards that apply to market rate units don't apply to us and so
they can continue to provide parking,but they don't or have to provide parking for those
affordable units. Um,there is a second part of that question.
Taylor: Have-have you noticed any like with a number that we've been building and supplying
out there and including parking,uh, is there a decreased need for that parking that they've
provided?
Lehmann: I- I do believe that we've heard from developers that if they could provide less
parking,they would. They've indicated that when they have parking on site,that it hasn't
been fully utilized and that's what we've heard. We don't track that independently though.
Fruin: Yeah, and I'd like to just ju-jump in on this one because I hear about it frequently. Matter
of fact, I had a discussion with a- a prospective developer today that was,um, saying that
our parking requirements are too high for those larger multi-family. So, um, I- I think
that's a common refrain that I hear is that our parking requirements for- for multifamily
units that-I'm talking particularly large multifamily units-are,um, very expensive and a
huge driver of cost for those,uh,multifamily structures.
Taylor: Thank you.
Teague: All right. Thank you all. Yes.Now this is an opportunity for anyone in the public that
would like to speak on this agenda item. I wanted to,uh, get a sense of how many people
wanted to speak. If you can raise your hands,please. All right. We're going to,uh, start
with three minutes and,um,we'll, if I need to adjust, I think I saw about 10 hands, so
that'll be about 30 minutes. But if I need to adjust, I'll let us know along the way. There
are stickers in the back that could help save a little time if you wanted to write your name
out and then place it in this basket. But at this time I'll ask people to stand,uh,kind of in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 20
a line or keep the line moving and come to the podium and speak and please state your
name and city you're from.
McGuire: Hi. I'm- I'm Linda Mcguire, and I'm from Iowa City. And I've lived here nearly 50
years,uh,mostly in the neighborhood. I- I wanted to ask the Council to,um, slow this
process down as much as you can. Whether that's we'll leave it up to Eric to how to do
that to continue the hearing. Um, I want to acknowledge the wonderful work that the staff
has done in bringing together the research and the package and the possibilities to address
issues that we really need to address here. Um,the reason I'm asking you to slow this
process down is that it's very hard to say no when there's such a good effort that has come
through, and Planning and Zoning,um,has done it. But,um, the public found out about
the particulars of this-correct me if I'm wrong-but in July, and it's so complicated, it's so
big, it's so fast, it's so confusing,that it's very hard for us to e- even if we don't have input
to know what to expect o- out of this. And,um, and so unfortunately,there seems to be a
little bit of an adversarial tone here between the staff and the public, and I really want to
try to diffuse that. I think that,um,we all want to have good development, address the
issues that we have,but this process has been too fast. So whether,um,you know,how-
however you can slow that down,um, I think, I- I think, ah, I'd ask you to do that and
give us more time for consideration,particularly about how these changes are going to
affect different neighborhoods. Um,we-we've been trying to suss that out amongst
ourselves in the neighborhoods and we're having a hard time and we haven't had a chance
to engage with staff about that. What can we expect on a certain block the changes would
be?And we-we really, ah,would-would like to know that. So I would ask to-to slow us
down in whatever way that we can.
Teague: Thank you. And Linda, did you sign in by chance? Okay and all those that have their
hands raised, if you're able to stand and if and you're not able to stand,you can maybe
raise your hand. And then I'll call you up. We'll take anyone at the podium at this time.
Welcome. Please state your name and the city you're from.
Creech: My name is Jonathan Creech and I am originally from Frankfort, Illinois,but I am
currently residing in Iowa City. Um, I do believe that all of the proposed amendments
will to some degree, facilitate the creation of affordability housing opportunities, and
enhance housing choices within neighborhoods, focusing on equity and low,um, income
households. With this being said, I believe that Amendment 3 will accomplish these goals
most effectively. The central ideas behind this proposed amendment is shrinking
dimensional standards,removing barriers to the construction of accessory dwe- dwelling
units, and conforming lots, all of which are reasonable and beneficial. The Urban Institute
published an article March 29 of this year, explaining through the use of quantitative data
analysis. They found adding land restrictions tends to increase median rent prices while
loosening restrictions is associated with an increase in supply of new houses. Similar to
what the Urban Institute found, implementing these changes, amendments,um, excuse
me, similar to what the Urban Institute found, implementing these changes will lead to a
dramatic decrease in cost per person. If amendment 3 is passed, a total of 16.7% of
current non-conforming lots will conform to Iowa City code. From an economic
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 21
standpoint,this is great news. In the free market, Iowa City is a part of,there will be a
few crucial impacts that are extremely likely to occur if more houses are built on the land
that was previously non-conforming. The event of having more houses than before will
set the market into a temporary surplus and if housing price is consistent with the values
of the previous homes sold,to prevent this surplus,the prices of homes will likely be
lowered,helping make the new neighborhoods more affordable to low-income
households. The market will soon reach a new equilibrium of quantity of houses
demanded and prices sellers are willing to give their houses up. For this movement will
be effective in reaching the goals to create affordability housing opportunities while
enhancing neighborhoods with-with a special focus on equity and low-income
households. But I would like to warn against the fact that we are shrinking land size, and
this could decrease value that home purchase owners often look for. They like a lot of
land, and this would decrease land size by a sufficient amount. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome.
Millbrook: Hi, my name is uh, Chad Millbrook, and I'm a resident of Iowa City. Um, I came here
tonight to voice support for the proposed zoning amendments. I believe these changes are
an important small step in beginning to address many issues that cities like ours face
today such as limited housing choice, infrastructure,resilience, environmental
sustainability, and the racially exclusive history of mandatory single-family zoning. The
ability to more broadly introduce duplexes and zero lots with their lower costs within the
existing fabric of the city's single-family neighborhoods, increases the opportunity for all
Iowa City residents to have freedom in choosing where they live. It also allows local
stakeholders, such as individual homeowners and small scale developers,to choose to
alter their properties to meet housing demand in an incremental, cost effective manner,
rather than relying on large developments. Um,the simpler the zoning code and
development process becomes,the lower the barrier of entry for creating housing
become. Incremental Housing development within the existing network of streets,
utilities and services, as opposed to new greenfield development,reduces the financial
burden of infrastructure maintenance on city funds. This allows for a more financially
resilient city that has more budgetary flexibility for other programs that can improve the
community. Last, I wanted to touch on the too often overlooked history of exclusionary
single-family zoning code and the racial segregation of our cities. The US Supreme Court
forbid racially explicit housing ordinances in 1917,however, cities adopted single-family
codes to prevent integration in neighborhoods, as black Americans were unable to access
the federal mortgage programs that provided homeownership to white Americans. While
the present zoning amendments, or any zoning changes for that matter, can do little to
rectify the immense damage caused by segregation and red lining, allowing exclusive
single-family zones to continue to endure in our communities as untenable. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. And Chad, did you have a sticker or?
Millbrook: Yeah, sticker.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 22
Teague: Thank you. Welcome.
Recker: Uh,my name is Laura Recker. I'm a freshman at the University of Iowa, and I'm
speaking on behalf of my microec,uh,microenomics group. Um,we believe adopting
amendment Number 4, create regulatory incentives for affordable housing, is the best
possible change to Title 14. Adopting the policies laid out in amendment Number 4,will
help alleviate pressure on the housing supply and the wallets of residents. By making
new, affordable,multifamily housing projects cheaper for develop- developers,the city
can increase housing supply, lessen the current-,the current market shortage, and drive
prices down. Multifamily developments should be encouraged in the current housing
market, as they are not only cheaper for residents,but also make more efficient use of
space. The creation of cheaper and more abundant housing for residents should be a
priority for the city during the ongoing housing crisis.Not only will the construction of
these new units reap economic benefit for residents,but the city and local businesses as
well. For example,nonprofit Habitat for Humanity states more affordable housing leads
to higher tax revenues,more local employment opportunities, and higher job retention
within the city. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. A familiar face. Welcome.
Sullivan: Hello, Mayor and Council,uh,Rod Sullivan,uh, 514 North Linn Street in Iowa City.
I'm a 40-year resident of Iowa City and have been working on affordable housing issues
almost as long. Um, I want to start out with a very sincere compliment. I mentioned 40
years here Iowa City, and that's 40 years of, I think, fairly closely watching City
Councils. I think this seven person Council is the most committed to affordable housing
of any that I've ever seen in that 40 years. And so I want to start out by thanking you for
that. I think that's great. I think we have a lot of work that remains to-to be done. I am
concerned about a couple of- of the proposals here. Item 4 that was brought up makes a
lot of sense to me because you are uh,talking about a quid pro quo,there's a requirement.
Uh, I think if you lower the cost to developers,you've done one thing,you've lowered the
cost for developers. The idea that they will somehow out of the kindness of their heart
turn around and turn that into more affordable housing is a bit of a stretch. And again,
we've got 40 years of watching to see that that doesn't necessarily happen. I think you get
affordable housing one of two ways. You incentivize it,you require it, and both work,
and I know that Iowa City has a history of doing both, and I would encourage you to
continue to do both. But any of these things that are put forward that do not, in fact,
require affordable housing, as a result, I would say you are not going to get affordable
housing as a result. So I want to encourage you with these uh-uh,recommendations, and
any recommendations that you have in the future,to think about making the affordability
piece a requirement. If it's not required, I think we have to assume you will not, in fact,
get it because the market has failed,uh,to provide affordable housing here in Iowa City
for at least the 40 years I know of And I would assume it's going to continue to fail to do
that unless we have some sort of government intervention requiring it. So,uh, I just hope
that you folks will consider making the tweaks necessary to make uh, affordability a
requirement of all of these conditions. And I thank you for all your efforts.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 23
Teague: Thank you. Welcome,Mayor Throgmorton.
Throgmorton: Good evening, friends. My name is Jim Throgmorton. I put this down here I
guess?
Teague: Yes,please.
Throgmorton: All right. Could I ask you a question without getting into the time thing?A
question for clarification?
Teague:No
Thogmorton: Is that okay?
Teague:No. But we can-you can speak whatever you want to the Council at this- at this time.
Throgmorton: How can I ask my question then?
Teague:Not during this time. Outside of the Council meeting.
Throgmorton: Sorry. Okay, good. Okay. The cost of housing in Iowa City is high and escalating,
I commend the City staff for considering how amending the zoning code can help
alleviate the problem. I agree with and generally support most of the propose,how do I
get into this thing,most of the support,help. Thanks. I can't see that. Great.
Russett: There you go.
Throgmorton: Thanks. I-I-I can't see the thing. It's a vision problem. Sorry. Okay. I apologize.
Um, I agree with and generally support most of the proposed amendments. I especially
support efforts to open up existing and future low density residential zoning districts to a
more diverse range of housing types,but I am not fully on board. The amendments
constitute the largest changes in the zoning code in 20 years. If adopted,they are likely to
affect every residential neighborhood in the city. I wish the City staff had involved the
general public early in the process of developing the proposed amendments. Doing so
would have demonstrated the City's commitment to democratic governance,while also
enhancing the legitimacy of its final actions. Consider a residents- a neighborhood
residents point of view. The fust challenge residents face is to understand the staffs
reports. This is no easy task,partly because the technical language of zoning is so
unfamiliar to most people. Adding to the difficulty is that the changes vary by zoning
category. My own neighborhood,which is shown up there, contains at least 12 different
types of zones,plus three historic overlay districts and one overlay conservation district.
The second challenge residents face is to determine how the changes might affect their
neighborhoods on the ground. This is a daunting task that exceeds the capabilities of
normal people trying to live their lives. It calls for collaboration and dialogue between the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 24
neighborhood leaders and the City's Planning staff. To help me understand, I decided to
focus on the medium density residential RS-8,parts of the North side that lie outside the
historic preservation districts.
Teague: Thank you.
Throgmorton: I get two more minutes.
Teague: Sorry. Thank you.
Throgmorton: Can I come back after everybody's spoke?
Teague:No.No. Yup.
Throgmorton: All right.
Throgmorton: Thank you.
Teague: Welcome. Yes.
Ferree: Hi. I'm Kelcey Patrick Ferree. I'm an Iowa City resident. Um, I have been coming before
Council,uh many times to talk about zoning issues. It's something that I've been talking
to you about since probably at least 2015,when Iowa City was found to be the 14th most
economically segregated small city in America. Um,the City has been working on that
since then, and I really appreciate all the changes that have happened in that time. There
have been multiple studies,there have been multiple input opportunities,but the fact is
that there hasn't been a large systemic change like this one, for this large systemic
problem. Um,what got me started on this in the first place is my kids. My kids go to one
of the very high FRI, schools in Iowa City,Alexander Elementary. And the fact that the
city is economically segregated has been a huge burden on the school system. So I'm
asking you to make changes that will allow the city to become desegregated. I know this
code change by itself isn't going to do that,but the way things are zoned right now,
economic desegregation isn't even a possibility. So I am thanking you today for
considering a systemic solution to a systemic problem. Thank you.
Teague:Thank you. And you don't have to take it off the sticker,you can just put it in the basket
up there.
Tim F. That would be nice to know,the're kind of hard to get off.
Teague: Yeah-yeah-yeah.
Tim F. So my name is Tim, I'm an Iowa City resident. I want to kind of- I just want to reiterate a
couple of points that I've heard earlier um, from other students who are speaking um, as
well as from other members of the community. Um,the proposal that staff has put in
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 25
front of you is not some brand new policy idea that they came up out of the blue. These
are textbook evidence based policy choices that we are now trying to implement within
our community to catch up with other communities that have already implemented these
to address the systemic issue of affordable housing. One point that hasn't come up that I
think is kind of interesting, is that these policy changes aren't only going to impact
housing affordability. They impact a lot of other things that are part of the Strategic Plan
from the City Council, and that especially includes environmental issues. The more dense
our neighborhoods are,the closer they are to public transportation,the less people who
are relying on personal cars for transportation,the less carbon we're emitting in our city. I
think that's a good thing, and it's kind of an impact that we haven't discussed so far today.
Um, so I just wanted to bring that up. Um, one last point, it seemed like there was some
interest on the Council about parking policy. If you are interested in that,there's a great
book by Donald Shoup called The High Price of Free Parking. Um, it's a long book,but
it's a page turner, and if you are interested in parking policy, I would highly encourage
you guys to go there. It's at the library, I checked it out last year, it was a great policy
book. All right,thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome.
Kubby: Hi, it's a great wonky book suggestion. I'm really excited that there are so many people
from the student body here speaking at a City Council meeting. There are a couple of
things I really want to say yeah too, about these changes.
Teague: Give us your name in the city you're from?
Kubby: Oh, I'm sorry. My name is Karen Kubby and I live in Iowa City.
Teague: Thank you.
Kubby: Um, one of them is the smaller lots, that's something that City has talked about for a
really long time, and the other one is increasing the time frame for the affordability. A lot
of projects I know about in our community are 10 years, and that decade comes around
really quick. I wouldn't mind the 30-39 years that Sean was referring to, so I hope that
you'll have some discussion about that. The other thing that I hope that you'll have
discussion about is having the definition of affordability, especially for the rental units to
be 50% of median income. The median income in Johnson County is pretty high, and if
we really want to create units that are going to help people that need the most help with
housing switching from 60-50 will help in that regard. There are three things I hope I will
hear Council discuss a little bit. One is,how do these regulations help us get--there was
one picture where there was a blue duplex on the top that looked really great,because I
know sometimes affordability and kind of neighborhood integrity and design that fits in
are two high values that are in conflict. And so how do these regulations help with those
design issues so that when there is increased density, it doesn't change the experience on
the street? So I hope that you'll have some discussion about that.Number 2,um,how
does the community help relieve development pressure to re- if you have higher density,
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 26
to relieve the pressure of developers offering large sums of money for lots to re-develop?
And thirdly,how do the accessory building discussion that has been taken out by
planning and zoning and talked about separately,how-how does that impact how you
think about these regulations? Should they be talked about together?And continue the
public hearing so that you can understand how these two things work together, and make
them work together really well. Thanks.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome.
Weiner: Thank you. I'm back.
Teague: Yes.
Weiner: Janice Weiner, Iowa City. I wanted to speak to this item briefly this evening because it's
something that I've been advocating for for a number of years. It's been a long standing
action item left over from the original Affordable Housing Plan. And I really want to
thank staff for their excellent presentation. We all know, and a number of people have
mentioned,that affordable housing is,has been the elephant in the room here in Iowa
City for many years. We have commissions and plans,we've-we've made good progress,
and it still remains stubbornly difficult. In my view,the items in this ordinance are the
result- are the result of extensive work aimed at continuing to expand affordable housing
solutions. And I think we won't really know who will be able to take advantage of it
unless we try it. And then you'll need to give it some time. I can imagine it could reap
benefits that you may not even have considered. So down the block from where I live,
east of City High, an older couple bought the ranch house next door. They gutted,redid
it,refurbished the inside, and moved in. They wanted to stay in the neighborhood,but
they didn't need as much house as they had. Then they sold a house next door, and a
younger couple with kids moved in. I could imagine that the- for about the same money
they could have gutted the ranch,built a duplex with zero entry,been able to age in place,
had their kids move into the larger house next door, and had an affordable unit there next
to them,that would help their-them in their o- older years get some income,but also help
a younger family that doesn't have so much money and help the school district as well
getting more kids in there. So there is-we need to encourage this density in different
housing options in our non core neighborhoods,much as we really did with the form-
based code. Every effort improves the situation. You have the luxury to experiment in a
good way. You're local government,you can always change it down the line. You can-
you can-you can have this as a-you can pilot it, see how it works, and pursue other ideas
simultaneously. How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. I urge you to take this
bite, I urge you to pass this ordinance,whether now or in the future, if you decide to
delay,because we really need these changes for density, and affordable housing in our
future. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Welcome,please state your name and city you're from?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 27
DeGraw: Sharon Degraw and I'm from Iowa City. Um, so I too would like to thank staff for
putting the time into this-the proposal. Um, I can tell it took a very long time to put
together and it's well thought out. But there are parts that have me a little anxious. I have
been following the zoning code amendments recommended for Council to approve. The
code amendments are a major- are major, and can have destabilizing effects for our most
walkable neighborhoods near the downtown and close to the UI campus. Making the
code changes available to the public in early July, approximately two-and-a-half months
ago, is too short a time to reveal to us and to begin the process of passing them. It's unfair
to the 30-50% of owner-occupied residents living in the University Impact Zone. And I
would say long term resi- long term renters also, especially to people in the areas that are
unprotected by historic or conservation districts. Please ask staff to take the time to meet
with neighborhood association leaders, and concerned residents. There is time for
conversation, and room for improvement. It's not an issue of nimbyism, it's an issue of
giving a gift in the form of an upzoning to landlord developers who stand to profit
greatly. And I think when we get to the stage of the ADUs being in the discussion,that's
what I'm referring to also. I trust that Council and staff are truly interested in creating
affordable housing. Our best chance is to work with the nonprofit organizations that
specialize in housing that is affordable to find ways for non profits to buy lots and
develop the affordable housing that's needed. For now, I would like to ask Council to
remove the University Impact Zone from the areas being considered for the rezoning
code changes. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Can I get a motion to receive correspondence?
Dunn: So moved.
Teague: Moved by Dunn.
Harmsen: Second Harmsen.
Teague: Seconded by Harmsen. All in favor say aye. Aye. (Voice Vote)Any opposed?Motion
passes 6-0. Welcome.
Carlson: My name is Nancy Carlson. I live at 1002 East Jefferson Street, in the RS-12 zone in
the University impact area. And I would like to talk about affordable housing because in
my area, affordable housing is very important. The vast majority of us who now live
there probably rented for a long period of time, and when we finally were able to buy a
house,we were very excited. We made a commitment. For most of us a commit-the
biggest commitment we will ever make in our life, and we want to honor that
commitment,but we're asking the City to honor that commitment with us. I gave you two
sheets,uh, one is the uh,the construction,the development that has gone on in my
neighborhood. If you notice, a lot-there has been a lot of development in my
neighborhood. There are 19 instances. Of those 19 instances, all of them are aimed
towards students. The houses that were torn down and the duplexes were put up,were,
are now occupied by students. There is only one instance uh, it's- I call it the pumpkin
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 28
house, it's over on the right hand corner. That is the only house that was moved in by
Max Yokum that has managed to maintain its status as an owner-occupied house. So I
know what the target audience is in our area. It is students. We have large houses, little
houses,tiny houses, expensive houses, less expensive houses, apartments, duplexes. We
have every kind of housing that you can have. But the vast majority of it is aimed toward
students. For us,we already have what the other neighborhoods should be working
toward, and we are trying to protect that. If you look at the little photograph that's in the
folder,that is the other part of the development in our neighborhood. That is the 700
block,the north side of the 700 block of Jefferson. All of those houses at one time could
have been bought as affordable. They are now all owned by one developer. They will be
rental units for students for 40 or 50 years until he dies. I would please ask that you
consider the University Impact Zone separately from the rest of the city simply because
we are already where the city wants to go and we are fighting to stay there. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Would anyone else like to address this topic?Welcome.
Knote: Hey there. Thanks. I'm Jarod Knote. I live on Market around the comer from Nancy. Um,
I think I'll just reflect some of the comments that others have said uh,you know, as a
relatively new uh,resident in Iowa City, I love it here, it's fantastic uh, and while I try to
think of myself as an engaged person in town,there is -as I have-you know,I do work 70
hours, 80 hours a week, as many people do. And so it's a little bit difficult to sometimes
find uh,the opportunity to fully digest big substantial changes like the one that's being
put forth. And frankly have dialogue with other folks who live in all different
neighborhoods. Uh, and so I think uh, I guess my ask,my request is perhaps to provide a
little bit of time for- for those of us who seek to be engaged and are engaged and are
talking with our neighbors and talking with folks to have a little bit more time just to,to
speak to one another,to talk to staff,to figure out and have a more robust conversation.
Because I think,you know,what I'm hearing are uh, some really great points some-
some- some- some frankly as a quantitative uh, financial person myself, I think some
misguided interpretations of- of where markets work and where they don't work,uh, and
lots of extant examples of that. And so I think applying models where they don't actually
work uh, is a good example.Nancy, I think you do a nice job of commenting uh, on
extant examples in. And the other gentlemen were uh,required-making requirements uh,
as part of a trade uh,to get to a particular outcome. That sounds really reasonable. Uh, so
I guess uh,the-to kind of sum it up, I'm super excited by-by some of the content,but it's
a lot to get through. Uh, and so I guess what I would just echo is a request for a little bit
more time,to, to- for us to engage uh, collectively on what feels like a really important
topic. Uh, so thanks and good to meet y'all.
Teague: Thank you. Anyone else like to address this topic? Seeing no one else in person or
online,before I close the public hearing uh, Councilors,we've heard from staff,we've
read P&Z.
Grace: Mayor,Andrew uh,has his hand raised.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 29
Teague: Has his hand?
Grace: Yes.
Dunn: I just want to talk when it- when it gets to Councilor discussion.
Teague: Great. Um,we've heard from staff,reviewed P and Z materials,heard from the public at
this time. So want to know if people are inclined to uh,vote along with P and Z. And then
Councilor Harmsen,you're going to have to speak your vote if you are inclined or well
inclined or not inclined.
Goers: Councilor Dunn. Oh.
Teague: Yes, Councilor Dunn.
Dunn: I am inclined.
Teague: Okay. Uh, if I understand correctly,we are through uh,4-2. So I'm going to close the
public hearing.
2. Consider an Ordinance(first consideration)
Teague: Could I get a motion for fust consideration?
Bergus: So moved Bergus.
Harmsen: Second Harmsen.
Teague: All right. Council discussion.
Dunn: If I could take it away, I'd appreciate it.
Teague: Yeah.
Dunn: Uh, so I have quite a bit of thoughts uh,here, so my,my apologies if this isn't as
organized as I would otherwise want it to be. Uh, I want to start with two I think of the
easier things to address. One part is a question uh, for staff for clarification. Uh,the fust
part is though,to acknowledge, again,the student engagement that we have seen in,uh,
in today's meeting,uh,both in terms of what we have seen with contact uh,on line,uh, as
well as people actually coming in and talking with the Council uh, and giving their
thoughts on- on this really important uh,proposal before us. Uh, I really love to see that.
Thank you to all of the students in the room that are participating in this project- in this
process,um, it's, it's absolutely vital that everyone in the community take part in and in
making sure that our community is as good as it possibly can be. And you're making an
immense contribution, especially as many of you are studying economics. Uh, an
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 30
immense contribution that some of us uh,may have less of experience with. So thank you
again for that. Uh,my second point is just to ask a question uh, on behalf of uh, former
Mayor, Throgmorton. In his comments to us that he emailed,uh, let me pull this up
through, apologies. Uh,there was one clarification question for us. Okay. So at the
bottom of his-his document,this is the one in the packet,uh,he writes, "during the
second of the recent open houses about ADU, I spoke with Kirk and Anne Russett about
whether the height bonus and other incentives for new affordable ADUs could apply to
new developments containing,uh, one or two units" Uh,he writes that he might have
misunderstood but thought that he heard one of them say yes and the other say no. Um,
could staff clarify this-uh,this question?
Teague: Yes. Staff is going to come up.
Sitzman: Thank you for that question. My apologies. I meant to actually touch on that in my,uh,
presentation about the,um, incentives. The way staff would interpret the way the
incentives are structured,they would not apply to ADUs. They would only apply to the
principal structure. So if the principal structure were the single-family home or duplex,
that would be the math on which that percentage would be calculated. An accessory unit
can exist as a principal, so therefore it's not a unit on its own, and density is calculated
by-by units per acre. So the ADUs and the incentives would not,uh,mix,the incentive
that could not be used or calculated or attributed to the accessory dwelling unit.
Dunn: Okay. Thank you. Uh,the next question I have,uh, is for Eric. Um, Eric, I'm wondering if
you could go over,uh, City's authority to require affordable housing just,you know,
based on the world that we live in,the context of our legislation.
Goers: Certainly. Thank you. Uh, as Council is aware,the State, from time to time,uh,preempts
things that we do or wish to do and this is one of those occasions. The City made an
effort to limit,uh,rental caps. That's one example. You've, Councilor Dunn,asked about
affordable housing. Um,we,uh, as you know, do require it in certain circumstances. It is
in Riverfront,uh, Crossing district, in which that's a form-based code and whenever folks
are coming to us,they are inevitably looking for an upzoning,that is the requirement is
going to be, or their new zoning will make their property more valuable for their ability
to develop at a higher density and so forth. And often that is in a redevelopment setting in
which there are,um,units of older housing, older dwelling units that are being
demolished. Presumably those dwelling units are affordable,not because they're
mandated to be,but just because they're older and smaller, and so consequently are often
cheaper. Our office has felt that we are justified in requiring,uh,uh, affordable housing
percentage in those kind of rezonings,much like we believe that is sustainable and when
we're annexing new property, and voluntary annexations and greenfield development and
so forth,we feel that that's appropriate there because again,you've got a significant
upzoning, and so there's not a constitutional taking kind of argument,uh,there, or at least
that would be a difficult argument to make. So I'm sorry for the long-winded response
Councilor Dunn,um,but in- I know there was one commenter who said you should just
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 31
require affordable housing,period. And,um,unfortunately, I don't believe that we can do
that in- in every case. Thank you.
Dunn: So I guess my-my question then becomes,you know, if- if we are in- in a sort of effect
upzoning a large portion of the community,um, if people choose to make changes to
their-their properties or if they were to take down,uh, and redevelop a property,um, are
you saying that there's-there's likely not an avenue for us to require affordable housing in
this context, similar less- similarly to how we would with repair costs.
Goers: I would agree with the last part that I don't think,uh,we can require it here,uh,because
I'm not sure I would agree that we would consider this and upzoning. If the zoning rule
remain the same,um, for the properties unless, of course,they're seeking a rezoning. Um,
but otherwise, it's just the requirements and the allowances,uh, for each zone will be
changing and- and you know, in some instances,we'll be becoming more generous in that
more,uh, density can be used. But in answer to your kinda underlying question, I think
that no- I don't think we can require it in every instance, I think it needs to be on a
voluntary basis.
Dunn: Okay. Thank you. All right. I promise on getting to the end of- end of my comments here,
I just wanted to get some of those questions answered fust. Um, so the final two things I
want to discuss are,um,the economics of- of this proposal and the whole question that
we have before us,this whole problem of affordable housing,um, and a discussion of- of
public involvement. I think the discussion of public involvement is going to be a little bit
easier to address, so I'm going to start with that. Um, I- I certainly understand the
frustrations all around,uh,that we're-that we're dealing with. Likely frustration from
staff,uh,who-who feel,um, and can demonstrate that public,uh, involvement has been a
part of this policy development process nearly the entire way,uh, as well as members of
the community who feel,um,that they have not been included in this process. I
understand how,um,the thinking for all of those-those separate groups,um, comes to
be. That being said, I think that,um,public engagement,uh, is something that needs to
be,uh,very deliberate,uh, for things,uh, like what we do here in- in government. It
needs to be,uh, a governance prerogative and priority. Uh, so that being said, I think that,
um,you know, it may have been better if- if we were to have,uh, included,uh,
neighborhood associations towards the very end. Um, I can understand how-how people
get- get frustrated,um,you know,having been involved with the process,um, in some
cases, I think,you know for three- for between 3-5 years prior,that-that got us to where
we are today. Um, if people don't have a consistent reminder of what's going on, it's- it's
very easy, especially at this level of government,uh,to become disengaged,to become
uninformed,uh,with-with the progress,uh, and- and the work that is going on. So,um, I
think that what I would like to see in the future is just a bit of a more,um, deliberate,uh,
active engagement at every step in the process. Um, and I was thinking,uh,while this
conversation was going on as to how that would look because at fust, I didn't really
know. Um, I didn't really have any idea what staff could have done different aside from,
you know, doing everything in public and-uh and making sure that,you know,
everything was-was kosher in that regard. Um,but I- I did eventually come to the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 32
conclusion that,um, a lot of the concerns seem to come from, going- going to an official
body before, or pardon me, let me think about this. Going to an official body for,uh,
asking for public input in the final step. That- that seems to be to me where a lot of this
public discontent comes from. Staff proposed the changes to the Planning and Zoning
Commission and subsequently the Council. But the public was not aware before the
meetings and proposals about,um,what exactly the specifics were. I would just say that
in the future, it might be good for us to experiment with some ways that we can get
neighborhood associations and other people more actively engaged in that as early in the
process as possible. Because we can and reasonably should assume that public
consciousness will drift and degrade over time. That being said, I don't want to-none of
this should be considered a denigration of the immense work that the staff has-has done.
The immense important and really great work that staff has done to have public
engagement in this context. Um, I think that that should be,um, commended. I think that
this should also be a potential learning opportunity for how we can avoid these things in
the future. And this is just one guy's idea. I don't know everything. This was just how I
was thinking about how we could solve this conflict in the future. The last part of my
comments regards economics,um, and I think it's really the most difficult thing that we
struggle with in- in this community. Because really,no matter what happens tonight,
whether it's approved or denied or deferred,the impacts are going to take a very long
time for our community, our staff, our economists,to actually be able to quantify them.
Development takes a long time-building a building takes a long time. Uh, and at the
same time, Iowa City struggles with-with an immense deficit uh in housing units. It is
hard for me to believe that this change alone is going to make a significant dent,uh, in
our deficit of housing units,which is a major contributing factor,not the only
contributing factor,but a major contributing factor to our communities affordable
housing crisis. Uh,that being said,not making a huge dent is not an excuse for not trying
um and trying to move in the right direction. Um, I believe based on what we've heard
here today that,um, City staff and the other fellow Councilors are working with the best
of intentions and working with the communitues oocketbooks is really what we're talking
about here,you know, affordable housing in mind. And I- I think that this is going to
move us in the right direction. But I would also like to see,um, more action on affordable
housing. Of course,we need to make more investments. Um, all this is to say,uh, it's
going to take a long time for us to understand the impact of this policy. And I think that
um,that is going to be very frustrating,both to Councilors,to members of the
community,um,but it also gives us time for- for transition if there are any changes that
people see in their neighborhoods. It allows us to-to react to those changes, as well as
address any problems that arise as they come. So policymaking is an ongoing, eternal
process. Engagement is something that is an ongoing and internal process. And as I
believe we're about to pass this tonight, and I believe that we should. I- I would
encourage the folks in the audience that have been frustrated by this process or who
maybe disagree with the premise that it operates on,to stay involved,um,to continue
sharing your thoughts with the Council,with Planning staff,with the City Manager's
office. And also let us know in real time what you see. We can't be on every street corner,
we can't every single development in this community. Um,that being said,the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 33
information is still important and you're involved. So I will be supporting this, I believe.
Yeah, sorry things were a little bit messy and- and drawn out.
Thomas: I'll make a few comments,um. This is a very-very interesting in that I'm- in- in
complete support of the idea of applying missing middle in Iowa City. In fact, I believe I
was the fust person at one of these Commission-Council meetings to bring up the idea of
missing middle back when I was on Planning and Zoning. I've been familiar with the
concept for a long time and I've been looking forward to how can we apply this notion of
what I'd like to think of as the next increment. In fact,that's what I campaigned on in
2015 was development at the next increment,which is in effect what missing middle is.
Um,but what I've been frustrated by, on this- on this particular application is what seems
to be a failure to acknowledge the-the pressures within the University Impact Zone,
which creates a distinct market quite different than the rest of Iowa City. There was some
reference- staff made some reference to this being consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. Well, the Central District Plan which was adopted in 2007, spoke very specifically
about the concerns with the balance between short and long term residents. Because it is
unique to the Central District. It's been an issue that has plagued the Central District for
decades. And it's not something, as Andrew said,that happens overnight. Um,when I
arrived here in 2010,the District C Representative,Mike Wright referred to this
phenomenon as the death of 1,000 cuts. It's one house at a time over decades. One house
after another, after another.Nancy's photographs and- and graph on the buildings that
have been impacted in her neighborhood,that-that occurs over time. It's not something
that happens in a short period,but there's an inevitability to it because of the economics.
Student rentals are rented by the person. They are an aggregate rent. There is no way that
a conventional household can compete with a student rental because it's aggregating the
rents of each occupant,which far exceeds what is typically affordable to a conventional
household. So there-there's an inherent economic challenge there that has resulted over
time, and we haven't talked about the percentages that apply. Where are we with respect
to this imbalance? It's people in the central neighborhoods who look at the NDS annual
report because it gives some percentages in the different areas of the central district. And
they vary. But to the northernmost central district neighborhoods,the single-family
duplex percentage of rental is over 50%. If you include the apartment buildings, it's
probably 70-80%. The center, College Hill areas in the single-family duplex are around
60% and again,you'd add on to that the apartment buildings. When you get down into the
Bowery,the-the number of single-family duplex units that are rentals is 70%. So that's
the reality on the ground. And the question in my mind is as Nancy noted, it's clear what
the target of any increase in density now,whether we call it an up zoning or not, it is
significant increase in density, if you- if you can allow single-family property to go from
one dwelling to three,which is in effect what we're talking about,that's a tripling in
density. Again, add- do the math on each person living on that property what that can
result in in terms of rent. So- so the question in my mind is how do we-how do we insist
that the-the-this change to the code will result in affordable housing because if it's- if it's
simply left to market forces,market forces are driven by profit. There is no profit in
affordable housing. The profit is in finding how you can get the most rent. And so there's-
there's a natural gravitation toward the center of Iowa City because there's no-no real
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 34
estate market more lucrative than in the central area of Iowa City. So that's the area of
concern, I think that's what I kept hearing tonight was yes, if you look at the rest of Iowa
City,what kind of activity are we expecting?Looking at Minneapolis,they did away with
so called,they did away with their single-family zoning, and there really wasn't much
activity that it generated except near the University of Minnesota. So I- I think when I
heard that, I thought,well,that's- that's kinds of what I'm sensing is the money to be
made from increasing densities on single-family properties is going to be in the center of
town.You know,that's my concern. You know,we have three readings. Uh, I certainly
hope we can sort this out because uh,my sense, and I know there are others in the
audience and- and elsewhere who-who live in the central neighborhoods and are
concerned that this could, again, over time, do considerable damage to the center of Iowa
City,uh,which is the center of Iowa City. The image of Iowa City is, I- I would argue,
conveyed by the central neighborhoods,the downtown,the University,that's-that's what
Iowa City is uh, in terms of its public image. And it's important how we manage it. Uh, I
do find it interesting you know, in terms of these pressures,uh,that-that apply to this
area. The-the City Council just approved uh,the purchase of a property on the corner of
Lynn and Washington for $4.5 million. Why did they do that?Why did we do that?We
did it because of the student housing market pressures. One piece of property, four and a
half million dollars. I agreed with it because that's an important corner in terms of
strategic planning in the downtown. If that site where the City Hall used to be becomes a
student high rise,how does that reflect on the downtown?Um, so I supported it. I think
we,we need to find a better use for that property,but that's a reflection of the pressures
that we're talking about. And you know, I certainly hope we can find a way forward.
Because if not,uh,the death of 1,000 cuts that Mike Wright talked about 10 years ago or
more uh,will continue in the central neighborhoods.
Taylor: I uh, echo my fellow Councilors and commend the staff uh, for all the work that you put
into uh,this document. It was obvious, it took a lot of thought,uh, and you have the right
idea with the purpose and mission to improve housing choice, increase housing supply,
and encourage housing affordability. Uh, I'd like to see a little bit stronger language than
encourage. I think incentivization can,uh, can lead to more affordable housing with
bonuses and such. And I think more than height or the parking requirement, I think there
needs to be a little more thought on that process. Uh,my-my real point is that we really
need to get this right,we need to get zoning right,uh,we have to avoid any pitfalls that
might come along. Danielle,herself, said that uh,you can't be 100% sure of the future,
and that's-that's really true. We don't know what's going to happen, or we,we can't
predict. Uh,but I think another point was that,uh, I think Andrew uh,Dunn stated,uh,he
wanted more of a deliberate engagement. And that's obvious by the number of folks that
came to speak before us about, and feel really strongly about this issue, and wish that
they would have had a little more public engagement about this. And that,uh,might truly
have avoided some of these questions and concerns. If they'd been involved,they
could've raised this all along rather than now when this item is before us. Uh, so that's all
I have to say.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 35
Bergus: I'm hearing a lot of different things tonight, so just trying to kind of process it all. I
think,uh,what I want to comment on is thanking everyone who's been involved in the
process. And just reiterating that you know,this moment and this meeting is really
important,public engagement.No matter how the votes,this is the process that we
currently have. And we're all,we're hearing you, and we're seeing you, and we're
understanding the effort and time and energy that you put into being here tonight and not
planning and zoning. Uh, I just want to respond a little bit also along those lines relating
to the democratic process and what Mayor Throckmorton said about that. Because I think
in our city and at this level of government,we have really accessible experts. We have
members of staff who,uh,you know,their contact information is readily available. All of
us are readily available. And I don't want people who work 70 or 80 hours a week to have
to know the details of technical changes to the zoning code. I think the,the reason that
we're here and the reason that we have these processes that have been going on for years-
-and I- I echo what Senator Weiner said about you know,what we've been talking about
implementing this last piece of that 2016 plan longer than I've been on Council and I
remember those conversations. So I think for those who are engaging now and thinking
about or feeling that it's too late,you know,kind of part of the process. Our obligation as
representatives of the entire community is to take those plans and to take those
recommendations and to implement them in the way that we believe is best for the
entirety of the community. And that may mean,you know,taking-that may mean not
knowing what's going to happen in the future. That may mean taking some chance to
implement what really are not drastic changes,but changes that incrementally could
move us towards enabling a little bit more supply. And I, I agree with Councilor Dunn in
that,you know,uh,having it not be sort of guaranteed to fix the issue is not a reason not
to do it. We know that affordability is a very complex problem. We also know that
increasing density and having compact neighborhoods with diverse housing types is right
there in our Strategic Plan. We know that climate action is one of the lenses through
which we have to make every single decision. And that infill development is one of the
most responsible ways we can develop when it comes to our responsibility to try and
protect uh,the environment and our climate. Uh, it doesn't require you know, additional
streets being laid, it's not more miles of, of water mains, it doesn't require additional
buses. Establishing a little bit more supply in existing neighborhoods is a well understood
time honored way of incrementally addressing some of these issues that we have
committed to trying to address. And I just- I want to really urge us to consider the fact
that inaction is a choice that has consequences. Slowing down a process to provide for
more engagement can be fruitful and it can directly impact the people who are missing
out right now,the,the tens of thousands of housing units that we know we are short in
Johnson County. Every month that we delay in allowing or enabling some incremental
increase in supply,we're widening that gap. Every month that we delay,we are saying to
those who can't find a home or can't find an affordable home, or can't you know, live in
the neighborhood that they want to live in,you just need to wait. And I'm an un-
unwilling to do that. I think we really do need to act with urgency. And this is a very
carefully crafted,well thought out uh,proposal that,that has been vetted and discussed
for, for a very good amount of time. So I- I do just want to acknowledge that,you know,
we shouldn't have the expectation that every person in the community fully understands
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 36
at the level of our planning staff or of the elected officials even,you know,what,what
the impacts of something could be down the road before we can make a decision on it.
And I think we have an obligation to consider the entirety when we're making a decision
like this. And that may mean we go with something that we think is 85% awesome
instead of 100% awesome. And that means 15% of people might be really upset,but that
is the balance that we're tasked with deciding. So that's why I'm in favor of uh,this
proposal this evening.
Harmsen: You go first.
Teague: I want to uh, say thanks to everyone for being here tonight, and of course,thanks to the
staff,thanks to P&Z,the-my fellow Councilors. As I think about this,uh, I was elected
in 2018 and I was asked,what are you going to put on your cowboy cards?What are the
three things that you're going to do?And of course, I knew what others have said and
done, and I wanted to do something different. What what I realized was affordable
housing, transit, and climate action were the things that were necessary in our
community. And so I went with what I saw other people go with knowing that that was
really what we needed to do. And today, again,we're in 2023 and we are still trying to
figure out affordable housing supply because we have a deficit for people to live here. I
talk to people all the time that live in our neighboring communities that would love to be
here in Iowa City,but they can't afford it. Or,you know,we went to do- every
community at one point went through uh, a low supply at one point and we've rebounded
from that to a certain degree, except we still have uh, a huge deficit of uh,really
affordable housing as well as uh, supply. Uh,the missing middle is something that I
learned once uh, I got my cowboy cars together. And I learned about the missing middle
and what that really means for our community. Ah and for me, it means diversity. It
means having uh, folks with lower income,persons with disabilities, students, elderly
families, individuals. So when I think of this opportunity before us, it is not perfect.
We're going to,you know,try something that I hope this Council would agree to vote for,
that will give us more opportunities to really-to live out our Strategic Plan. All the work
that people have been doing for years. There's some affordable gurus out there that have
really invested their time by attending meetings,talking about the need. And so today,
I'm going to support this. I- I do understand that,um,there's individuals that may not- and
I do understand,you know,kind of some of the areas of the University zoned where there
is an increase of student housing. This is a reality. It's not made up. It is- is a reality. The
City tried to address it a couple of years ago, and we know how that turned out. But we
have a huge need in our community that we have to do something. So I'm going to take a
step and go this route and just believe that it will make a big difference in allowing
people to live in our community where they want to be. And many people want to be
here. I say it all the time. Um,when I moved from Chicago, I lived in Coralville,but I
continued to say my address was in Iowa City. And I did everything possible to get back
to Iowa City. So I'm going to vote for this tonight. And I believe that, um, as we move
forward with this,there will be opportunities to tweak it should that need arise. So it's not
a once and done. As the years go on, far beyond my being on this Council, future
Councils will be able to review this. So I'm going to support this tonight.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 37
Harmsen: Thank you. I don't want to repeat too much of what other people have said,uh, except
I do want to repeat the gratitude to everyone involved in this process. Um, members of
the public coming out and speaking from a variety of different perspectives is always
very important. In addition to the many emails that we've received. And I've,uh,you
know,not only spent time reading through all of the other documents,but also as many
emails that had come to me by this weekend as I was prepping for this meeting. Um,
those are read and- and taken into consideration. Also,thank you to staff. One of the
things about this that even when I was running for office two years ago,the idea of
getting at some of these zoning issues,with something that--because I'm kind of a wonky
nerd--kind of was something that was appealing to me and I talked about then. Because,
uh, I am aware of some of the historic issues that were brought up here tonight.
Affordable housing is one of them,but also the way that zoning codes over the last
century have caused de facto segregation in our neighborhoods. So the-the idea that we-
the staff has taken the direction of this Council,that predates my time on the Council and
includes some of the people who are here speaking tonight to take all of what we've been
doing since 2016 and coming up with some proposals. Much gratitude for that because I-
I really appreciate that we are having this discussion if for no other reason than because
these are vitally important issues on multiple levels. So- so I appreciate that we are-we
are at a place where we were talking about this. Um, one of the other things I wanted to
mention,uh,that-that one of my fellow Council,just kind of-that's in a different
territory--also, I actually do feel very- I share some of the concerns about things like
predatory investing and out of state, out of community sorts of groups that come in and
buy up property--something that's had an impact on my own family as some of you,uh,
some of you know. Um, so that is a very real problem. The thing is,though, I'm not sure
that by-well, and I know that by not approving this zoning,we will not be preventing
that from happening. It's already happening. So trying to weigh out like what will be
gained by blocking this zoning in order to get at those people who I also don't have any
love for. That's probably about the nicest way I can say that. Um, and also,keeping in
mind that- so we talk about what's going to come,there is, I think, a risk. By considering
what might happen with this, I think we also have to understand the harm caused by the
status quo. And I think that is something too that weighs into my decision-making
process. And I think that's kind of a- sort of a recap of what some of the other Councilors
had said. My concern is also that we need to be taking steps, even if they aren't big steps,
which I think depending on who you ask,this is either going to be a major change or a
minor change and whether or not that's a good or bad thing, depends on who you talk to
as well. But I think it's important as part of what we move forward. And then the final
piece,um, for me that makes me feel like moving this forward makes sense, is also
because of the time frame involved. There is time to react to things, change,things
modify as we go. You know, one possibility is we'll do this and it'll be a giant thud. Like
it may not change a whole lot right up front or immediately. On the other hand,we might
see some of that infill development which all of the things that were mentioned earlier
about,you know,the reasons why infill is so good. And not only will this be important
for infill, but also for future green space development,where we see,um,you know,new
places being developed and maybe being developed from the very beginning with this
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 38
greater density,which will make those developments more affordable in the long term for
our community,because we will be serving more population,more population density.
So there's a lot of advantages,possible advantages,with this. So that's why I'll be
supporting this fust reading of this tonight.
2. Consider an Ordinance(First consideration)
Teague: If no other comments,we're going to go to roll call,please. (Roll Call)Motion passes 5-
2. Could I get a motion to accept correspondence?
Bergus: So moved. Bergus.
Teague: Moved by Bergus.
Thomas: Second, Thomas.
Teague: Seconded by Thomas. All in favor say aye. (Voice Vote)Aye. Any opposed?Motion
passes 7-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 39
9.b.Rezoning—715 N.Dodge Street—Local Historic Landmark—Ordinance
rezoning property located at 715 N.Dodge Street from Medium Density Single-
Family Residential with a Historic District Overlay (OHD/RS-8)to OHD/RS-8 in
order to designate the property as an Iowa City Historic Landmark. (REZ23-0006)
Teague: 9.b.,Rezoning - 715 North Dodge Street-Local Historic Landmark- Ordinance
rezoning property located at 715 North Dodge Street, from Medium Density Single-
Family Residential with a Historic District Overlay (OHD/RS-8)to OHD/RS-8 in order
to designate the property as an Iowa City Historic Landmark. I'm going to open the
public hearing and welcome,Danielle.
1.Public Hearing:
Sitzman: Thank you,Mr. Mayor. As you said,this is a rezoning case. It is to designate 715 North
Dodge Street as a local historic landmark. In an effort to tell a more complete history of
Iowa City and in conjunction with the 50-year anniversary of the forming of the Emma
Goldman Clinic, former Historic Preservation Commission Chair Kevin Boyden,
representatives of the Emma Goldman Clinic proposed local landmark designation for
this property. City staff contacted the owners of the property,who have voluntarily
requested this rezoning to be designated as an Iowa City Historic Landmark. The basic
purpose of a landmark historic designation is to ensure the preservation of historic
resources and require historic review for exterior modifications. Just a little quick
refresher. There are such things as historic districts which are adopted for a larger
geography than a single property, landmark rezoning allow us to have the flexibility to
designate individual properties where appropriate. In this case,the property is already in
a historic district, and so it's already protected largely from the changes that might have
come if it were not. This is just an escalation of the recognition of this particular property.
The subject property is a gable front house with craftsman-style detailing,built 1920-
1926. The house was designated as a key contributing property, and as I mentioned, it is
located in the Brown Street Historic District. The Brown Street Historic District was
established in 1994 through the assignment of an overlay district, a zoning overlay
district,to the area on top of the base zoning district,which is medium density single-
family or RS-8. Um, as a result of the historic district rezoning in 1994,the building has
been-has been required to go through Historic-the Historic Preservation Commission for
an approval of significant changes to the exterior of the building. The rezoning at that
time also made the property eligible for special exceptions granted by the Board of
Adjustment for waivers and modifications to historic properties to help support their
continued relevance and use and- and also makes them eligible for grants and funds
through the federal programs and the city programs. Landmark status requires the same
review and carries the same opportunities. In 1973, following the landmark US Supreme
Court ruling,Roe versus Wade, a group of young women formed the Emma Goldman
Clinic to provide feminist healthcare. They formed this clinic in a neighborhood house to
provide a new kind of healthcare. One that was welcoming, and unlike traditional
medical offices of the day. As they expanded,they acquired the home next door and then
expanded to the-to the location on North Dubuque Street. The role of the Historic
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 40
Preservation Commission is to conduct a public hearing to review and evaluate the
historic significance of the property. The Historic Preservation Commission did
determine that the property is significant for its role in local feminist history and women's
healthcare as the location of the founding of the Emma Goldman Clinic. That it is an
intact example of craftsman detailed house from the 1920s and therefore meets the
criteria for a landmark designation. As I mentioned, landmark designation is a type of
zoning overlay and requires a recommendation also from the Planning and Zoning
Commission to you. The Commission's role is to review the proposed designation based
on its relation to the Comprehensive Plan. As the historic preservation component of the
Comprehensive Plan does call for identification of resources significant to Iowa City's
past,with the objective of designating individual buildings as landmark,the Planning
Commission has reviewed the historic landmark designation zoning, and found that it is
consistent with our Comprehensive Plan for those goals. As far as the development
history, or the land development process for this property, as I mentioned, it already has
been in a designated historic district, and subject to those regulations,this is simply a
rezoning to the same overlay designation,but for landmark designation. So based on the
applicable review criteria, staff did recommend designation as a landmark to the Historic
Preservation and Planning and Zoning Commission. Both bodies have recommended that
to you this evening. The Planning and Zoning Commission,most recently, at their August
16th meeting, found that it met the proposed rezoning standards for the Comprehensive
Plan and has forwarded this unanimously, 7-0. That concludes staff report.
Teague: Great. Any questions?All right. Thank you. Anyone from the public like to address this
topic?Welcome.
Boyd: Good to be here.
Teague: Yes.
Boyd: Hello. I'm Kevin Boyd,the former chair of the Historic Preservation Commission. At my
last meeting in June I gave my going away statement to the rest of the Commission. I was
talking about the importance of telling a more full history of Iowa City and making sure
that what we preserve and share about our history reflects our values in our community.
Um, one of the historic preservation work plans-plan goals is identifying opportunities to
highlight Iowa City's history as a leader on social justice,racial equality and human
rights, and preserve the stories and structures that help define that history. This
nomination fits that objective. It was a project that got started before I left the
Commission. It's an opportunity to add uniquely Iowa City story. The story of these
founders radical college aged feminist bad asses,who 50 years ago this month had just
opened the Emma Goldman Clinic for women to try to shift the power dynamic in health
care. As I re-researched the history of the Emma Goldman Clinic, ah, for this project, I
was really in awe what these founders were able to accomplish together and how radical
it really was, and- and yet how relevant it is for the fight, ah, of women's health care
remains today. The founders story, along with the property at 715 North Dodge,which is
now a residential home, again, is so much part of that history, it deserves to be among the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 41
properties listed on the list of Iowa City local landmarks. And I urge you to support this
landmark nomination. I also want to thank the property owners,Jennifer and Benton, for
their open mindedness and support of sharing their property history. Thank you.
Teague: Thank you. Anyone else like to address this topic?Welcome again.
Kubby: Hi,my name is Karen Kubby, I live in Iowa City and I hope that you will support this
designation with some enthusiasm. So the Emma Goldman Clinic is not only a historic-
of historic significance locally,but nationally. The clinic just celebrated its 50th
anniversary and through I- I've been involved with the clinic for one way or another for
40 years. And when I have gone to other communities or gone to conferences of other
reproductive healthcare providers, and they knew that I worked at the Emma Goldman
Clinic,they just had all these stories to tell about staff who had been trained at the Emma
Goldman Clinic,moved to Seattle,moved to Mesa,Arizona, and worked at a clinic. And
what they brought from-brought the Emma way we call it,to other communities. And it
is a nationally known clinic and it- it is a revered clinic. And so we're not only
recognizing the local historic value,but the national value. So please say yes. Thanks.
Teague: Thank you. Mayor Bailey, good to see you.
Bailey: Good evening. Um, I want to echo what Karen and Kevin have said. It was pointed out
by staff that this is important to local feminist history,but feminist history isn't history
with an Asterix. It's our history. It's everybody's history. And so by recognizing this as a
local landmark,we are acknowledging that social justice theme. We are acknowledging
the national-,um,the national reputation that the clinic has developed over those 50
years, and we are noting that it started here and it's our history, and we want to,we're
proud of it. So I urge you to vote yes.
Teague: And please state your name and city for the record.
Bailey: Oh,Regenia Bailey, Iowa City.
Teague: Thank you. Anyone else would like to address this topic? Seeing no one,before I close
the public hearing, I want to just check in with Council to see if you're inclined to support
P and Z. Okay. All right. And I'm going to close the public hearing.
1. Consider an Ordinance(First Consideration)
Teague: Can I get a motion to give fust consideration,please?
Taylor: So moved Taylor.
Bergus: Second Bergus.
Teague: Council discussion.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 42
Taylor: All I can say is how can we say no. I- I'm very much in favor of this and I'm very happy
to see this.
Thomas: Yeah,me too. Thanks for everyone's who work on this.
Harmsen: I think this is a landmark recognizing those who not only believe that women deserve
full medical access in including reproductive care,but they did something about it which
is always near and dear to my heart. Um,proud of this herit-heritage in our community,
and to honor what Kevin called those bad ass women. So right on.
Bergus: I think it's so important to elevate not just this, ah, structure but the-the history behind it.
And thank you so much for reminding us that it was a group of young women who came
together and were able to make such radical, significant change. That's such a good
lesson for us to remember.
Harmsen: It's a great time to do it.
Bergus: Yeah.
Teague: So I'm going to get excited. This is exciting. Um, it was great to see Deborah Nye, one
of the founders, letter in support of this. And this oftentimes,when we get a local historic
landmark,um, sometimes the owners aren't or neighbors aren't always in agreement,but
this owner of this property is in agreement. So this even makes it extra special that they
would acknowledge and,um, allow their home to be historic. Um, and in 50 years,that's
kind of the perfect the milestone to mark this designation. So I'll be supporting it.
Dunn: I'm not going to beat a dead horse. There's no other Right vote,but yes.
Teague: Roll call,please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 6-0. Could I get a motion to give to accept
correspondence?
Taylor: So moved Taylor.
Second, Thomas.
Teague: All in favor say aye. (Voice Vote). Aye. Any opposed?Motion passes 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 43
10.Regular Formal Agenda
10.a. Utility Rate Public Hearing- Ordinance amending Title 3,entitled "Finance,
Taxation and fees," Chapter 4,entitled"Schedule of Fees,Rates,Charges,Bonds,
Fines and Penalties",of the City Code to increase or change charges and fees. (First
consideration:
Teague: Item number 10.a. Utility Rate Public Hearing - Ordinance, amending Title 3, entitled
"Finance, Taxation and Fees,", Chapter 4, entitled "Schedule of Fees,Rates, Charges,
Bonds,Fines and Penalties", of the City Code to increase or change charges and fees. I'm
going to open the public hearing.
1. Public Hearing
Teague: Welcome.
Davies: Good evening,Mayor and Council. This one's a pretty easy much easier than the last
couple. Ah,this is just clean up of a couple of code items that came to our attention as we
were implementing the beginning of the year. First being when the carting fee was
removed in 2020 and the late fee was increased from 5-10%. It was changed in the water
rate section. It came to our attention that it's also the same exact language is in two other
places and it was not updated to the 10% in those. So the fust item is to change that to
10% in those two places. The second is the minimum tipping fee was raised to $14 at 300
pounds,while,the regular tipping fee is $45 a ton. So to get that to work out with the
minimum fee that we need to increase that 300 pounds to 600 pounds to align with that
minimum. So like I said,just two kind of clean up items with the code. Any questions.
Teague: Hearing none. Thank you. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no
one in person or online, I'm going to close the public hearing.
2. Consider an Ordinance(First Consideration)
Teague: Could I give a motion to give fust consideration?
Bergus: So moved Bergus.
Harmsen: Second,Harmsen.
Teague: All right. And Council discussion. I think it's pretty straightforward. Clean up. All right.
Roll call, please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 44
10.b. FY24 Budget Amendment Public Hearing—City budget amendment and
certification resolution—FY 2024—Amendment 91.
Teague: Item 10.b.,Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Amendment Public Hearing - City budget
amendment and certification resolution -Fiscal Year 2024 -Amendment#1.And I'm
going to open the public hearing and welcome again,Nicole
1.Public Hearing
Davies: I'm back. Okay. So this is our fust budget amendment for FY24. The original budget
was approved April 4, it started July 1,runs through June 30. Our City policy allows for
amendments in the following situations: emergent, transfer from contingencies,
expenditures with offsetting revenues, or carry-over of prior year budget authority. And
we can amend anytime in the fiscal year other than the last 30 days. Uh,typically,we've
averaged three amendments a year,um, one right about this time, one in the spring with
the budget, and then two,usually early summer,which is really May. Um, with the new
property tax legislation,we won't be approving the budget until April, so we probably
will just have this amendment and the amendment with the budget unless there's
something that comes up that would require us to amend in April and turn around and
amend again in May. I don't foresee that,but it's possible. Um, and then, like I said,the
next planned amendment will be with the FY25 budget process which will be approved in
April of`24. So this fust budget amendment is mostly carry forwards. Um,these are
submitted by the departments,reviewed by the City Manager's Office and the Finance
Department. The budget policies that carry forward must be $5,000 or 1% of the budget.
Um, and then a lot of the- a lot of the carry forwards are capital improvement um,
projects. Um,the CIP tends to align more with the calendar year than the fiscal year,
which is why we see a lot of carry-over there, and then just a few miscellaneous items of
things that we need to amend into the budget. So the revenues,uh,the largest increases is
the intergovernmental revenues. And again this is mostly state and federal grants that's
from the CIP carry forwards. Um,the couple other big things--the other financing
sources--uh,447 is just carrying forward,uh, sales proceeds from University and South
District homes, and then miscellaneous is mostly contributions and grants. As far as the
expenditures,the largest again,the capital-the governmental capital projects of 36
million. Um, some of the major projects that we're carrying forward some funding are the
Rochester Avenue construction,the Gilbert Street Bridge replacement, and then the
Senior Center building improvements. Um, and then also with the business type and
enterprises, about 24.5 million. Again,that's mostly made up some major CIP projects
including the Rohret South sewer and the new landfill cell. And then also with
community and economic development,we're still carrying forward um, some of the
CDBG home and then a lot of ARPA dollars still. And then one of the additional
expenditures with the Southland Street purchase that has been referenced earlier today.
So again,the fust budget amendment--he overall impact is a decrease to fund balance of
about 74 million and it's covered through either excess fund balances and bonds. It will
not affect the property tax levy. Any questions?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 45
Bergus: I have a couple of questions. Um,Nicole, so the-you gave the three reasons why the
budget can be amended and it sounds like these are all within the expenditures with an
offset that are in fund balances. Is that how you would classify them?
Davies: I would say 90% is carry forward.
Begus: Okay.
Davies: Um-then of the stuff that's being added,most of it is offsetting um, or we're using fund
balance.
Bergus: Okay. I was just wondering how do we get a $74 million reduction in fund balances
when it's-
Davies: Because it's mostly carry forwards.
Bergus: Okay. Okay. Maybe we can go on.
Davies: It's mostly CIP projects too.
Bergus: Yeah. Yeah.
Davies: Where we already have the bond proceeds but we haven't spent the dollars.
Bergus: Okay. So the money is just sitting there. So it's not- it's not like you're spending down a
fund balance unexpectedly, it's just that...
Davies: Right. It was budgeted in prior years, it just hasn't been used yet.
Bergus: Okay. And then my other question was the $5,000 minimum, did you say for carry
forwards? Is that per division?
Davies: Yep.
Bergus: Okay. So if a- if a particular division had multiple smaller items,they could aggregate
that?
Davies:No, it's per item.
Bergus: Okay. There's just a couple of items that are below $5,000 in the detail list.
Davies: Oh, it could be too, if there's a purchase that was already started that just hasn't
completed,which we've definitely ran into more recently than we have in the past,right?
With supply chain issues. Something that we-we normally have in a month or two is
taking 6-8 months. So-
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 46
Bergus: Okay.
Davies: - if a purchase was already started,we would carry that forward too.
Bergus: It's just passed that July 1st date, is that what you mean?
Davies: Right,but it was just received probably in July or possibly early August.
Bergus: Okay. Thank you.
Davies: Yep.
Teague: Any other questions? There are none. Thank you. Anyone from the public like to
address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online, I'm going to close the public
hearing.
2. Consider a Resolution
Teague: Could I get a motion to approve,please?
Thomas: So moved, Thomas.
Harmsen: Second,Harmsen.
Teague: Council discussion.
Bergus: So the other, a few meetings ago,Mayor Pro Tem Alter threw out this idea of a protest
vote. So I'm just going to let you all know that I will be voting against this. I had some
questions for our City Manager before the meeting relating to the about a half million
dollar increase that's shown in the public safety line. And I'm confident that the
amendment is going to be successful,but I'm just letting you all know that I'm uh,voting
consistent with the values that I articulated in- in the spring until I can get some better
clarification on that.
Teague: Roll call,please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 5-1. Could I get a motion to accept
correspondence?
Harmsen: So moved,Harmsen?
Thomas: Second, Thomas?
Teague: All in favor say aye. (Voice Vote)Any opposed?Motion passes 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 47
10.c.Discrimination against Section 8 Tenants—Ordinance amending Title 2,
entitled "Human Rights," Chapter 1,entitled"General Provisions,"to eliminate the
prohibition on landlords discriminating against Housing Choice Voucher(aka,
Section 8) holders. (Pass & Adopt)
Teague: Item 10.c. Discriminating against Section 8 Tenants - Ordinance amending Title 2,
entitled "Human Rights," Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions,"to eliminate the
prohibition on landlords discriminating against Housing Choice Voucher holders. Could I
get a motion to pass and adopt.
Dunn: So moved.
Harmsen: Second.
Teague: Moved by Dunn, seconded by Harmsen. And we'll get Eric Goers to our City Attorney.
Goers: Just very briefly, as a reminder, Council did a motion to amend from the floor last time
around at the second reading for this to allow for the protections Council has previously
offered to folks with federal housing choice vouchers for that protection to spring back
into place, should it either- should the State preemption either be repealed or a court
overturned that in any similar language. And so I've drafted language to that effect and
it's been included in the packet. And hopefully it achieves what Council will sought.
Teague: Any questions for Eric?Hearing none. Anyone from the public like to address this
topic? Seeing no one in person or online, Council discussion.
Taylor: Thank you,Eric, for doing that because I appreciated Councilor Dunn's comments and
concerns uh, about this shameful practice of- of landlords refusing to rent to Section 8
folks. So I- I was wondering what we could do making a statement, or what we could do
to reflect that, so that it doesn't get lost in the shuffle. So thank you.
Dunn: I would just say that I was also very happy with what the City Attorney was able to
produce with regard to our instructions. So, I think this is,you know, given the
circumstances,the-best possible thing that we can do.
Teague: All right. Roll call, please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 48
11. Council Appointments
1I.a.Housing& Community Development Commission—One vacancy to fill an
unexpired term,upon appointment—June 30,2025. (Jennifer Haylett resigned)
Teague: Item Number 11 is Council Appointments. So we have two appointments, and that is
Housing and Community Development Commission,um,which is l l.a.. There is one
vacancy to fill unexpired term upon appointment through June 30, 2025, and that has no
gender balance requirement. And then we have l lb.,which is our Parks and Recreation
Commission. One vacancy to fill unexpired term upon appointment through December
31, 2026. And that-that also has no gender requirement. And we'll start with housing and
community development. Um, anyone who has a suggestion?
Thomas: Well, I was looking at Saranya, I can't read my own writing here.
Teague: Subramanian.
Taylor: Yeah. Subramanian.
Teague: Any other nominations?Um, I- I can support her.
Teague: Yeah. All right. So I heard four, so we're good. All right. We're going to move on to the
next Commission nomination,which is for Parks and Rec., and there are, again,no
gender balances.
Dunn: I would support either sharing Sharon DeGraw or Caleb Recker.
Bergus: I had Caleb Recker as my top choice.
Teague: Okay. Any other nominations?
Thomas: Well, given what we've heard, I would support Sharon DeGraw.
Teague: Okay. Yeah. I mean, I can go with probably either one. I thought both-
Taylor: I- I was going to say that I have to go with almost all of them. I- I.
Teague: Yeah.
Taylor: I'd- I'd be agreeable to appoint any one of them there. So many of them and so many of
them had-had a great knowledge of boards and commissions and what it means to serve
on that. And a lot of years of experience in- in the city. And I know a couple of them that
I- I know Sandra Armbruste. I worked with for many years. She's very dedicated to
whatever she does. She's retired,has lot of time to do things,but any of them would-
would have been very good.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 49
Harmsen: Yeah, I agree. A lot of good candidates there, 14 candidates for those that don't- don't-
aren't looking at the packet,members of the public, so,you know, I think the two names
have been mentioned. You know, obviously, Sharon DeGraw comes with some
experience being on the History-History Commission and stuff like that. I think Caleb is
very interesting. I think as somebody has experience in working for the UI Rec services
brings kind of interesting, I'm kind of intrigued by that. I think that's kind of an
interesting connection to this-this whole topic. It might be kind of an interesting
perspective.
Teague: So are you.
Harmsen: I'm leaning Caleb. Yeah.
Teague: Okay. And I can support Caleb as well, so I think he has the majority. All right. Ready
for voting. So for a roll call for Housing and Community Development Commission
Appointing Saranya Sub- Subramanian and for the Parks and Recreation Commission
Sharon Degraw.
Harmsen:No, Caleb ecker.
Teague: Oh, I am- Caleb Recker.
Bergus: I'd make that motion.
Teague: All right.
Bergus: Is that what we're doing?Making a motion?
Teague: So moved by Bergus.
Dunn: Second.
Teague: Seconded by Dunn. Roll Call,please. (Roll Call) Motion passes 6-0.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 50
14. City Council Information
Teague: And we are at item Number 14,which is City Council information.
Taylor: Over the past week, I attended a number of gatherings that have really shown to me the
essence and importance of neighborhood cohesiveness in Iowa City that's so
characteristic of Iowa City. I just felt a sense of community in all the events that I went
to. Uh, a couple of them you were present at Mayor Teague. You spoke at uh,the,uh,
Successful Living anniversary party,block party. It was amazing. Twenty-five years of
Successful Living helping those peop-people out. And a number of people spoke on how
it's been helpful to them and it was just really a great event. Uh, then I attended North
Side Neighborhood Party. Thank you John for inviting me to that. That was uh, a lot of
great people that live in that neighborhood and it really showed the pride in-in their
neighborhood and their park and how they'd all sort of took the time to help develop that
park and help it be in uh, cohesiveness with-with the school there. So it was really,that
was a nice one. Uh, of course,the Miller Orchard uh,Neighborhood party uh,was great
too. Uh, and there was also an event that it wasn't more neighborhood, it was kind of a
community thing. They welcome festival that was held at Mercer Park. It was a focus on
immigrants and refugees. And there was a really large, I mean,there were a couple
hundred people that was very diverse group in- in ages and nationalities and just people
having a great time. Music and good food. And- and just a really nice event. So it was
just a week-weekend full of- of community which was great. It was good to see.
Thomas: I'll just add a couple of comments On the north side,uh, I think it was called the
neighborhood gathering. Uh, one it started raining while that event was going on and it
actually,people just hung in there. Um,we-we kind of embraced the weather,the rain,
and it made it all that much more memorable. And also you might, if you're in the
neighborhood,take a look at the-the new public artwork by Thomas Agran in the center
of the square. Um, it's a horizontal mural in the center- center point of the park,uh,which
is a pretty interesting piece. Like I encourage you to check it out.
Teague: I have a question. Is it raining now?
Bergus: I think so. I believe that's what that sound was.
Thomas: Right on cue. Yeah.
Teague: Yes. Um, I just wanted to mention that this week that Mayor Pro Tem and I, along with
Redmond,we're going to be at the Iowa League of Cities hosted in Cedar Rapids. And
then I know the Metro Coalition we have,they kind of combine their annual meetings
there as well. Other than that,this is Climate Fest week, so there's quite a few things
going on. And then the CPRB, they have their community forum October 3 at 5:30 which
will be located at the Public Library Room A.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 51
Bergus: Just two more events that I would highlight,um, on both on Saturday coming up the
Farmers Market this Saturday is the Kids Market. So that I think will be fun. All the
vendors, children vendors selling their things at the market and then the same day,but at
noon is the South of Six. So our South district SSMID community input session to help
develop the master plan. So that's happening in the South District Market, which is in that
building adjacent to the post office down in Pepperwood Plaza at noon on Saturday.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.
Page 52
15.Report on Items from City Staff
Teague: All right. We're going to go onto item Number 15 and that's report on items from our
city staff. We'll start with our City Manager's Office.
Fruin: Yeah. Real quick. I think a couple meetings ago Darian shared some preliminary fare-free
data with you. I thought I'd just provide a little bit more now that we've put the wraps on
um,August's data. That was the fust month of fare-free. So as Darian reported,the month
of August,year over year 22-23,we were 53%up system-wide in ridership. That is about
46,000 additional rides.That were provided. That's very significant amount. We actually
had three routes that were 70%up,which again, is just tremendous figures. We always
like to look at the cost per ride that it costs to provide the service. And with those
increased numbers,that cost per ride dropped 21% from August of 2022 to August of
2023. And then on the paratransit side,uh,we saw ridership increase about 26%which is
another fantastic statistic there. So we'll keep reporting that out as we continue to get
more data on the fare-free. But so far,very encouraging signs from that service level
enhancement.
Teague: Great.
Bergus: Awesome.
Teague: Our City Attorney.
Goers: Thank you.Nothing from me,Mayor.
Teague: And our City Clerk.
Grace:Nothing from me.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular
formal meeting of September 19, 2023.