The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2002-08-20 Info Packet of 8/8 CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY August 8, 2002 www.icgov.org I MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS IPl City Council Meeting Schedule and Work Session Agendas IP2 Memorandum from Council Member Kanner to Personnel Administrator: Recruitment of Women and Minorities for Iowa City Civil Service Positions IP3 Memorandum from City Attorney: Absence IP4 Letter from First Assistant City Attorney to Robert Downer (Meadon, Sueppel & Downer): James and Sandra Thomas - 131 N First Avenue IP5 Memorandum from Planning and Community Development Director: Development Code Review IP6 Letter from JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner to Lexington Avenue Residents between Park Road and River Street: Follow-Up Survey Evaluating the Lexington Avenue Traffic Calming Barricade IP7 Email from Jann Ream to Tom Saterfieh Bushes IP8 Memorandum from pOlice Officer R.A. Mebus to Police Chief: July Monthly Activity Report IP9 July 2002 Iowa City Police Department P.A.U.L.A. Report IP10 July 2002 Iowa City Police Department Monthly Liquor License (OFF PREMISES SALES) Report IPll July 2002 Building Permit Information IP12 Minutes: June 25 Deer Task Force IP13 lC Gazette Article: ICPD Arrest Blotter [Atkins] IP14 Memorandum from Police Chief: Police Traffic Stop Data Study I ~ City Council Meeting Schedule and AugustT, 2002 CITY OF IOWA CITY Work Session Agendas www.icgov.org TENTATIVE FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS · MONDAY, AUGUST '19 Emma J. Harvat Hall 5:00p Council Work Session · Joint Meeting: Airport Commission Dinner Provided · Neighborhood Housing Relations Task Force Recommendations · Fire Strategic Plan · ICPD Traffic Stop Practices · Remaining Agenda TBD · TUESDAY, AUGUST 20 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00p Council Formal Meeting · MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 2 Labor Day Holiday - City Offices Closed · MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 9 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Special Council Work Session · TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00p Special Council Formal Meeting · MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23 Emma J. Ha/vat Hall 6:30p Special Council Work Session · TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00p Special Council Formal Meeting Meeting dates/~imes/topics subjec~ to change FUTURE WORK SESSION ITEMS Regulation of Downtown Dumpsters Downtown Historic Preservation Comprehensive Plan Update Opening of First Avenue Age of Consent First Avenue Truck Embargo Criteria for Housing Projects STEVEN KANNER ¢i'l'y ¢ouncilqleqlber. Zowa ¢i'1¥ Home Address: 630 S. Governor, #1, Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319)338-8865 To: Sylvia Mejia, Personnel Administrator From: Steven Kanner Date: August 6, 2002 Re: Recruitment of Women & Minorities for Iowa City Civil Service Positions Dear Sylvia, City Council recommended that if any individual councilmember had suggestions on ways to increase recruitment of women and minorities for civil service jobs - firefighters and police officers - that we should submit them personally to you. Below are the latest recruitment stats for the police certified hiring list supplied by your department. I've supplemented them by adding corresponding percentage amounts and 2002 census figures for Iowa City. I'd like to suggest a method to increase recruitment of women and minorities, at least equal to the percentages in Iowa City for our total population. I propose that we set percentage goals for the next five to ten years for our "Applications Received" and "Certified Hiring List". Each year we would increase it until five to ten years from now it would equal the real percentages of the population at large in Iowa City. For instance one goal would be to move fi.om 14% of the "Applications Received" for police officer jobs from women to 51% within 5-10 years. Incremental goals would be set for each year. I've talked with The University of Iowa and found that they do some similar goal setting. We could look to the University for guidance and advice. The Civil Service Commission and/or a Council appointed/recruited ad hoc committee would be responsible for setting the goals, methods to reach those goals, and financial support necessary. One scenario of how the above might play out: the commission/committee and personnel department (along with City Council consent) sets a goal of 20°/'o of the "Applicants Received" and 15% of the "Certified Hiring List" for police officer positions in 2003 be women. If the group finds that the actual numbers of women that apply tums out to be much less then the anticipated goal, the commission/committee, the community and personnel department would brainstorm on ways to increase the percentages. For instance, this might include hiring a part-time person to do extra recruiting. I appreciate the work that you are doing. I realize that there are many forces in the greater society that limit the amount of women and minority recruits that we get. I also realize that we have certain legal restraints on hiring practices. There is no doubt we would have to mn any of the above possible scenarios through our City Attorney. We would want to see what our exact restraints would be as a city working to get more women and minorities to apply for our police and fire positions. Please let me know what you think. I believe that we have to put more effort into recruiting women for our civil service positions, especially after looking at the police hiring lists. Sincerely, Steven cc: Dale Helling, Assistant City Manager Heather Shank, Human Rights Coordinator "POLICE OFFICER RECRUITMENT 2002 - Application Summa~' Total (%) tiaa (%) Black (%) Hispanic (%) Indian (%) White (%) Unknown (%) Applications Received 147 Female 20 (14%', 1 (5%) I (5%) 16 (80%) 2 (10%o) Male 127 (86%1 1 (<1% 10(8%) 2 (2%) 112 (880/0', 2 (2%) Written Test 63 Female I t (17%) 1(9%) l0 (91%) Male 52 (83%) 2 (4%) I (2%) 49 (94%) Physical Agility 60 Female 11 (18%) l (9%) 10 (91%) M~I¢ 49 (82%) 1 (2%) 1 (2%) 47 (96%) Interview 41 Female 6 (15%) 1 (17%) 5 (83%) Male 35 (85%) 1 (3%) 34 (97%) Certif'~l Hiring List 12 Female 1 (8%) I (100~ Male 11 (92%) 11 IOWA CITY % (2000 Census) Total (5.6 %) (3.7%) (2.9%) (.3%) (87.3%) Female ~ 31,712 (51%) Male -30,508 (49%) Advertising Summary Omaha World-Herald St. Louis Post Dispatch Waterloo Courier · Cedar Rapids Gazette Iowa City Press Citizen · Quad City Times · Des Moines Register · QCTimes.eam (Top Jobs) · 911 hofiobs.com City of Iowa City jobline · City of Iowa City wcbslie · City of Iowa City media releases · Re~ruilmeat brochure sent to Placement Director at 30 colleges and universities" City of Iowa City IP3 MEMORANDUM Date: August 6, 2002 To: City Council From: Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attorney Re: Absence I wiii be out of the office the week of August 12, 2002. My staff will know how to reach me. cc: Steve Atkins Dale Helling Marian Kart eleanor/mem/abs8-12~2.doc August 7, 2002 Mr. Robert N. Downer Meardon, Sueppel & Downer 122 South Linn St. Iowa City, IA 52240-1802 Re: James and Sandra Thomas-131 H. First Avenue Dear Bob: I have not yet received a copy of the Thomas' title opinion on the above property, which I requested by letter dated July 3, 2002, and I remain interested in reviewing the same. Nevertheless, I wish to respond to the issues raised in your letter to Steve Atkins dated June 13, 2002. Initially, I cannot agree with your assertion that the City had a duty to ensure the formation and function of the Rochester Place Homeowners' Association under the "Facilities Maintenance Agreement and Declaration of Covenants". First, when the Thomas' purchased their property, the plat, subdivision documents, and presumably the title opinion, placed them on notice of both the burden of the public access easement over their property and the sharing of expenses associated with such access through the homeowners' association. At the time of purchase, the Thomas' were certainly in a position to exercise due diligence to determine whether the homeowners' association had been formed and was operating. While the City, as a regulatory authority, was able to require the Subdivider to address the common elements of the development, the City was not in a position to actually form the homeowners' association through appropriate Articles of Incorporation, by-laws, and meetings. It is clear to me that the City discharged its regulatory obligations in this matter by requiring the Facilities Maintenance Agreement, thereby putting future property owners on notice of their maintenance obligations for the development's common elements. Additionally, the Thomas, claims for damages against the City as a result of their maintenance of the walkway is also misplaced. It appears that your clients assumed this responsibility voluntarily, as neither Iowa Code §364.12 nor the Subdivider's Agreement for the development impose such an obligation on your clients. In fact, recital I.(C). of the Facilities Maintenance Agreement clearly contemplates that this burden will be shared by all lot owners in the development, and again, your clients were on notice of this shared responsibility when purchasing the property. I can only speculate as to why Mr. and Mrs. Thomas assumed this obligation for so many years without taking steps to enforce their right to contribution from the other lot owners. However, it is unreasonable to now seek damages from the City as a result of their voluntary actions and decision not to utilize the existing agreements to gain contributions from the development's homeowners. 410 EAST WASHINGTON STREET · IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240-1826 · (319) 356-5000 · FAX (319) 356-5009 As for the sidewalk along the First Avenue frontage of Lot 22, again, it is the City's position that upon pumhasing the property your clients were on notice of the developer's obligation to install the walk, and at that time were in a position to either require installation by the Subdivider or to make an appropriate adjustment in the purchase price based on the sidewalk's absence. Moreover, the City has been contacting your clients regarding sidewalk installation since 1990. However, given the current stay under Bankruptcy proceedings, the City will not take any action to enforce the installation of the sidewalk under the Subdivider's Agreement at this time. Lastly, given that the walkway between Rita Lyn Court and First Avenue provides necessary pedestrian circulation between the development and other destinations in the neighborhood, staff cannot recommend vacation of the easement and removal of the sidewalk as a solution to the Thomas' concerns. It appears that your clients may be best served by addressing these .issues with the development's homeowners under the Facilities Maintenance Agreement. As stated, I am still interested in reviewing the Thomas' title opinion. If you wish to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me. First Assistant City Attorney Cc: Steve Atkins, City Manager Eleanor Dilkes, City Attorney Rick Fosse, City Engineer City Council City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 6, 2002 To: City Council Re: Development Code Review We have had a recent setback in our development code review and revision in that we were compelled to release the consultant from our contract based on the quality and timeliness of their performance. We will be proceeding with the development code revision in-house, devoting one of our associate planners with extensive experience in code drafting to the task and hiring a temporary associate planner for one year to address the normal work load. Karen Howard is the staff person who will be assigned to address this project and her work load will be devoted to the code full-time. We have chosen to do the project in house to ensure our ability to monitor its progress on a daily basis. The cost of hiring an associate planner (up to $52,000--$39,000 base with benefits) will be less than that to complete the consultant's contract ($73,000). We had expected to have a draft development code available for public review in September. Our current target dates are as follows: Zoning Ordinance: · draft for public review--by Dec. 31, 2002 · Planning & Zoning review-commence first meeting in January, 2003 · Council review and approval--March, 2003 Subdivision and Site Plan Regulations: · Draft for public review-by March 1, 2003 · Planning & Zoning review--commence first meeting in March, 2003 Council review and approval--May, 2003 Once the drafts are completed, the time lines are dependent upon Commission and Council considerations. Cc Steve Atkins Bob Miklo Karen Howard Planning & Zoning Commission August 1,2002 ~l~,,~Ci[~ Oj~-~ Lexington Avenue residents between Park Road and River Street ~"i Re: Follow-up survey evaluating the Lexington Avenue traffic calming barricade (survey due August 23, 2002) Dear Resident: One year ago the City installed a barricade across Lexington Avenue in the vicinity of McLean Street. The specific proposal, which was approved by the City Council, was to install a "three-season" barricade immediately north of the McLean Street cul-de-sac. Installation of the barricade occurred after a neighborhood survey showed 71% of you were in favor of trying the barricade on a trial basis to reduce the number of recklessly operated vehicles on Lexington Avenue. According to the guidelines of our traffic calming program, the process of evaluating whether or not this traffic calming application has been successful includes a follow-up traffic study and neighborhood survey approximately one year after the installation. Public service providers (Fire Department, Police Department, Johnson County Ambulance, Iowa City Transit, and Iowa City Public Works Department) are also being asked to provide their opinions on the barricade. Enclosed you will find a survey asking your opinion of the barricade. We are asking you to indicate whether or not you would like the barricade to remain in place between March and November. The results of the survey, as well as the traffic study (copy enclosed) and comments from the public service providers, will be taken to the City Council for the final determination on whether or not the barricade will remain in place between March and November. Please take a few minutes to complete the postage-paid survey postcard. Please respond no later than August 23, 2002. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 356-5254 or beth-pfohl@iowa-city.org. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. We appreciate you participating in the planning of facilities that affect your neighborhood. ,4~/',~SiqcerelYL~ Beth Pfohl ~---~ JCCOG Traffic Engineering Planner Enclosures cc: City Council City Manager Director of Planning and Community Development Assistant Director of Planning and Community Development Neighborhood Services Coordinator Director of Public Works City Engineer jccogtp\ltrs\lexingtonave doc 410 EAST WASHINGTON SYREET · IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 1826 · (319) 356-5000 ° FAX (319) 356-5009 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: December 31, 2001 To: City Council From: Jeff Davidson, Asst. Director, Dept. of Planning and Community Development Re: Preliminary assessment of Lexington Avenue traffic calming You will recall that in August of 2001 a barricade was placed on Lexington Avenue near the intersection with McLean Street. This barricade was erected after a majority of the neighborhood indicated they were in favor of trying such an action in an attempt to reduce the number of recklessly operated vehicles on Lexington Avenue. There were concerns expressed by persons on adjacent streets in the Manville Heights neighborhood that the placement of such a barricade would cause vehicles to be diverted from Lexington Avenue to the parallel streets of Lee Street, Magowan Avenue and Ferson Avenue. Based on the traffic volumes that were recorded on Lexington Avenue prior to erection of the barricade we did not feel traffic diversion would be a significant problem. However, we agreed that it would be good to take before and after traffic counts in order to assess the situation. Traffic counts were recorded by the JCCOG Transportation Planning Division in August prior to the barricade's installation, and in November after the barricade had been installed. Counts were taken on both the north half and south half of Lexington Avenue. Not unexpectedly, on the north half of Lexington Avenue thero was a 68% reduction in traffic volume from 232 vehicles per day (vph) to 74 vph. The 85th percentile speed was reduced from 25 mph to 17 mph. On the O south half of Lexington Avenue there was a 40 Yo reduction in traffic volume from 268 vph to 160 vph. There was a 10% reduction in 85th percentile speed from 30 mph to 27 mph. On the parallel streets of Lee Street, Magowan Avenue, and Ferson Avenue traffic data were recorded as follows: Lee Street · 13% increase in traffic volume from 239 vph to 270 vph · 3% decrease in 85t~ percentile speed from 30 mph to 29 mph Magowan Avenue · 23% increase in traffic volume from 391 vph to 481 vph · 4% increase in 85th percentile speed from 27 mph to 28 mph Ferson Avenue · 6% increase in traffic volume from 1,461 vph to 1,550 vph · the 85th percentile speed remained the same at 27 mph In conclusion, there was a modest increase in traffic volume on the streets parallel to Lexington Avenue following the installation of the traffic calming barricade, a total of 210 vehicles per day. It is likely that some of this increase in volume can be attributed to the closure of Lexington Avenue. The two immediately parallel through streets, Lee Street and Magowan Avenue, recorded the largest percentage increases in traffic, but the actual traffic volume numbers are relatively Iow. Lee Street and Magowan Avenue both remain under the 500 vehicle per day . traffic threshold that we find appropriate for local residential streets. Ferson Avenue is a higher December 31, 2001 ~. Page 2 traffic volume street because it is an access route to the Ellis Avenue multi-family housing area. Vehicle speeds on Lee, Magowan and Ferson did not increase appreciably following installation of the barricade. The Lexington Avenue traffic calming barricade has been removed for the winter months, and will be reinstalled at the end of March 2002. In accordance with our traffic calming program, we will conduct a follow-up survey of the neighborhood in August 2002 to see if they wish to continue with the thrae-season barricade. cc: Steve Atkins Karin Franklin Marcia Klingaman Chuck Schmadeke Rick Fosse Matt Johnson Andy Rocca jccogadm~wnos~exingtonave.doc Location: L.~c~.Aw,.[3~&,~o~} JCCOG Date recorded: ~ ;~oo& Nov ~, 2001 Traffic Count Program Requested by: jerrico. I..,. c~, SEPTEMBER 2000 NOVEMBER 200t Park Road Park Ro~d ~5% - ~ 6. 7 mph -o1- ~ ~ s~: ~ 85% - 15. 7 m~ McLean S~t McLean S~ 1171 fS~ 85% - 27. 0 m~ River St~t River S~ Num~m shown indicate 2~our ~N~ average daily traffic DMa recorded by NC97 HI,TAR dMa classier If there are any questions ~m~e JCCOG Trans~Aation Planning D v s on ~ 3~235. Location: F~.,~v..~,,~oo~,~ JCCOG Date recorded: M.v & ~o~,,~.r ~OOl Redueated by: - '- 2001 TraffiC Count Program May 2001 November 200t I ¥ / -% Numbers shown indicate 24-hour average daily traffic Data recorded by NC97 HI-STAR data classifier If there are any questions contact the JCCOG Transportation Planning D v s on at 356-5235. Date recorded: May & November 200 f Requested by: u~r~d.o. ,.w. c~y 2001 Traffic Count Program May 2001 November 200t Park Road Park Read 165 226 Speed: '187 294 Speed: Mclean ~b~et McLean S~et Numl:~m shown indicate 24--hour average daily traffic Data recorded by NC97 HI-STAR data classifier I~j~.TCCOGI If there are any questions, contact the JCCOG Transportation Planning Division at 3.56-5235. ~ocation: L.~.,~=~ JCCOG Date recorded: R~uested by: · ' 2001 Traffic Count't.'rogram May 200~ November 200f / Numbers shown indicate 24-hour average daily traf~c Data recorded by N097 HI-STAR data classifier ~j~.~CCO(~ If there are any questions, contact the dCCOG Transportation Planning Division at 356.5235. Marian Karr ~ From: Jann Ream Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 10:48 AM To: 'Sater/ACTInc@act org' Cc: *City Council; Lisa Mollenhauer Subject: RE: bushes/1235 Burlington Tom - I did an inspection for the bushes and the tree on Muscatine- Again I am sorry for the confusion on the location of your concerns but I think we have it figured out now. Both of these locations are a violation and the Notices will be mailed 8/5/2002. Hopefully, the property owners will take care of this immediately but if they don't we will be able to abate the problem after 8/22/2002. ..... Original Message ..... From: Sater/ACTInc~act.org [mailto:Sater/ACTInc~actorg] Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 9:56 AM To: Jann Ream Cc: 'Sater/ACTInc~act.org' Subject: RE: bushes/1235 Burlington Thanks for the update. Tom Saterflel Jann Ream <Jann-Ream~iowa-clty.org> To: '"Sater/ACTInc~act org"' <Sater/ACTInc@act org> CC: 07/31/2002 09:50 AM Subject: RE: bushes/1235 Burlington Tom - We have been talking about two different locations but the bushes on Burlington are a problem so that's ok. I'm sorry it's taken so long to figure this out but I will check the bushes and the tree on Muscatine either today or tomorrow. ..... Original Message ..... From: Sater/ACTInc@act.org [mailto:Sater/ACTInc@act.org] Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 9:38 AM To: TheJann Ream CC: 'Sater/ACTInc@act.org' Subject: RE: bushes/ 1235 Burlington Let me start over since there may be some confusion here. As I look at the map I see the bushes I have been talking about located where Burlington dead ends into Muscatine. This is where there is a double row of cedar bushes on both sides of the sidewalk. I assumed the address would be on Muscatine but did not question when you gave the 1235 Burlington address. If you go to these bushes you are in that short section of road past the Stop sign on Muscatine that ends up at the Stop Light on Court and Muscatine. The Pine tree is over the side walk between the Cedar bushes and the Stop light. 8/5/02 Page 2 of 3 Have we been talking about two different locations all the time? I am sorry if my first set of directions were not clear. Tom Saterfiel Jann Ream <Jann-Ream@iowa-city.org> 07/31/2002 09:17 AM To: "'Sater/ACTInc@act.org'" <Sater/ACTInc@act.org> cc: Subject: RE: bushes/ 1235 Burlington Tom- I having a hard time visualizing where that pine tree is since Burlington and Court run parallel to each other. Is the tree on Burlington or Court Street? - If you could get me an address or a more specific location, it would helpful. Thanks. ..... Original Message ..... From: Sater/ACTInc@act.org [mailto:Sater/ACTInc@act.org] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 5:27 PM To: Jann Ream Cc: *City Council; Lisa Mollenhauer; 'sater/ACTInc@act.org' Subject: Re: bushes/ 1235 Burlington Thanks you for the feedback. I also would appreciate you having someone look at the pine tree that is growing over the sidewalk about 10 years from the bushes toward Court Street. The limb on that tree is very iow. Tom Saterfiel Jann Ream <Jann-Ream@iowa-city.org> 07/30/2002 02:33 PM To: "'sater/ACTInc@act.org'" <sater/ACTInc@act.org> cc: *City Council <Council@iowa-city.org>, Lisa Mollenhauer <Lisa-Mollenhauer@iowa-city.org> Subject: bushes/ 1235 Burlington Mr. Sater - Thank you for bringing these bushes to our attention again. We actually had Quality Care trim them back about the middle of July and I checked them right after they had been trimmed and they seemed ok. However, I think with the hard rains we have had in the last few weeks, these bushes have fallen towards the sidewalk again and now are worse than they were when 8/5/02 Page 3 of 3 you first notified us! So Quality Care has been told to go back and trim them way back from the sidewalk so this does not happen again. Hopefully they should be able to get to these bushes in the next few days. Thank you. Jann Ream - Code Enforcement Assistant 8/5/02 From: Officer R. A. Mebus Ref: Monthly Activity Report Date: Copy: Captain Widmer During the period covered by this report, 6different officers spent a total of 8.75 hfs rticipating in than 6community events and had contacted nearly 164 persons · Listed is an overview of the different events. DATE OFFICER Contacts Length Activity 07-02-02 Hartman 12 1.0 hr Neighborhood Watch Mtg 07-12-02 Mebus, 35 2.0 hrs Regina Summer DayCare- Humrichouse Safety Presentation 07-15-02 Moore 55 1.5 hrs "Kids Camp" ICPD Tour 07-17-02 Jackson 25 1.5 hrs CPAAlum Assn Mtg 07-21-02 Tack 12 1.75 Neighborhood Watch Mtg hrs 07-31-02 Mebus 25 1.0 hr Kids Dept Preschool - Safety Presentation Due to summer vacation - no school visits to report Iowa City Police Department P.A.U.L.A. Report -- July 2002 (PA ULA = Possession of Alcohol Under ther Legal Age) Monthly Totals Year-to-Date Totals PAULA per Visit Business Name visits arrests visits arrests (j/ear-to.date. Adagio Airliner 6 4 26 16 0.615 Alley Cat 3 '~ 8 · 5 __ 0.278 American Legion Aoeshe Restaurant Atlas World Grill 1 13 0.000 Baldy's Wraps Bob's Your Uncle Bo-James 14 17 59 88 1.441 Brewery Brothers Bar & Grill 17 5 95 23 0.242 Brown Bottle Buffalo Wild Wings Grill & Bar 9 0.000 Carlos O'Kelly's College St Billiards Club 6 41 5 0.122 Colonial Bowling Lanes 4 13 0.000 Cottage Bakery & Cafb Dave's Fox Head Tavern Deadwood Tavern 1 7 0.000 Devotay Diamond Dave's (Old Capitol) 6 1 _ 0.167 Diamond Dave's (Sycamore) Dublin Underground 5 0.000 Duds 'N Suds Eagle's Lodge Elks Country Club El Ranchero 1 2 2.000 Et Cetera 8 2 48 9 0.188 Fieldhouse Restaurant & Bar 11 5 60 62 1.033 First Avenue Club I 5 0.000 Fitzpatrick's 3 0.000 Gabe's 2 2 6 3 0.500 George's Buffet Givanni's Godfather's Pizza Green Room 1 0.000 Gringos Mexican Bar & Grill 1 Grizzly's South Side 5 0.000 Ground Round Restaurant Hanrahan's I Happy Joe's Pizza Highlander Hilltop Tavern 1 2 0.000 India Cafb Joe's Place 2 _ 9 0.000 Kitty Hawk ...... ~3 .... 0.00~0 ' La Casa La~'k R~e~taurant . _ Linn Street Caf~ Malone's 15 18 91 106 1.165 Martinis 17 2 92 17 0.185 Masala Memories 1 0.000 Micky's 2 15 1 0.067 Mike's Tap 1 1 Mill Restaurant 1 0.000 Moodo's (Downtown) 10 0.000 Moose Lodge Morgan's Bar & Grill (S~eraton)~ 6 . 75 .8 0.107 Mott,~y Cow Caf(~ Mumm's Saloon & Eatery 6 36 0.000 Okoboji Grill One-Eyed Jake's ~:~ 'i4 - 63 69 1.095 One Twenty Six Outer Limits ..... 1 0.000 Pagliai's Pizza Panchero's (Clinton St) Panchero's (Riverside Dr) Parthenon Pizza Hut 1 1 1.000 Press Box 1 16 0.000 Q Bar 4 1 21 9 0.429 Quinton's Bar & Deli 3 15 2 0.133 R T Grunts 4 2 0.500 Sam's Pizza Sanctuary Restaurant & Pub Serendipity Laundry Caf~ Shakespeare's 1 3 0.000 Sports Column 20 17 111 147 1.324 Summit Restaurant & Bar 17 15 104 83 0.798 Sushi Po Po T.G,I. Friday's Thai Flavors Thai Spice Tokyo Ichiban Union Bar 19 19 127 160 1.260 VFW Post Vine Tavern Vito's 20 11 116 - i07 - 0.922 Wig & Pen Pi~:za Pub Yen Ching Restaurant Zio Johno's Spa~]hetti House Totals: ] 221 132 1340 923 0.689 Other PAULA at non-business locations: 18 150 PAULA Totals: 150 1073 Iowa City Police Department IP10 Monthly Liquor License (OFF PREMISE SALES) Report July 2002 YEAR 2002 Monthly Total Year to Date Totals Arrest/Visit ~siness Nam~ ...... A ~B--- A B ~ YTD A&J ~INI M-,~ 22153 AC~ CiR ~J~XX LIQU0~ S~ORE - ~ ~~ ~0 -- COLLEGE ST. OAS S 1 ~ ~ 0.00 BAN'S SHOR~ ~TOP ~ORP ~ ~ ~ - ~ 0.0q - ~ELI-MART - ~MfN TREK 1 DELIMART - E. B~N~ON ~' 11 ~ - ~d~RT-HWY ~ ~E~:~CAT~NE- ~oc's sr~.D~b- 0 ~~0- -- D~T~h .... --'f ~~ - 0.00 ~;~ ~0~ ~NTER-~.D~D. GASBY.S - S~L-~ERT 1 5 ,,,~,M,SV- ~us~6~ s~. ~ ~ ~0~ 0.¢ - HA.O~U~R~- ~ ~'~ ~ 4 0 ~ 0.00 HARTIG 5RbG - MORMO~REK 0 ~0.00 HAWKEYE CON ST-KIRKWOOD 1 3 0 ~ 0.00 HAWKEYE 56~ ~T- commerce ..... ~ 0.00 _ HY-VEE WATERFRONT 1 JOHN'S~ROOER~IN~' 2 ~GO-GILB~ 3 ~ [~; ~-~ {~'~ 0.00 a o o.oo L&M M GH~Y-SHOP N~ 2 7 3 ~f~ 0 ~ 0 00 LNNSTREETCAFE 0 ~ 0 000 NEW'-PIONEER COOP , *' 0-- ,1~4, 0 0~ NORTH DODGE EXPRESS 1 ~ 5 ~ 0 ~ 0.00 OLD MARKET PLACE : ~ 0 ;~:~ 0.00 Column A is the number of times a license bolder is visited specifically checking for underage sales. Column B is the number of people charged with possession under the legal age. Note this is not the total number of charges. Iowa City Police Department Monthly Liquor License (OFF PREMISE SALES) Report July 2002 YEAR2002 Monthly Total Year to Date Totals I Arrest/Visit Business Na~_m_e '~-I I __B A I ~ ~~~ ON THE GO CONV. STORE INC. 1 3___: __.0_ ~ 0.00 OSCO DRUG --- ; ......... 0 ; ~ 0.00 PETRO-N-P~OVI~i~NS' 1 1 ',~ 0.00 PIZZA PALAC~ ..... : 0 0 ~ 0.00 RUSS' AMOco ~ERvICE - : - 0 l- ' 0.00 :: SCOTT BLVE) H~W-KEYF CON ST 0 : om 0.0o _ SUBURBAN AMOCO - ~ ~ 5 0 m 0.o0 ~UBURBAN AMocO:KEOKUK ~ '- ~ ~ 0.00 T&M Ml~i ~:1' ~ 2 0.0(~ TOBACCO OUTLET PLUs; S. RIV 0-" 0.00 - WALGREENS 1 1 0 ~ ~ TOTAL I401 101 11341 I OI I 0.00 Column A is the number of times a license holder is visited specifically checking for underage sales. Column B is the number of people charged with possession under the legal age. Note this is not the total number of charges. BUILDING PERMIT INFORMATION July 2002 · Type of Improvement: ADD - Addition ALT- Alteration REP- Repair FND - Foundation Only NEW- New OTH - Other type of construction Type of Use: RSF- Residential Single Family RDF - Residential Duplex RMF - Three or more residential RAC - Residential Accessory Building MIX- Mixed NON- Non-residential OTH- Other "v go: 2 City of Iowa City Date: S/2/2002 Extraction of Building Permit Data for to: 7/I/2002 Census Bureau e. From: 7/31/2002 Type Type Permit Number Name Address Impr Use Stories Units Valuation BLD01-00657 CITY OF IOWA CITY 123 S LINN ST ADD NON 2 1 $13,783,133 53,000 SQ FT EXPANSION AND RENOVATION OF LIBRARY BLD02-00422 SOUTHGATE DEVELOPMEN 2610NORTHGATE DR ADD NON 2 1 $825,000 2 STORY 11,396 SQ. FT ADDITION TO OFFICE BUILDING BLD02-00380 CHEZIK SAYERS 2343 MORMAN TREK BLV ADD NON 2 1 $220,000 ADDITION TO EXISTING SERVICE BUILDING BLD02-00400 IOWA CITY COMMUNITY S( 1900 MORNINGSIDE DR ADD NON 3 1 $46,465 WHEEL CHAIR LIFT AND RAMP ADDITION TO HIGH SCHOOL Total ADD/NON permits: 4 Total Valuation: $14,874,598 BLD02-00457 FRANTZ CONSTRUCTION C~ 1506 SOMERSET LN ADD RMF 2 1 $13,447 3 SEASON PORCH ADDITION TO RMF UNIT BLD02-00325 TOM & JAN PLATH 3387 WENTWORTH PL ADD RMF I 1 $12,500 3 SEASON PORCH ADDITION TO RMF I Total ADD/RMF permits: 2 Total Valuation: $25,947 BLD02-00446 BARBARA & ETHAN CANIN 210 RICHARDS ST ADD RSF 2 1 $240,000 2 STORY ADDITION TO SFD WITH DETACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00398 JENNIFER JOSLIN & THERE 700 WHITING AVE ADD RSF 2 1 $220,000 ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00309 BILL DAVIES & PAT WEIR 1133 MAPLE ST ADD RSF 2 I $110,000 ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00421 JOHN & SHIRLEY LEK1N 830 WALNUT ST ADD RSF 2 0 $80,000 2 STORY ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00397 PAT & TONYA NAUGHTON 650 SCOTT PARK DR ADD RSF 2 1 $38,000 ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00475 CRAIG O STREED & MARSH 324 LEE ST ADD RSF 1 0 $35,000 10' GARAGE ADDITION AND 15' KITCHEN ADDITION BLD02-00411 JIM FRIDAY 509 S LUCAS ST ADD RSF 1 1 $30,000 ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00443 JEFF & JILL RISK 1215 GINTER AVE ADD RSY 2 6 $21,000 3 SEASON PORCH ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00454 LINDA GERHOLD 721 FAIRCHILD ST ADD RSF 1 0 $20,000 ROOM AND DECK ADDITION TO SFD FENCE BLD02-00463 ALAN F NAGEL & KRIST1N ( 1215 CAMP CARDINAL RD ADD RSF I 0 $18,750 REPLACE FOUNDATION OF PORCH AND REMODEL PORCH AND ADD DECK BLD02-00354 KATHLEEN HANSEN 1124 SPRUCE ST ADD RSF 1 0 $13,776 CONSTRUCT 12' X 12' PATIO ROOM WITH 10' X 12' UNCOVERED DECK BLD02-00437 ROGER D & PENNY L MEDS 2345 MACBRIDE DR ADD RSF 2 8 $7,000 ROOM AND DECK ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00492 DAVID & LISA HENKHAUS 46 GOLDFINCH CIR ADD RSF I 0 $5,500 DECK ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00440 SUZANNE KOURY 919 DEFOREST AVE ADD RSF 2 6 $4,000 SCREEN PORCH ADDITION TO SFD P~.: 3 City of Iowa City Dat~: 8/2/2002 Extraction of Building Permit Data for To: 7/1/2002 Census Bureau Report From: 7/31/2002 Type Type Permit Number Name Address Impr ~ Stories Units Valuation BLD02-00420 TITZE, R KATHERINE 2 TRIANGLE PL ADD RSF 1 0 $2,600 12' X 22' WOOD DECK BLD02-00493 BRAD WALTERS 3311 SHAMROCK DR ADD RSF 1 0 $2,500 DECK ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00415 CECIL SHELLADY 7 DURHAM CT ADD RSF 1 1 $2,200 DECK ADDITION TO SFD BLD02~00429 LANCE BOLTON 957 PEPPER DR ADD RSF 2 6 $1,600 PORCH ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00441 KEV1N KAUFMAN 1205 DIANA ST ADD RSF 2 0 $1,500 DECK ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00477 MICHAEL P & RACHAEL M J 1115 DEFOREST AVE ADD RSF 1 0 $1,000 8' X 14' UNCOVERED WOOD DECK BLD02-00488 HELEN R MART1NSON 1215 YEWELL ST ADD RSF 1 0 $961 CONCRETE PATIO WITH FOOTINGS BLD02-00435 JOHN D WATSON 403 ELMRIDGE AVE ADD RSF 2 6 $900 DECK ADDITION TO SFD BLD02-00114 HANNA, MARY C N 126 AMHURST ST ADD RSF 1 0 $0 12' X 32' ROOM ADDITION(HEATED) Total ADD/RSF permits: 23 Total Valuation: $856,287 BLD02-00369 CHESTER PELSANG III 2901 NORTHGATE AVE ALT NON 1 ! $360,000 SLEEP LAB IN BASEMENT OF COMMERCIAL BUILDING BLD02-00419 MCINNERNEY'S BAR & GRII 161 HIGHWAY 1 WEST ALT NON 1 1 $70,000 CHANGE OF USE FROM RETAIL TO RESTAURANT 3146 SQ FT INCLUDING OUTDOOR SERVICE AREA BLD02-00426 UN~VERSITEES 201 S CLINTON ST 121 ALT NON 2 6 $50,000 INTERIOR TENANT FINISH OF MALL SPACE BLD02-00431 SOLEIL TANNING SALON 311 S LINN ST ALT NON 2 6 $15,000 EXPANSION OF TANNING SALON BLD02-00396 WILLIAM LAUNSPACH 18 S VAN BUREN ST ALT NON 2 I $8,500 ALTERATION AND RAMP ADDITION TO COMMERCIAL OFFICE SPACE CHANGE OF USE FROM OFFICE TO MEDICAL OFFICE BLD02-00474 MEADOW, INC 327 MARKET ST ALT NON 1 0 $300 MOVE AN INTERIOR WALL Total ALT/NON permits :6 Total Valuation: $503,800 BLD02-00427 NEPTUNE LAND COMPANY I 107 PRAIRIE DU CHIEN R ALT RDF 2 6 $5,500 KITCHEN REMODEL OF RDF BLD02-00046 ALBERHASKY, JAMES 725 BOWERY ST ALT RDF 2 2 $2,000 CONVERT TRIPLEX TO DUPLEX Total ALT/RDF permits: 2 Total Valuation: $7,500[ BLD02-00439 AUR 102 -08 S LINN ST ALT RMF 2 0 $12,000 INSTALL SLOPED ROOF TRUSSES OVER FLAT ROOF Page: '4 City of Iowa City Date: 8/2/2002 Extraction of Building Permit Data for To: 7/1/2002 Census Bureau Report From: 7/3 1/2002 Type Type Permit Number Name Address Impr Use Stories Units Valuation BLD02-00232 PHI DELTA THETA HOUSIN~ 729 N DUBUQUE ST ALT RMF 1 1 $1,000 PROVIDE FIRE SEPARATION CEILING IN BOILER ROOM TotalALT/RMF permits: 2 Total Valuation: $13,000 [ BLD02-00472 RON GESSNER & MICHELLE 2745 HICKORY TR ALT RSF 2 0 $30,000 BASEMENT FINISH BLD02-00417 LYNN BRENNAMAN 821 EASTMOOR DR ALT RSF 1 1 $22,000 INTERIOR ALTERATION OF SFD BLD02-00333 RON SCHIETTER 50 NORWOOD CIR ALT RSF 1 0 $15,000 FIRST FLOOR BATH REMODEL AND INSTALL BATH IN BASEMENT BLD02-00442 NEIL AYLWARD 815 WOODSIDE DR ALT RSF 1 1 $15,000 BATHROOM FOR RSF BLD02-00418 CYNTHIA & DAVID FREUN[ 1224 ASH ST ALT RSF 2 2 $11,500 KITCHEN REMODEL OF SFD BLD02-00444 LUTGENDORF, PHILIP A 911 IOWA AVE ' ALT RSF 1 1 $8,600 CONVERT STUDIO SPACE INTO A GARAGE BLD02-00434 BARB VAKULSKAS 2033 LITTLE CREEK LN ALT RSF 1 1 $4,754 ALTER SCREEN PORCH TO 3 SEASON BLD02-00455 MATTHEW & DAVID SHEET 1162 JEFFERSON ST ALT RSF 2 1 $2,000 BASEMENT EGRESS WINDOW BLD02-00461 MAEVE K CLARK 422 WALES ST ALT RSF 1 0 $800 REMOVE BEARING WALL AT 1 ST FLOOR AND REPLACE WITH LVL BLD02-00405 ERIC MCDERMOTT 1316 MUSCATINE AVE ALT RSF 1 I $700 EGRESS WINDOW IN UNFINISHED BASEMENT BLD02-00433 JAMES & BECKY BUXTON 1030 JEFFERSON ST ALT RSF 2 1 $400 ADD BEDROOM TO SFD I Total ALTfRSF permits: 11 Total Valuation: $110,754 ~ BLD02-00445 PROCTER & GAMBLE 2200 LOWER MUSCATINE FND NON I I $226,950 FOUNDATION FOR 39,710 SQ FT WAREHOUSE ADDITION TO MANUFACTURING PLANT BLD02-00436 FAREWAY STORES 1NC 2765 COMMERCE DR FND NON 1 0 $45,000 FOUNDATION FOR NEW 24,351 SQUARE FOOT GROCERY STORE BLD02-00423 SOUTHGATE DEVELOPMEN 2610 NORTHGATE DR FND NON 2 0 $30,000 FOUNDATION FOR 2 STORY 11,396 SQ. FT ADDITION TO OFFICE BUILDING BLD02-00410 HY-VEE INC 260 STEVENS DR FND NON 1 1 $10,000 FOUNDATION FOR GAS STATION Total FND/NON permils: 4 Total Valuation: $311,950 ~ BLD02-00459 WlLLIAMSON NISSAN 817 HIGHWAY #1 WEST NEW NON t 1 $1,150,000 9,200 SQ FT CAR DEALERSHIP BUILDING WITH SERVICE BAYS BLD02-00363 FAREWAY STORES INC 2765 COMMERCE DR NEW NON 1 0 $955,000 NEW 24,351 SQUARE FOOT GROCERY STORE BLD02-00361 HY-VEE INC 260 STEVENS DR NEW NON 1 0 $450,000 NEW GAS STATION & CONVENIENCE STORE 'eag;: ~ City of Iowa City Da~:: 8/2/2002 Extraction of Building Permit Data for To: 7/I a002 Census Bureau Report From: 7/31/2002 Type Type Permit Number Name Address lmpr Use Stories Units Valuation BLD02-00449 HY-VEE 1NC 260 STEVENS DR NEW NON 1 1 $334,939 GAS PUMPS AND CANOPY FOR CONVENIENCE STORE BLD02-00447 NOAH MILES 117 HIGHWAY 1 WEST NEW NON 1 1 $6,500 DRIVE UP COFFEE SHOP Total NEW/NON permits: 5 Total Valuation: $2,896,439 [I 1 BLD02-00489 PATRICIA R EDBERG 1380 DODGE ST CT NEW RAC 1 0 $15,600 DETACHED GARAGE ADDITION TO SFD I Total NEW/RAC permits: 1 Total Valuation: $15,600 BLD02-00389 SYCAMORE APARTMENTS 2073 KOUNTRY LANE NEW RMF 3 12 $786,043 12 PLEX APARTMENT BUILDING BLD02-00390 SYCAMORE APARTMENTS 2127 KOUNTRY LANE NEW RMF 2 8 $589,532 8 PLEX APARTMENT BUILDING BLD02-00425 ARLINGTON DEVELOPMEN' 4430 COURT STREET NEW RMF 2 6 $579,236 6 PLEX TOWNHOUSES WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGES I Total NEW/RMF permits: 3 Total Valuation: $1,954,811 II 1 BLD02-00378 JIM & NANCY BAKER 30 ALDER CT NEW RSF 1 1 $350,000 SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00465 RANDY L NANCY J KRUTZF 3634 ELGIN DR NEW RSF 1 1 $230,000 S.F.D. WITH TWO CAR ATTACHED GARAGE BLD02-00438 TKAVIS SHIELD 4721 DRYDEN CT NEW RSF 2 1 $207,000 SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00416 VANSON CONSTRUCTION 62 KEARNEY CT NEW RSF I 1 $201,000 SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00392 ROBERT & DAWN STODDAt 167 HUMMINGBIRD LN NEW RSF 1 1 $164,164 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00467 FRANTZ CONSTRUCTION C~ 1651 WETHERBY DR NEW RSF 1 1 $157,772 S.F.D. WITH TWO CAR GARAGE BLD02-00468 ARLINGTON DEVELOPMEN' 75 ASHFORD PL NEW RSF 2 l $150,000 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00312 KEVIN KIDWELL 1222 WILD PRAIRIE DR NEW RSF 1 I $147,421 SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00404 WALDEN WOOD ASSOCIAT] 81 ANDREA CT NEW RSF 2 1 $143,000 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00453 ARLINGTON DEVELOPMEN' 94 ASHFORD PL NEW RSF 2 1 $137,387 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00401 WALDEN WOOD ASSOCIAT] 63 ANDREA CT NEW RSF 2 1 $127,000 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00402 WALDEN WOOD ASSOCIAT] 69 ANDREA CT NEW RSF 2 1 $127,000 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00403 WALDEN WOOD ASSOCIAT] 75 ANDREA CT NEW RSF 2 1 $127,000 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE Page:' 6 City of Iowa City Date: 8/2/2002 Extraction of Building Permit Data for To: 7/1/2002 Census Bureau x.p,[ From: 7/31/2002 Type Type Permit Number Name Address Impr U~ Stories Units Valuation BLD02-O0452 ARLINGTON DEVELOPMEN' 39 ASHFORD PL NEW RSF 1 0 $121,267 SFD WITH ATTACHED 3 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00471 STEVE KOHLI CONST. 3003 RUSSELL DRIVE NEW RSF 2 1 $113,251 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00393 STEVE KOHLI CONSTRUCTI 1441 LANGENBERG AVE NEW RSF I i $104,141 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00466 FRANTZ CONSTRUCTION O 1641 WETHERBY DR NEW RSF 2 1 $103,622 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00395 FRANTZ CONSTRUCTION C~ 1631 WETHERBY DR NEW RSF 1 1 $100,954 SFD WITH ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE BLD02-00470 STEVE KOHLI CONSTRUCTl 1520 LANGENBERG AVE NEW RSF 2 1 $82,000 S.F.D. WITH TWO CAR GARAGE BLD02-00432 MICHAEL & SHANNON THII 2511 WHISPERING MEAD( NEW RSF 1 1 $63,578 SFD MANUFACTURED HOME PLACED ON PERMANENT FOUNDATION Total NEW/RSF permits: 20 Total Valuation: $2,957,557 BLD02-00399 TOM BERG 709 S SUMMIT ST OTH RSF 1 1 $5,000 FENCE FOR SFD Total OTH/RSF permits: I Total Valuation: $5,000 BLD02-00430 GRANT WOOD ELEMENTAR 1930 LAKESIDE DR REP NON I 0 $57,000 ILEROOF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BLD02-00383 MACHT, INC 308 E BURLINGTON ST REP NON 2 6 $15,000 RESIDING OF COMMERCIAL BUILDING Total REP/NON permits: 2 Total Valuation: $72,000 BLD01-00334 CHARLES B THAYER 204 PARK RD REP RDF l 1 $10,000 REPLACE WINDOWS IN HOUSE Total REI'/RDF permits: 1 Total Valuation: $10,000 BLD02-00409 CHRIS BOWER 632 S DODGE ST REP RMF 3 1 $19,000 REROOF OF RMF BLD02-00385 CAYMAN POINT CONDOS 205 CAYMAN ST REP PdMF 0 0 $10,000 REROOF OF 4 UNIT RMF BLD02-00408 CAYMAN POINT CONDO AS 147 CAYMAN ST REP RMF 1 l $10,000 REROOF OF RIvlF 147-49-51-53 CAYMAN ST BLD02-00473 REMINGTON, BETTY B 127 CAYMAN ST REP RMF 2 0 $10,000 REROOF Total REP/RMF permits: 4 . Total Valuation: $49,000 II 1 P~e: ? City of Iowa City Date: 8/2/2002 Extraction of Building Permit Data for To: 7/1/2002 Census Bureau From: 7/31/2002 r~epm~ Type Type Permit Number Name Address Impr Use Stories Units Valuation BLD02-00424 MARY C N HANNA 126 AMHURST ST REP RSF 1 0 $31,430 MAKE REPAIRS TO ADDITION BLD02-00407 DENISE MERRISS & DOUG Ix 1210 SUNSET ST REP RSF I I $2,500 PORCH REPAIR OF SFD BLD02-00451 GRETA ANDERSON 803 S LUCAS ST REP RSF 2 1 $1,200 FOUNDATION REPAIR OF SFD Total REP/RSF permits: 3 Total Valuation: $35,130 ~ I GRAND TOTALS: PERMITS: 94 VALUATION: $24,699,373 ] MIN UTES F I N A L/AP P ROVE D DEER TASK FORCE MEETING JUNE 25, 2O02 LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM - CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Farrant, Harold Goff, Lezlie Hall, Jan Ashman, Nancy Menning, Mark Sadler, Kadme Reveiz MEMBERS ABSENT: Pete Sidwell, Linda Dykstra STAFF PRESENT: Lisa Mollenhauer OTHERS: Tim Thompson (IDNR) CALL TO ORDER Farrant called the meeting to order at 6:45 P.M. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL None. APPROVE MINUTES Minutes of June 5 were approved with no changes. 2002-2003 PLAN RECOMMENDATION Goff raised a concern that in many areas, it seemed the population was still a concern. He thought bow hunting should be seriously considered, perhaps in a controlled area where the human population isn't high. He believes this is the first year it is a practical option as numbers of deer have been too high in the past. Sandier relayed it seems his experience with hunters in the past is that they desire a specific deer and will not settle for anything less. They will sit in a tree for two to three weeks and allow deer to pass below them, waiting for one that matches what they want. Manning thought in an urban hunt, there may be a different motivation for hunters. Thompson said that follow-up surveys from the Coralville program, hunters indicated there were so many other opportunities, they decided to go elsewhere rather than shoot does in Coralville. One hunter did take 13 deer. Thompson mentioned if Iowa City wanted to allow bow hunting, the DNR would need to make Iowa City part of the special zone north of town. Mollenhauer inquired as to the timeframe for such a request. Thompson indicated April before the next hunting season. The City has two options from the DNR's perspective: 1) The City could be considered a landowner. Under this scenario, if the City stipulated only does could be killed and a hunter killed a buck, the DNR could not impose a violation. 2) Special zone tags. These are State-issued, for a specific area with specific guidelines the DNR can enforce. Timeline for getting special zone tags for this year would be August 20. Because the Long-Term Plan and City Code would need to be amended, Task Fome members did not view this as a viable option for consideration in 2002-2003. Mollenhauer raised the question that if the Iowa City deer population gets close to the biological carrying capacity, are there enough deer present to satisfy hunters. If they don't see a deer for extended periods of time, is it worth their time to sit? Would they be satisfied with that opportunity. Deer Task Force Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 Page 2 Thompson said that in the special zone north of town, it probably averages around 35 deer per square mile but they did have concentrated areas with more than 60-70 deer per square mile. Deer concentrate where the habitat is. He said there are many other hunting opportunities state-wide and believes there would need to be some type of enticement to get hunters to participate. Goff reiterated his concern about Iowa City's deer population, particularly with the special hunts surrounding Iowa City. A refuge could be created inside the City limits. He believes one of the reasons our numbers are reduced could be attributed to the pressure from White Buffalo on the City's herd. Perhaps we should have kids go out with capguns and create disturbance to pretend they are hunting deer to keep them dispersed. Farrant reminded the group that, in her opinion, there are a couple of things we need to consider in good faith before amending the plan. 1) It was a strong sentiment that we did not want to provide recreational opportunities as part of the deer management plan. We made no judgement about recreation, it was just not what this group was interested in providing. 2) The Task Force has spent a great deal of time talking about humane kill. Community acceptance has always been a huge consideration. She happens to believe the majority of Iowa City residents would not support a bow hunt. Sandier said rarely is a bow-shot instantaneous. In his opinion, it must be relatively painless because he's witnessed deer being shot with an arrow, it doesn't make a bleating sound. Head shots, however, by snipers are instantaneous. When you hit a deer in the brain, everything stops. You don't get that when it's hit some place else. Farrant added that was a very impor[ant issue to a lot of people. That's why they could embrace the sharpshoot. Sandier said sharpshooting is instantaneous if a headshot is utilized. Farrant said that, in an odd sort of way, people were soothed by that concept. They stopped resisting when they knew we were going to utilize a method that resulted in instant death and the kill method was not viewed as a sport. Mollenhauer suggested the Task Force discuss and decide whether or not kill should take place before investigating methods. Since the population is below 35 per square mile, complaints are relatively non-existent (except on the west side under or adjacent to multiple jurisdictions), and deer- vehicle accidents have stabilized, the Task Force would need to justify a decision to kill. Ashman added if a kill were recommended under these circumstances, some could view it as gratuitous killing. Menning said she's always understood, for purposes of deciding whether or not to kill, we use the helicopter count. The added birth population is figured in by the DNR on how many deer to kill, but not the decision on whether to kill. Farrant reiterated her belief that there are numerous people in this community who are very concerned that if we have to do a distasteful thing, we do it in the most humane way possible. She said we have found nobody who would agree that killing with a bow and arrow, particularly in the hands of a recreational amateur is going to meet the criteria that we had when we wrote this plan. We would have to amend the principles on which the plan was formulated in order to allow bow hunting. Sandier said if a hunter cannot demonstrate their ability to use a bow, they should not be allowed to participate. Sandier agrees with Farrant that the plan would need to be amended to use bow hunters. Farrant said if the tenor of the community has changed, and a majority of people support bow hunting, the majodty rules. But she doesn't believe that is the case at this time. Goff responded that we haven't ever polled the community. Activists (including Task Force members) have expressed their views, but the general public has not. Ashman said she does not believe people who have really strong Deer Task Force Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 Page 3 feelings about this subject have changed their minds. Menning added she does not think residents of Iowa City will ever support bow hunting. Residents of Coralville and Madon may support it, but she doesn't believe this community ever will - but she doesn't have any data to go on. Community forums typically bring out those with extreme or activist views, not necessarily the majodty opinion. Goff indicated he thinks the only issue general citizens have are concerns about spending $100,000 a year on a program to kill deer. Mollenhauer said it comes to around $1.60 per Iowa City resident per year. Farrant said she's had people tell her "1 don't like it but just do it. I don't want to see or think about it." Money was raised at Council public hearings, but was not a big issue. Menning believes money will be a major issue if contraception is ever an option because it will be vastly more expensive than sharpshooting. Members would like the City to investigate the possibility of a professional community survey regarding kill options. Menning said she has no interest in amending the Long-Term Management Plan at this time, but community support is something that needs to be flagged for next year. Farrant said a great deal of intuitive decision making went into the plan. Mollenhauer reminded the group the fundamental question is "should killing take place." If the answer is yes, a method needs to be recommended. If the answer is no, it's a non-issue. Sandier does not believe the plan, as written, leads us in a direction where killing is justified this year. It would need to be amended, as well as City Code. In order to allow bow hunting in Iowa City, a public hearing would be held as well as three readings. Menning suggested that perhaps to get public opinion on the issue and in order to fulfill our mandate to consider all legal lethal options, an ordinance amendment allowing bow hunting could be presented to the City Council some time in the next several months. Goff said we will kill fewer deer if we kill each year. Don't wait until the population might double before we take action. He would like to see us address the bow issue but if that doesn't come to pass, he favors some kind of sharpshooting this year. Ashman said we do not have the numbers of deer, combined with complaints, to justify the killing. Goff said he believes there are more than 35 per square mile now because of the birth. [Hall arrived] Farrant is reluctant to do anything that is not consistent with the Long-Term Plan. It would have to be amended if we are not going to operate under the Plan. She believes it should be altered publicly and she can't, in light of the discussion that led to the plan, think of an urgency that would lead her to support changing the plan. She concedes Goff may be correct in his assessment of how the population may increase over the next year as there are many variables involved. Ashman said she hates killing deer. She supported the deer "assassin." She still supports the deer "assassin." She understands we don't have money for two years and we have to make some choices. Tony DeNicola has indicated he doesn't think it would be financially responsible to spend the money on sharpshooting this year. She thinks it's pretty incredible that he recommended that since he would be the one to benefit financially from shooting. She believes Tony is honest and commends him for saying shooting would not necessarily be a good idea this year. Sandlers agrees for 100 deer, it isn't worth bringing in sharpshooters. Goff asked if the group was about killing fewer deer. Why wait until the population doubles to kill? Hall indicated it was more cost effective to wait. Farrant added it was always the goal to not have to kill every year. This is what we were looking for as a result of our recommendations. Deer Task Force Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 Page 4 By a vote of 6-1 (Coif voting no, Sidwell and Dykstra absent), the Task Force recommends no lethal component in the 2002-2003 Deer Management Plan. EDUCATION PROJECTS Mollenhauer updated members on the deer-vehicle crash video. Sidwell is reviewing the scdpt. A copy of the Michigan deer-crash video has been received. Ashman will continue to work with members on the brochure. ANNOUNCEMENTS Reveiz will only be with the Task Fome through July. Her vacancy will be announced after her departure. Next meeting is set for Tuesday, July 16, 6:30 p.m. Lobby Conference Room. Mollenhauer and Farrant will prepare a draft which will be distributed late in the week prior to the meeting. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:20 P.M. Minutes submitted by Lisa Mollenhauer Score a Point for online I.C. police blotter Itdidn't take long to discover a when the same charges are filed covered a police beat will tell you, benefit from the decision to put theagainst, say, an Er~glish major from sometimes you have to be especially Iowa City poUce log on the Dubuque. That kind ~f. careful when perusin~ the log because Iut~meC "~tion" doesn't need reparts occasiormUy will get Some fervent Hawkeye fans who defending. But the situation does show misplaced~ If you're in a hurry, and thought the constabulary was pickin~ how modern technology has turned only go througtl the new reports until on athletes were able tradition upside down, you find the ones you cheched the to go to the site and Although police logs have long been previous day, you might ~ a good see their suspicions public information, routinely impected one that was "accidenta3y' filed were groundless, or by reporters, the vast majority of further down in the stack. at least not supported entries are never seen outside the cop That's all changed now. If your son by the evidence, shop. News organizations make or daul~ter is living in Iowa Cit~, all Clearly, one need not decisions based on how important the you have to do to mahe sure they're be on scholamhip in infraction/s perceived to be and how staying out of trouble -- or at least out Iowa City to run much space is available, of the hoosegow -- is check the police afoul of laws deal/ng The Iowa City Gazette and Cedar log Web site every day for familiar with public l~apids Gazette don't ordinarily report ~ ~ intoxication, th~ugs like public intoxication, for. ' The new policy could have both 'me ~ disturbing the peace example, and are among the relatively good and bad implications. We won't and s~mfl~r low-level few newspapers e~ any size that stil] know for a few months whether the trans[~ssions. Ora~r~ folks are report arrests for drunken driving. In good outweighs the bad. One ~ ~g nailed when they get out of ]arger cities the standard is hi~her, however, already is clear l~om regular line, too. Even a mm'der in Orlando, ~a., may inspections of the lo~. The difference is tl~t they aren't not be reported in all editions e~ the The Ped Mall is an awfully Uvely getting their names in the paper, hometown Sentinel, an editor once place after 2 It should be obvious why journalists told me, Jf it appears to be of only · · · conside~ it newsworthy when a neighborhood significance. stm'th~ cornerback is arrested but not Moreover, as any reporter who has 410 EAST WASHrNGTON STREET, IOWA CITY, IA 52240 (319) 356-5275 ! FAX # (319) 356-5449 "An Accredited Police Department" Date: August 7, 2002 To: City Council From: RJ Winkelhake Ref: Police Traffic Stop Data Study The University of Louisville will present the results of the study of the Traffic stop Practices of the Iowa City Police Department at the work session of the City Council on the 19th of August 2002. A copy of the report is in the Council packet. Traffic Stop Praetiee~- of the Iowa City Police Department: April 1 - ~~ 31,2001 * Research Team Terry D. Edwards, J.D. Elizabeth L. G-rossi, Ph.D. Gennaro F. Vito, Ph.D. Angela D. West, Ph.D. University of Louisville Department of Justice Administration Brigman Hall, 2~a Floor. Louisville, KY 40292 (502) 852-6567 June 13, 2002 *This report is confidential and is intended for the Iowa City Police Depa~ hnent to use as it deems necessary. It is not to be distributed, quoted, or cited without the express written consent oftbe authors, of Chief R.J. Winkelhake, or others that the ICPD may designate. Executive Summa~ This ~ s~es the f'mdin~ o£ a study conducted u~in§ data collected by the Iowa City Police Department between April 1, 2001 and December 31, 2001. These data resulted from 9,702 interactions between law enforcement officers and citizens during traffic-related contacts. Information was collected about the driver, the officer, and the stop event. Driver demographics included race, sex, age, residency, and vehicle registration. The only information collected about the off'leer was officer badge number. Finally, data collected about the stop event include the date, time of day, "reason for stop," "search," "property seized," "force," and "outcome oftbe stop." Data analysis was conducted with the aid of SPSS-11.0 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences). Analyses were conducted on two levels. First, descriptive analysis, using percentages, summarized stop patterns, stop characteristics, and driver demographics. This information is useful only to describe the existing state of affairs ("what is"), but not to explain them ("why") or to formulate predictions about future events ("what if'). To address the complex relationships that exist among different variables, a program called "chi-square automatic interaction detector" or CHAID was used to evaluate the variables in tvtms of their relationships with one another (multivariate analysis). The greatest percentage of stops was made in the month of April (15%), with the fewest in June (9%). Interestingly, 41% of stops oocurred between midnight and 3am, with the third shift (11 pm-7am) responsible for the greatest percentage (54%). Stopped drivers were mostly White (84%), male (65%), young (median age of 23), Iowa City residents (62%), with Iowa vehicle registrations (86.5%). Drivers were mainly stopped for moving violations (69%), were not searched (95%), and were released with a warning (58%). The descriptive analysis indicated some slight percentage differences among the races in certain events (e.g., stopped for equipmentYregistration violations). These percentage differences, however, cannot be used to infer correlation or causation ("racial profiling"). To make these types of inferences, multivariate analyses using CHAID were conducted. CHAID segments the sample of traffic stops and reveals the inteaxelationship between the potential predictors and the events involved in the stop. The CHAID procedure generates a "decision tree" that identifies significant predictors of each decision in question. In effect, the procedure "cross-references" each event with each potential predictor. Results from CHAID analyses resulted in only three events (mov'mg violation, being warned, being cited) with siL, nlficant predictors. Being stopped for a moving violation was significantly related to the age of the driver; the youngest and oldest drivers were most likely to be stopped for this reason. Warned drivers were those least likely to have been searched, and cited drivers were those least likely to have been stopped for an equipment/registration violation. Race of the driver never appeared as an independent predictor of any event. These data provide no empirical evidence that the ICPD is systematically engaging in discriminatory stop practices. Stops conducted by the Iowa City Police Department, aa a whole, during the study period, do not involve the race of the driver as a sjEnificant factor related to events and outcomes. This does not mean, however, that no individual citizen ever experienced discrimination. It is always possible that individual officers may engage in racially biased practices, both in determining which drivers they will or will not stop and in determining what steps to take after the initial contact. To detect discriminatory practices at this level, however, requires constant vigilance by the community, by all the officers within the depa~ent, and by the deparlmental administration. Statistical analysis, while valuable, cannot substitute for community involvement and effective management. The full report notes some minor problems with the data entry process, provides a discossion of the "baseline dilemma," makes recommendations for continued study to obtain a full year of "clean" dam, and suggests modifications of the data collection instrument to include more variables (e.g., warrant cheek information). Table Of Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 - 3 Methods ..................................................................................................................... 3 - 7 Data Collection .............................................................................................. 3 Variables ........................................................................................................... 4 Collection and Measurement Concerns ............................................................. 5 Analyses and Results ......................................................................................... 6 Descriptive Analyses ~md Results ............................................................................ 7 - 16 Driver Demographics .................................................................. 7 Stop Event ............................................................................... 10 Sul~mary of Descriptive Analyses ................................................................. 16 CHAID Analyses and Results ................................................................................... 16 - 23 CHAID Results ............................................................................................. 20 Reason for Stop ................................................................. 20 Outcome ......................................................................... 22 Sunmmry of CHAID Analyses ........................................................................... 23 The "Baseline" Dilemma! ............................................................................................. 23 Legal Issues Relating to BiasLRacial Profiling Data Collection and Analysis ........ 26 - 29 Overview ................................................................................. 26 Civil Liability ............................................................................ 26 Disclosure of Information~Records ................................................... 28 Conclusion ................................................................................ 29 Conclusion and Recommendations ............................................................................. 30 - 33 Bibliography ...................................................................................... 34 Appendices ....................................................................................... 35 Appendix A: Iowa City Police Department Policy on Racial ProfiYmg Appendix B: Iowa City Police Contact Sheet Introduction Racial Profiling Accusations of discriminatory traffic stop practices ("racial profiling") have emerged as a critical issue facing law enforcement. According to a 1999 Gallup poll and research conducted by the American Institute of Public Opinion (2000), many believe that racial profiling is widespread and disapprove of the practice of stopping motorists simply because the driver fits a p~ieular profile (Newport, 1999). In response to this growing concern regarding traffic stops and a more general distrust of law enforcement personnel, many police departments across the U.S. have begun to more closely examine their traffic stop policies and procedures. Further, some peliee departments have begun collecting traffic stop data. The collection of traffic stop data initially may appear to be a rather straightforward process. In reality, however, the collection and analysis of traffic stop data is far from simplistic. A number of concerns must be addressed by any agency comemplating such an endeavor. These eoncorns range from defining the issues, developing data collection instalments and procedures, training personnel to collect data, and determining the most appropriate means to analyze the datm Defining Racial Profiling The precise definition of racial profiling is a matter ofdehate. While no universal definition exists, racial profiling is generally regarded as any act by law enforcement, whether it involves motorists or pedestrians, based solely on the rave of the alleged violator (Ramirez, McDevitt 8: Fan'eli, 2000). In expanding on this broad definition, the U.S. Department of Justice considers racial profiling to be "any police action that relies upon the race, ethnicity or llat'lona] origin of an individual rather than behavior of that individual that leads the police to a particular individual who has been engaged in or having been engaged in criminal activity" (Ramirez, McDevitt & Farrell, 2000). Accordingly, police may use race and ethnicity to determine if an individual matches a suspect description but police may not use stereotypes when deciding who to stop, to search, or make subject to other stop - related actions. Further, as Withrow (2002) notes, profiling by police can be further defined based on specific factors used in profiling. MacDonald (2000) suggests that profiling can be considered hard or soft. Hard profiling occurs when race is the one and only factor used in police decisions to stop a particular motorist. Soft profiling occurs when race is one of several factors the police use in determining whom they stop. For this report, the Iowa City Police Department defines racial profiling as "the detemion, interdiction, exercise of discretion or use of authority against any person on the basis of their racial or ethnic status or characteristics" (Racial Profiling, General Order 01~01). A copy of this policy is contained in Appendix A. Collecting Data Many departmems have, independently or in collaboration with others, undertaken the task of analyzing traffic stop data. These agencies vary in terms of their structure and function, as well as in the type of data they collect. In addition, some data collection efforts involve sophisticated data analyses where others simply compare basic percentages. These differences, on the surface, are not all that dramatic. When making conclusions about the practices of a department, however, these methodological considerations take on more importance. In fact, methodological considerations are considered paramount by prevailing judicial opinions (see following discussion on legal issues). It should he noted; however, just as there are no widely accepted standards for defining racial profiling, the methods of collecting and analyzing traffic stop data are not universal. 2 Police departments across the country collect a variety of data elements in their analysis of racial profiling. Some agencies collect a minimal mount of data such as the race, age, and gender of the driver, along with the reason for, and outcome of the traffic stop. Other agencies collect data pertaining to all passengers of the vehicle, key events that may occur during a traffic stop (e.g. warrant check, search), and police officer demographics. There appears to be no consensus regarding the most appropriate data collection elements across departments. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ), however, recommends certain data be collected on a "routine" basis (Ramirez, McDevitt & Farrell, 2000). These data elements include: date, time, and location of stop, license number and description of vehicle, length of stop, and name and identification number of the officer initiating the stop. The NIJ also recommends that certain "study specific" variables be considered. These include the race, date of birth and sex of the driver, the reason for stop; the outcome of the stop, and whether or not a search was conducted. Methods Data Collection Data were collected about each traffic stop (N -- 9,702) made by officers of the Iowa City Police Department over the nine-month period between April and December, 2001. Officers were required to enter data into mobile data terminals (MDTs) at, er each traffic stop interaction. A copy of this form is contained in Appendix B. When an officer would initiate a traffic stop, he or she would call that stop into the dispatcher, who would document the contact. At, er the stop, the officer would fill out a screen on the MDT located in the vehicle. These data were centrally stored in a Microsot~ Excel spreadsheet. Each stop became a case for analysis. The Excel file was subsequently transferred into SPSS for analysis. Variables Information was collected about the driver, the officer, and the stop event. Driver demographics included race, sex, age, residency, and vehicle registration. The only information collected about the officer was officer badge number. More data about the officer, such as sex, race, age, time in service, etc., can be entered at a later date. Several items of interest pertain to the stop event, including the date and the time of day. One broad category related to the stop event involved the "reason for the stop." These were coded dichotomously (yes/no) and included the following: moving violation, equipment/registration violation, criminal offense, other violation, call for service/suspect or vehicle description, pre-existing knowledge or information, special detail, and other. Information regarding any "search" that might have been requested or conducted also was collected and included the following dichotomous variables: consent search requested, consent search of vehicle requested, consent search of person requested, consent search conducted, officer safety search conducted, search incident to arrest conducted, and probable cause search conducted. Data pertaining to any "property seized" also was collected and included the following dichotomous variables: property seized, alcohol seized, weapons seized, money seized, narcotics seized, evidence seized, other seized. The "outcome of the stop" also was measured, and included the following dichotomous variables: no action, citation, arrest, warning, and field interview. Finally, information also was collected about whether any "force" was used during the stop and whether the force was aga'mst the driver or a passenger. Originally, 38 variables were measured and entered for analysis. Some oftheso were recoded for analysis. For example, driver race was collected in 7 categories (Caucasian, Black, Asian, Spanish, Native American, Other, and Unknown). These were collapsed into 3 categories for the analyses (White, Black, Other). In addition, some new variables were created to obtain a clearer picture of the data. For example, it is logical to assume that a person mopped for multiple masons might be more likely than a person stopped for only one reason to get a citation or to be arrested. The dichotomous variable "multiple reasons" was created by distinguishing between cases with "only one reason" for the stop and cases with 'Yaore than one reason." Collection and Measurement Concerns Glitches arise at the initial stages of any large data collection undertaking. This study was no exception. Although the ICPD engaged in a series of training sessions to familiarize officers with the data collection form, the use of the MDT, and the procedure, diffficulties and oversights still occurred. This most problematic ofthese became apparent when Excel entries (fxom the MDTs) were cross-referenced with CAD entries. A discrepancy was noted between the number of stops as indicated by the CAD system and the number of stops as indicated by the Excel entries. In addition, stops were referenced by officer badge number. A routine check of CAD and MDT entries appeared that some officers were calling stops into the CAD system and not entering them into the MDT, or entering them into the MDT without calling them into the CAD. At~er a series of inquiries and discussions with the officers, it was obvious that the problem was related to training and/or to data entry. For example, in situations where 2 officers were in the car during a traffic stop, one officer may call in the stop m the dispatcher, who enters the stop under that officers badge number. The second officer in the car may take responsibility for entering the data into the MDT, which then gets entered under his or her badge number. In this way, it may appear as if an officer is either under- or over-reporting on the MDT system. In addition, some difficulties were noted with officers forgetting to "save" the data into the MDT after they had entered it, resulting in some lost information. These problems were quickly caught and corrected, but it is recommended that any conclusions drawn from this data keep these difficulties in mind. A full year of"glitch-free" data collection is recommended for use as a baseline for this department. Moreover, any close inspection of stopping behavior by individual officers should not be undertaken until a full year of corrected data collection is completed. Analyses & Results Analyses were conducted on two levels. First, descriptive analysis takes a broad look at stop patterns, stop characteristics, and driver demographics. This information is useful for descriptive purposes only. That is, this type of analysis is useful in understanding the existing state of affairs ("what is"). Descriptive analyses are neither predictive nor explanatory. They cannot explain ''why" things are as they are and they cannot predict how things might be in the future. Comparisons using descriptive analyses also are problematic given that descriptive statistics do not consider relationships among different variables involved in any given situation. To address the complex relationships that exist among different variables, multivariate analyses also were conducted. Specifically, a program called "chi-square automatic interaction detector" or CHAID, was used to evaluate the variables in tern of their relationships with one another. For example, this type of analysis is able to determine whether the sex of a driver is related to the reason for stop, given all the other variables that might interact, such as race or age. A more detailed explanation of this process is contained below. Descriptive Analyses & Results Driver Demographics The variables related to the driver involved in the stop were the following: race, sex, age, residency, and vehicle registration. Drivers stopped were mostly White (84%), male (65%), younger, Iowa City residems (62%), and fi.om Iowa (86.5%). Race. As indicated below, 84% of the drivers stopped were White, 9% were Black, and 7% were Other. The "Other" category includes Asian, Hispanic, Native American, and Other. There were 13 eases in which the race of the driver was coded as 'hmknown" and these were counted as "missing" in the analyses (See Table 1). Table 1: Percentage of Stops by Race of Driver / 70%. / 60%- J -- 50%- J -- 40O/o. J -- 30O/o. / -- 20%. / lOO/o. / 0% 7% White Black Other Residency and Vehicle Registration. Of all drivers stopped, less than two-thirds (62%) were city residents (See Table 6). Another 11% were Johnson County residents. An equal percentage either was from other Iowa locations or from out of state (13.5% respectively). This is probably characteristic of a city with commuters and a large college campus. Given this, city census figures should NOT be used as a baseline for comparison to the overall stop data. Table 6: Percentage of Drivers Stopped by Residency/Registration 70%' 62.0% 60%' 50%' 40%' 30%' 20%. 11.0% 13.5% 13.5°/o 0%' Iowa City Johnson Other Iowa Non-Iowa County Stop Event Temporal Distribution. The most active month for stops was April (15%), followed by May (13%), and November (12%). June (9%) was the least active month (See Table 7). The time distribution of stops was unusual, with 41% of all stops occurring between midnight and 3:00 am. In fact, the most active time was between 1-2am (17%) (See Table 8). This is likely due to the fact that Iowa City is a college town with a high concentration of bars and restaurants that close around that general time. Drivers probably get stopped as they are leaving a bar or restaurant after closing time. Given this time distribution, it is no surprise that the third shift is responsible for the highest percentage of stops (54%), followed by the second shift (25%), and the first (21%) (See Table 9). Table 7: Percent of Stops by Month 20% 18°/o' 16°/o' 14°/o' 11% 11% 12% 12°/o. 9% lOO/o lOO/o 10O/o. 80/0. 6O/o. 4%' 2O/o. 0O/o. Table 8: Percent of Stops by Hour of Day ~.2O/o-IBt. '~O°/otBtt 8% 'lB'lB 6°/ol'tt .1 0%~ 11 Table 9: Percent of Stops by Shift 60% 54% 5O% 4O% 25% 21% 10% O% 1st Shift 2nd Shifl~ 3nj Shift; In general, drivers were stopped for moving violations (69%) or equipment/registration violations (26%), were not searched (95%), and were released with a warning (56%). Only 10 cases involved use of force, so this variable was not used in any analyses. Likewise, only 147 (1.5%) cases involved any type of property seizure (mainly narcotics) so this variable is not considered further. Only 5% of the cases involved a search, and these were mostly (75%) incident to arrest. Reason for Stop by Race. The three most-cited reasons for stops were 1) moving violations (69%); 2) equipment/registration violations (26%); and 3) other violations (6%). Stops of"other" drivers (71%) were more likely than stops of white (69%) or black drivers (63%) to involve a moving violation. Twenty-six percent (26%) of all stops were for equipment/registration violations; stops of black drivers (31%) were more likely than stops of white (25%) or other drivers (24%) to involve this reason. Other violations (6%) involved white drivers (6%) more often than black (5%) or other drivers (5%) (See Table 10). 12 % o. Summary of Descriptive Analyses At first glance, one might be tempted to conclude that race is a factor in some events. For example, higher percentages of"Other" drivers were stopped for moving violations while higher percentages of Black drivers were stopped for equipment/registration violations. Similarly, the sex and age of the driver also appear to be factors given that higher percentages of White females were stopped, as were higher percentages of Non-White males. Descriptive statistics are very superficial and only give the broadest picture of the dat~ This type of analysis lacks inferential ability. One cannot use it to predict events orto describe the relationships among characteristics and events. Descriptive statistics only should be used to describe the state of affairs. They will not help to: 1) understand why the percentages are the way they are; 2) determine the relationships among the characteristics and events; 3) predict one outcome or event over some other outcome or event. Providing a description of the data should only be the first step in a thorough analysis. More comprehensive multivariate analysis is required to understand the relmionships between and among variables, and to understand how these variables interact with one another to produce a certain reality, as portrayed by the descriptive statistics. In this case, a procedure called chi- square-automatic interaction detector (CH_AID) was used to more fully explore the relationships between and among the various variables. CItAm Amflvsis & Results This portion of thc report examines the relationship between three demographic predictors (age, race, sex), vehicle registration (Iowa/non-Iowa) and several events related to the traffic stop. These events involve the following questions: 16 1) Reason for the Stop? (moving violation, equipment/registration violation, pre-existing knowledge, other violation, crime, special detail, other). 2) Search Conducted? (vehicle search or driver search). 3) Type of Search? (search incident to arrest or consent search). 4) Property Seized? 5) Outcome (warning, citation, or arrest). Some of these decision points also were examined as predictors of subsequent evems. For example, whether property was seized might be related to whether a driver was warned, cited, or arrested. CHAID is based on an analytical technique called chi-square. Chi-square analysis demonstrates whether a particular observed proportion within a sample is statistically differem from a particular expected proportion within that sample. The expected proportion is based on the premise that there is no relationship (i.e., one has no impact on the other) between the two variables in question within the population from which the sample under study was drawn. It is calculated using information from the entire group. For example, if we were interested in whether race (White, Other) and being arrested (Yes, No) are related in a population, we would use chi~square analysis. The chi-square procedure would determine that 25% of all the persons (regardless of race) were arrested and 75% were not. Then, the chi-square procedure would determine that, of all the "Other" drivers, 30% were arrested. Chi-square analysis would then conclude whether the 5% difference between all persons arrested and "Other" persons arrested is attributable to chance, or whether it is likely that there is a true difference in the population between White and Other drivers in being arrested. If the chi-square value is "statistically significant," this 5% difference is not 17 attributable to chance and represents a true difference between White and Other drivers in being arrested. By convention, statistical significance is reached when the probability of error in this conclusion is less than .05 (i.e., only 5 times out of 100 would one reach this ennelusion in ell'or). Race, however, is just one factor that could be related to any event in a stop situat'lor~ Other variables may be more important. They may mediate, or even eliminate the influence of race. This is why we use a "measure of association" called the "phi coefficient" with chi-square analysis. The phi coefficiem ranges in value from 0 (no relationship) to 1 (perfect or very strong relationship). If chi-square analysis indicates statistical significance (that the 2 variables are related), it is then necessary to determine the strength of that relationship. In the previous example, the 5% difference in the propofflOn of Black drivers arrested and the proportion of all drivers arrested was statistically significant. The question now relates to how strong the relationship is between race and arrest. The chi-square analysis determines the phi coefficient for this relationship to be .03. This indicates an extremely weak, almost non-existent relationship between race and arrest because .03 is much closer to 0 than to 1. In fact, this means that very little variation in arrest is expla'med by the race oftbe driver. Another variable or set of variables is more influemial in arrest than the race of the driver. This is where it becomes necessary to conduct multivariate analysis. CHAID is a multivariate technique that segments the sample of traffic stops and reveals the interrelationship between the potential predictors and the events involved in the stop. The CHAID procedure generates a "decision tree" that identifies significant predictors or each decision in question. In effect, the procedure "cross-references" each event with each potential predictor. 18 CHAID simultaneously considers the impact of several independent variables (age, race, sex) upon a particular event in question (arrest, in the example above). The CHAID results indicate the strongest predictor of the event, while takin~ the other variables into account. It may be that no variable or set of variables is a predictor of the event when the other variables are considered. This means that any original relationship (e.g., between race and arrest) is so weak that when other independent variables are considered (age, sex), nothing predicts the event. In the arrest example, the program examines all the cases in which individuals were arrested. It then examines all the factors associated with each case and determines the ones that keep occurring in conjunction with an arrest. Then, the program compares that state of affairs with the cases in which drivers were NOT arrested. In this way, it is possible to detcmdne whether factors are really predictive of an event or whether observed differences between those arrested and those not arrested occurred purely by chance. For example, if descriptive analysis determines that 30% of the drivers arrested were White and 70% were Black, one might be tempted to conclude that there was a racial bias in arrests. However, the CHAID analysis would examine the cases and simultaneously consider all the other potential factors involved in an arrest. The decision tree that it generates might indicate that the most significant factor related to arrest is a stop for "pre-existing knowledge." The analyses demonstrate which of the potent'mi predictors (if any) had the strongest and most important relationship to the events or outcomes. In this case, the potential predictors were used to examine the five events listed above to determine if they were actually related or whether any observed differences occurred purely by chance. The advantage of multivariate analysis is that it reveals the strongest predictors of the event in question~ In other words, if race is a factor, it wilt emerge independently of the other 19 factors. If race is not a factor, then the one or more of the other predictors will emerge, or none of the selected predictors will emerge as related to the events/outcomes. If no significant predictor emerges, it either means that the analyses did not include the most relevant predictors or that no measured factor is related to the event. This attribute is particnlarly relevant for a traffic stop situation in which many things go unmeasured. For example, one cannot measure the quality of the personal interactions between an officer and the individuals stopped. One cannot measure the demeanor of the driver. In this case, one cannot measure any information about the passengers in the vehicle. Finally, extraneous factors such as the weather, the time of year, the social environment, and the location are not measured in this study. CHAID Results Results from CHAID analyses using the 5 event categories and the potential predictors oullined above resulted in only three events that had significant predictors. Within "Reason for Stop," being stopped for a moving violation was significantly related to one or more of the potential predictors. Having a search conducted (vehicle search or driver search), type of search (search incident to arrest or consent search), and having property seized had no significant predictors. Two outcomes (warning and citation), however, did have significant predictors. Arrest, on the other hand, did not. Reason for Stop Reasons for stop included the following: 1) moving violation; 2) equipment/registration violation; 3) other violation; 4) pre-existing knowledge; 5) criminal offense; 6) special detail; and 7) other. A stop for a moving violation was the only variable that had significantly related predictors. 20 Moving Violation. For the entire group, 68.6% (6656/9702) of the drivers were stopped for a moving violation. This is the base rate for moving violations. The question is whether any subgroups formed based on the potential predictors had moving violation rotes significantly different from (greater than or less than) that of the entire group. The most s'wonifieant predictor of a moving violation was the "age" of the driver. Second- order predictors were "sex of driver" and "vehicle registration-" Sex (being female) was a predictor for the 10-17 age group. Vehicle registration (non-Iowa) was a predictor for the 18-20, 21-30, and over 40 age groups. Finally, "race" and "sex" emerged as third-order predictors. Race (being an "other person of color") was a relevant factor among the 18-20 and 21-30 year old Iowa residems. Sex (being female) was relevant among the over 40 year old Iowa residents. Apart from order of significance, the subgroups also can be described in terms of their proportion, remembering that 68.6% is the base to which comparisons are made. The subgroups receiving moving violations, in order of proportion are: 1. Persons over 40 with non-Iowa registration: 84.5% 2. Persons 10-17 who are female: 81.8% 3. Persons over 40 with Iowa registrations who are female: 77.8% 4. Persons 10-17: 75.0% 5. Persons over 40: 74.6% Thus, age (being in the youngest group or being in the oldest group) was the strongest predictor of a moving violation stop. Sex of the driver, registration, and race only emerge in combination with the other variables, not aa independent predictors. There is no evidence of racial bias in drivers being stopped for a moving violation. 21 Outcome Warning. Nearly two-thirds (65.5%, or 5383/9702) of the entire group was given a warning. The most significant predictor of being given a warning was whether a search was conducted. Those who were not searched were significantly more likely to receive a warning. The second-order predictor was being stopped for an equipment/registration violation, and the third-order predictor was having a non-Iowa registration. Those most likely to receive warnings were: 1. Persons who were not searched, who were stopped for equipment/registration violations, and who were non-Iowa registrants: 77.1%. 2. Persons who were not searched, who were stopped for equipment/registration violations: 70.2% The strongest predictor of a warning was whether a search was conducted. These finding are logical in that drivers who were searched would be more likely to have been stopped for a more serious violation and would therefore not receive a warning. Also, drivers stopped for only having an equipment/registration violation and/or to be from "om of town" might be less likely to be issued citations. Overall, no bias was detected in the issuance of warnings. Citation. With this event, the base rote for the entire group was 38.7% (3753/9702). The most significant predictor of a citation was whether the driver was stopped for an equipment/registration violation. Being stopped for something other than an equipment/registration wns the most significant predictor of receiving a citation. The second- order predictor for this group was age (10-17), and the third-order predictor was having an Iowa vehicle registration (among those over 30 years old not stopped for E/R violations). Describing the subgroups in terms of their proportion (compared to the 38.7% base), the subgroups receiving citations are: 22 1. Persons not stopped for equipment/registration violations who were over 30 years old, with Iowa registrations: 50.4% 2. Persons not stopped for equipment/registration violations who were between 10-17 years old: 50.2% Therefore, not having an equipment/registration violation was the strongest predictor of a citation. This is logical given that the other biggest category of stops involved moving violations. This is the type of situation in which an individual is more likely to be issued a citation. Age and registration were related to receiving a citation in combination with equipment/registration violation, not as independent predictors. There is no evidence of racial bias in drivers being issued a citation. Summary_ of CHAID Analyses Only three events involved significant relationships to tested predictors. Receiving a moving violation (being in the youngest or the oldest age groups), receiving a citation (not being stopped for an equipment/registration violation), and receiving a warning (not being searched) were the only events that CHAID analysis determined to have significant relationships with predictor variables. Sex of the driver and the vehicle registration also were related in conjunction with the significant predictors in some situations, but not as independent predictors of any given event. Race of the driver (being an "other person of color') only appeared once, as a third-order predictor among certain age groups of Iowa residents in being stopped for a moving violation. The "Baseline" Dilemma The most problematic part of any study of this nature is determining the baseline to which collected data should be compared. We want to look at "what is" and compare that state of affairs to ''what should be." However, determining "what should be" is troublesome. In 23 theory, the racial distribution of drivers stopped should represem the racial distribution of drivers doing something that makes them eligible to be stopped. For example, if20% of the drivers doing something that makes them eligible to be stopped by the police are Black and 80% are White, one would expect that 20% oftbe drivers stopped are Black and 80% are White. This con~arison h~q very little, if anything, to do with any racial di~h?oution in the city or county population. It has everything to do with the racial distribution of drivers on the roadways and the driving behaviors or characteristics that they exhibit. Making decisiom as to whether a department is engaging in discriminatory stop practices depends on the ability to identify the racial distribution of stops that would exist in the absence of discriminatory stop practices. That is, one must know the true racial distribution of drivers eligible to be stopped (i.e., doing anything that could get them warned, cited, or arrested-- anything that creates reasonable suspicion or probable cause). Stops in the absence of discriminatory practices, then, would be the "right" proportions. One could then compare the research findings to the "right" proportions to det~nine whether discrimination exists. Unfortunately, we cannot measure this objective reality. Determining the "right" proportion of stops is impossible because of the infinite variations in driving behaviors and police response within various locations at various times on various days in various months during various years. Also missing is a measure of the interactions between those stopped and the officers. Demeanor is thought to significantly contn~oute to stop outcome as well as to other law enforcement outcomes such us warning, citation, and arrest. This reality, however, is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to measure. We eallllot know the racial distribution of drivers doing something that makes them eligible to be stopped. Some research has attempted to measure this, but the methodology employed is often seriously 24 flawed. The most common method involves posting trained observers at strategic locations armed with stopwatches to determine the racial distribution of speeders. Obviously, this method is extremely limited, relying on split second judgment by observers as to the race of drivers. In addition, this method rests on the assumption that speeding is the only thing for which drivers get stopped. In the current study, moving violations were the most commonly cited reason for a stop, but equipment/registration violatiom and other violations accounted for about 3 in 10 stops. Given that comparison to population data is invalid, we suggest that the current data become the baseline from which to evaluate future practices. The initial analysis of a law enforcement agency's traffic stops does establish a benchmark for that department. Once an inifml study is completed, a department ha~ an empirical basis for comparison in the future. If an initial study indicates the possibility of bins (race appears as a significant predictor of some event), future research will provide data for comparison to help determine whether the relationship previously observed between race and some outcome persists or whether it has disappeared. If an initial study shows no evidence of bias (race does not appear as a significant predictor of any outcome), the department in question should attempt to maintain this desirable result. These data, collected from traffic stops made by the Iowa City Police Department between April 1 and December 31, 2001, provide no evidence that the ICPD is systematically engaging in discriminatory stop practices. Stops conducted by the Iowa City Police Departineut, as a whole, during the study period, do not involve the race of the driver as a significant factor related to events and outcomes (e.g., arrest, search, etc.). This does not mean, however, that no individual citizen was ever discriminated against. There is always the possibility that individual officers may be engaging in racially biased practices, both in determining which drivers they will 25 or will not stop and in determining what steps to take after the initial comact. This is a serious possibility that is not likely to be revealed with statistical analysis. To detect discriminatory practices at thi~ level requires constant vigilance by the community, by all the officers within the department, and by the departmental administration. Statistical analysis, while valuable, cannot substitute for community involvement and effective management. Legal Issues Relating to Bias/Racial Profiling Data Collection and Aha ,lysis Overview The findings and conelusious of any study involving bias/racial profiling are often used, or interpreted, in a number of ways, for a variety of purposes, by many factions. These studies often raise issues related to the management and admini.qtmtion of the agency, issues relating to the recruiting, training and attitude of the officers, and issues related to the community, just to name a few. This section focuses strictly on the legal issues involved with this, or any, study of bias/racial profiling. Civil Liability Without a doubt, the central legal issue relating to any study of bias/racial profiling by a law enforcement agency is the degree to which the agency, orthe individual officers employed by the agency, may be subject to civil liability for their actions. While the terms "bias profil'mg" and "racial profiling" are of relatively recent origin, and neither are legal terms, the practice of biaffraclal profiling, if substantiated, allows victirus to pursue civil claims against an offending agency, or officer, under a variety of legal theories. Although each legal theory has its own strengths and weaknesses, for a number of reasons, the theory employed by most plaintiffs, and the one that is arguably the most difficult for plaintiffs to obtain evidence and prove, is that of a Constitutional violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Generally speaking, 26 the standard required for a plaintiff to win in an Equal Protection claim is that the plaintiff must prove that other similarly situated individuals, of a different race, were treated differently. Likewise, proving, or disproving, disparity oftreaamem based on race should also be the focus of any study of bias/racial profiling. Thus, the key importance of any study on bias/racial profiling, bom a legal perspective, is that the smdy's findings and conclusions can become the evidentiary basis for supporting, or defending, such claims. In short, the data, and more importantly the findings and conclusions of the evaluators, of bias/racial profiling studies serve as the statistical evidence used by plaintiffs or defendants to support or defend the legal claims. Several courts have addressed the issue of civil liability under the 14t~ Amendment based on a claim of biasdracial profiling and the evidentiary requirements needed to support such a claim. These courts repeatedly emphasize the need for both plaintiffs and defendants to introduce valid and reliable statistical evidence establishing, or disproving, disparate treatment based on race. Evidence taking the form of staflstics based on anecdotal sources, or d~ta evaluated using unacceptable methodology, are universally rejected by the courts. In Chavez v. Illinois State Police, 251 F.3d 612 (7~ Cir. 2001), a typical Equal Protection lawsuit, the court went to great lengths to outline the validity and reliability standards required of evidence relating to the collection and/or analysis of data regarding bias/racial profiling. The court noted that statistical evidence may be used to establish that other similarly situated individuals, of a different race, were treated differently; however, to he admissible and of any relevance to the issues before the court, such statistical evidence must be collected and analyzed in a universally scientifically acceptable manner. Further, the court noted that the statistical evidence must be subject to rigorous methodological procedures and evaluated by persons with the academic credemials and practical experience to qualify as experts. The court specifically 27 noted the inherent problems with statistical evidence relating to bias/racial profiling with regard to the following: establishing base lines, determining the quantity and quality of the data being collected, sample groups, and interpretation. Accordingly, if the statistical analysis and findings and conclusions of this, or any, study of bias/racial profiling are to be of any value from a legal perspective, the study should comply with the evidentiary requirements currently being imposed by the courts. This study seems to satisfy the admissibility requirements for evidence relating to disparate treatment based on race, currently being imposed by courts in bias/racial profiling cases. This study employed sound methodological techniques with regard to the collection and analysis of data and was performed by individuals with nationally recognized expertise in statistical analysis. Disclosure of Information/Records Although generally not rising to the level of concern as civil liability, law enforcement agencies engaged in the collection of information and analysis of data, whether related to bias profiling or some other topic, must be familiar with the applicable statutes and/or ordinances governing the release of public records. Typically referred to as "Open Records Acts", virtually all jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring certain records in the possession of police agencies to be released to the public. These "Open Records Acts" vary tremendously from jurisdiction to jurisdiction; however, in all jurisdictions, to some degree, the ,t_ata collected as part ora bias profiling project will be subject to disclosure to the public, and to the media~ Ideally, agencies will address this legal issue before initiating any data collection to ensure they know, going into the project, what records, if any, will be subject to disclosure, and under what circumstances. 28 The fundamental questions to be resolved relating to the release of data and information collected as part of a bias profiling project are: 1) Who, exactly, is the custoclian of the data and information relating to the project? [This can become very complex in situations where agencies contract afl, or part, of the project out to a consultant.] 2) What records are, and are not, subject to disclosure? 3) Can any of the information collected be "masked" or otherwise shielded from disclosure? Must any information be shielded from disclosure? 4) If large data sets are subject to disclosure, what format is required? 5) Where disclosure of large, bulky, data sets is required, what costs, ii' any, may be recovered by the agency? 6) Is the analysis/interpretation of the data subject to disclosure also? 7) When must data/information be released? [This can pose difficulties in multi-year, on going, projects.] 8) How long must the data/information be retained and who had responsibility for archiving the materials? Conclusion It is imperative that agencies practice proactive risk management with regard to the collection and analysis of data relating to bias/racial profiling. In addition to serving as the basis for addressing a host of management, administration and personnel issues, bias/racial profiling studies can also serve as useful tools for developing statistical evidence for defending against lawsuits alleging civil rights violations. However, experts hi statistical analysis must conduct any study using scientifically acceptable methodology. The statistical analyses involved in this study appear to satisfy the legal requirements currently being imposed by the courts and the findings and recommendations should serve as valid evidence relating to allegations of bias/racial profiling. Finally, a determination should be ascertained ns to what degree the information/records will be subject to disclosure under the applicable Open Records laws. 29 Conclusion and Recommendations The Iowa City Police Department, as a whole, does not appear to be systematically stopping drivers based on their "racial or ethnic status or characte~ics' as defined by departmental policy (Racial Profiling, General Order 01-01). While the percentages of races were not always equal ia some categories, the discrepancies are most likely explained by factors other than the driver's race. For example, the age and sex of the driver were important explanatory factors in many events. This makes sense given that we know driving behavior to be different among various ages and between the sexes; younger drivers drive differently than older drivers and males drive differently than females. This study used a fairly comprehensive set of data collected about a population of stops over an 8-month period. The d~ were collected in a consistent manner, with only minor problems pertaining to entry and reeordiag that were addressed as they were discovered. The stat'~ieal analysis used to evaluate the data was rigorous, thorough, and conducted by academicians with expertise in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of such dam. Further, this analysis was conducted on a contractual basis with researchers from the University of Louisville in Louisville, Kentucky, providing a level of objectivity that is necessary to avoid any conflicts of interest or appearances of impropriety. These factors have yielded valid data, mak'mg valid conclusions highly likely. The only caveat is that one full year's worth of data should be collected and analyzed to provide a baseline from which to evaluate future stop practices. Moreover, the legal considerations set forth by the courts have been met, makiag legal actions against the Iowa City Police Department based on accusations of "racial profiling" very unlikely. However, the Department must still recognize that this does not preclude the actions of 30 any one officer becoming suspect. Our findings do not conclude that such profiling might not be occurring against individual citizens by one or more individual officers. This type of discrimination on an individual level, however, is virtually impossible to detect otto prove given the type and amount of discretion that officers must use in the completion of their duties. These matters are more likely to be discovered through administrative and supervisory vigilance, and through community awareness, rather than through the collection and analysis oftrattic stop The Iowa City Police Departmem can enhance their collection of traffic stop data. The recommendations offered here involve both process and contem elements of the project. First, it is suggested that a full year of data be collected and subsequemly used as a baseline for analyzing future department practices. The data in the study covers only 8 months ofthe year 2001 and may not fully reflect the traffic stops practices of the department on an annual basis. Second, census population data should not be used as a baseline. As previously discussed, census data does not provide for an appropriate point of comparison and should only be used when nothing else is available. Clearly, with the adoption ofthe recommendation for a full year of data collection, the use of census data can be avoided. Third, data collected for the year 2001 (April-December) should be viewed carefully as the departmem experienced considerable challenges in refining the data entry process. Throughout the course of this project quality assurance checks were employed to ensure that the data collected was valid although it is suggested that the validity of the data may continue to be somewhat suspect. Continued monitoring of date entry and fine-mnlng of the department's quality assurance mechanisms, however, must be a priority. A fourth recommendation involves the training of all officers in regard to departmental policy, data collection procedures, and the 31 results of the analysis. Officers collecting the data must have a thorough understanding of the project in order to ensure more accurate and complete data collection and entry. In a similar vein, supervisors must be proactive in ensuring line officers understand the policies and procedures related to the project. Supervisors also should identify officers who require additional training or closer supervision to ensure adequate understanding of the data entry procedures as well as policy compliance. Fifth, it is imperative that the department establish clear, written guidelines regarding the entry of traffic stops into both the CAD and MDT database systems. These guidelines should be made available to all personnel involved in the data entry process and should be incorporated into departmental training as required. Further, dispatchers should receive guidelines and training regarding recording calls when more than one officer in involved in a traffic stop. This will allow for more timely and accurate quality assurance checks as well as enhance the validity oftbe dam In terms of the coment of the data collection forms, several data elemems could be added to the forrrr First, in attempt to control for variations in traffic stop practices by location, the quadrant in which the stop occurred could be added to the form allowing for traffic stop identification~ Also, the form should contain information about warrant checks. First, there should be a question that asks whether a warrant cheek was performed during the stop. Secondly, the form should contain a section addressing the outcome of the warrant check. Currently, information about outstanding warrants is obtained through a plate and/or license check. These types of checks, however, are not performed routinely. Finally, the form should include an item that indicates whether the driver was asked to exit the vehicle. These additions are consistent with data collection efforts throughout the country, require minor modifications to 32 the form, and would aid in the development of a more accurate understanding of the key events that are likely to occur during traffic stops. These recommendations are offered to improve the data collection process and to enhance the quality of the data. Several of these recommendations were communicated to the Department as the study progressed and have been addressed. Others are currently being implemented. Overall, the departmental adminigtration has been receptive to recommendatiolls for the improvement of their data collection and analysis, and seems genuinely concerned about the accurate measurement of traffic stop practices. Again, the only major concern is that this study is based on only 8 months of data with which some minor collection and entry problems were noted. Therefore, it is necessary that a full year's worth of"clean" data be collected and analyzed to provide the best baseline from which to evaluate the future stop practices of the department. Although no evidence of departmental discriminatory stop practices may be welcome news, the department now is faced with the responsibility of eontinuai monitoring to maintain these practices for the confmued benefit of both the departmem and the community. 33 Bibliography MacDonald, H. (2000). The burden of bad ideas: How modem intellectuals misshape our society. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee. Newport, F. (1999). Racial profiling is seen as widespread, particularly among young Black men. Gallup Poll, December 1999, g411, 18-23. Ramirez, D., McDevitt, J. & Farrell, A. (2000). A resource guide on racial profiling data collection systems: Promising practices and lessons learned. Simms, J. (2000). The Maryland 1-95 corridor study. University of Washington in Missouri. (http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~focus205/supreme/stat s_i95.html). Smith, M. & Petmcelli, P. (2000). Racial profiling: A multivariate analysis of police traffic stop data Withrow, B.L. (2002). Race based policing: An initial analysis of the Wichita Stop Study. Paper presented at the meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Anaheim, CA. Zingraff, M. Warren, P., Tomaskovic-Devey, D. Smith, W., McMurray, H., Mason, M & Fenlon, C. (2001). Evaluating North Carolina State Highway Patrol Data: Citations, warnings and searches in 1998. North Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public Safety. (On- line). Available: wwwnccrimecontrol.org/shp/n_cshrep__ort.htm 34 APPENDIX A Iowa City Police Department Policy on Racial Profiling General Order # 01-01 Section Code OPS-17 35 0PS-17.'1 RACIAL PROFILING IDate of Issue I General Order Number Januar~ 10, 2001 014)1 Effective Date I Section Code February 1, 2001 0PS-17 I Reavaluation Date Amends / Cancels December 2001 New IC.A.L.E.A. ' Reference 1.2.4,1.2.9,41.3.8,61.1.2.9 INDEX AS: Racial Profiling Search and Seizure Complaints Traffic Stops Supervisor Responsibilities Arrests Warrants Discipline I. PURPOSE The purpose of this order is to unequivocally state that racial and ethnic profiling by members of this department in the discharge of their duties is totally unacceptable, to provide guidelines for officers to prevent such occurrences, and to protect officers from unfounded accusations v~en they act within the parameters of the law and departmental policy. II. POLICY It is the policy of the Iowa City Police Department to patrol in a proactive manner, to investigate suspicious persons and circumstances, and to actively enforce the laws, while insisting that citizens will only be detained when there exists reasonable suspicion (i.e. articulable objective facts) to believe they have committed, are committing, or are about to comreit an infraction of the law. Additionally, the seizure and request for forfeiture of prope[ty shall be based solely on the facts of the case and without regard to race, ethnicity or sex. III. DEFINITIONS Racial profiling - The detention, interdiction, exercise of discretion or use of authority against any person on the basis of their racial or ethnic status or characteristics. Reasonable suspicion - Suspicion that is more than a "mere hunch" or curiosity, but is based on a set of articulable facts and circumstances that would warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that an infraction of the law has been committed, is about to be committed or is in the process of being committed, by the person or persons under suspicion. ("Specific and articulable cause to reasonably believe criminal activity is afoot.") 0PS-17.2 IV. PROCEDURES The department's enforcement efforts will be directed toward assigning officers to those areas where there is the highest likelihood that vehicle crashes will be reduced, complaints effectively responded to, and/or crimes prevented through proactive patrol. A. In the absence of a specific, credible report containing a physical description, a parson's race, ethnicity, or gender, or any combination of these shall not be a factor in determining probable cause for an arrest or reasonable suspicion for a stop. B. Motorists and pedestrians shall only be subjected to investigatory stops or brief detentions upon reasonable suspicion. C. Traffic enforcement shall be accompanied by consistent, ongoing supervisory oversight to ensure that officers do not go beyond the parameters of reasonableness in conducting such activities. 1. Officers shall cause accurate statistical information to be recorded in accordance with departmental guidelines. 2. The deliberate recording of any inaccurate information regarding a person stopped for investigative or enforcement purposes is prohibited and a cause for disoiplinary action, up to and including dismissal. D. Motorists and pedestrians shall only be subjected to investigatory stops or brief detentions upon reasonable suspicion that they have committed, ara committing, or am about to commit an infraction of the law. Each time a motorist is stopped or detained, the officer shall radio to the dispatcher the location of the stop, the description of the parson detained, and the reason for the stop, and this information shall be recorded. E. If the police vehicle is equipped with a video camera, the video and sound shall be activated pdor to the stop to record the circumstances sunounding the stop, and shall remain activated until the person is released. F. No motorist, once cited or warned, shall be detained beyond the point where there exists no reasonable suspicion of further c~iminal activity. G. No parson or vehicle shall be searched in the absence of a warrant, a legally recognized exception to the warrant requirement as identified in General Order 00-~1, Search and Se/zure, or the person's voluntary consent. 1. In each case where a search is conducted, information shall he recorded, including the legal basis for the search, and the results thereof. 2. A cursory "sniff" of the extedor of a vehicle stopped for a traffic violation by a police canine may he recorded on the department's canine action report form. TRAINING Officers shall receive initial and ongoing training in proactive enforcement tactics, including training in officer safety, courtesy, cultural diversity, the laws governing search and seizure, and interpersonal communications skills. 1. Training programs will emphasize the need to respect the rights of all citizens to be free from unreasonable government intrusion or police action. COMPLAINTS OF RACIAL/ETHNIC PROFILING Any person may file a complaint with the department if they feel they have been stopped or searched based on racial, ethnic, or gender-based profiling. No person shall be discouraged OPS-17.3 or intimidated from filing such a complaint, or discriminated against because they have filed such a complaint. 1. Any member of the department contacted by a parson, who wishes to file such a complaint shall refer the complainant to a Watch Supervisor who shall provide them with a departmental or PCRB complaint form. The supervisor shall provide information on how to complete the departmental complaint form and shall record the complainants name, address and telephone number. 2. Any supervisor receiving a departmental complaint form regarding racial/ethnic profiling, shall forward it to the Commanding Officer Field Operations and all such complaints shall be reviewed and the complaint acknowledged in writing. The complainant shall be informed of the results of the department's review within a reasonable period of time. The report and the reviewer's conclusion shall be filed with the Chief of Police, and shall contain findings and any recommendations for disciplinary action or changes in policy, training, or tactics. 3. Supervisors shall revis,~v profiling complaints, as well as periodically review a sample of in-car videotapes of stops of officers under their command. Additionally, supervisors shall review reports relating to stops by officers under their command, and respond at random to back officers on vehicle stops. 4. Supervisors shall take appropriate action whenever it appears that this policy is being violated. REVIEW 1. On an annual basis or as requested by the Chief of Police, the Commanding Officer Administrative Services, shall provide reports to the Chief of Police with a summary of the sex, race, and/or ethnicity of persons stopped. 2. If it reasonably appears that the number of self-initiated traffic contacts by officers has unduly resulted in disproportionate contacts with members of a racial or ethnic minority, a determination shall be made as to whether such disproportionality appears department wide, or is related to a specific unit, section, or individual. The commander of the affected unit, section, or officer shall provide written notice to the Chief of Police of any reasons or grounds for the disproportionate rate of contacts. 3. Upon review of the written notice, the Chief of Police may direct additional training towards the affected units/sections or to individual officers. 4. On an annual basis, the department may make public a statistical summary of the race, ethnicity, and sex of persons stopped for traffic violations. 5. On an annual basis, the department may make public a statistical summary of ali profiling complaints for the year, including the findings as to whether they were sustained, not sustained, or exonerated. 6. If evidence supports a finding of a continued ongoing pattern of racial or ethnic profiling, the Chief of Police may institute disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment of any involved individual officer(s) and/or their supervisors. R. J. Winkelhake, Chief of Police WARNING 0PS-17.4 This directive is for clepartmental use only and does not apply in any criminal or civil proceeding. The department policy should not be construed as a creation of a higher legal standa~ of safety or care in an evidenfiary sense with respect to third-party claims. Violations of this directive will only form the basis for departmental administrative sanctions. APPENDIX B Iowa City Police Contact Sheet 36 IOWA CITY POLICE CONTACT SHEET Date of Contact Time ~ A~ ~e Driver Info Resident Vehicle Registratio~ IIIIII IIII[E) I :.. ri'ow' Female -- Johnson CountyU Non-iowa 'nonth day /ear hour minute _ Unknown _ Other County ,0i0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Out of State Conse~tSearch :1~ 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I Other Requested? i2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 -- [~Yes r~vehicle 13 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 R_.ace/Ethnicity [~No I JPerson 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Caucasian 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 ~Black/Negro/AfricanAmedcan T_ffpe of Search 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Asian/Pacific Islander Consent 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Spanish/Lafino/Hispanic Officer Safety 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 NafiveAmericanlndian Incident to Arrest 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Ot~er Probable Cause Unknown R_eason for Contact? Property Seized -- Moving Violation U_ce of Force? O~utcome _ None _ Equipment or Registation violation !None No Action Alcohol Cdminal Offense :Driver Citation Weapons Other V'~ation Passenger Arrest _ Currency Call for Se~ice-S~ D~c. Nehicte Desc. m Waming _ Narcof~cs Pre-existing knowledge or informa~don __ Field Interview _ Evidence -- Special Detail _ Other Other Comments 0 ff you add anal comments to the ares listed below, you must darken the circle to ~e left. ............................................. ._Ma_~-O~ · IOWA CITY POLICE CONTACT SHEET Date of Contact Time Bad ~le ~ D._river Info R_eaideat Vehicle Registration Iowa _ Female _ Johnson County month da 'ear hour minute Unknown Other County 0 0 0 0 0 0 010 0:0 I0 0i 0 0 _ OutofState Consentsearoh I I 1 I I 1 11 1 lil! 1 1i I I Other Requested? 222222 212 2i2 i2 22 t- 3 3 3 3 3 3 i3 313 13 3 3 3 ~R~Ethnicity [~No [_JPerson 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 caucasian 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 _ BiadUNegro/AfricanAmedcan T_.~pe of Search 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 ~sian/Pacific Islander Consent 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 _ Spanish/Latir~/Hispanic Officer Safety 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 81 8 NativeAmedcan Indian Incident to Arrest 9 Z other Z Probable Cause Unknown Reason for Contact? Property Seized Moving Violation U_se of Force? O_utcome -- None Equipment or Registafion Violation _ None -- No Action _ Alcohol Criminal Offense _ Driver _ Citation Weapons Oilier Violation _ Passenger _ Arrest _ Currency _ Call for Sewice-Suspect Desc./Vehicle Desc. Warning Narcotics _ Pre-e~sting knowledge or information _ Field Intervie~ _ Evidence _ Special Detail _ Other Other Comments 0 ff you add any comments to the ama listed below, you must darken the cimle to ~he left. ~pd contact shee~.~$ Mar-01