Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-08-22 Transcription #2 Page 1 ITEM 2 CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED. Bailey: Move adoption. Champion: Move adoption. Wilburn: Moved by Bailey; seconded by Champion. Discussion? Roll call. Ordinarily this might be a spot where we have special presentations. There are none on the agenda, but I'm going use my discretion to make a special presentation. Every year the City recognizes employees for their longevity, and their dedication to the City ofIowa City, and the good work that goes on, and if you're the person in charge, you ordinarily don't have someone to do that for you, but we will do that with the Council. The City of Iowa City presents a certificate of recognition to Steven Atkins in appreciation of 20 years of service with the City of Iowa City. So, Steve, if you could come forward and accept this please. (applause) In all seriousness, Steve, we really appreciate your time and commitment. It's in some ways unprecedented, it's uncommon, that a City Manager stays in one community. . . Atkins: .. .last that long? (laughter) Wilburn: But thank you very much! Atkins: Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. --",."_..'-----~------,---_.~~--~-'----_.~-_.._- #3 ITEM 3 Wilburn: Walker: Page 2 COMMUNITY COMMENT (ITEMS NO ON THE AGENDA). If you wish to address the Council, please step to the mic, say your name, and please limit your comments to five minutes or less. Hello. I'm Jean Walker and I want to say something that I have timed, and if! read it, I can do it in five minutes. So, I'm the Melrose Neighborhood Representative and I'm here to talk about the Grand A venue roundabout and what we consider a serious lack of due process. I, as Melrose Representative, was an official part of the traffic study of the one-way system. The roundabout is a modification of the one-way system we developed in that study. However, I was not told of the roundabout plan. I happened to hear about it at a University Campus Planning Committee meeting. Brian Boelk, whose brainchild is the roundabout, apologized for the oversight, and forwarded me the plan. Since that time, I've conveyed the neighborhood's concerns and suggestions about the plan, both to the City and to the Council. These concerns have not been addressed and I have not been invited to any ofthe meetings, nor have I been copied any of the correspondence between the University and City officials on this topic. However, many University people reviewed the roundabout and the UI's consultant studied and endorsed it. Meanwhile, the City Council has had two working sessions where it first invited Brian to present the plan, and then last night, University personnel were invited to give their input and feedback to the City and the City Council. I was not invited to give our input and feedback, although the University student liaison to the Council was asked his opinion. In fact, the plan that Brian presented was modified from earlier plans I received from him, so we are not even being kept up to date of the plans. I also didn't learn about the artwork, which is being proposed for the center of the roundabout, until just before the August 1st Council meeting. The artwork is on the agenda for tonight's meeting, to consider a resolution approving the call for artists, but at last night's meeting, Brian Boelk suggested the topic might be deferred, partly for input from the University as to what they would like to have there. Once again, no mention of the neighborhood. Landscaping of the area is also under consideration by the University and the City. In spite of repeated efforts to have my neighborhood's concerns and suggestions discussed, they have not been discussed, but meanwhile the project has gained considerable momentum, during which time the University has, according to Ron Lehnertz, been working with Jeff Davidson and Brian Boelk, who has been working closely with UI staff. Mr. Lehnertz said that the University will continue to work with Brian and his staff. This momentum culminated in the Mayor asking the Council last night ifthere were four votes to support the project and four hands were raised. This without any consideration of the neighborhood. Should this momentum be allowed to override due process? I will repeat what I said at the Council meeting on August I st. The roundabout, which would This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. ____~~...._...__._______.___..._.____._._ __n_'_________..____',_.__ __"________. __,.~_________._~..___.__,,___...__.._____~_m________ #3 Wilburn: Dieterle: Page 3 cost $360,000, was proposed to overcome several perceived problems in the area. The neighborhood believes and has suggested several times that there are other ways to address these problems that would be less costly, and we think that these should be investigated before a commitment is made to spend the money on such a roundabout. After development, the two alternatives should be compared side-by-side in order to make the best decision for our City. On a larger issue, we are very concerned about the working relationship between the University and the City. I would remind the Council that a few years ago, the University expected the City to vacate Grand A venue Court because the University was building the Athletic Learning Center, and when it was built, that street would be too close to the building. That expectation was due to closed discussions between the City and the University. Dee Vanderhoef tried to have a traffic study done, before the street was vacated, but not only was it vacated, it was handed over to the University and a traffic study was allowed after the street was already handed over. What other business in Iowa City could get away with that? My exclusion from the University/City discussions and planning of the roundabout, even though I was an official part ofthe traffic study, appears to be another unfortunate example of a too-close relationship between the City and the University. Is the roundabout going to be built and then the City and University will contemplate the neighborhood suggestions and concerns? A final comment: I am disturbed that one of the Council members last night asked the University what their future plans were for Melrose Avenue and Grand Avenue. Aren't those City streets? It makes us wonder who is in charge of the city. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else care to address the Council, on items not on tonight's agenda? I am Caroline Dieterle and I haven't come to a meeting to speak to the Council since Ernie Lehman retired as Mayor, and the agenda appears to be different than it used to be, so I hope that I'm in order by talking to you very briefly about one of the last items on your agenda. I am assuming that Item 24, Executive Session, will be used in part to discuss the City's decision as to what to do about the recent decision by the Court against the City in the matter of the declaratory judgment that was sought by the City, regarding the proposed Charter amendments that the citizens petitioned for five years ago. And I am here to ask you to please simply put these amendments onto the ballot for the City of Iowa City to consider. It seems to me to be the fairest thing to do, and in a way as the Judge noted in his declaratory judgment, there's little to be gained by arguing about whether the amendments are legal or not, until we know whether they'd actually would pass. If you would put them on the ballot, there would be a lot of public discussion, I'm sure, and you would have ample time to explain to the citizenry why you think that it would be illegal or injurious to the City This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #3 Wilburn: Zumwalt: Page 4 government as it now stands to have a strengthened Police Review Board, a retention vote by the citizens for the City Manager and the Police Chief, and to have some say in the Police procedures, community policing. The last amendment, I think, is important because as you look across the land now, our civil rights are under a great deal of pressure and the last amendment that the citizens wanted to put into the Charter would in some measure restore some respect for the Fourth Amendment, protecting people against unreasonable search and seizure. I don't believe that any of these measures would harm City government as we know it. In fact, I think it would, they would strengthen City government because they would reassure the people that it was in fact possible to amend the Charter, that it was in fact possible to bring measures to the City Council and have them put on the ballot for public discussion, and to be voted up or down. It would also reassure the citizens that this Council still believes in the Democratic process. I followed the Charter Commission changes for the Charter and was distressed to find that even some people who consider themselves progressive voted in favor of removing zoning from the matters that can be considered by initiative and referendum, and at the end of the hearings, the Chairman of the Charter Commission told the citizens that if they did not like the Charter, they could petition to change it. That is exactly what we did. We have the right number of signatures. The Court has affirmed that we did it properly, and they have found in our favor in the declaratory judgment. It seems to me that the fairest thing you can do is now to allow people to please vote. Thank you very much. Thank you, and the Charter amendments are not on tonight's agenda. A, an Executive Session is not a matter on the agenda, so that was the appropriate time for you to make your comments. All right. Would anyone else care to address the Council on an item that is not on tonight's agenda? Good evening, Members of the City Council. I am Gordon Zumwalt with American Legion. I serve as Chaplain. The American Legion has a programs where we work for the betterment ofthe community and all persons in the community, for such as the senior citizens mainly, the handicapped, the veterans, and of course the general public. Here, oh about a year ago, I made up until here a month or so, a few months ago, I made appearances here and about putting in a bus service on the eastside of Scott Boulevard. I'm happy to say that we have it today. It's one of, that was my project, and it's just something that you won't believe the results of it. I had some things lined up here, but I think the best way is just to put it from the hip here. We had, as I say, when I had my first meeting with you, I started out, if you remember, that we are landlocked at the senior citizen, Regency Apartments. They can't go where they want to go to enjoy what you have made for them in Iowa City. So, tonight by golly, we're out in the ocean! We made it! We can go everywhere! I had This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. ---_._---,.._._---_.,.,-----_.__._-_._--_..~~-----_.-",._._-~-~.__._-----_._~----------,~.,--'-_..,-~_.._---....-.-..- ..._-_.._._---~--_.__.._~--_...._----~-'"--_..._,._---- #3 Page 5 a party the other day, attended the party that was supposed to be in my honor, but ended up I switched it over to you folks too, that... because you're the ones that was the big help on it, along with the people that signed the petitions and all this, and also there was one gentleman who was supposed to be here tonight that couldn't be, and he helped me immensely on it, and that was Mr. Matt Devray, and he was called out of town, otherwise he'd of been here. So, I believe that I can really culminate this whole thing and tell you the thanks that you've gotten in this way. The other day, I had a husband and wife - he was with a cane - come up to me and said, "Gordon, thank you. We went uptown to the Library." Another one, "We went shopping!" They couldn't of done that before, until you folks done your job. So, I think that that just about, the end of it there as far as how we've come along and everything, but we have one final thing to do here. If Mayor Wilburn will step forward, please. Wilburn: To do what? (laughter) Zumwalt: Mayor, the American Legion wishes to present to you the American Legion Community Service Award. It reads: presented to the City of Iowa City for their continued work in providing the best public transportation for senior citizens, persons disabled, and veterans and the general public." It's signed by Michael Hull, Post Commander, and myself as Post Chaplain. (applause) Wilburn: Thank you. Thanks for...and thank you for coming forward! Vanderhoef: Thank you. Yah, transportation! Bailey: Let's just go home now! O'Donnell: There should be more (unable to hear) in every community! (laughter) Champion: Or more parties! Wilburn: All right. Would anyone else care to address the Council on items not on tonight's agenda? Walker: If it's not too late I'd like to submit this as correspondence. Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. Correia: So moved. Bailey: So moved. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. -----~-_.~--_._-----_._.._-,_.,.._.,~-----_.~---~._~_.-_..~_.__._-_._..,--"_..._------_._.,_._-_._--._--,--- ---,-'"-~.._-_.~---,---_.__._~.._---~------- . #3 Page 6 Wilburn: Moved by Correia; seconded by Bailey. All those in favor say "aye." Opposed same sign. Carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #4 ITEM 4 Wilburn: Burns: Wilburn: Burns: Wilburn: Page 7 PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. e. CONDITIONALLY REZONING APPROXIMATELY 2.83 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4435/4455 MELROSE AVENUE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC (P-I) ZONE TO NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLlC/LOW DENSITY MUL TI-F AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL (P-lIRM-12) ZONE. (REZ06-00001) 1. PUBLIC HEARING (CONTINUED FROM 8/1) (pounds gavel) Public hearing is open. (pounds gavel) Public hearing is closed. Oh, okay, you can come forward. (pounds gavel) Public hearing is reopened. Sorry, I was a little slow. That's all right! Bob Burns, architect for the Melrose Ridge project. Ijust wanted to affirm that the Board of Supervisors has approved and signed the Conditional Zoning Agreement, so the project will be able to move ahead. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else to address the Council at the public hearing? (pounds gavel) Public hearing is closed. 2. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE (FIRST CONSIDERATION) (DEFERRED FROM 8/1) Correia: Well, I'd like to, urn, consider doing first and second reading ofthis tonight. There's some, there's been a lot of public.. . Wilburn: Can you make the motion so we can discuss it? Correia: Oh, okay. O'Donnell: Second. Wilburn: Been moved by Correia, seconded by O'Donnell to have first and second. We need to have a motion to waive the ordinance, right? (several talking) Yeah, read your paragraph. Correia: Okay, I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended, that the first consideration and vote be waived, and that the ordinance be given second consideration and vote at this time. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. ----,_.__.......__.__.~~--_._-_..._~._._---_...-~----_.-----------.------.-- . #4 Page 8 Wilburn: Now it's been moved by Correia to collapse; seconded by O'Donnell to collapse. Discussion? Roll call. Oh, I'm sorry! Discussion. (laughter) Correia: Well, I just wanted to say that this is, I think, a project that has been in the works for a very long time. There's been a lot of opportunities for a lot of people to weigh in in support of the project. In fact, I think it's kind of been in the works for about five or ten years. It's a really great example of collaboration on all sides to bring newly critical affordable housing to special population, and I'm excited to get it, starting to move. We, the Council, last night set our meeting where we'll have final consideration on this for 8:00 A.M. on Friday. That's the 25th.. .so that will be the meeting where we will make our final vote on this. So... Vanderhoef: This is a great public project that gives a continuum of care, and it is filling a gap that has not been filled in our community for persons with some disability that have not needed all the care that they have received in other facilities. So this is a great addition to the City of Iowa City and I want to thank all the people who got behind it and got started and moved this forward, because it wouldn't have happened and I do happen to know that a number of them are the parents ofthose people needing assistance. Thank you. Wilburn: Can you... we're discussing whether or not to collapse or not, so can we go ahead and have that roll call first? Bailey: And I think that's a good idea because it does need to move forward in this construction season. Wilburn: Roll call. Carries 7-0. Correia: I move second consideration. Bailey: Second. Wilburn: It's been moved by Correia; seconded by Bailey. Now, discussion. Any other comments? Bailey: Ijust want to say that I think the strength of the design ofthis project is in the collaboration of services that it's put together and the work that the County and the City and private non-profits have pulled together to make this project possible, and I think it's really great. Nice and innovative! Wilburn: Roll call. Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #5 Page 9 ITEM 5 INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS TO TAKE ADDITIONAL ACTION FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $3,400,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING CAPITAL LOAN NOTES, SERIES 2006C. c) RESOLUTION DIRECTING SALE OF $3,400,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING CAPITAL LOAN NOTES, SERIES 2006C. Champion: Move the resolution. (several talking at once) Wilburn: Okay, let me try that again. Champion: Move the resolution. Is that the one we're on? Bailey: We have an amendment, right? Karr: We had an amendment simply telling you the lowest and the highest bids. Wilburn: Okay, all right, general obligation refunding Capital Loan notes, Series 2006 C, moved by Champion, seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Vanderhoef: Just for the public information, this is going to save our community considerable money in interest payments, so... O'Malley: That's what I'm here to explain. When we first put this to you in July, we were looking at saving about $80,000. Since then the market has moved in our favor, and it looks like we're going to save $170,000. The other thing I wanted to make note of is normally these are bid by large syndicates and the syndicate that got this also teamed up with Hills Bank. That's the first that I've seen a local bank get some of our bonds, so I thought that was pretty good for the community. Elliott: Good work! Wilburn: Roll call. Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #7 Page 10 ITEM 7 INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS TO TAKE ADDITIONAL ACTION FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $10,000,000 SEWER REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, SUBORDINATE SERIES 2006. a) PUBLIC HEARING Wilburn: This is a public hearing. (pounds gavel) Public hearing is open. O'Malley: Mayor and Council, Ijust want to mention that we're not going to go to the sale market, we're not quite ready for that. We have some issues to look at, but I was talking with our consultants today and they said maybe later this month or early September might be a better time, and we might even get about...we were looking at $650,000 savings, and now we're looking at maybe a million dollar savings. So.. .I'll be back to you on that. Wilburn: (pounds gavel) Public hearing is closed. b) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION Champion: Move the resolution. Bailey: Second. Wilburn: Moved by Champion; seconded by Bailey. Discussion? Roll call. Item carries 7-0. Doing okay? Anybody need a break? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. ______._.____~.______~_____.._______._...n_______.__'___.~____..__,._.__..........__._.____.____.______'~_____-----.--.---.~- #8 Page II ITEM 8 CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 7, ENTITLED "FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION," CHAPTER 1, ENTITLED "FIRE CODE" BY AMENDING SECTION 4 TO INCREASE THE PENALTIES FOR OVERCROWDING. (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Bailey: Move first consideration. Wilburn: Moved by Bailey. Vanderhoef: Second. Wilburn: Seconded by Vanderhoef. Discussion? Correia: 1...1 support this, the change in the fines and everything and what we're wanting to do, enforcing overcrowding. 1 have, in talking with somebody today, 1 have...wondering...I have some concerns...wondering if there, if we've set in motion or there has been set in motion, some unintended consequences with, with occupancy. What I'm hearing is that there are some bars that are taking out all of their seating so they can get as many or more, more people, in their establishments, and 1 just have real concerns about that for the feeling of downtown, for safety, for what we're communicating about, you know, what's okay, how it's okay to operate business, and 1 don't know what we can do about that or what, you know, what the Building and Housing Inspection services can do about that, or our current ordinances about alcohol establishments having certain amount of seating required, I mean, I don't know, but I just, hearing that there are bars taking all of their seating out, just leave the bar and no.. .I've not confirmed that, but... Elliott: Amy? Excuse me. There was a very productive meeting I think held this afternoon. Eleanor? Would you mind just telling the Council a little bit about that? Dilkes: Urn, City staff, myself, Chief Rocca, the Fire Marshall, Doug Boothroy, and Tim Hennes from H.I.S. met with the.. . Leah Cohen and Brian Flynn from the Alcohol Advisory Board and Rebecca Neades from the Chamber today, and Mr. Elliott stopped in. Urn, and, I think the concern on the part of the bar owners, and Brian's here so he can correct me ifI'm wrong, is that, and everybody kind of acknowledges that nobody's really paid much attention to occupancy, and so as they've been going through this process to look at enforcement of the occupancy restrictions, there have been, you know, the establishments are taking a look at their occupancy and are finding, in some cases, that the occupancy that's available to them is not 'consistent with the way, the number of people they normally have in their places, and so they have asked for some additional time to do what they This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #8 Correia: Wilburn: Dilkes: Wilburn: Dilkes: Page 12 need to do to get their occupancy rates up. Sometimes that involves, and I don't know all the technicalities ofthis, but sometimes that involves adding additional restrooms, sometimes that does involve increasing the square floor area that's not encumbered by tables and chairs. I mean, these are the way occupancy is set by our Building and Fire Codes, the way it's set...I mean, we follow the model codes are adopted so that's a very common way of establishing occupancy, but they want some additional time to evaluate those things and get their occupancy at a level that they can have, and the way we left the meeting is Fire, the Fire Department is going to give some thought to...I think they don't want to be in a position of not enforcing, not continuing their complaint-based enforcement when they see a safety issue. I mean, that needs to continue, but not starting their very strict enforcement of the occupancy limits until February 1 st. Chief Rocca and Fire Marshall Jensen are going to be talking about that and getting back to the group. So... That's not exactly, I mean, that's not exactly what I, I guess I'm concerned about. I guess what I'm concerned about is hearing that, that...I think it was a difference between an establishment that's a bar and a restaurant, and they need to add some bathrooms, and they're still going to have tables and chairs and all that, so I guess what I heard was that there were some bars that wanted to just have a whole lot of occupancy and they were taking all of their tables and chairs out. It was just going to be a warehouse, a bar warehouse, and I guess that's the kind ofthing that concerns me, that's going to increase their occupancy so much more...um...that's the thing I'm concerned about, so I don't know, this doesn't really address it, but because this sort of has put it on the table for looking at, and then having this unintended consequence of that. I guess I would just suggest if that was a productive meeting' and they're going to try and have some further discussions with the, with Fire and Building Inspection, then I would suggest just seeing how those discussions go. It's not uncommon when we, either on our initiative or at suggest by other groups, if an ordinance comes forward that individuals and groups talk about how they can get around that. Well, and I don't know that that's necessarily getting around it, because I mean, I think what's happening is... Other, other (unable to hear). Right. I think what's happening is there's, people are starting to examine what occupancy involves, and occupancy involves square footage area and number of bathrooms and sprinklers and all that stuff, and so I think there are people looking at the table issues, but there's also people looking at the bathroom issues and that kind of thing, and that's a reasonable process, I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. ^""'_.,',"_.__.~_.,__.______~.~___~____~________~_'_____n'__"__'._'__" ......-..,----.-..".. .,-.--...---..-----...' .._-----,_..__.__._----_._.__.~-_._..,. #8 Bailey: Wilburn: Bailey: Correia: Bailey: Correia: Page 13 think, to occur at this point when they're looking at establishing their occupancy. But I think that this is an important example to us, and a reminder that if we do not consistently enforce the ordinances that we have on the books, I mean, these occupancy numbers haven't changed since they were determined, I'm assuming. That this... but we haven't paid, neither have business owners, paid much attention to occupancy and then all of a sudden we are attending to occupancy and people are surprised. I don't know if! would go to that extreme, because there have been efforts by law enforcement and Fire over the years to try and... Well, Ross, I'm going to go to that extreme for a moment, because we had a discussion last night again about an ordinance that we're not, ordinances that we're not enforcing when it comes to parking in the middle of Dubuque Street, and it results in confusion. I mean, it results in these kinds of discussions, these kinds of delays when safety issues are the concern, and that has always been my interest with this ordinance and moving forward, and I thought that the Fire Department had done a great job of taking the time - this started in March and here it will be almost a year later before we'll be really moving forward on this, and so I think it's really important that we enforce consistently our ordinances that are on the books. I think that's exactly right. I guess what I'm trying to say is that what I'm concerned about is because I think that we should be doing this. What I'm saying is because everybody's been looking at occupancy and having their establishments go in for re-evaluation of occupancy, and they're realizing, "ah, it's based on these things, so if! take out all of my seating, I can put more people in there and I'm going to do that so I can make more money, get more people in there," but is that a safe environment? Policies often have unintended consequences, and this potentially is one of the unintended consequences of trying to make a safer environment in our downtown, and if that moves forward, I would have to say that I'm very disappointed in the business establishments because part of this moving forward was a trade-off. I mean, the other option I think that we discussed at one time was 21 ordinance. Well, what I'm wondering is, can an ordinance say that an establishment serving alcohol or serving the public has to have a minimum number of tables and chairs, or something. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. -~--_.-----_.._---~-_._---------~._~---_.'".__.._-----..~_.~-,,_..-.__.- #8 Page 14 Champion: I think that's a business decision and a public decision, and if somebody wants to take all their tables and chairs out of their bar or restaurant, I think after a while people are not going to want to go there. Bailey: But I mean, can you build enough restrooms to support that level of occupancy, and doesn't that get into your square footage availability? I mean, there are other things including entrances and exits. I mean, wouldn't you require additional exits for that, I mean, as occupancy rises, don't you have additional exit requirements? Dilkes: Well, exit is another one of the major issues. I don't think you can just examine one aspect ofthis in isolation. Bailey: Okay. O'Donnell: Tonight we've heard that the bar/restaurants downtown are going to take out all the seating. I don't think that's correct. They may remove some. They're asking for more time on this, and I'm in favor of that. What we need to do is determine how a sink and a bathroom affects occupancy and to what degree. Bailey: We don't need to determine that. That's...determined by our codes. O'Donnell: But that's what we're doing right now, Regenia. We're doing that right now. Bailey: No! What we're doing right now is setting the fine, and what I would like to see is, I would like to go back to the schedule that, and apparently that was agreed at the meeting this afternoon, that that schedule would be put on hold and moved back to February, but I am... Dilkes: I think there's one thing that has not, I mean, that hasn't been finally settled. Fire needed some time to think about how, you know, how we were going to... what they were going to enforce and what they weren't going to enforce in that interim. Bailey: I just want to say I'm very disappointed in that. I mean, we had an incident in our downtown that we were very fortunate that there weren't more injuries, and I think we're kidding ourselves if we continue to delay these kinds of occupancy and safety considerations, and I'm very disappointed if we're going to wait til February because people didn't know their occupancy level. That's not an excuse. O'Donnell: The intention of this, and it was brought up last night, is not to put people out of business. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #8 Page 15 Bailey: No, not at all, but when you operate a business and you don't know your occupancy, there's no excuse. O'Donnell: Excuse me. The incident you were talking about, I don't think had anything to do with occupancy. It was a foolish act. Did it involve fire? Bailey: Yes! O'Donnell: Yeah, okay, that wasn't an overcrowding. That was just a bad, bad action by a bar. Champion: Maybe there are other possibilities too. For instance, let the Fire Department mull this over. Maybe they will still enforce occupancy. Maybe they'll go in and if they think it's over-occupied, that'd be a warning, and then you're going to have to get rid of people, and if they have to go back a second time, maybe then there will be a fine, but what I'm asking, and what I think the bar owners are asking, is time to implement some of these changes, but to still enforce some kind of occupancy for safety, but...if people want to take all their furniture out of their bar, I think that's their business. I think it's a foolish thing to do, but that's their business. I don't think they'll do it, but I agree with Regenia. There still has to be some type of enforcement, because I'm very concerned about some of the occupancy. Dilkes: I think the idea coming out of the meeting today was, Fire's ready to go and they want to start addressing some of these issues that they think are very unsafe downtown, and they don't want to hold off on those things until February. There...I think they were somewhat receptive to holding off on strict enforcement of occupancy levels, which I think is something that they're looking at doing. So, but nothing...I don't think the Fire Department, and we haven't talked to Steve about this yet, but I don't think they're going to be receptive to anything they think is going to compromise safety during that period oftime. Elliott: I think equal enforcement of these codes and laws are important - I agree with Regenia on that, but I think even more important is that those should be fair, equitable, and reasonable and this provides time to assure that that is what is going to happen, and I think at the meeting today, Amy, your concerns were brought up, not specifically but in general about what some of the unintended consequences might be, and I will be tonight. . . prepared tonight to support the first reading if we do this with the understanding that there are two more to come and I think that it was, I was very pleased that Andy and Rocca, Andy and Roger, who were very much set on implementing this September 1 agreed to give serious thought to delaying it, out of fairness and reasonableness, and I'm just pleased with everything that went on at the meeting. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #8 Page 16 Bailey: So, what is the balancing act to going forward September I? You said that they would be doing something. You just used the word "delay." I mean, fall semester is probably one ofthe more crowded semesters in many of our establishments. What, what will be happening September 151? Dilkes: Well, I think that's what Fire needs to give some thought to. After we had the meeting today, I think there was general, you know, understanding about what we wanted, or what the group wanted to accomplish from the bar owners' perspective and what staff was willing to consider, but Fire needed some time to step back from that and give some thought as to how, you know, where they were going to draw that line during that interim. Bailey: And so when will we have a sense of when the decision is made and what the decision will be. I mean, September is next week, I guess. Dilkes: I think the idea is to move pretty quickly on that. Elliott: My understanding is there is a training session that is scheduled for next week, and that Any and Roger indicated that they intended to have their thoughts pretty much centralized by that time, and if there is a delay, that the Fire Department and the Inspectors will still use their professional discretion in investigating and monitoring the situations downtown. Vanderhoef: Well, personally, public safety is one of the biggest things that happens in this community and in the fall, in particular, when the weather is nice, it's not just the people who live in Iowa City. It's people who live all over the state that come to Iowa City to participate in our fall activities. So, I will go forward with this resolution. Hopefully we'll have a report back. I want to hear it from (TAPE ENDS) a reasonable kind of way of enforcement. We have to go with what's on the books now. I fully agree with Regenia. We can't take chances anymore. And that's what I think we have happening right now. Wilburn: I will also point out for the benefit ofthe public that there has been information and training sessions going on earlier in the year, so that has been going on by our Fire personnel, and also that this, one of the recommendations from Iowa City Alcohol Advisory Board, which are some of the people who are trying to negotiate with this ordinance, had put forth restricting size and capacity may help keep some of the larger places in compliance with the spirit of the laws, and that's what this is about, so this a recommendation that came forward from that group, which included some of the bar and restaurant owners. Roll call. Item carries 7-0. Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #8 Page 17 Bailey: So moved. Vanderhoef: Second. Wilburn: Moved by Bailey; seconded by Vanderhoef to accept correspondence. All those in favor say aye. Opposed same sign. Carries 7-0. We're going to take a break. We will be back at 8:00. (TAPE OFF) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. _ _ _...._".____,_~.~._..._~_____.,....,,_~~_.__.___.. _____.._~..______.__..__.._.___._~._~.____~____M. #9 Page 18 ITEM 9 CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 9, ENTITLED "MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC," CHAPTER 3, ENTITLED "RULES OF THE ROAD," SECTION 6, ENTITLED "SPEED RESTRICTIONS," SUBSECTION B, ENTITLED "EXCEPTIONS," AND SUBSECTION C, ENTITLED "SCHOOL SPEED ZONES," TO ESTABLISH AND AMEND THE SPEED LIMIT ON PORTIONS OF MORMON TREK BOULEVARD, NAPLES AVENUE, SYCAMORE STREET AND U.S. HIGHWAY 6. (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Champion: Move first consideration. Correia: Second. Wilburn: Moved by Champion; seconded by Correia. Discussion? Champion: This has to do with school speed limits, during non-school hours, regular speed limits will be in effect. Isn't that right? Wilburn: Does not change any posted speed limits. Karr: It's just a code clarification.. . correction. Wilburn: In the City code. Roll call. Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #10 ITEM 10 Bailey: Wilburn: Correia: Wilburn: Correia: Wilburn: Page 19 CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, ENTITLED "PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY," CHAPTER 3, ENTITLED "WEED CONTROL" BY AMENDING SECTION 1 TO PROVIDE FOR ENFORCEMENT THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Move first consideration. Moved by Bailey. Second. Seconded by Correia. Discussion? This basically just extends the current ordinance to all year. Roll call. Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of tbe Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #12 Page 20 ITEM 12 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT (CLG) GRANT FOR CONDUCTING A RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY OF THE NEAR SOUTHSIDE AREA TO IDENTIFY PROPERTIES ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES; AND AN INTENSIVE SURVEY IN THE MANVILLE HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD TO INVESTIGATE POTENTIAL FOR A HISTORIC DISTRICT. Bailey: Move the resolution. Champion: Second. Wilburn: Moved by Bailey; seconded by Champion. Discussion? Vanderhoef: We asked for some information last night. Ifit's here, I have not seen it yet. Dilkes: I gave you a copy ofthe application, and you can take a look at what happens from this point forward. There is, ifthe grant is approved, there is then an agreement that is signed between the City and the State Historical Society. So I specifically amended the resolution approving that submission of the grant to provide that it needs, that agreement needs Council approval. So it will come back to you if the grant is approved. Bailey: What will be happening in the meantime to a~sure that when the grant approval comes back to us that we can move forward on it? I mean, there were some people who had concerns. What needs to happen in the meantime so we can move forward, should we be awarded the grant? Vanderhoef: I asked for that, that I felt that it was' important that we have an up-front meeting with, and notification of the people in the area that was surveyed, before we accept the grant, because I feel like it's, it's one of those places where if we don't have input from them, we could potentially have another very split neighborhood about what's about to happen. Bailey: And I know we received another letter in support, but is this something that the Historic Preservation Commission could undertake? Weitzel: We have had a meeting with the residents of Manville Heights. It's for the revision of the Preservation Plan, but at that meeting, people brought up the issue that they wanted to have a historic district pursued. That was by overwhelming majority of the residents in attendance at that meeting. Bailey: How many people were in attendance? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. . ..._,.__.._,,_._._~.._...._~m._._____'__"____'_'__'_' _ _ ______._______,__._______._____,~_._". #12 Page 21 Weitzel: I'd say probably 35, 40. Vanderhoef: And tell me how they were notified. Weitzel: Ofthat meeting? V anderhoef: Yes. Weitzel: Direct mailing, I believe. Bailey: That was a direct mailing notifying them ofthe meeting about updating the current plan. Weitzel: Right, it did not specifically address this. There would be, as part of this plan though, there are meetings scheduled, for this grant. So, before the district could go into effect, there would be another meeting with the residents, notifying them what the findings ofthe survey were, what the effects of a district would be for them. Correia: And then it would come back to the Council for designating it as a Historic.. . Dilkes: No. Correia: No? Bailey: Approving the grant. Weitzel: Not before approving the grant, but before there would be a district - yes. The Commission would have to have a hearing, Planning and Zoning would have to have two hearings, and you'd have to have three. Dilkes: That's a district, we're talking here about National Register, and if you look in the grant application it has, if the grant is approved, the schedule, and I think that includes some meetings, etc. Weitzel: Correct. Dilkes: But, page 5 of the grant application that I gave you...but those, there are no scheduled, as I understand it, meetings to occur prior to the time that the grant would be approved and you all would enter into an agreement to proceed. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. ---_.._------------~-~"-_._~---_._-_.._._._._-------------~-~----~--------_.__._-_...,-,,-"'---_._-'------_._-~--.--.,.-----.'.-..---- #12 Elliott: Dilkes: Elliott: Bailey: Weitzel: Elliott: Bailey: Franklin: Correia: Bailey: Correia: Franklin: Correia: Page 22 And you said that if the grant is approved, that this would come back to the Council before it could move forward for petition to be recognized and officially...(several talking at once) The agreement whereby they give you money and you agree to go through these steps to determine whether you've got the requirements met to establish a National Register District, that agreement will come before you. My question, and Regenia was looking at me, and I will respond to that. How many property owners are there in the area that is being, will be, designated? Surveyed. We don't know what the designation will be until the survey is completed. I don't know, actually, I don't know that. Yeah, when you have a meeting, but my thinking is, before I would want to approve it, and I would hope that the...at least 60% of the property owners are in favor of it, because I think it would be a wonderful thing, but these property owners will be notified by direct mail and you will have a listing of who is supportive of it, and 1.. .that was my concern last night- that that's how the Melrose Historic Preservation District went through enthusiastically rapidly because it had groundswell support, and I would hope that you would follow that kind of pattern. But I think, there's a difference between what we do for National and what we do for local. I'm confused. What is your expectation between now, when this resolution is passed, authorizing us to apply for the grant, and the time when the grant comes back to you for authorization to proceed? I think what I've heard is there's some folks who want all of the property owners in the designated area. . . Survey area. .. . survey area will receive a letter saying... Certified? That's how you know they got it. There is a cost to it. .. . received a letter saying that application is going in to do this survey to see if this area. Do you support this...is that what we're saying? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. -------_._.._--_..~--_.._..-~-,--_._--~-----".-.__..-- -_._--~,-_.._._~_._-"-------~-_."--_.-.-..- #12 Page 23 Franklin: Okay, so.. . (several talking at once) Elliott: As a matter offact, Karin, you asked about Certified. No.. .if the Neighborhood Association will contact the people, and I have no reason to require that it be Certified. If they bring to me that here are all of the property owners involved and at least 60% of those are very supportive, that's fine. I don't, I personally would not need to have... Franklin: Before the grant is signed... the grant agreement is signed... that would be before we know...(several talking at once) Bailey: I am willing to do this just because I want to avoid the same kind of confusion and misunderstanding between the difference between National and local designation, and I want to avoid the same kind of talk, the same kind of thing that happened with the Northside. I'm willing to do this. I think it's a little extreme. Wilburn: Willing to do what? Bailey: To support notification. Are you willing to do that, Connie, or are you against it? Champion: No, I don't think it's necessary. I think the notification comes after the survey. There might not even be the qualifications there to be a National Historic District. I think it's a waste of money and time and energy til we know ifit is. Correia: Ijust have one question based on that. Are you, are we saying if we get this grant, we enter into the contract to do the grant. We do the survey and indeed the survey says, 'Yes, this neighborhood qualifies for National Historic,' status or whatever. Then is that automatically bestowed upon the area. We would still have to vote on that. Elliott: That's all I'm asking. (several talking at once) Dilkes: They vote on the National Register designation? No they don't, I don't think. The City Council does? Champion: Yes. Franklin: Well, it's initiated by the Historic Preservation Commission, and it's going through the Council as the entity that is requesting that the Department of Interior make it a National Historic District. So, the Melrose one, I think, was different because it was initiated by the neighborhood itself, and they made the application. The City did not. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #12 Page 24 Dilkes: Except in the Gilbert-Linn situation, the only thing that had come in front of the Council was the grant application. (several talking at once) Vanderhoef: .. . and we couldn't do anything about it. Franklin: Okay, maybe if we take it step by step here. (several talking at once) At this point, we're talking about a resolution authorizing us to make an application for a grant. The next step of what will come before you is that grant agreement, that enables us to hire a consultant to do the survey. Before we bring that before you to have you authorize us to hire the consultant to do the survey, do you want us to notify the neighborhood? We can send out a letter saying, 'We are doing this step.' Are there four of you who want to do that? (several talking at once) Bailey: I want to know what happens... Elliott: Karin, I'm not sure when. Just so that while it is still in the hands and in the responsibility ofIowa City to determine whether or not it is, that's when I want to know that there is a percentage of people who support it, of property owners, who support this. Franklin: Tell you what. We'll just send that letter out and let them know, okay? And then when you get the grant, you will know that they have been notified. We'll have a list of people that we have notified. We will not know how people feel about it. Correia: Can we ask them if they have strong feelings against they should let us know. I mean, I think.. . (several people talking at once) Wilburn: Excuse me, Karin, if everybody could just hold off for a second and just slow down. Let's continue to have one person talk at a time, please. I would like to point out that some of the assurances and attempts to avoid controversy and disagreement, you're not going to get with a voluntary letter. You won't know.. .it's very likely that without a Certified letter being sent, that someone that disagrees with something that's going to happen will come forward and say, 'I didn't know about it. I didn't get a letter.' So some of the assurances that some of you are asking for are just not going to happen. Champion: I'd like to ask if there are four of us who are willing to apply for this grant and move forward with it if we get it. Wilburn: By a show of hands, how many are willing to do that? That's four right there. So... no letter. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. -_."..__.__.,.".,._"'-----~_.._--,._,. #12 Page 25 Correia: I would like people to be notified. If it's a letter, or through the Neighborhood Association, I mean, I think... Bailey: One of the things we didn't do was the rest ofthis flow chart. What happens after the survey, Karin? I think that that's part of the misunderstanding. What happens after the survey? We get the grant. We hire the consultant. We do a survey. Let's say that there are a number of properties that meet the criteria. What happens after the survey? Vanderhoef: We're already locked in! Bailey: I want to hear from Karin. Franklin: The survey is presented to the Historic Preservation Commission for review, discussion, revision. The consultant makes the revisions. The Preservation consultant then has a meeting with the owners... Bailey: So that's one meeting. Franklin: Okay...it says, "Nomination papers will be completed and three copies submitted to the State. The State sends the review comments on the first draft to the Preservation consultant. The consultant makes the corrections. Preservation consultant returns three copies ofthe final draft to the State." This doesn't tell me. Dilkes: I think.. .looking at that schedule and knowing what we went through with the Gilbert-Linn, there is no point at which, in our normal process, the nomination-petition comes back to the City Council for approval. Maybe that's something that could be added to the process. I don't know. But maybe that would be the way to do it, because then you would have had all your notification. You'd be at the point where you had the information you needed to decide whether you were going to nominate. The Commission would make a recommendation on nomination. It would come to the Council to approve that recommendation, and then go forward, and then we wouldn't have to do any ofthis interim notification. So, assuming that that is okay with...it seems like we could do that. Wilburn: Can you speak in the microphone, please? Weitzel: Having dealt with the State Historic Preservation office, I am sure they would be happy whatever means we come about as a locality to approve our districts, before they went on to National. Bailey: I would encourage the Historic Preservation to look at a more rigorous notification process. I think that that would get, gain additional support from Council. You already have four who are interested in this, but there This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of Angust 22, 2006. #12 Page 26 have been some concerns about the process...it moves forward with out another check-in. Weitzel: I understand. First of all, this is just a survey. I'm trying to keep that at that level. This isn't, this is just a grant to investigate whether there's even the potential for a district, and that district would be at the National level, not at a local level, but I understand there are concerns and the perception that was portrayed by one side, at least, of the arguments of the Gilbert- Linn district that it was fast-tracked somehow, that people weren't given appropriate notification, and so in order to alleviate those concerns, I'm sure that we could do something, Certified mail at this point, as Karin pointed out is an additional expense. If that's, if that is something that people on the Council want done, I'm sure we can do it, but... Vanderhoef: The question that I have for you at the Commission, what Eleanor just outlined was that after the survey was done and the corrections were done, if it came back to Council for the opportunity to say "yes" or "no" - send in the application to the State. What I recall from the Northside area was that the Commission hustled up to get the nomination into Des Moines so that they could quickly hit the schedule of when the State Historic Preservation was going to meet and all ofthis. So it never came back to Council that we had anything to say about it. Weitzel: I guess all I can say about that is we have a different Chair and a different staff person and I don't think you're going to see that happening again. Vanderhoef: But that's what's outlined here. Unless we have something built into the process that says, 'After the survey is done and the parameters are recommended by the Commission, then the Commission sends it back to Council, and Council gives it an "up" or a "down.'" Weitzel: That's fine. Wilburn: When is the application due? Weitzel: September I st. (several talking) Correia: . . . but Eleanor had given us an option that Tim is saying he thinks. . . that will do what you're saying... Dilkes: How about if we just amend, if you look at your schedule in this grant application, it says January 2008. The nom... October through November, 2007, you've got the consultant submitting the final recommendations to the Commission, and then January 2008, the nomination papers will be completed and three copies submitted to the State by February, etc. We could say the nomination papers will be completed, approved by the City This represents only a reasonahly accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #12 Page 27 Council, and submitted to the State. Is that.. .does that sound like it's fine with... Wilburn: Is that acceptable to the Council? Vanderhoef: It has to be voted on by Council. Correia: And the meetings, part of the survey includes meetings to discuss with owners and residents in the affected properties, so there's a requirement that they will not only send a letter, they're actually going to sit down with all of the owners and residents and invite them to a meeting and give them.. .it's part ofthe process. Vanderhoef: It'll probably take more than one meeting. Correia: But that's for them to figure out. Bailey: Ijust encourage the Historic Preservation Commission to take some leadership. We've had a lot of things happening in this County regarding process and notification, and I think that we can learn from that, and you can undertake a more rigorous notification process, or a more citizen involvement process and take the leadership and then bring it to Council, and I think that that would make it easier to move these things forward. Weitzel: I'm 100% in favor of more communication and bettering my communication lines and channels, so I think that's a great idea. Elliott: The usual statement is that we learn from history, that we learn nothing from history. Sometimes we can learn from history, and I hope that is what is not duplicated this time around. So I applaud your approach to this. Karr: Mr. Mayor, just for the record because in the transcriptions and the audio we won't be able to see the four people who raised their hands. (laughter) So, it was.. .Amy, Connie, Ross, and Regenia. Thank you. Wilburn: Can I get a roll call? Correia: Should we... we had a motion on what was here. Do we need to amend the motion to include... Wilburn: No, that's part of the grant application, not the resolution itself. Is that correct? Dilkes: I'm assuming your motion is approving the grant with the change that we have discussed. (several talking at once) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #12 Page 28 Wilburn: Roll call. Carries 7-0. Karr: Motion to accept correspondence. Vanderhoef: So moved. Correia: So moved. Wilburn: Moved by Vanderhoef; seconded by Correia to accept correspondence. All those in favor say "aye." Vanderhoef: Thank you everybody for sticking with this process. Wilburn: Motion carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. ------,~---_._---~------~_..._.~---._~--'-- #16 Page 29 ITEM 16 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVI~G THE CALL TO ARTISTS FOR THE GRAND AVENUE ROUNDABOUT PROJECT. Champion: Move the resolution. Bailey: Move the resolution...second. Wilburn: Moved by Champion; seconded by Bailey. Discussion? Vanderhoef: I would like to see this resolution deferred until a later time, and more discussion with the University about cost sharing for the actual art project that goes in the median of the roundabout. The landscaping that they're doing on their own property around the old Fieldhouse, that's normal things that they would do anyway. This is a particular, special site that's being created by a road in that area and I think it deserves shared budgeting. Wilburn: Is that a motion, or are you just putting that out there for discussion? Vanderhoef: I move to defer until we can have more discussion about that. Elliott: Second. Wilburn: You want to put a date on that, or do you want to defer it indefinitely? Or at next Council meeting? Vanderhoef: Oh, probably to keep it moving, the next Council meeting. Wilburn: Moved by Vanderhoef to defer this to the 5th; seconded by Elliott. (several talking at once) Discussion? Champion: It does say in the resolution that the budget for the public art project is not set, it will be determined based upon the merit of submittals, but maybe (unable to hear) some other entities to complete the project, so I think that's already being taken into consideration. So, I'm not going to vote to defer it. Elliott: In addition to what Dee has said, I think that the City has yet to establish priorities for a budget that I anticipate will be perhaps even more stringent than it has been in the past and I think we need to wait until we set some priorities and determine what the budget will allow. Correia: We also heard from the University last night. They're not sure that they even think public art is appropriate or warranted or something in this space, in the roundabout, and it's a joint project. So I wonder if that, I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription ofthe Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. ~_,.__~..~~.__,___.__,___.~"___"._.__._._,.____.__._~..__,....._,._._~_..._~___'u_."'_________._ #16 Page 30 mean, I'd rather see the University come to us saying, 'We want it,' or 'We don't want it.' Champion: But it's not the University's road - it's ours! Elliott: This appears premature on several levels. (several talking at once) Franklin: Yes, I just wanted to point out, because I wasn't here last night when you talked about this, that in the call, this anticipates that the decision making regarding the art within the roundabout would be done collaboratively between the University, University ofIowa Hospitals and Clinics, the Melrose Neighborhood Association, and the Public Art Advisory Committee before you got a recommendation on what would be acceptable for the roundabout. The budget was not set by the Public Art Committee. They're not recommending that a budget be set. To try to see what sort of proposals we get, it may result in the, in nothing being acceptable, or it may be result in there being a fairly spectacular piece that's proposed for this site, at which time then the Public Art Committee anticipated that there would need to be some fund raising. Wilburn: It's truly a call to artists. Franklin: It is truly a call to artists, to get proposals for what might go in the roundabout. O'Donnell: And that's it! Franklin: That's it! They did make a change from it being a little bit more ambiguous as to what would be in there, to sculptures, so that if in fact the roundabout were more transitory, that it was there for a number of years and then removed, that that sculpture, or those sculptures, could be removed likewise. So, a lot of these things have been talked about as it went through the Public Art Committee. O'Donnell: University's concern last night, or one ofthem, was that the piece of art in the center of the roundabout could be a distraction to drivers, and you know, that is a concern, but I had the impression that they were certainly willing to talk about it and listen. I didn't think by any means that they said that they weren't interested. Vanderhoef: They were not interested in putting money into it. What... O'Donnell: I didn't hear that, Dee. Vanderhoef: What Rod said to us was that they felt that their public art part of the project was the landscaping and the new sidewalks and so forth, along the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. #16 Page 31 front ofthe building. Not anything to do with the roundabout itself. And that to me says that's part of the landscaping that they would normally do, so ifthey want to share in the cost of the art, which could be landscaping on the roundabout, but that's a difficult place to maintain. Champion: I thought they said they were thinking of using their public art money to put some public art further up the sidewalk. That's what they said, at a different location. They couldn't use public, they couldn't use their art money for landscaping. Bailey: Well, and we're a community that really (several talking at once). Wilburn: I'm sorry. We can only have one comment going on. Bailey: This is a community... we value public art, and the Commission has already indicated that this may require additional fundraising, and I think that that is really the question. I mean, if potentially the fundraising goes to the University and asked them for a portion ofthe expense for the art, after showing them what art has been selected or submitted, I think that's fine. I think we should move ahead on this. O'Donnell: Well, once again, we ought to see if there's four of us that'd like to do that. Wilburn: There's a motion on the floor to defer this to the 5th. All those in favor say "aye" of deferring. All those opposed same sign. Elliott: Looks like we have a call to artists, which is gladly not a call to arms! (laughter) Champion: I'll move the resolution. Karr: It's already been moved. Wilburn: It's the opinion of the Chair that it carries 5 to 2, it was a motion. Go ahead, Connie, I'm sorry. Karr: There's a motion on the floor to approve it. Wilburn: Can I get roll call. Item carries 5-2; Vanderhoef and Elliott in the negative. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. - - --_._-~-~-~--------_._----~~'.'----~-"------'---------_._"----_._.~._--_.------------_.._."._._- #18 Page32 ITEM 18 CONSIDER A RESOLUTION CONCERNING MEDlACOM COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION'S 2006 UPDATING OF RATES FOR BASIC CABLE SERVICES. Vanderhoef: Move the resolution. Wilburn: Moved by Vanderhoef. O'Donnell: Second. Wilburn: Seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Bailey: Just for the public, these rates don't change the current rates. This is just for the basic, yeah... basic rate, yes, which is all we are entitled to have any kind of weigh-in on. Wilburn: Roll call. Item carries 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. .---~----~_._-----~-----_._---------'-_._---'------_.--~---,---~---,---,------'--------'--'-'-- #22 Page 33 ITEM 22 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION. Elliott: Couple very brief items. Yesterday we had the opportunity to meet the new Dean of the College of Business, Curt Hunter, and found him certainly in the Dave Skorton mold. He's just a very engaging, and obviously a very well experienced and talented individual, so I think we're going to hear more from this individual. Secondly, in the summer, it's kind of nice when we have parking spaces on the streets and it's a little more calm, but you know? We really, I really love it when the students come back to town. That's the vibrant Iowa City that we all love, and so it's just great to have the students back. (laughter and talking) Bailey: I want to thank the Creekside Neighborhood Association for a great picnic. I know that many of the neighborhood associations have been having these. It's a collaboration with the City, and I was able to attend that one, and I was invited over and it was a great time and a lot of people showed up and it was a lot of fun. So thanks for the invitation, and also thank you to the staff who put together the Community Development Block Grant event at Grant Wood school. It was great, and I appreciate everybody who came out for that. It was a nice celebration. Vanderhoef: I'd like to thank the City staff, particularly the Parks and Rec group who have been working with all these neighborhood, summer celebrations. I had the chance to attend Washington Park, which is a relatively new neighborhood, and attended it with my grandchildren which was kind of fun. Ernie left so I cant' tell him about that. (laughter) But, they really do put on a quality program that the kids love it and get all involved and play with each other, and it's a way to touch base one more time before school starts, which brings me to the next issue. Not only did we have the University start classes yesterday, we had our public schools start yesterday, and we've been talking a lot about public safety and just remember we have a lot of young children headed back school, they're crossing our streets, they're learning their way - some of them to new school buildings, so let's drive carefully and be sure to take care of the children of our community. That's it. Wilburn: Mike? O'Donnell: Nothing this evening. Champion: I don't have anything either. Wilburn: Just a couple things - I want to thank the University for inviting me to speak with several first year, first generation University students. First generation in their family to attend college, and we had a very lively discussion, and just wish them all good luck in their first year at Iowa! This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. ~____.~.._._._m._~_______"___~'_'_________"____'_"_" #22 Page 34 Secondly, tomorrow I will be in Ames, a meeting with the mayors of Des Moines, Ames, and several other cities, discussing alternative municipal finance issues. Just FYI to the Council. Otherwise, City Manager? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of tbe Iowa City City Council meeting of August 22, 2006. ~_~,_"____"_______~____.__'~___'_"__""_~~___.__"___+___._________..~__.___.____'_,.________.__..____._.__._.__________ ._,'. ___._..~"_m