Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-05-22 Info PacketI r City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM, Date: play 11, 1984 To: City Council From: City Manager Re: Informal Agendas and Meeting Schedule May 15, 1984 Tuesday 6:30 - 8:30 P.M. Conference Room 6:30 - 8:30 P.M. - Conference Room 6:30 P.M. - Housing Market Analysis Update 7:00 P.M. - Industrial Revenue Bond Policy Revisions 8:00 P.M. - Council Time, Council Committee Reports i 6:30 P.M. - Bus Tour of Scott Boulevard 7:15 P.M. - Presentation by Broadband Telecommunications Specialist on Cable Deregulation (HR 4103) 7:35 8:00 P.M. P.M. - Outdoor Service Areas and City Plaza Building Extensions - City Council Summer Meeting Schedule 8:10 P.M. - Council time, Council Committee reports May 21•_ 1984 (Incomplete Agenda) Monday 6:30 - 8:30 P.M. Conference Room 6:30 P.M. - Review Zoning Matters 7:00 P.M. - Urban Renewal Attorney's Fees 7:15 P.M. - Old Library Redevelopment 7:45 P.M. - View Committee on Community Needs Video Tape 8:15 P.M. - Council agenda, Council time, Council Committee reports May 22, 1984 Tuesday 7:30 P.M. - Regular Council Meeting - Council Chambers May 29, 1984 (Incomplete Agenda) Tuesday 6:30 - 8:30 P.M. - Conference Room 6:30 P.M. - Housing Market Analysis Update 7:00 P.M. - Industrial Revenue Bond Policy Revisions 8:00 P.M. - Council Time, Council Committee Reports i z PENDING LIST Priority A: Utility Franchise Blackhawk Minipark Improvements Priority B: Duty/Procedure Changes - Housing and Inspection Services Lower Ralston Creek Parcels - Use and Configuration Congregate Housing Development Alternatives Iowa Theater Type Problems Northside Lighting Project Report Newspaper Vending Machines Minimum Open Space Requirements Priority C: Housing Inspection Funding Policy Willow Creek Park Sidewalk North Dodge/Old Dubuque Road Project 9�� I z a City of Iowa City" MEMORANDUM Date: May 4, 1984 To: City Council �J From: City Manager j'---7--;�. Re: Rapid Creek Farm The City has been contacted by a representative of the owners of the Rapid Creek farm land which is approximately 134 acres immediately north of Westinghouse. The property is for sale at price ranging from 12,500 to $3,000 per acre. The caller inquired as to whether or not the City would be interested in acquiring the land for park purposes or for any other municipal purpose. I am passing this on to the City Council so that if you have any ideas concerning this matter you might contact me. tp3/3 9(� % 1 i City of Iowa City - MEMORANDUM Date: May 8, 1984 To: Charter Review Commission From: City Manager``�y „�aL Re: Meeting The first meeting of the Charter Review Commission is scheduled for Monday, May 14 at 7:30 P.M. in the City Manager's Conference Room. The City will provide clerical staff for maintaining minutes of the meetings. Clayton Ringgenberg indicates that the Institute of Public Affairs will be happy to provide research for issueswhich the Commission wishes to explore. This first meeting probably should be used' for organizational purposes and the election of a Chair and a Vice -Chair. In addition, you may wish to discuss the possibility of public hearings, meetings with former Council members, etc. If you will not be able to attend the meeting; please contact Lorraine Saeger at 356-5010. be/sp cc: City Council Q 'City of Iowa Cit';'' MEMORANDUM Date: May 10, 1984 To: City Council From: Assistant City Manager Re: Sidewalk Cafes/Outdoor Service Areas The above -referenced matter has been scheduled for additional discussion at your informal meeting on May 15, 1984. Included in your packet are proposed regulations for each of these types of uses. In both cases, I have included information regarding the latest revisions made pursuant to your last discussion of these matters. Your packet also includes a legal opinion from the City Attorney which you requested prior to further discussion of these matters. During your last discussion, several Councilmembers also indicated a desire to take another look at the concept of permanent building extensions onto the City Plaza. Further processing of the one formal application we have received has been put on "hold" until you have had the opportunity to discuss this further. Since these issues are all interrelated, all have been scheduled for your discussion at the same time. The Design Review Committee discussed the concept of building extensions onto the City Plaza at its meeting on May 9, 1984. Information regarding this discussion is also included in your packet. bj4/3 I City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: May 9, 1984 To: City Council n From: Dale Helling and Andrea Hauer L Re: Sidewalk Cafes/Revised Version of Criteria This memo will include suggestions and options the Council has previously discussed. Explanations are given in the comment section. These criteria were based on the premise that the primary function of a public sidewalk is for the safe and smooth passage of pedestrians. Since the last Council discussion of this issue, the proposed regulation relating to use of public amenities has been revised to exclude such use (see AS). In addition, the basis of the fee schedule is included with provision that the actual formula (based on that which will apply to permanent extensions onto the City Plaza) will be set by Council resolution (see t10). Criteria (revised)for use of the public right-of-way for sidewalk cafes 1. A sidewalk cafe is defined as a temporary, outdoor service area used for the serving and consumption of food and beverages, which are dispensed from inside a restaurant to people seated at tables and chairs in the area. 0 Comment: The word "temporary" was added to this definition to emphasize I 1 the seasonal nature of a sidewalk cafe. 2. Sidewalk cafes will be permitted in the public right-of-way or on other publicly -owned property only in the CB -10 and CB -2 areas (the downtown and the commercial areas directly north and south of the downtown - see attached map). 3. The sidewalk cafe area must be adjacent to or in front of the building housing the restaurant and utilization of that area is subject to the building owner's approval. Comment: The phrase "or in front of was added to allow for situations where a sidewalk cafe might be better situated not directly next to the restaurant. However, as staff noted at the April 3 meeting, there may be conflicts between the pathways of food servers going to and from the restaurant and normal pedestrian flow. 4. The cafe area may not extend onto the sidewalk in a manner that will not allow a minimum of eight feet of unobstructed sidewalk remaining for pedestrian use. The eight foot unobstructed portion of the sidewalk should be continuous and contiguous with the adjoining sidewalks in such a manner as to provide uninterrupted, smooth passageway for all pedes- trians If the existing sidewalk is less than eight feet in width, no encroachment will be permitted. On the City Plaza, a sidewalk cafe may use the area defined as Zone 1. 970 2 Comment: The minimum width of unobstructed sidewalk was changed from ten to eight feet as directed by the Council. There is some concern on the part of staff that the eight foot width may not be sufficient to allow for the smooth and safe passage of pedestrians. 5. All tables and chairs in the cafe area should be set back, for safety j purposes, at least ten feet from alleys and should be not located in a triangular area at street corners, in which two of the triangles' sides measure 20 feet in length along the curb lines from the point of inter- section of the streets. 6. The area for the sidewalk cafe should be temporarily delineated by ropes or some other suitable method. Tables, chairs, and other items used by the cafe are to be removed at the end of each day's operation and the cafe area restored to its normal condition as a pedestrian way. 7. Permitted hours of operation shall be from sunrise to sunset and the operation shall not be allowed before April 15 nor after October 15 of any calendar year. i Comment: This item was referred to the City Attorney for his opinion as to how the City may or may not regulate hours of operation. 8. A sidewalk cafe may not utilize any public amenities such as benches or seat. 9. Amplified sound equipment and additional advertising or identification signage beyond that permitted for the main restaurant shall not be permitted. Any amenities (such as chairs, tables, and umbrellas) shall not have any advertising on their surfaces. Compliance with the City noise ordinance shall be required. Comment: An issue was raised by the manager of the Holiday Inn as to whether amplification equipment would be permitted in the hotel's outdoor dining areas. Other than enforcement of the noise ordinance, the hotel would be permitted to do such because the cafe area is located on private property. 10. A fee will be charged for the use of the public right-of-way. This charge will be calculated on an actual value per square foot basis or a flat fee; the fee rate will be set by resolution of the City Council.— ouncil:Comment: Comment:Two options have been presented as per Council's wish to . explore this item further. The first option is to charge a lease rate based on the actual square footage used by the business and the second is to simply charge a flat rate fee for all businesses, no matter how large or small the sidewalk cafe area may be. 11. The use of public sidewalk space for cafe purposes shall not be subject to the zoning code because the cafe is a use of public property rather than private property. The Zoning Ordinance regulates only the use of private property. 12. The sidewalk cafe, as part of a restaurant, must be licensed by the Johnson County Board of Health. 970 3 13. The sidewalk cafe operator will be required to post sufficient insurance and to enter into an agreement holding the City harmless against any and all liability arising from accidents or other actions arising from its operation. In addition, if alcoholic beverages are served in this area, other provisions such as dram shop insurance shall also be provided by the operator. Comment: The Council requested additional information on the serving of alcoholic beverages in the public right-of-way from the City Attorney. An opinion will also be issued regarding whether alcoholic beverages may be served to a cafe not directly adjacent to the restaurant. 14. The application for a sidewalk cafe should contain, at a minimum, a plot plan, a picture or illustration of the amenities to be used, and the seating capacity of the cafe. In addition, the applicant shall provide the name and address of the owner of each immediate abutting property. Applications will be handled by the City staff with the review and approval of any use of the public right-of-way approved by the Council as prescribed in the City Code of Ordinances. The City will notify the immediate abutting property owners by letter of the nature of the application, and the date and time this item will appear on the agenda for approval by the City Council. If the application is approved by the Council, the City staff will be responsible for the administration of the lease and correction of fees. Comment: This was revised to include the applicant submitting the names of the immediate abutting .property owners in order to facilitate public comment on the application. ah/sp CB -10 and CB -2 Zoned Areas: Iowa City Downtown and Near Downtown 970 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: May 10, 1984 To: City Council From: Oale Helling, Assistant City Manager Re: Regulations for Outdoor Service Areas with Liquor Licenses Attached please find a copy of a final draft of regulations for the operation of outdoor service areas by establishments licensed under Chapter 123 of the Code of Iowa. According to Council's instruction, paragraph VO was added. It is similar to that provision in the proposed regulations for sidewalk cafes which prohibits additional signage as well as use of amplified sound equipment. It further requires total compliance with the Noise Ordinance. This matter is scheduled for discussion at your informal meeting on May 15, 1984. Staff will be present at that time to answer additional questions or provide further information. tp4/2 Enclosure cc: City Attorney City Clerk 971 REGULATIONS FOR OPERATION OF OUTDOOR SERVICE AREAS BY ESTABLISHMENTS LICENSED UNDER CHAPTER 123 OF THE CODE OF IO41A These regulations shall apply to those outdoor service areas located on PRIVATE PROPERTY adjacent to any business licensed under Chapter 123 of the Code of Iowa and as defined in Chapter 123.3(31). These regulations shall NOT apply to outdoor service areas located on or directly adjacent to the 7ty Plaza as defined in Chapter 9.1-2 of the Code of Iowa City. An outdoor service area shall include any such area where beer or liquor is sold and served, carried, or consumed by the public. It shall be considered as part of the licensed premises, and the same Federal, State, and local laws which apply to the licensed premises shall also apply to the outdoor service area. Any establishment operating an outdoor service area as defined above shall be subject to the following: 1. Outdoor service areas must be located on private property and may not encroach on any public right-of-way. Such area must be immediately adjacent to the licensed establishment of which it is a part. 2. Outdoor service areas shall not be located in the front yard of any licensed premises. 3. Outdoor service areas shall be screened on all sides from public view. Screening shall consist of a fence or other suitable barrier of not less than five feet in height nor more than six feet in height. It shall be of solid construction which will effectively prevent normal access and/or egress from the premises except by way of an emergency fire exit only. Such fire exit shall be required of all outdoor service areas. 4. Seating or other accommodations in an outdoor service area shall not exceed one (1) person per fifteen (15) square feet of floor area accessible to the public. 5. Outdoor service areas shall not be accessible except from the licensed premises which it adjoins. The required fire exit shall be an emergency exit only. 6. Outdoor service areas shall be permitted only in those zones which permit other than residential uses and shall not be permitted to exist within 100 feet of any lot zoned for residential use. 7. Outdoor service areas shall comply with appropriate building, housing, and fire codes and with all other applicable State and City laws. 8. The City shall inspect outdoor service areas at least annually at the same time inspection of the adjacent licensed establishment occurs. The City may, at its discretion, inspect an outdoor service area at any other time. 9. Applications for the approval of outdoor service areas shall include all required information and be submitted with applications for beer and liquor licenses. Such application shall be submitted to the City Clerk at least 15 days prior to the date it is to be considered by the 97/ N City Council. Outdoor service areas shall be subject to the same annual renewal requirements as are all beer and liquor licenses. Approval by the City Council of an outdoor service area shall be by letter to the Iowa Beer and Liquor Control Department and such approval shall be separate and distinct from approval of the beer or liquor license. Said approval shall be subject to the applicant also meeting all requirements of the Iowa Beer and Liquor Control Depart- ment with regard to diagram, dram shop coverage, and all other State requirements. 10. Amplified sound equipment and additional advertising or identification signage beyond that permitted for the main licensed establishment shall not be permitted. Compliance with the City noise ordinance shall be required. 11. The City reserves the right to revoke its authorization for the operation of an outdoor service area for any establishment where ex- cessive noise or other problems, as determined by the City, shall arise directly from the operation of the outdoor service area. Notification of revocation shall be provided to the Iowa Beer and Liquor Control Department. Revocation of authorization by the City for operation of an outdoor service area shall not affect the licens- ing of the principal establishment, unless separate action to suspend or revoke that license is also initiated. 12. Upon submitting an application for an outdoor service area, applicant shall provide the name and address of the owner of each abutting property as well as every other property which is within one hundred (100) feet of applicant's premises. The City will then notify these property owners by letter of the nature of the application and the date and time when it will appear on the agenda for approval by the City Council, so that these property owners will have an opportunity to comment on the application if they wish. 13. Approval or disapproval of an application for an outdoor service area shall be at the discretion of the City Council. 14. Appeal from a revocation of the authorization for the operation of an outdoor service area shall be to the City Council according to the procedure as established in Sections 2-184, 2-185, 2-186 and 2-187 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Iowa City, Iowa. 15. These regulations are established by resolution of the City Council and may be amended from time to time by further resolution of the City Council. �P71 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: -May 10, 1984 TO: City Council FROM: Robert W. Jansen, City Attorney Ku:.),,, RE: Hours of Sale of Beer or Liquor at Sidewalk Cafes You have asked me to check whether the City has authority to regulate the hours of sale of beer and alcoholic beverages at times other as provided by State law. The City does not have that authority. The regulation of the hours of sale of beer or liquor for licensed premises is set out in Section 123.49(2)(b) of the Iowa Code as follows: 2. No person or club holding a liquor control license or retail beer permit under this chapter, nor his agents or employees, shall do any of the following: b. Sell or dispense any alcoholic beverage or beer on the premises covered by the license or permit, or permit the consumption thereon between the hours of two a.m. and six a.m. on any weekday, and between the hours of two a.m. on Sunday and six a.m. on the following Monday, however, a holder of a liquor control license or retail beer permit granted the privilege of selling alcoholic liquor or beer on Sunday may sell or dispense such liquor or beer between the hours of noon and ten p.m. on Sunday State law also provides that local authorities, such as the City, cannot adopt an ordinance which would "diminish the hours during which beer or alcoholic beverages may be sold or consumed at retail." See, Sec. 123.39, Code of Iowa. Accordingly, a sidewalk cafe which is covered by a liquor license or beer permit would be permitted to sell beer and/or liquor for consumption on premises during all hours other than those proscribed by Sec. 123.49(2)(b). jb cc: Neal Berlin Dale Helling Andrea Hauer 9;�� City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM OAi, May 10, 1984 TO: City Council flA: Robert W. Jansen, City Attorney RWT� as Plaza Extension Lease Changes Attached is the revised Plaza Extention Lease following Council discussion on March 20th. The Lease provides for a 15 year term. Liability insurance amounts have been increased. The policy and annual renewals are to be filed with the City Clerk. Annual rent is locked in for the 15 year period without any provision for increases during the period. In view of the fact that the extension premises may be subject to property tax,.as indicated in an earlier memo to Council, I have added a provision that any property taxes assessed by virtue of the commercial use of a City -owned right-of-way shall be paid by the lessee. ib Attachment cc: Neal Berlin Dale Helling Andrea Hauer X73 i i AGREEMENT FOR LEASE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE CITY PLAZA THIS AGREEMENT FOR LEASE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE CITY PLAZA entered into this day of 198 by and between the City of Iowa City acting by and through the City Manager hereinafter known as Lessor and hereinafter known as Lessee(s) on the following terms and conditions: 1. This Agreement is for the purpose of leasing a portion of the public right-of-way in the City Plaza for the construction of an addition to an existing store or building front owned (or rented) by the Lessee(s), which addition extends into the public right-of-way for a distance of feet. A diagram showing the dimensions of the addition and the number of feet same extends into the right-of-way is hereto attached as Exhibit A. The address of the building is 2. This Agreement is executed pursuant to Chapter 9.1 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Iowa City and the provisions contained therein. This Agreement and the parties' obligations hereunder shall be subject to all City Plaza regulations now in force or hereafter enacted where applicable. 3. This Agreement shall commence on the day of 198_, and shall terminate on the day of 199_ This Agreement shall be for a term of fifteen (15) years. i 4. The addition to be constructed shall be used for the purpose (s) of No change in the use for the 973 f purposes listed herein shall be permitted unless same is approved by the City Manager in writing. Any such change shall then be by written amendment to this Agreement. l 5. Lessee(s) shall pay to Lessor the sum of $ ' upon the execution of this Agreement and the sum of $ payable each year thereafter on the anniversary date of this Agreement for a period of 15 years for the rental of the i public right-of-way. 6. Lessee(s) shall indemnify, defend and save harmless the j it Lessor, its agents, officers and employees, from and against all f{ claims, damages, losses and expenses in any manner resulting from, arising out of or connected with the construction, use, ij maintenance or removal of the addition or its use. Lessee(s) shall at all times maintain a policy of liability insurance in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 for personal injuries, and $300,000 for property damage arising out of the construction, use, maintenance or removal of the addition or its use. The policy and 'I all annual renewals of same shall be deposited with the City ; Clerk. 7. Lessee(s) shall be responsible for maintaining the area adjacent to the leased premises in a clean and hazard -free i condition including ice and snow removal for a distance of 10 feet surrounding the structure or addition. 8. Lessee(s) shall at all times maintain the exterior in a manner consistent with the original design and same shall not be permitted to deteriorate or present an unsightly appearance. Failure to maintain as provided herein shall be cause for revocation of this Agreement and Lessor may order removal of the 9.73 I Y r addition from the public right-of-way at the expense of I Lessee(s). I 9. Lessee(s) represents and warrants that all conditions i concerning building design, signs and Design Review Committee, design criteria have been met at the time of execution of this Agreement or will be met within months. 10. Any abandonment of the use of the addition or any violation of the City Plaza ordinance regulations shall be cause for termination of this Agreement. In addition, the following may also be grounds for revocation: A. Failure to pay the annual rental payment. B. Failure to maintain liability insurance. iC. Assignment or transfer of this Agreement without the written approval of the City Manager. D. Failure to comply with all applicable City building, plumbing, fire and electrical codes. E. Repeated violations of city and state liquor laws. F. Failure to comply with Johnson County Health Department I regulations. 11. Any use of the premises for the purpose of selling beer or liquor or wine shall not be permitted until there is full compliance with all state and city laws governing licensing and dram shop insurance. 12. Lessee(s) shall indemnify and hold harmless the Lessor, its agents, officers and employees from and against any and all claims, damages, losses and expenses arising from damage to or destruction of utilities located in the public right-of-way 973 d I /1 during the term of this agreement or any extensions or renewals thereof. 13. Lessee(s) shall furnish a construction bond to the Lessor during construction in an amount to be determined by the City Manager. 14. This Agreement shall not be of force and effect until a building permit has been issued. 15. Upon termination of this Agreement the Lessor may, at its option, order the addition removed and all costs for removal shall be borne by Lessee(s). Removal shall include restoration of the surface of the Plaza on which the addition was located. 16. In the event that the portion of the public right-of-way in the City Plaza which is leased pursuant to this Agreement should ever be assessed for real property tax purposes, Lessee agrees that it shall pay any and all real estate taxes thereby assessed against the City of Iowa City as Owner -Lessor. The City agrees to promptly furnish the Lessee the tax statement that it receives from the County Treasurer and Lessee shall thereupon pay said taxes when due directly to the County Treasurer even though said taxes are listed in the name of the City of Iowa City. Failure to pay said taxes when due shall constitute a grounds for revocation of this Lease in addition to those grounds specified in Paragraph 10 herein. 17. Additional Provisions: Additional provisions, if any, are set forth on Exhibit B attached hereto. City Manager LESSOR Owner Tenant LESSEE(S) p73 I i City of Iowa City-': MEMORANDUM OMI May 11, 1984 Ta City Council FIM �Mndrea Hauer fE: Design Review Committee Comments Regarding City Plaza Permanent Building Extensions At the May 9, 1984 Design Review Committee meeting, the Committee reviewed the City Plaza Ordinance and wished to forward its comments on permanent and seasonal/temporary extensions on City Plaza. These comments are attached for your consideration. May 9, 1984 Design Review Committee Meeting BUILDING EXTENSIONS ON CITY PLAZA REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION: DRAFT MINUTES Hauer gave a brief review of the City Plaza Ordinance which was adopted in 1918. She stated the ordinance allows for up to a 10 foot permanent building extension to be constructed in front of the building. Wockenfuss said the ordinance was adopted to alleviate some of the straight line effect of buildings on the City Plaza. Lafore said he is not enthusiastic about any type of permanent structure extension but would be receptive to a seasonal type of structural exten- sion. Wockenfuss questioned if the ordinance had to be changed. Hauer stated that the ordinance was undergoing a review by the City Council and staff. Sinek stated he also could visualize seasonal extensions but not anything permanent. Lafore stated the Plaza has a personality of its own and he felt it would be destroyed if permanent extensions were constructed. He proposed the Committee recommend that it is no longer a good idea if a permanent extension was constructed. He has no objection to temporary extensions, such as awnings or sidewalk cafes subject to Committee approval. He also noted that the vendors have generated additional pedestrian traffic and that all of the space on the Plaza war being used. . Lafore pointed out that if the 10 feet were used, pedestrians would have to use the center lane. Seiberling stated the open space of City Plaza would be gone if permanent structures were allowed to be built. She feels some sort of professional guidance is needed to help assess the impact of permanent structures. It was noted that some Plaza planters obstruct the passage between the center lane and the 10 foot zone which could necessitate removal of the planters. Seiberling questioned if the Historic Preservation Committee would have any concerns regarding this and recommended it be contacted for input. Lafore moved to recommend to City Council that permanent structure extensions on City Plaza were not desirable. Seasonal extensions are more desirable because of the interaction they would encourage with the City Plaza and the temporary nature of seasonal extensions. Haupert seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously with Amert, Alexander, Summerwill and Wegman absent. 97�z City of Iowa City = MEMORANDUM DA111 May 10, 1984 TO: City Council f■Olq1 Dale E. Helling "r Sumner Meeting Schedule and Vacations During the past summers the City Council has elected to meet informally every other week only on the Monday before the regular Council meetings. This schedule would be in effect during the months of June through August. A brief time has been scheduled at Tuesday's informal meeting to discuss this matter. Attached is a calendar withthe dates of meetings under the proposed schedule circled. Note Council would not meet on Memorial Day (May 28), July 4, or Labor Day (September 3). The regular meeting schedule would resume with meetings on September 10 and 11, 1984. In addition, it is requested that the Council members notify Lorraine of vacation plans for this summer so that it can be determined whether or not a quorum will be available for each meeting. 175 ■ 1984 JANUARY S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 28 29 30 31 29 ®©1 FEBRUARY S M T W T F S S T F 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 5 M T W MARCH 5 M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 ®©1 APRIL S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 23 24 25 26 27 28 MAY S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 I 16 17 18 19 200023 24 25 26 27 28 U9 30 31 JUNE S M T W T F S 1 2 3© 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ®® 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 �I OCTOBER S M T W T F S JULY 2 3 4 S M T W T F S 1 Q Q 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 ©(0 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ®©1 NOVEMBER S AUGUST T W T S M T W T F S 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Q ® 15 16 17 18 19 26 2 21 (0® 22 29 23 30 24 31 25 25 SEPTEMBER 27 28 5 M T W T F S 2 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 ( Q 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 7730 24 25 26 27 28 29 OCTOBER S M T W T F S DECEMBER S M T W T F S 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NOVEMBER S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 DECEMBER S M T W T F S 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 7330 243, 25 26 27 28 29 97s ; ■ JORM MICROLAB MI[I10611MIKf mmox SERIES MT -8 PRECEDING. DOCUMENT APRIL S M T W T F S 1 2 JANUARY 4 5 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 APRIL S M T W T F S 1 2 FEBRUARY 4 5 S M T W T F S 13 14 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 29 30 31 APRIL S M T W T F S 1 2 MARCH 4 5 S M T W T F S 13 14 15 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 APRIL S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 23 24 25 26 27 MAY 5 M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 3 14 1 16 17 18 19 20 (61 23 24 25 26 27 28 9 30 31 JUNE S M T W T F S 1 2 3 Q 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17LCA ® 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 JULY S M T W T F S I © 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q6®I8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ®Q AUGUST 5 M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Q A 15 16 17 18 1921 22 23 24 25 26 (S 29 30 31 SEPTEMBER S M T W T F S 24 2 5 6 7 1 8 9 ( Q 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 7730 24 25 26 27 28 29 OCTOBER 5 M T W T F S 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30 NOVEMBER S M T W T F 5 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 DECEMBER S M T W T F S 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 loll 12 13 I4 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2370 747 25 26 27 28 29 97-s CITY CSF IOW/-\ CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHNGTON Sr. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 May 10, 1984 Mr. Fred Krause P.O. Box 2240 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 Bear Mr. Krause: CITY (319) 356-5000 I wish to express my sincere appreciation for your participation as a member of the ad hoc committee which recently reviewed proposed amend- ments to the Iowa City Human Rights ordinance. The issues discussed and compromisesproposed by your committee served as a basis for the amendments the City Council will finally adopt in the near future. I believe that there 'remains a strong commitment to civil rights in Iowa City and this commitment is shared by the City Council. It is very encouraging to know that we do not allow personal differences in this area to render us inactive or unresponsive to the needs of our citizens. I do not believe that the City Council could be nearly as effective in dealing with these matters were it not for the willingness of citizens like you to contribute your time and effort in these matters. Thank you very much for your interest and your personal contribution. Sicerely yours, �� ohn Me0onald Same letter to: John Breckner Mayor Susan Buckley cc: City Council John Watson Mark Human Rights Commission S Hamer Housing Commission Gary Smith Carol Karstens Susan Futrell asp Karen Kubby .774 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: May 7, 1984 To: City Manager and City Council From: Lyle Seydel JZ Re: Congregate Housing The Project Schedule For Development And Implementation of a congregate housing project was included in the packet to Council. The initial meeting to receive, public input has been tentatively scheduled for Thursday, May 17, 1:00 P.M, in the Senior Citizens Center. Publicity will be generated and those organizations representing elderly persons will be invited to attend. Posters will be made, signs put on buses and some paid advertis- ing inserted in the paper. Members of the Council are invited to attend this meeting. Specifically, the Mayor is requested to perhaps welcome the group and open the discus- sion. Additional information will be provided as it becomes available. bcl CONGREGRATE HOUSING DISCUSSION The elderly/handicapped persons of Iowa City are invited to a public meeting. Ideas are needed to develop plans for a Congregate Housing Project here in Iowa City. i Thursday, May 17, 1984 1.3 pm at the Iowa City Senior Center Classroom on the ground floor THE HOUSING COMMISSION NEEDS YOUR IDEAS! 977 -City of Iowa Citi, MEMORANDUM Date: May 10, 1984 To: City Council and City Manager From: Lyle Seydel, Acting Director, Housing & Inspection Services Re: Housing Rehabilitation Housing Rehabilitation has been a continuing CDBG project since 1976. The emphasis has been on assisting low and moderate income single family home owners. The program has changed over the years to meet certain criteria (local and HUD's). Currently there are four programs available for owner -occupied homes: 1. Low Interest Loan - This is a loan/second mortgage where one can borrow up to $15,000.00 at 6% for 15 years. 2. Weatherization Loan - This is a loan secured by a Promissory note where one can borrow $1500.00 at 3% for 5 years. 3. Forgivable Loan - Maximum amount allowed for home repair is $15,000.00. A lien is recorded against the house for five years and 20% is forgiven each year. The lien is also forgiven upon death or incapacitating illness. 4. Painting Grant - This is funded by the COBG "Jobs Bill" on a one-time basis. A one story home could be eligible for up to $2,500.00 while a two story home could receive up to $4,000.00. This is a basic grant - no lien involved. All monies for this program have been encumbered. Since 1976 the following funds have been spent on rehab programs: Basic Grant $234,950.70 Forgivable Loan - 3 yr. 227,547.77 Forgivable Loan - 5 yr. (80) 74,999.00 Forgivable Loan - 5 yr. (81) 82,700.00 Forgivable Loan - 5 yr. (82) 102,140.00 Forgivable Loan - 5 yr. (83) 109,500.00 Rehab V& Low Interest Loan 68,450.00 Emergency Forgivable (78) 3,500.00 Weatherization Grant (78) 7,215.24 Paint Grant (83) 43,280.00 In sumnary, comprehensive rehabilitation since 1976 has provided assistance in the amounts of: All Grants $234,950.70 All Forgivable Loans 596,886.77 Rehab I & Low Interest Loans 68 450.00 5900;287-47 go 1 2 1 t d A total of 76 comprehensive rehabilitation projects were completed with CDBG w funds with'an average cost of $11,945.89 per structure. Also, from 1976 to s 1981, we were able to capture $229,200.00 in Section 312 monies from the Department of Housing & Urban Development. This was a direct loan to single family owner occupied homes with an interest rate of 3% for a term of 20 years. The maximum loan was $27,000.00 per dwelling. In November 1983 , a new rental rehabilitation program was authorized by Congress. The interim regulations have been published. The funds available for this year will be approximately $71,500 with the possibility of another $71,500 for 1985. pb/sp I ,I i r - City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: May 11, 1984 TO: City Manager and City Council ,og�� FROM: Lyle Seydel, Acting Director, Housing & Inspection Services /!% RE: Junk pile near Noel's Tire Service This subject was first brought to the attention of Woody Kendall, inspector approximately 2 weeks ago by Councilman Baker. Mr. Noel is currently recovering from another serious operation. Discussion with other family members indicate that they have plans to remove the debris and clear the area, but no definite dates were provided. A follow up (written) will be accomplished the week of May 14. ■ City of Iowa Cite MEMORANDUM Date: May 10, 1984 To: City Council and City Manager From: Frank Farmer, City Engineer �el �1_ Re: Shamrock and Arbor Storm Sewer Project On Thursday, April 26, 1984, City staff met with the neighbors of the Shamrock and Arbor drainage area at the residence of Frank Burns. The project overall was very well received and required easements from those property owners affected will be forthcoming. The main concern of many of the property owners upstream of Shamrock Drive was the creek channelization. The project as designed including channeli- zation stops at the east property line of 3222 Shamrock Drive. The property owners feel that the creek should be channeled deeper but not necessarily wider, and extended an additional three lots to the east line of 3310 Shamrock Drive. Additional channelization was discussed at length and staff agreed to look at additional channelization further upstream than originally planned. It is possible to enlarge the channel an additional three lots to the east line of 3310 Shamrock Drive without having to remove any trees. Due to slope instability, potential liabil- ity, and future City maintenance responsibility with a narrow deep channel, the Engineering Division recommends against deepening the channel without properly sloping the sides. The channel widening previously presented (see attached drawing) was designed to handle a five year storm. This represents a storm with a 20 percent probability of happening in any given year. The existing channel will not handle a one year storm. If the channel were dredged deeper, it could then handle the one year storm, a one year storm being a storm with a 100 percent probability of occurring in a given year. If additional channelization is undertaken, for safety and maintenance reasons, the minimum channel should be as proposed on the attached drawing and should be rubble -lined. This would handle a two year storm. This would represent a storm having a 50 percent probability of occurring in any given year. The attached drawing shows various proposed channel configurations compared to the existing channel. The cost for the rubble -lined channel extended an additional three lots, which is recom- mended by the Engineering Division, is estimated to be $5,000. The Engineering Division will proceed with incorporating the additional channelization into the Shamrock -Arbor storm sewer project upon Council authorization to do so. bdw4/2 go \zf EXISTING, CHANNEL ENGINEER'S REVISED PROPOSAL - PROPERTY OWNER'S PROPOSAL - ENGINEER'S ORIGINAL PROPOSAL L•1 TYPICAL CHANNEL CROSS - SECTION TRIBUTARY OF SOUTH BRANCH RALSTON CREEK LINED CHANNEL SCALE: V- I" = 2'-0" H- I" = 3'-0" '1 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: May 11, 1984 TO: City Council FROM: City Clerk RE: Absence I will be out of town from May 20 thru May 27 attending the annual Municipal Clerk's Conference. Deputy City Clerk Ramona Parrott will be in charge during my absence. M/ I The University of Iowa Iowa city, Iowa 52242 Student Senate May 9, 1984 qt-'�1VED 1047 Mr. Neal Berlin City Manager Office of the City Manager, Civic Center City of Iowa City Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Berlin: Enclosed is a copy of a UI Student Senate resolution on the proposed footbridge that was passed by a majority of the Senators last Thursday, May 3, 1984. It generally states that the UISS supports the building of a footbridge. We hope that this support might assist the City Council in making a decision on this particular topic. Please feel free -to contact myself or the President of the UISS, Lawrence Kitsmiller for any other feedback on this issue or others. Thank you again for this opportunity of student input. Sincerely, Mike Skinner City Relations Chairperson UI Student Senate 9�z SSR -845-012 Submitted by: Skinner, Davis, Mintzer, Gillogly, Rogers flay 3, 1984 Re: Pedestrian Footbridge M,'HEREAS, the Iowa Avenue bridge shall be closed for the 1984-85 year for extensive repairs, and WHEREAS, many UI students live on the west side of the Iowa river. or attend classes Iaowa Avenge bridge to get to and approximately d from classes00and�t�ans RHEREAS, it's in the best interest of the students to have a footbridge during this time of construction in terms of student safety and saying student time, and WHEREAS, the funding for this footbridge may be taken from a University afund called In -m in= s a fund for non-recurrfi g expennditurres,and Investment, which acts WHEREAS, other recurring expenditurest Teaching Assistants, and therefore boo ( BE IT RESOLVED, that the UISS supports the University in funding for half of the footbridge, according to the agreement with the City of Iowa City, on the grounds that the money for this footbridge comes from Income from the Treasurer's Temporary Investment fund, rather than the UI's general fund. r ■ OeHawkeye Ca a 02 May 4, 1984 Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Civic Center 410 E. Washington Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members: RECEIVED ;y,�y ----- 41984 This letter hopefully will serve two purposes. One, to enlighten you concerning information about this system which at this time you know nothing about, and two, to request a prompt decision on your behalf concerning municipal ownership. The cable system in Iowa City is extremely capital intensive in nature. Residential and commercial development within this community is unprecedented anywhere in Iowa. In 1984 alone, this company plans on spending nearly $200,000 on plant expansion into new developments, a plan which, by the way, is on hold pending resolution of the ownership question. 1985 will see the acquisition of at least 12 new vehicles to replace the existing ones, as well as to beef up manpower. This is another $140,000 to $150,000 investment. Subscriber hardware and materials, including converters for the remainder of 1984, will exceed a half million dollars, and the need to replace worn out studio equipment will be a continually pressing issue this year and the years to come. Our investment in this category is nearly $200,000 at this time. This business also has its risks. Emerging unregulated industries such as Direct Broadcast Satellites, Multiple Distribution Systems and Subscription Television threaten to represent a form of competition which could seriously impact our revenues. Approximately 52% of the households in Iowa City have cable service. This Is undoubtedly due to the strong presence of local off -air television such as channels 2, 7, 9, and 12, not to mention the Quad City channels. Needless - to -say, noteveryone has cable. Even your pride and joy downtown motel has told us in writing that they will not be in need of cablevision's services, and an apartment building,,la-Ill Manor, elected to install their own satellite system leaving us with only three subscribers out of a possible fifty. P.O. Boz 4500 546 Southgate Avenue Iowa City, Iowa 52240 319-351-3984 A subsidiary of American Television & Communications Corp. HONORABLE MAYOR (2) IOWA CITY, IOWA May 4, 1984 The idea that the City could operate this system at a lower cost and could, therefore, reduce rates is absurd. Virtually all the satellite contracts for Pay TV and basic programming would have to be renegotiated. Because this system, by itself, would not have the strength in subscriber numbers such as Heritage Communications, these rates would increase 25 to 30 %. Multiple System Operator's discounts for installation and construction materials could not be secured representing another 10 to 15% increase in the costs of doing business as a city -owned cable system. Undoubtedly, the public access program's budget would double from the present $100,000 or so to over $200,000, not to mention the capital needs which 1 spoke to before. As a private entity, Hawkeye pays over $170,000 a year for the right to be here. Franchise fees and property tax would be no more. Surely, the City would have to dump some of the profits, if any, back into the General Fund to cover this deficit. Regardless of financing methods, the City would have to pay interest on a $11,680,000 note. Even at a mere 10$ interest rate, it would gobble up half the system's gross revenues to pay this interest. With nearly 1.5 million dollars a year in on-going operating costs v.s. 2.5 million dollars in revenues, it does not take an accountant to figure out the City would have to borrow money to make its interest payments. This also does not take into account that sooner or later the principle on notes comes due and payable to the tune of 11.6 million dollars. Also, sooner or later, the City will be faced with investing another 10,000,000 dollars or more in rebuilding this system and updating the technology. Whether you are buying a system or rebuilding one, if I were one of those 48% or so that do not subscribe to cable, the City's willingness to encumber me with such indebtedness would make me sick -- especially when the sewer system is shot, the water reeks of chemicals, and the local airport is a comedy of bureaucratic blunders. � All of what I have said are real situations and are not pumped up or blown out of proportion scenarios. I have managed this system from j the beginning, and I know what I am talking about. Over 17 years in this business has given me great insight into the operational aspects and the on-going demands placed on the operator. Please, Mr. Mayor and Council, all I ask is that if you are going to buy this system, then do so at once. If not, issue a directive to your commission to move rapidly toward transfer of ownership language for Heritage Communications to look at. There are many things that need to be done here; such as, construction, adding new services and up -dating subscriber hardware. They will not be done unless this ownership question is resolved. If not for the sake of our employees, then move on this issue immediately for our present and future subscribers' sake. I would think that by July 1, this issue should be buried and done with. Respectfully submitted, /i .,',•,.:. :%iu �983 N17 vLe�7 sus o��•-�' 9�ii i E MINUTES OF STAFF MEETING MAY 2, 1984 Referrals from the City Council meeting of April 30, 1984 were distributed for review and discussion. Items for the agenda of May 8, 1984, will include: Resolution approving plans and specifications for the Iowa Avenue Bridge Project Resolution deferring award of bids for the Highlander Lift Station project to May 22 Set a public hearing on the Asphalt Overlay Program for May 22 Set a public hearing regarding off-street parking design standards - I proposed amendment to exempt single family and duplexes j Set a public hearing on the vacation of a portion of Melrose Avenue Set a public hearing on an ordinance to rename Sandusky Avenue to Sandusky Drive First consideration on rezoning of 3.52 acres (Plum Grove Acres Project) from IDRS to RS -5 First consideration on the rezoning of the Preucil School property First consideration of ordinance amending the zoning ordinance to permit certain uses in historic structures in an W-12 zone Second consideration of final OPDH of Hunter's Run Subdivision, Parts 2 and 3 Third consideration of an ordinance to amend off-street parking design standards Resolution to approve preliminary plat of First and Rochester i Subdivision, Part 2 j Resolution setting an expiration date for the east and northeast side j development policy , Recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding Rocca Subdivision in Johnson County Recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding rezoning of certain land in the Harlocke area from RM44 to RS5 Appointments to the Resources Conservation Commission, Mayor's Youth Employment Board, and the Urban Environment Ad Hoc Committee Second consideration of an ordinance amending the housing code regarding second bedrooms in mobile homes 50 M Minutes Staff Meeting -5/2/84 Page 2 Second consideration of amendments to the Human Rights Ordinance Resolution to set public hearing on FY84 budget amendments Resolution reclassifying two positions in the City Confidentials Pay Plan The Senior Center Director raised a question regarding use of sick leave for family members and its relative benefit vs. the current disability plan. The City Manager indicated that the whole question of a cafeteria benefit program, to which proposals in this area had been previously discussed, was an hold pending the issuance of federal regulations which might seriously impact the feasibility of such a program. The Senior Center Director also raised a question about the policy on reassignment of staff members and how such information can be conveyed to all administrative staff. She will serve on a committee, along with the Director of Planning and Program Development, the City Clerk, and the Library Director to discuss and suggest possible remedies to this problem. Prepared by: Dale E. Helling rm Informal April 30, Bus Tour Old Librar Charter Re Council Ga Ia.-Ill. F S. Johnson Apartment I- S Rental Rehal J AFSCME/Admit Financing of Melrose Cot i i MINUTES OF STAFF MEETING May 9, 1984 1 Referrals from the informal and formal Council meetings were distributed to 7 the staff for review and discussion (copy attached). The Acting Director of Housing and Inspection Services reminded the staff of i the May 17 meeting on Congregate Housing. The City Clerk advised that she will be out of the office the week of May 21. The Deputy Clerk will be in charge of the office. The Library Director advised that two-way use of cable institutional network is about to become operational. j The City Manager advised that Iowa City will soon be offering electronic ; transfer for payment of utility bills. The Finance Department is also looking into the use of an automatic teller here in the Civic Center for payment of t utility bills. Prepared by: j V�d-aha AA-0, QJto�U`J j Lorraine Saeger 0 a Ez I Informal Council lay 7, 1984 Special Use Historic Pr IRB Review Elderly Hou Jim Clark Melrose Cow First Femalf Informal Council Meeting May 7, 1984 DEPARTMENT REFERRALS i Page 2 U SUB.J EC r DATE REFERRED RECO TO ATE DUEF � � COMMENTS/STATUS Traffic Signals - Flash Mode 5-7 Public Wor Assistant / ty Manan r No flashing - solid red! Do not proceed. Hotel Walkway 5-7 Lights are out and temporary railing on north side has been removed. Write letter and check Letter of Congratulations 5-7 Library Letter from Mayor to Ed Zastrow re. regional V -P. CCN Video tape P 5_7 pgpp Show to Council at informal meeting and draft memo from liayor to CCN conveying compliments. Discrimination by Private clubs 5-7 Assistant C ty Manag r Status in inquiry?. Send copy of letter to Council. Dirt, etc., on street 5-7 Public Work First and Rochester - Check and resolve problem with developer. Also on North Dubuque Street near I _. Regular Cou May 8, 1984 Special At1 Street Nam, Minimum Opi East Side I Rezoning o' Junk Pile Benches on Center ' Outdoor se extensions Amendment Regular Council N May 8, 1985 Page 2 Weeber Warlocke W, Urban Environment City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: May 10, 1984 To: City Council From: Drew Shaffer Re: HR4103 and Status of Cable Plant On April 23 the City Council requested a report on the content and status of HR4103 and the status and projected obsolescence of the cable plant in Iowa City. PART I: HR4103 HR4103 is the most current legislation in the Congress following at least four years of deregulatory attempts. The National League of Cities (NLC), U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) and concerned public interest groups have worked successfully to, defeat such legislation, introduced by Senators Packwood and Goldwater, which has been designed largely by the National Cable Television Association (NCTA). However, S66 was passed by the Senate in early 1983. This legislation is a bill aimed at deregulating the cable industry. HR4103 was introduced by Chairman Wirth in his House Subcommittee in late 1983. Currently HR4103 is before Rep. Dingall's House Committee on Commerce and Energy. Rep. Dingall recognized the importance of and history behind this bill and requested NLC and NCTA negotiators to sit down and resolve their difference in January, 1984. These negotiations are still underway. Reports from Washington indicate that the Committee on Commerce and Energy will not wait much longer to act on the bill and that the NCTA is unwilling to compromise to any signifi- cant degree on at least the six following major issues which are incorpo- rated into HR4103: 1. The cities should not be able to regulate cable TV rates. If any rates are regulated, it should be for a narrowly defined basic service (more narrowly defined than Iowa City's current basic service offering and with no restriction on the cable company's ability to restructure basic service and subsequent tiers). 2. Incumbent franchise holders should get franchise renewals at expira- tion time unless the City can show the cable company to be negligent in certain areas. This would make the burden of proof to show negligence or abuse the responsibility of the City. 3. Existing franchises are not fully grandfathered in HR4103. Substantial modifications might result immediately upon its passage. 4. HR4103 currently imposes the right of de novo review through a court for the cable operator, again placing undue burden on the franchising authority. 9IF4 2 5. "Significant change in circumstances" is a clause used in HR4103 concerning the provision of facilities and services by the cable operator. This clause is left undefined and ambiguous, and might allow a cable operator to curtail or change facility or program offerings essentially at his/her own discretion. 6. Finally, other sections of HR4103 give broad authority to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), authority previously that of state and local governments; may permit access funds to be calculated as part of the franchise fee (this would be disastrous for Iowa City's access program and the City's programming efforts); and do not adequately outline and protect commercial leased access require- ments. Most of these points were outlined in an October 24, 1983, letter from NLC President Charles Royer to Chairman Wirth, and in an NLC resolu- tion passed last November at its annual conference in New Orleans. Iowa City has consistently taken a stance against deregulatory attempts over the last four years through letters to the Iowa delega- tion as well as other appropriate Senate and House members. Currently negotiations between the NLC and the NCTA are still under- way. Reports indicate the NCTA is unwilling to compromise on the above issues, hoping that Rep. Dingall's staff will end up drafting legislation closer to its liking. In the event no House legislation is passed by the House committee, the NCTA will probably attempt to get its changes enforced by the FCC. FCC Chairperson Mark Fowler has been attentive to cable industry interests as indicated by the FCC's ruling last November that cities cannot regulate any cable TV rates beyond those of the lowest cost basic service tier. Chairman Dingall and the NLC have made it clear that the cable lobby is extremely powerful and that the cities' and public's interests and concerns have not been impressed upon House or Senate members. The NLC is currently requesting cities and citizens to contact their Congressional representatives to express their concerns regarding this bill. PART II: STATUS OF THE IOWA CITY CABLE PLANT The question of the status of the cable plant in Iowa City and a projection of when it will become obsolete can be considered from two perspectives: the hardware used to build, the system and the capacity of the system, including the number of channels available and the expansion capability. The cable system in Iowa City is constructed with good quality components from reputable manufacturers. With these components, an applicable industry standard for replacement projections in this climate is about 15 years. Some cable systems can and have functioned for 20 years, but at this age a system faces a continually rising number of technical problems and obsolescence in design and capacity. At the time Iowa City's franchise expires in 1994 the cable plant will be approximately 14 years old. Therefore, shortly after the franchise expires a rebuild may be necessary. 0 PRECEDING D OCUMENT 5. "Significant change in circumstances" is a clause used in HR4103 concerning the provision of facilities and services by the cable operator. This clause is left undefined and ambiguous, and might allow a cable operator to curtail or change facility or program offerings essentially at his/her own discretion. 6. Finally, other sections of HR4103 give broad authority to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), authority previously that of state and local governments; may permit access funds to be calculated as part of the franchise fee (this would be disastrous for Iowa City's access program and the City's programming efforts); and do not adequately outline and protect commercial leased access require- ments. Most of these points were outlined in an October 24, 1983, letter from NLC President Charles Royer to Chairman Wirth, and in an NLC resolu- tion passed last November at its annual conference in New Orleans. Iowa City has consistently taken a stance against deregulatory attempts over the last four years through letters to the Iowa delega- tion as well as other appropriate Senate and House members. Currently negotiations between the NLC and the NCTA are still under- way. Reports indicate the NCTA is unwilling to compromise on the above issues, hoping that Rep. Dingall's staff will end up drafting legislation closer to its liking. In the event no House legislation is passed by the House committee, the NCTA will probably attempt to get its changes enforced by the FCC. FCC Chairperson Mark Fowler has been attentive to cable industry interests as indicated by the FCC's ruling last November that cities cannot regulate any cable TV rates beyond those of the lowest cost basic service tier. Chairman Dingall and the NLC have made it clear that the cable lobby is extremely powerful and that the cities' and public's interests and concerns have not been impressed upon House or Senate members. The NLC is currently requesting cities and citizens to contact their Congressional representatives to express their concerns regarding this bill. PART II: STATUS OF THE IOWA CITY CABLE PLANT The question of the status of the cable plant in Iowa City and a projection of when it will become obsolete can be considered from two perspectives: the hardware used to build the system and the capacity of the system, including the number of channels available and the expansion capability. The cable system in Iowa City is constructed with good quality components from reputable manufacturers. With these components, an applicable industry standard for replacement projections in this climate is about 15 yearsSome cable systems can and have functioned for 20 years, but at this age a system faces a continually rising number of technical problems and obsolescence in design and capacity. At the time Iowa City's franchise expires in 1994 the cable plant will be approximately 14 years old. Therefore, shortly after the franchise expires a rebuild may be necessary. The cable system in Iowa City is a 300 MHz, 35 channel system with a subsplit configuration built with coaxial cable. It is a "one-way" cable system to subscribers, not a bi-directional system. This is not a state of the art system. There are systems being built now that offer over 100 channels and offer bi-directional services. However, with a system and a community of this size, a 35 channel system built with coaxial cable is very common. The most likely replacement for 1 coaxial cable appears to be optical fiber. A few cable systems using fiber optics have been proposed. The telephone industry has done a great deal of experimenting with this transmission medium and is also now bidding on several cable franchises. Fiber optics would multiply the speed that data could be sent over "cable." However, it is highly unlikely that fiber optics will be commonly used. It is still very expensive and untested in what are now considered cable applications. The Iowa City cable system has a 35 channel capacity with seven channels not being used. Three of these seven channels have color bars and the other four channels are blank. Of the four blank channels, one cannot be used for video purposes, but could be used for data transmission. One channel must be kept available for leased access purposes as outlined in the cable ordinance. The relevance of the number of channels available can only be viewed in light of what is and what will be available in the way of programming channels, such as ESPN, HBO, etc. There are currently 34 basic service channels and nine pay channels available via satellite. In addition, there are 23 regional entertainment services and six more services that are bicycled by mail. Although it is difficult to project with certainty, it is estimated there will be 15 more satellites in orbit by 1986, each carrying 12 to 24 transponders. Each transponder can carry one video service, such as ESPN. In addition, there are up to 45 new channel services planned, such as The Job Channel, Magicable and Shopping by Satellite. This information is given to indicate the wealth of services in existence and the projected increase in services to come. With a 35 channel system and five blank channels available for such usage, channel space may soon become scarce and valuable. There is currently no mechanism in place (in the ordinance or otherwise) that allows the City or the community to select what additional programming should be added beyond those proposed by the company. To provide additional channel capacity beyond the 35 now available would require a large capital investment, starting with different converter boxes and additional technical upgrades to the system. In addition there may be a cost attached to some of the additional programming cablecast. A rough estimate of the required cost of such an endeavor would be over $1 million. Depending on the company's interests, and the community's and City's interests, needs and ability to select programming, 35 channels may be filled before 1994. While cable services other than entertainment are not common at this time, it is likely that by 1994 non -entertainment cable services will be much more common. Such cable services could include: fire, police and medical alarm systems; the monitoring of buildings for security and power load management purposes; traffic engineering via cable; the 0 i DAT11 May 18, 1984 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager If: Material in Friday's Packet Memorandum from the City Manager regarding City Manager evaluation. 987 Copy of letter from the Assistant City Manager regarding discrimination in private clubs. 988 Memorandum from the Chairperson of Broadband Telecommunications Commission 9:9 regarding management and operation of public access channel 26. Notice of meeting regarding congregate housing and memorandum 'regarding update on congregate housing development activities in Iowa City. 99a Memorandum from the City Clerk regarding beer/liquor Sunday sales/ conditional approval. 99/ Memorandum from*the Senior Center Coordinator regarding Senior Center 99.2 evaluation. Notice of meeting of Southeast Iowa Municipal League. 993 Y City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: May 18, 1984 To: City Council From: City Manager Re: City Manager Evaluation The City Manager's evaluation is scheduled for May 29. It usually is scheduled earlier in the year. However, because of the change in Council composition, I considered it important for you to benefit from several months of City activity before being requested to comment on evaluation issues. Enclosed is a booklet which provides general guidelines for the evaluation process. In addition, I have enclosed two evaluation forms which offer specific suggestions as ta• performance criteria. The City Council usually meets for 30-45 minutes without the Manager present to review issues and organize ideas, then there is a discussion with the City Manager, and finally the Mayor offers any public comments, on behalf of the City Council, if deemed appropriate. At this time of the year, in order that the appropriate resolution is adopted before July 1, the Council determines the City (tanager's salary adjustment for the following year. As provided by Chapter 28A of the Code of Iowa, relating to the evaluation of professional competence, I request a closed session. A short time has been scheduled at the informal session of May 21 to determine if you desire additional information. 5dsk EYM Ev@Ju dflg �h@ MOW Adgnaho u(N@Q This handbook was prepared by Christine Schwarz Becker, Project Director, International City Management Association. The cartoons were created by Peter Clarey, Englewood, New Jersey. Handbook design by Virginia Sheard, Washington, D.C. !Q, i� i Q P@00M'e¢ d @ @ h At EVdU 0*@fl Evaluation is a touchy subject—whether it's evaluation of a product or of an individual. Traditionally, personnel evaluation has meant a critical and often negative look at an indivi- dual's performance—putting the employee's every move under a microscope and determining what's wrong. In the public sector, evaluation has gradually become a part of staff relations and development. But when it comes to the relationship of chief administrator to elected governing body, evaluation causes some particular uneasiness. You evaluate an administrator because there are problems and you want to take a closer look at what's wrong—or you avoid the process entirely. But wait—why does evaluation have to imply something negative and unpleasant? Why not think of evaluation as a process to find out what's right and what has been going well. A positive attitude toward evaluation will help both you, the governing body, and your admini. strator begin to accept and appreciate the value of the process. First, let's think about what evaluation is. Of course, it IS a critical look at what an em. ployee (the chief administrator) has accomplished during a given time. But it's also a communi- cations process—a method for permitting discussion apart from the formal decision-making pro- cess. And, despite the close working relationship between the administrator and governing body, opportunities for that kind of frank and personal discussion are very rare. Evaluation is also a learning process. Through a regular evaluation, you can begin to learn more about what everyone is doing, what everyone expects from each other and where there are strengths or weaknesses in the relationship. At the same time, evaluation is a difficult and sometimes time consuming process. You have to think about what's happening in your community, what you want to happen, and why things are oraren't going as you hope. You have to do more than scratch the surface. And, evaluation is threatening—a risky process for both the evaluator and the person being evalua- ted. Some will say it's harder on the evaluator because the benefits are less clearcut. If an ad- ministrator is doing a bang-up job and knows it, evaluation will only reinforce the strengths of that administrator. But what does it do for the governing body—the ones who have to agonize through the process? For one thing, it can help you see yourself in a new light. It forces you to spell out your expectations and needs in terms of the administrator's performance. And, if it's done well, it can help you determine how you're doing as an elected official—what you're contributing to the organization and how you might improve YOUR performance. This handbook is designed for you, the governing body or the evaluator, as well as your appointed administrator, the one who's being evaluated. It won't tell you the perfect way to conduct an evaluation, but it will get the wheels turning toward a thoughtful, effective, sensi- tive, and POSITIVE evaluation process. "A An evaluation must have a defined purpose. 2 9g7 how¢opM oq EVdUW5@fl A good way to start talking about evaluation is to consider some basic principles which should go into any evaluation process. While there isn't one pie in the sky way to carry out a perfect evaluation, some common concepts will help you reach a satisfactory end. The most important principle is that there aren't any absolutes when it comes to evalua- tion. There are many systems, formats, approaches, criteria, and designs. What works is what's acceptable What feels best is what's light for soul LITTLETON. COLORADO has an informal semi-annual evaluation process for its city manager— largely just a general discussion about what's happened and how both the council and manager are doing. "The process is very infor- mal and the success is largely dependent upon the personalities of the Coun- cil and Manager involved." explains Littleton City Manager Gale D. Christy. "It could be more formalized if we chose to make it so, but why argue with success? ? ?" i I Once you realize there isn't one right way, one recommended approach, you'll be well on your iway to developing ao�od approach for your community. Here are some additional principles to help you think through the evaluation process: • ANEVALUATION MUST HAVE A DEFINED PURPOSE: That's obvious, you're probably thinking, Everyone knows the pur- pose of an evaluation. But, sometimes misconceptions about what the evaluation's purpose is an lead to the unpleasant, negative eval- uations you want to avoid. So start by thinking it through—why do you want to go through a process which is timeconsuming, risky, and threatening? Try to define your reasons —spell them out Are you evaluating strictly to see if a raise is appropriate? Or does it go deeper than that? To find out what the administrator's strong and weak points are so you can work to improve them? To Improve the working relationship between administrator and governing body? To help define goals and objectives for future performance? Don't assume everyone "understands" the purpose. Spell it out when you're plan. ning the evaluation process and make sure your process meets that purpose. 3 Q� r pQo��op0¢� ofd �da0�a�0o� A good way to start talking about evaluation is to consider some basic principles which should go into any evaluation process. While there isn't one pie in the sky way to carry out a perfect evaluation, some common concepts will help you reach a satisfactory end. The most important principle is that there aren't any absolutes when it comes to evalua- tion. There are many systems, formats, approaches, criteria, and designs. What works is what's acceptable. What feels best is what's light for youl LITTLETON. COLORADO has an informal semi-annual evaluation process for its city manager— largely just a general discussion about what's happened and how both the council and manager are doing. "The process is very infor- mal and the success is largely dependent upon the personalities of the Coun- cil and Manager involved." explains Littleton City Manager Gale D. Christy. "It could be more formalized if we chose to make it so, but why argue with success? ? ?" Once you realize there isn't one right way, one recommended approach, you'll be well on your way to developing ao�od approach for your community. Here are some additional principles to help you think through the evaluation process: • ANEVALUATION MUST HAVE A DEFINED PURPOSE: That's obvious, you're probably thinking Everyone knows the Pur - pose of an evaluation. But, sometimes misconceptions about what the evaluation's purpose is can lead to the unpleasant, negative Oval• uations you want to avoid. So start by thinking it through—why do you want to go through a process which is time consuming, risky, and threatening? Try to define your reasons —spell them out Are you evaluating strictly to we if a raise is appropriate? Or does it go deeper than that? To find out what the administrator's strong and week points are so you can work to improve them? To improve the working relationship between administrator and governing body? To help define goals and objectives for future performance? Don't assume everyone "understands" the purpose. Spell it out when you're plan- ning the evaluation process and make sure your process meets that purpose. 3 I • EVALUATION SHOULD BEGIN WITH MUTUAL AGREEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE: Ideally, starting and developing the whole proem should be a joint undertaking. That means both the admini. strator and governing body want to do it and have a hand in figuring out how. It won't work if the process is railroaded through by an individual or by either the administrator or governing body. Work on it together—coming up with some mutual understandings about why you want to evaluate and how you're going to do it • THE EVALUATION PROCESS SHOULD BE REGULAR: Ona you start, stick with it A one shot deal ("hey, let's evaluate our chief admini- strator tomorrow") is ineffective, threatening, and suspicious. Regular doesn't necessarily mean stiff and formal. It means you evaluate period- ically, at an agreed-upon interval. When you jointly define the purpose and process, also define the interval and make sure you stick with the schedule. • AN EVALUATION SHOULD BE OPEN AND CONSTRUCTIVE: When you're evaluating you should be sharing—talking openly. Admittedly, that's hard to do. But, if you try to think constructively, you'll make the process infinitely more beneficial for everyone. Look for the strong points without concentrating on the week ones. And when you do raise weaknesses, focus on what an be done to eliminate them. Try not to waste time on areas the administrator can't do any- thing about— like the administrator's personality. At all costs, both you and the administrator should avoid going on the defensive. Talk, share, be open, and positive. You're communicating— not facing head-to-head combat) 0 EVALUATION SHOULD BE BASED ON OBJECTIVE CRITERIA: The criteria will give evaluation the needed direction. And, if your criteria are well thought out and positive, you'll end up with a positive and effec- tive evaluation. The best criteria aro comprehensive— identifying skills, achievements, and results. In other words, you try to look at and evaluate every dimension of your chief adminisdator. It's hard to coma up with objective criteria when you think about the many hats a chief administra- tor ween. But you can begin by thinking about expectations—and then expanding those expectations into criteria. • EVALUATION SHOULD FIT INTO THE GENERAL STREAM OF THINGS: An evaluation shouldn't be an isolated, unrelated interruption. It's an integral part of everything that's going on. When you're developing an evaluation process, think about the way you do things, what you're already doing, and how you can fit evaluation in. It might become part of an annual retreat where you hammer out goals and objectives. Or it might fit best some- where in your budget cycle. But integrate it into what is already happening. 4 9V7 T �1 1. SUCCESS 2. uCCES S uCCESS I SUCCESS G� a Look for strong points without concentrating on the weak ones. • AN EVALUATION SHOULD LEAD TO POSITIVE ACTION: Follow-through is critical to the w of evaluation. Make sure you plan on something hep• pening after the evaluation—action steps or a governing bodyedministrator improvement plan. Then, when you come to the next evaluation, you'll be able to look at progress, "How'd we do?" An evaluation should lead to change. Even If there's nothing wrong, think about specific ways to make strong points even better or to develop new skills. 5 FM Roo WAnd G3¢�po��obo�oaoQ� Every time evaluation of the chief administrator is mentioned, at least ten questions pop up about who does what, how do I start it, what should I do, where does the public fit in .. ? So it's important to think about the process in those terms — toles and responsiblities in evaluation process. There are really three important actors to consider in the process— the governing body who does the evaluation: the administrator who is being evaluated and the citizens who want to know what's going on. Where, if anywhere, do they all fit in? THE GOVERNING BODY: Why Bother? Everyone always assumes an evaluation process is roughest on the person being evaluated. There's also a great deal of pressure on the evaluator and, in most cases, the benefits of the process are less apparent. So, what's in it for you, the evaluator? An evaluator probably has to be a little more magnanimous and a little less self serving than the person being evaluated. A good evaluation pointing up some of the administrator's strengths can be beneficial on both sides. Obviously, it can strengthen your working relation- ship with the administrator because you'll know more about the person you're working with. But it can also help you in your role as the administrator's employer—a role some elected offi- cials forget about until they decide it's time to fire the administrator. A good employer needs to know if an employee is satisfied with the job, the working conditions and the challenges. A good employer also needs to be able to pinpoint strengths and weaknesses, and, more impor- tantly, let the employee know about those strengths and weaknesses. And, a good employer owes an employee regular feedback—whether it's a reprimand or a pat on the back. In your policy making role, an evaluation can put you and the administrator on the same wave length when it comes to issues, ideas, concerns, and interests. When you're evaluating an administrator, you're bound to look at some of the issues which concern both of you—the goals you and the administrator are trying to achieve. And a common awareness of goals and expectations will lead to a more satisfying and more productive working environment for both you and the administrator. More simply, evaluation provides an outlet—a regular forum for airing issues, problems, needs, concerns, frustrations, or anxieties. If you're dissatisfied with the way your administra- tor handled a certain issue, evaluation gives you a chance to air that dissatisfaction and deter- mine if it was the issue or the administrator that really bothered you. 11 90f;7 You can get a more direct benefit from evaluation if it's a two way process—governing body evaluates the administrator and the administrator evaluates the governing body. That way you can get the kind of feedback you might need to strengthen your end of the team. Are you articulating your needs, concerns, and interests clearly and effectively? Are you giv- ing the administrator the kind of policy leadership needed to carry out the day-to-day business of running a city or county. Are you getting too involved in day-to-day administrative business? Your administrator is in a good position to evaluate how well you're doing as a policy making body. Then, after the total evaluation process you and the administrator will be able to improve the way you carry out your respective jobs. Another beneficial element of the general evaluation process might be a chance to do some SELF EVALUATING. When you think about how well your administrator is doing and how well the governing body as a whole is functioning, you can also take a look at what you're doing as an individual. Are you communicating well with the administrator and govem- ing body members; are you working as a member of the team; are you accomplishing some of your own goals? It can be helpful to turn the process inward—to make it introspective. Two MAINE councilmen who have wom the hats of evaluators admit the process can be difficult— but feel strongly that it can also be most rewarding and beneficial. Richard Walker, of CUMBERLAND. MAINE, says a planned evaluation annual establishes a sound working relationship between the coun- cil and manager. It also provides an opportunity to review the manager's job description, council expectations of the manager, and the manager's own satisfaction. Similarly, Robert Adam of FALMOUTH. MAINE, sees evalua- tion as a way to achieve "a healthy two-way communication." Both the manager and council must discuss problems, expectations, and needs. 'The evaluation process should facilitate careful consideration of Council and Manager roles in municipal government and how effectively each has func- tioned." Now, as the evaluator, what are you supposed to do? That's not easy to define. Your responsibilities will depend on the evaluation structure you and your administrator choose. It might mean filling out a form, or talking with the administrator or both. "Eyeball -to. eyeball" contact with the administrator is often the hardest part of the evaluation. But direct contact—an open and honest discussion—is usually the best and most thorough way to evaluate. It adds a certain amount of credence to what comes out in a written form. And it can give both you and the administrator a chance to question, clarify, or elaborate on what you feel. Your primary responsibility in evaluation is to be HONEST. Think first about what you ex. pect from an administrator and then think about what you're getting from YOUR administrator? Do they coincide? Remember, it's best to focus on RESULTS—what the administrator set out to achieve and what's been achieved. Personality, or better yet, STYLE will have some impact on your im- pression of the administrator. The way a public administrator carries out a job can be an im- portant part of what he or she accomplishes. Nevertheless, it's important to look primarily at results—not at personality traits. THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR: Why Me? ?? So you're the chief administrator—why on earth would you want your governing body to evaluate you? It seems like a perfect way to let them take pot shots at you and put you on the chopping block. Few administrators who've gone through the process will tell you that's the way it is. Of course, it's threatening and sometimes risky. After all, you're dealing with an elected body, usually at least five people, all with different ideas about what you're supposed to be doing and different opinions about how well you're doing it. There are, however, some very definite benefits for you in an evaluation. Think about it: • Evaluation gives you a chance to talk openly and frankly with your governing body—a way to dal with them away from the decision-making table. • Regular evaluation an help you avoid crisis confrontation with your governing body. If them are problems, you have a way to get them out. If them are serious conflicts, you'll know about them and together you can find a way to handle them. It helps avoid surprised • Regular evaluation gives you a chance to show how well you're carrying out the governing body's directives. If you're doing an outstanding job, you have a right to know. Evaluation gives the governing body an excuse to pat you on the back. • Evaluation can force you and the governing body to define roles and expectations so you'll know what you're supposed to be doing. Ideally, roles and expectations should be defined BEFORE an evaluation, but if that doesn't happen, evaluation is a perfect place to agree on a process to spell them out. • Evaluation can give you more confidence—in both yourself and your work. After a good evaluation you have a clearer idea of what the governing body wants. Even if the evalua- tion points up problems or weaknesses, at least you know where you stand and why. In a more general way, evaluation gives you a better handle on things. You'll begin to know more clearly what individual governing body members want and expect from you and you'll be better equipped to meet those expectations. It puts the governing body into perspective for you. 9 go i AT/0, 4.• I✓ fl:1 - '��yjNisT -'' Evaluation is a touchy subject) And, if you and the governing body agree to make the evaluation process a two-way street, you'll have a chance to talk about how well the govering body is meeting your ex- pectations and what changes are needed. From your perspective, it's not easy to take on the evaluation of an entire governing body. There area lot of sensitive areas. But you're probably in the best position to give the governing body some constructive feedback, so it's worth a try. Some of the "tender" areas worth discussing include: is Is the governing body providing the necessary leadership? • Is the governing body facing critical community problems and coming up with solutions to those problems? • Is the governing body stepping too much into administrative affairs—are they concentrating enough on pollcymaking? • Is the staff getting a clear direction from the governing body? It's not easy to focus on these kinds of issues unless you have a fairly good working re- lationship with the governing body. But if you agree you want to evaluate each other, then do it. 7 94f7 Let's assume you're sold on evaluation. What role do you play in developing and imple- menting the process? You may be in a position to sell the governing body on the process. If you're starting a new job, you might ask the governing body to set up an evaluation as a condition of employment. That approach has worked for some administrators because it gets the process started off on the right foot. In other cases, you could build an evaluation process for yourself into an employee evaluation system for your own staff. You evaluate the city staff and your governing body evaluates you as part of a broad process. Either way, there's some advantage if you initiate the idea of evaluation, particularly if the governing body members don't have any individual experience in employee evaluation. They might need and welcome guidance from a professional administrator on the mechanics of evaluating employees. Once you're both sold on evaluation, it's a joint effort. In VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON, the manager and council spent some time defining the managerial duties and then implementing an evaluation system. City Manager Alan Harvey believes that the concept of evaluation is worth pursuing. "To maintain effective Council and Manager relationships, it is essential that the Council establish specific measurable objectives with the City Manager and periodically review those objectives. To do otherwise creates the situation where both are operating without the advantage of knowing the other's expectations." He says defining the manager's duties has been the "hardest part of the process." MOUNTAIN VIEW, CALIFORNIA, has a comprehensive Management Perform. ance Program me u es evaluation for department heads, city attorney, city clerk, and city manager. Each individual is reviewed semi-annually by the respective supervisor based on a general approach to employee appraisal for all levels. The city manager goes through the process with his supervisor—the coun- cil. In all, about 50 management level employees in the city participate In the evaluating process. The Mountain View approach is based on the premise that "careful planning and implementation of a Performance Evaluation System is an essential management element to insure that all personnel are effectively used"—including the City Manager. The "Performance Evaluation System" was designed by the administrator and staff, but specific objectives for the manager's review are developed jointly by the manager and the council. In FALMOUTH, MAINE, City Manager David Whitlow requested an evaluation as a condition of employment. The first evaluation would take place six months after he started in Falmouth and then annually thereafter. 10 M Once the process is moving, you become a participant in it—not a victim of it. That means working with the governing body to maintain the positive approach needed to carry out a worthwhile evaluation. If the governing body puts you on the defensive, try to work your way out of that position. And, if the process seems to be waning or the governing body wants to forget about it, work to keep it regular: The first crack at evaluation usually won't be your best shot. Don't give up the CONCEPT of evaluation before you've had enough time to work the kinks out of your PROCESS. THE CITIZENS: Hey, what's going on? ? ? A few years ago, the role of citizens in evaluation wouldn't have been an issue. After all, personnel evaluation is usually private and confidential even in the public sector. But with the rise of open meeting laws—Sunshine Laws—it's impossible to forget about the citizens. "Evaluation in the sunshine" makes the process even more threatening and intimidating. The open and frank dialogue so critical to evaluation's success is harder to achieve under the watchful eye of the public and the press. How do you handle the public? If you shut them out deliberately and completely, they may get suspicious. But, if you open the door to anyone and everyone, you may also be opening up a Pandora's box of misunderstandings and misconceptions. It's important to start by convincing yourselves that evaluation is best conducted in pri- vate. Think about it. What is evaluation? It's primarily a personnel process—a systematic review of an employee's performance. And while the kind'of issues discussed may affect what happens in the community, you aren't making any formal decisions or setting speci- fic policies. You're looking more at your ability to make decisions as governing body and administrator rather than actually making decisions. Few administrators would be willing to go through a public evaluation. Even fewer elected officials would want to evaluate in a goldfish bowl. It's hard to be completely honest, critical, and objective when a lot of out- siders are watching you. Most sunshine laws allow closed sessions for personnel issues. That's usually the best route for justifying a closed evaluation. Look to your city attorney to find the right exemp- tion for justifying an executive session for the evaluation. If there isn't any exemption— some states like Florida have rigid sunshine laws which permit very few closed sessions—the best way to handle evaluation is a one -tonne process, based on written forms. Each govern- ing body member completes the written evaluation and then the mayor or a selected repre- sentative compiles the forms and meets with the administrator to discuss the findings. Other members of the governing body may also want to talk to the administrator individually. There are some flaws in this approach. It cuts down on the sharing which is sometimes so im- portant in evaluation and which can only come at a meeting with the entire governing body. Nevertheless, if it's the only legal way, it's better than no evaluation at all. Assuming you can evaluate in private, what, if anything, should the public know about it? Your biggest challenge will be to convince the public that the process is POSITIVE and 11 if/ BENEFICIAL Evaluation is a suspicious process—particularly the first time you do it. Some- how it implies there's something wrong. Regularity will reduce the suspicions but there's still a first time. The best way to deal with the public is to bring them into the evaluation at the develop- ing stages—when you're deciding to do it and figuring out how. If they understand what you're doing and how you're going to do it, chances are they'll realize that the actual eval- uation should be done in private. Most of your dealings with the public an evaluation will probably be through the press. They'll set the tone for how the evaluation will be viewed by the public. So it's important to keep them informed as much as possible. Again, the best way is to let them in at the de- veloping stages. Give them the criteria you'll be using or the format you plan to use. And talk about it—tell them what you'll be doing when you evaluate the administrator. You're taking a big risk if you keep the evaluation completely secret and the press finds out. The more they know and understand about the concept of evaluation, the more likely they are to agree that the evaluation dismission is best conducted in private. AFTER the evaluation, the some thing goes—let the public and press know what hap- pened. That doesn't mean giviig a play-by-play of everything that was discussed with all the specifics. It means simply telling them what you decided to do—keep going in the same direction, make a few changes here and there, or whatever. Several communities in MAINE have conducted evaluations with assistance from the Maine Municipal Association and the Bureau of Public Administration at the University of Maine. One part of all those evaluations is a council.mana. ger development plan which spells out what they plan to do as a result of the evaluation. Although the actual evaluations have been conducted in private, the post -evaluation development plan is released to the public—so everyone knows what the council and manager plan to do over the coming period. And, at the same time, the public and press get a pretty clear idea of what evaluation is all about. The key issue is to think about the public and press when you decide to evaluate—what they'll expect and what you owe them. Some communities have found it's enough to say simply an evaluation will be held and it was held and all important issues discussed. Other communities find they have to say a little more. You'll have fewer problems if evaluation is defined at the time you hire a new administrator—as something you both want to do to make sure the relationship works well. In any rase, think positively and the public and press will too. 12 9,F7 CeaO�aaowgo Fh¢il¢Q�a�oQ� Talking about the concept of evaluation is one thing. Actually doing it and doing it well is anotherl It is also particularly difficult to generalize about the mechanics of evalua. tion—the steps needed to complete the process. But, with the basic principles firmly in mind and a clear understanding of the roles you should play, you already have many of the tools You'll need to get the process started. GETTING STARTED Getting started might mean talking and thinking through the process. Its not some- thing you can say this is the way to do it and then dive in. Some governing bodies have found that a retreat setting—away from the day -today details of running the local govern. ment is a good way to brainstorm about the process. The retreat could be devoted entirely to the evaluation issue, or it could focus on other areas such as team building or goal setti It's important to take it slow, at the start, to make sure you're both ready to do it. Ing. 13 The first specific step in designing a process is to develop an "evaluation instrument." It might be a list of general questions to guide the discussion. Or it could be a detailed criteria form which defines management duties—or defines what the governing body and administrator believe are primary management duties. Developing criteria isn't easy. Ideally, criteria for the administrator's job should re- flect the goals and objectives of the governing body and staff. If you already have some clearly defined goals and objectives, you also have what you need to evaluate your admini- strator and yourselves. How effectively has the administrator worked to achieve those goals? Which goals haven't been accomplished? Why not? If you don't have in hand a list of governing body goals and objectives, it is important to develop some evaluation guidelines before tackling the task. First, what are criteria? Most simply, they're specific standards against which you can measure someone's performance. The most effective criteria are framed in terms of re- sults—what should have been achieved. It's difficult to come up with messureable criteria or objectives for a public administrator. The job usually has such a wide range of duties which are often radically different from community to community. And you can't count the number of "widgits" produced and then rate the manager. There really aren't any "recommended" criteria. "Recommended" criteria for all administrators would be so broad they'd become meaningless. Yet there are general areas which you can use to build your own specific criteria. • PLANNING: anticipating needs, recognizing potential problems, looking ahead • ORGANIZATIONAL SKILLS: running the day -today business, hiring staff, "managing" the community • BUDGETING: managing resources, preparing and carrying out the budget • PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT: skill in designing, organizing and carrying out programs to meet policy directives • RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE GOVERNING BODY, THE PUBLIC AND THE STAFF: meeting the requirements of those relationships • PROFESSIONAL AND PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT: expanding capabilities, developing and refining skills • PERSONAL QUALITIES/STYLE: working style, aggressiveness, flexibility, ability to handle crises. Usually it's best to develop the guidelines together—governing body and administrator trying to spell out what they expect an individual in that job to accomplish. It might be valuable for you each to prepare separate criteria lists before you come together. Then you can look for common areas and discuss the different issues until you reach an agreement. 14 94F7 In VANCOUVER. WASHINGTON, the Governing Body and City Manager together came up with a criteria list based on what they agreed were the manager's major areas of responsibility. These were: • organizational management • fiscal management • physical plant management *.program development and follow-through • relations with mayor and council • long range planning • relations with public • intergovernmental relations Within each major area, several general performance guidelines were spelled out to specify what the responsibilities were. Then each council member had to rate the manager in that area on a scale of 1-10—one, that the manager doesn't meet the council member's expectations; five, that he meets the expectations to some degree, and ten, that he meets all ex- pectations. For each category, the council member could elaborate on specific strengths and weaknesses. When you're developing your evaluation guidelines, don't confuse criteria with formality. An evaluation based on specific written criteria isn't necessarily a formal process. And, if you opt for an informal type of evaluation, it doesn't mean you don't need criteria. Criteria are what make an evaluation process something other than a gripe session—or a testimonial dinner. MOUNTAIN VIEW, CALIFORNIA, uses two sets of objectives for evaluating its managers. First, them am normal performance objectives—the broad objectives expected of every manager or basic requirements. Then, there are incentive objectives—something beyond the normal requirements which are used as a basis for extra compensation. And, there is a third level for evalua- tion—personal development objectives which look at the individual's person- al development and plans for the future. All objectives are developed by the manager and governing body at the beginning of the fiscal year and then re- viewed at the end. Additional sample criteria are included in the appendices. 15 N7 EVALUATING Once you have the criteria, you're already well along the way to an effective evaluation process. Your criteria will help determine the process. There are three general approaches to consider: 1. Use your criteria as a discussion tool. The criteria provide guidelines, but the evaluation isn't limited to those areas. 2 Develop a written rating system to use with your criteria. For each area, individual governing body members rate the administrator's performance either on a numerical scale or as satisfactory/umatisfactory. A section for addi- tional written comments is useful.with the rating sale. Then, all the forms are compiled to develop an overall picture of the administrator's performance. 3. Use a combination of both—a written evaluation form followed by a general discussion. While all three approaches have been used with varying degrees of success, the comb! - nation written -discussion is usually the most effective. It has the advantages of individual, thoughtful, and written evaluation as well as of open and frank discussion. With the written approach, you also have a written record to keep for comparison. Sometimes a freewheeling, unrecorded discussion can become "you said," "but I thought you meant" and "didn't we agree?' after the evaluation. When looking for the right approach, it's best to start simply. A long and detailed evalua- tion instrument and a gruelling follow-up discussion can tum everyone off to the process before anything positive happens. A simple start might mean talking through the process the first time—almost a dry run. In FALMOUTH, MAINE, the manager and governing body started the evalua- tion process with six simple questions. Developed by the manager, they were used to lead the discussion. The first evaluation wasn't very satisfactory, largely because the council hadn't worked long enough with its new manager. But, the group did agree to try again in another six months. By that time, the six questions had been expanded somewhat, drawing on experiences in the private sector, and the council was more prepared to handle the task. The evaluation discussion is the most personal part of the process, so it's difficult to generalize. How well it goes during the discussion will depend somewhat on the individuals involved. Your ability to communicate with each other, the rapport you already have with each other, and your individual and group commitment to the process will contribute to the success of the discussion. 16 9RO MOUNTAIN VIEW, CALIFORNIA, in its Management Performance Program offers some tips on carrying out a successful "evaluation interview" no matter who is being evaluated. Here are some ideas to make the discussion work: 1. PREPARATION: Both sides should think about what's going to be discussed beforehand and be ready to discuss. That means really thinking about performance, including a self- assessment before the discussion. if you use a written imtru- rcent, h dasarsas time, attention, and thought to make sure you know what you feel and why. It's helpful for the admini- strator to complete the some written form a a aN valuation. 2 PRIVACY: That man' no interruptions and a dear understand- ing that what's sold it confidential or, at least, will be handled with discrartion. hr,$ Important, what the public will be told aboutthetherefore, bansion w everyone feels free to talk openly. 3. TIME: The fading that you're Ming rushed through the avalua- tion discussion makes it meet theaatenhtg. Make sura you have enough time to talk thing through and to finhis what you start. You should try to sat aside a special time just for the evaluation— NOT attar the spine goveming body meeting, 4. PROPER PHYSICAL SETTING: The interview should be held in a plea that's Physically comfortablt—whea the environment is cordial, but businesslike. A noisy restaurant isn't Privent Or body Comfortable. An office, conference room, governing c ami we usually fire. S. PROPER EMOTIONAL SETTING: This is harder to define, but it's important. The discussion' should -be open end honest—and allow for give and take bstwesn the manager and supervisor. It nom talking and listening on both sides. Again, this is a meter of positive versus negetio—open discussion versus o gripe session. Once you've got your criteria, decided on a process, ana Totems Tree . vyvv. x•w a. ^ �• actually happens at an evaluation discussion? It will vary depending on the process and the people involved. At its best there will be a jot of discussion—a jot of give and take. In order to make it work, however, the mayor or governing body president probably should serve as a dis- cussion leader. That way you'll have some guidance or leadership to make sure the discus- sion goes somewhere. While you don't want the discussion to be stiff and formai, you do need some organization and direction. The success of your discussion will depend a jot on how comfortable you are with each other and with your process. So it might take a little time before everyone opens up and talks freely. The administrator should participate actively— that means contributing to the general discussion rather than responding only when asked. Give yourself a little time, though, and gradually you'll improve your ability to talk openly with each other: BRINGING IN AN OUTSIDER Another variation on the evaluation process you might consider is using an outside facilitator—sort of an evaluation moderator. The approach tries to minimize the threat and make sure the important issues are covered. It's most useful if there's a communica- tion gap which is hampering evaluation. The outsider can bridge that gap. 17 W This approach was tried in Maine to evaluate the executive director of the Maine Municipal League. It worked like this: • the executive committee and director met to agree on a process and chose a facilitator. • the facilitator met individually with each member of the executive committee (comparable to a governing body) to discuss the executive director's performance. An evaluation checklist was used. • the facilitator then met with the executive director, using the same checklist for self-assessment. • then the facilitator compiled the findings of all of these interviews, pulling out common issues, special concerns, and coming up with, an agenda for the evaluation discussion. • the executive committee and director met to discuss these findings and come up with a performance improve- ment plan—with the outsider acting as discussion leader. The approach, according to officials in Maine, worked well, particularly in compari- son to an earlier evaluation process without a facilitator. Both sides were unhappy with the results of that first evaluation. Several other commuriities have also tried this approach: In BRUNSWICK MAINE, the executive director of the Maine Municipal League serve as acs stator or an evaluation of the manager. Officials in the city say the facilitator helped "keep the whole process in perspective" and helped the council and and manager concentrate oer focus on nrtant develop ingng an improvement plan asr also ea result of the evaluation. PHOENIX, ARIZONA, also used a discussion leader the first time the council eval- uate t to city manager there. The Council, Manager, and discussion leader met at a day -long retreat to hammer out major goals they agreed the manager should be striving toward and then discuss how well they thought he was doing in achieving those goals. Both the manager and councilmembers felt the discussion leader played a key role in the first evaluation session. He provided valuable guidance when the council and manager were dealing with a new and somewhat unfamiliar process. He also helped put the manager and all council members in the same position—all PARTICIPANTS in the evaluation discussion with no one serving as the appoint ea er. In considering this approach, it's critically important to find someone who you and the administrator trust and feel comfortable with. Without that kind of trust and confidence, the process simply won't work. Basically, the idea behind bringing in the extra person is to eliminate the problems which sometimes interfere with effective evaluation—inability to communicate, failure to address the issues, personality conflicts, personal vendettas, general griping, failure to come up with an act - V l If/ ion plan: So, it's probably most useful when all else fails. If, after some effort, you can't get an evaluation process moving by yourselves, the third party approach might be your next option. Most will agree that something much simpler is best at the start. ANOTHER VARIATION NAPERVILLE, ILLINOIS, handles evaluation of its manager from a different perspective. There, the management staff evaluates the manager's performance from their vantage point as employees. The written forms are completed by all department heads and compiled by the Personnel Officer. Then the Person- nel Officer and Manager meet to discuss strengths and weaknesses and help the manager work better with his staff. This approach emphasizes the mana- ger's capabilities as a supervisor and staff leader. In addition, the department heads weigh the manager's overall performance as a manager and his relations with the council as they see it. FOLLOW-UP The real success of an evaluation comes in what happens after it's done. You might come up with a WORK PLAN for the period before the next evaluation or a DEVELOPMENT PRO- GRAM to strengthen the weak points and make the best of the strong ones. Or you might de- cide that a broad team building program using some outside resources is really what's needed to strengthen the overall working relationship. Be sure your evaluation includes an element for action steps—changes to be made, special tasks to be done, or decisions to follow as a result of what the evaluation showed. If you already have a good working relationship, evaluation probably won't bring up any major surprises—like discovering that an administrator isn't satis- fying ANY of your needs and should be dismissed. But it will help you identify areas to work on. Then, the next time you evaluate, you should be looking for progress—improvement in the weak areas and even more advancement in the strong areas. You can also consider some special development options as part of the evaluation—courses, conferences, training programs which you (governing body and/or administrator) might want to attend. Remember, formulate action steps and schedule the next evaluation. TIMING Another important element in a successful evaluation—and one of the frequent questions which comes up—is HOW OFTEN to evaluate and WHEN to fit it in. The frequency will vary. Annually is usually enough because it gives you and the ad- ministrator a chance to do something to evaluate. And it gives you a broader area of issues to cover so you won't concentrate on a particular crisis. Some communities feel semi-annually is better because it keeps the communication process going more regularly. It might be worth- while to start on a semi-annual basis while the process is evolving and then spread it out to annually once you're comfortable with the concept and approach. It's important to try more often—perhaps even quarterly—if you're having trouble with the process. Otherwise, you might find yourself letting it slide, if you wait too long. 19 Even more critical than how often, is WHEN. The day after a major crisis is definitely not the right time to evaluate. You'll end up focusing entirely on that one conflict rather than on overall performance. Ideally, you should decide to evaluate six months or a year after hiring a new administrator. That way you'll be starting with a clean slate and will be evaluating in your mind all along. But if you're starting midstream, there are several issues to consider when deciding on WHEN. Your most important decision will be whether to tie the evaluation process to the budget cycle—and, at the same time, to salary. There are some obvious advantages to evaluating with or around budget work. That's when you have your closest working relationship as governing body and administrator. That's also when you're both carrying out your most important job responsibilities. But salary adds another dimension to the evaluation process and can pose some extra problems. When you talk money and performance, you also have to think about budget constraints, tax increases, other salary hikes, and the general pay scale. You run the risk of mak- ing evaluation a negotiating process—more than a communicating process. For that reason, it's more effective, particularly when starting out, to separate the actual evaluation process from salary issues. A Y - Spite EIRM Evaluation: when to fit it in. 20 M7 I you should also think about your election schedule—try not to set your evaluation short. ly after an election when some of the elected officials haven't had a. chance to work with the administrator and form an opinion. Right before an election, when a change in the governing body make-up is expected is also a bad time to evaluate. Another issue you might consider is ongoing programs which could be tied to evaluation. Goal setting is a perfect example. If you meet annually to set goals and look at accomplishments, you could evaluate at the same time. Once you find the right time and the best interval, REMEMBER to make the process a REGULAR part of your activities. Set the time and do it. 'And 5@000 Are you ready to evaluate? ? ? Probably not yet. But you should feel a little more comfortable about the questions to ask yourselves and the issues to address before evaluating. It's too bad evaluation has had such a bad reputation. With only a little rare and plan- ning, the process can be remarkably constructive. Even going through the exercise of devel- oping a system and defining some criteria can begin to strengthen your working relationship. A regular evaluation process won't eliminate all conflicts—but it will help you keep those conflicts in perspective. More importantly, it will give you a regular outlet for dealing with conflicts. Evaluation is a very personal and interpersonal process. It can help you learn more about the people you're working with and how you can work together better. On a more practical level, evaluation gives you a chance to talk about what's been done, what should have been done and what you'd like to see done. Without it, you don't have many chances to talk about things in general—you're always facing so many major decisions and specific issues. There haven't been many post evaluation cesualities. In fact, most administrators and governing bodies who've gone through the process said they felt better when it was over. And their relationship worked better. The key is to think positively and design an evaluation system which will produce positive results. 22 9f7 Appendix A EVALUATION IN ELCERRITO, CALIFORNIA Because of the many variables and issues to consider in evaluation, it's helpful to look at the way one city carried out the process from start to finish. In EL CERRITO, a suburban community of 25,000 in the San Francisco Bay area, evaluation is one element of a broad team building pro- gram. The city got involved in team building early in 1974 when the mayor and city manager at- tended a retreat. After the retreat, the manager shared the elements of the conference with his staff and the mayor introduced the rest of the council to the concept One ongoing pan of the program has been evaluation—both for the city staff level and the dry manager. In fact, it became a "matter of policy" that the council would evaluate the city manager "not less than once yearly" Evaluation in EI Cerrito is a TOTAL process, including written evaluation forms, a discussion between the manager and full council, followed by individual conferences between the manager and city council members. As pan of the individual interviews, the manager also evaluates that per- formance of the council member, particularly In terms of the role the individual wants to assume on the city council. So evaluation becomes a two-way street The entire peens takes about a month to complete from the time the mayor distributes the written forms until all individual discussions are completed. Officials in EI Cerrito view evaluation as primarily a "communications proem" and an important part of their team workings Salary Isn't an issue during the evaluation. The goal of the process is to discuss what the council expects of the massager, how well he is meeting those expectations and what the manager and staff expect of the city council and how well they are meeting the expectations. Salary levels don't fit into that scheme, so evaluation has been deliberately separated from wage adjustments The written form used in EI Cerrito has two parts. The first section lists PERFORMANCE categories which the council feels aro most important to the manager's job. The council and manager spent a lot of time developing this list—to make sure it was comprehensive and usable. The second section deals with SKILLS the manager should have to arry out the job. In the first section, council members evaluate Wthe work according to the RESULTS that have been achieved. It's a narrative -type evaluation. Then, when It comes to the "managerial skills", coun• cil members rate the manager on a 1 to 5 scale— unsatisfactory to outstanding. There's also a section for brief comments to explain the rating. After all the forms are completed, the mayor compiles a total picture of the manager's performance. After the evaluation, the council and manager together develop gals and objectives which will provide a framework for the next evaluation. The goals provide an action plan to make sure some progress is made between evaluations Evaluation in EI Cerrito isn't static. The council and manager periodically review their approach to evaluation to make sure ft's still timely. Recently, the evaluation format was changed, drawing on the experiences of one council member who is a manager in private business The new form emphasizes areas which the council and manager agreed were critically Important in the manager's job. The process has worked well in EI Cerrito. A key to Its success, according to the City Manager Richard Brown, has been the team building program. "Before evaluation can be performed success• fully, the council must prepare Itself by developing rapport among themselves and with their chief administrator," Brown explained. "Retreats participated in by all council members and the City Manager are a common device for this purpose. It's important to develop rapport to the point where council members and the city manager can articulate their feelings about their working relationship." 23 9fl EL CERRITO, CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT EVALUATION Section I EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE RESULTS A. JOB RESPONSIBILITIES 1. Coordination of City Departments 2. Preparation and Review of Staff Reports 3. Budget Development—Preparation and Monitoring 4. Press Relations S. Professional/Personal Development 6. Personnel Development—Subordinates 7. Communication with Employees S. Communication with City Council 9. Communication with Public 10. Project Accomplishment 11. Priority and Organizational Goal Setting 12. Supervisory Ability Section II EVALUATION OF MANAGERIAL DIMENSIONS A. ADMINISTRATIVE SKILLS 1. Organizing and Planning 2. Quality of Decisions 3. Decisiveness 4. Creativity 5. Written Communications S. INTERPERSONAL SKILLS 6. Leadership 7. Behavior Flexibility B. Oral Communication C. STABILITY OF PERFORMANCE 9. Tolerance of Uncertainty 10. Resistance to Stress D. WORK MOTIVATION 11. Inner Work Standards 12. Energy 24 "J Appendix B SAMPLE CRITERIA, FALMOUTH, MAINE Evaluation of the Town Manager In Falmouth, evaluation is limited to an open discussion based on some general questions and criteria prepared by the manager and council. The questions are used to provide direction for the discussion. All councilmembers are expected to review the questions before the process, so they're well prepared, even though no form. al written form is used. Councilmembers are also encouraged to send written com- ments to the manager before the evaluation if they want to. These six questions were prepared by the manager: 1. Is the meager providing the council with adequate information to make decieforo? U the council provided with sufficient alternatives to avoid being forced into a decision? 2 Is the technical date and odor information presented in in uraiaewMable manner? 3. Is the manager effectively Communiating the council's position to the public? 4. Is the manager able to resolve problems under strained or unplwsam conditions? 5. Is the 'WON approaching the job from a day-to4ey standpoint or we NOW efforts directed toward brad organizational objectives? & Is the menager able to ceaogeize and deal effectively with the distinction between policy and administration? Is he/she too engaged in policy? Not enough? These additional questions were prepared by the council to evaluate specific managerial performance: I. lbw well dM the manager independently recognize problems, develop relevant facts, formulate alternative solutions and decide on the appropriate conclusion? 2 Hew effective were the mane 'I letter, memoranda, and other forma of written communication? 3. Does the manager make the most effective use of available talent to get the work done? Don the manager develop staff member? Is the manager readily accepted as a leader? 4. Does the manager respond in a positive way to suggestions and guidance from the council? Is each assignment undertaken with enthusiasm and zest? S. Con the manager be depandd upon for sustained, productive work? Does the manager readily assume responsibility? Does tM meager meet time estlmato and document work pepen properly? And, for general guidance, the council added these criteria for the manager: • is visible in the community through participation In various social, athletic and cultural affair • originates Ideas and program Improvements • attempts to economize whenever possible (especially Important In a snail Now England community) • makes recommendations on Issues is often as possible to provide a benchmark and starting point for council action. 25 W7 Appendix C SITUATIONAL STANDARDS FOR NORMAL PERFORMANCE MOUNTAIN VIEW, CALIFORNIA The Basic Requirements For Any Management Position PLANNING: To anticipate future needs and make plans for meeting them. ■ To recognize potential problems and develop strategies for averting them. ORGANIZING: To efficiently and economically organize and carry out the operation for which you are accountable. COORDINATING: To coordinate all activities related to work goals. To maintain cooperation and coordination with other departmentsand divisions. LEADERSHIP: To create a leadership climate providing challenge and motivating employees to high performance. BUDGETING: To prepare operational and capital budgets and to expend within adopted budgeted limits. PUBLIC To maintain a high level of contact with the public and RELATIONS: meet the needs of the public within available resources. EMPLOYEE RELATIONS: To equitably adjust grievances among subordinate employees. PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT: To train and develop subordinate employees. MANAGEMENT: To provide quality achievement in your job. To make sound judgments and decisions. To be creative and decisive. To set and achieve goals and objectives. To adjust plans to accommodate unforeseen and uncon- trollable factors. PERSONAL To remain aware of current developments and writings in DEVELOPMENT: the field of public administration and your career field. To develop personal traits and characteristics necessary to make your performance effective. ■ Appendix D EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: COACHELLA VALLEY (CALIFORNIA) ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS ADMINISTRATION (Factor II: 1. Man weir Develooment: Does he appoint and train effective subordinates? Has he retain exce ant people who were tempted to go elsewhere? 2. Su vision: Does he direct his group and control their efforts? Does he encourage t car in nstive? Don he know what is going on with all CVAG projects? Is he available•ta his employees for guidance and counselling? Does he evaluate his key personnel and suggest ways for them to improve? 3. Execution Does he understand and comply with the overall policy, laws and philosophy of the organization? Do his efforts lead toward successful accom. plishment of goals? Does he measure results against gals and take corrective anion? 4. Bud t It his budget realistic? Is it prepared in a good format? Is it reasonable? Ooestl a control expenses within the set levels of the budget? S. _ROM" . no: Does he submit$=rate and complete Staff Reports on schedule? Are they resble7 Are Staff Reports concise, to the point and submitted with appro• priate recommendations when necessary? 6. Planning: Is he familiar with the Association's policies, objectives and practices? Dan ere translate these policies, objectives and practices into specific programs? 7. Leadership: Don he motivate others to maximum performance? Is he respected as�ma�n ing but fair? Don he get enthusiastic response to new ideas and needed reorganizations? S. hb�Or ni2ttion: Does he delegate responsibility but handle job details efficiently? Dpes he uY time productively? Don he program activities in an ortlnly and systematic way? 9. Communication: Don he keep appropriate people informed? Does he present n' sigh I in an orderly understandable manner? Is he able to convince people to adapt his viewpoint? Is his written correspons entxf clear and concise and an accurate representation of Association policy? EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS (Factor III: 10. Community Reputation: What is the general attitude of the community to this man? is he regarded as men of high Integrity, ability and demotion to the Coache• Its Valley Association of Governments? 11. b/ggippal Raoutatbn: How does he stand among othm in the Public Admini• stration prof Opera he deal effectively with other City and County Managers? Is he respected by other professional and staff representatives of the Cities and County? Does he enthusiastically and constructively attend seminars and conferences conferences? 12 Inter vernmen�tal Relrtiont: Don the Executive Director work closely with other cera , tatFed 15 a and Ictal gowinment representatives? Is his relationship with others friendly? Don he provla requested assistance to other Cities and the County? 13. Communi Relations: Don he skillfully represent the Coachella Valley Association o avernments to t press, radio and television? Don he properly avoid politics and partieanship? Don he draw an honest interest in the community? Does he pro• perly defend CVAG and its reputation? PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS (Factor III): 14. Im ation: Does he show originality in approaching problems? Does he sense ectivesolutions? Is he able to visualize the impliations of various approaches? 16. Ob 1 • Is he unemotional and unbiased? Don he take a rational, mpersonal viewpoint based on facts and qualified opinions? 16. Drive: Is he energetic, willing to spend whatever time is necessary to do a good job? Don he Mve good mental and physical stamina? 17. Decisiveness: Is he able to reach timely decisions and initiate action, Suit—mise—compuhlve? 18. Attitude: Is he enthusiastic? Cooperative? Willing to adapt? 19. Firmness: Does he have the courage of his convictions? Is he firm when convinced, but not stubborn? 27 go Resources ORGANIZATIONS: • American Society for Training and Development, Madison, Wisconsin, 608/274.3440 • American Management Association, 135 West 50th Street, New York; New York 10020, 212/5868100 • Institute of Government. University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 404/524.1328 • Institute of Public Affairs and Community Development, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045,913/864-3288 • International City Management Association, 1140 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20036, 202/293.2200 • National Association of Counties, 1735 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20006, 202/785-9577 • National League of Cities, 1620 Eye Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006 202/293.7330 • National Municipal League, 47 East 68th Street, New York, New York 10021 212/535.5700 • National Training and Development Service, 5028 Wisconsin Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20016, 202/9663761 • New Englard Municipal Center, P.O. Box 39, Durham, New Hampshire 03201 603/868.5000 • U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1620 Eye Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006 202/293.7300 • Your State Municipal League or State County Association �M go I purpose- To provide professional and efficient a inistration of mmicipal resources and depart- ment operations within policy established by the City Council. ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT Does the manager plan and organize work that carries out the policies of the Council? Most Often_ Often_ Sometimes_ Never Does the manager effectively communicate the Council's position to staff and to the public? Most OftenOften_ Sometimes Never— AMUNI'STRATION Does the manager develop staff, encourage their initiative, and motivate maximum performance? Most Often_ Often_ Sometimes Never_ Do the manager's efforts lead to the successful and timely accomplishment of goals? Most Often_ Often_ Sometimes Never BUDGET Does the manager utilize prudent practices in the preparation and administration of the City's operating and capital improvement budgets consistent with guidelines adopted by the City Council? _ Sometimes Never most OftenOften _ Does the manager suggest creative solutions to City financial needs? Most Often,__ Often Sometimes Never I)ROGRA%1 DEVELOPMpNT AND FOLIAh' TljROUGH Does the manager plan, organize and supervise implementation of ongoing City programs and services? most Often_ Often Sometimes_ Never Does the manager maintain knowledge of current and innovative trends in the area of local government services and incorporate that knowledge in program suggestions and research? Often_ Sometimes Never` �bst Often_ --- 917 R i ■ LDNG RA4GE PLAXING Does the manager keep the Council advised of new legislation and developments in public policy as well as actions in other jurisdictions that may have an impact on the City's activities? Most Often_ Often_ Sometimes Never Does the manager organize program planning in anticipation of future needs and problems and establish common goals to be adopted by the Council? hbst Often Often Sometimes Never RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE PUBLIC Does the manager maintain an image of the City to the commnity that represents service, integrity, sensitivity to public needs and professionalism through his own conduct and that of the City employees? Most Often Often_ Sometimes_ Never_ Does the manager enjoy the respect of members of the comunity, as well as the other members of the Public Administration profession? Yes_ NO RELATIONS WITH MAYOR A\'D 00=IL Does the manager maintain effective communications with the Council and a good system of reporting on staff plans and activities? Most Often Often Sometimes Never Is the manager available to the Council, either personally or through designated subordinates? hbst Often Often Sometimes Never I\TERGOVTRN.%E% AL/CC 1A'ITY REUTI0\S Does the manager maintain awareness of developments in other public jurisdictions and community organizations, as well as open communications with themin areas that may affect or relate to the City? Most Often Often Sometimes Never PERSOXAL CHARACTERISTICS Does the manager show originality in approaching problems and creating effective solutions? Most Often Often Sometimes Never Is the manager energetic, enthusiastic, cooperative and unbiased regarding actions and decisions concerning the City? Most Often Often Sometimes Never ; . I -3- COUNCIL OBSERVATIONS Two things that the manager does now that the Council would most like him to continue: (2) Wo things that the manager does now that the Council would most like him to discontin (1) (2) 7WO things that the manager does not do now that the Council would like him to do: (1) (2) tm CITY OF IOWA CITY PERSONAL EVALUATION FORM Ibis form is intended as an aid to formulating a carefully considered and fair appraisal of a supervisory employee's job performance and potential for greater responsibilities. The following evaluation for management performance is divided into four general j headings: a) Management, b) Technical Skills and Abilities, c) Personal Performance . and d) Commmity and Intergovernmental Relations. The comments under these headings contain one or two mord descriptions of various aspects to be considered in the evaluation. This is followed by longer discriptions of criteria to aid in evaluating an employee. Comments should address the employee's current performance in his/her present position. Additional comments may suggest how an employee may improve performance in his/her present position. After completing the evaluation, a personal interview should be held with the individual who has been evaluated. The scale and definitions below provide a rating of the employees being evaluated. 1 Outstanding - A select mnber merit this classification. These people's performance exceeds that required by the job description. They are eager, creative, fair, prudent, economically efficient, highly motivated - and able to convey these characteristics to their subordinates. Meets the expectation of the rates. Cortmendable - Often exceeds expectation of job description. He/She is responsive to change in the administration of ordinances and policy decisions, handles himself/herself and his/her subordinates well during stable as well as crisis periods. Is a responsible and dedicated leader of the city operation. Satisfactory - Meets and sometimes exceeds job descriptions and duties. He/She can handle almost anything that might develop and can be a very effective participant in decision-making. Makes good use of tools available to his/her but occasionaly falls short of goal achievement. Potential. Needs Improvement - Doesn't always do what needs to be done in his/her area of responsibility. Lacks consistency in doing his/her job, may find change hard to accomodate, wastes time and can't always commmicate the right ideas at the right time. Needs occasional supervison or direction. Unsatisfactory - Consistently fails to do what is required of him/her. Ilis/Ifer performance falls short all the time. Needs constant supervision or correction. Unable to make decisions on his/her own or follow directions. ' • ?r7 A GUIDELINES FOR PF.RFORW4(.'E EVALDATICN CITY MANAGER AND DEPAR1MENr HEADS PBFOIHANCE CITY OF IOWA CITY Employee: Position: Division/Dept.: Anniversary Date of Employment: Current Monthly Salary: Period Covered by Evaluation: 7his Lvaluation is: Annual: Promotional Probationary: Other: A. 1. MIM Human Resources 01234 I rty toe ectrve y train and motivate employees to secure optimum results and cooperation from others. Does he/she develop and evaluate employees; handle grievances, affirmative action casplaints; maintain discipline; monitor employees records, receive few complaints?) 2. Or anization 01234 r ity to maintain control and manage all city functions effectively; Organize as well as maintain on-going programs offered by the city.) 3. Setting Objectives 01234 s re s►e a e to achieve goals by using MBO guidelines consistent with the present City and Council goals and priorities?) 9tf? 4. Managing Information 01234 kAbUity to communicate verbally and in writing in a concise understand- able manner, effective in informal talks and conducting meetings; commmiciates with community groups and public; keeps staff informed.) S. Decision Making01234 s he/she able to assume responsibility for those decisions which are his/hers to perform and any alternatives which may be developed that affect proper administration of laws and ordinances? Are results measured against goals and if needed corrective -steps to solve those problems?) 6. Poli Makin 01234 s s recognize the bounds of policy making, policy coercion, policy administration and enforcement caused by political interruptions? Does he/she comm nicate policy decisions detezmined by Council to all other employees?) 7. Delo ation of Authority 01234 tAbility to effectively control events through proper delegation of authority and responsibility.) .2- 4. Managing Information 01234 kAbUity to communicate verbally and in writing in a concise understand- able manner, effective in informal talks and conducting meetings; commmiciates with community groups and public; keeps staff informed.) S. Decision Making01234 s he/she able to assume responsibility for those decisions which are his/hers to perform and any alternatives which may be developed that affect proper administration of laws and ordinances? Are results measured against goals and if needed corrective -steps to solve those problems?) 6. Poli Makin 01234 s s recognize the bounds of policy making, policy coercion, policy administration and enforcement caused by political interruptions? Does he/she comm nicate policy decisions detezmined by Council to all other employees?) 7. Delo ation of Authority 01234 tAbility to effectively control events through proper delegation of authority and responsibility.) 1. -t -3- A. I'm 1 gent ileviation 01234 (Regulations for hiring personnel (Federal Regulations, Union Gnntracts, Affirmative Action, Civil Rights Acts) (mown and followed. Are the regulations know by the Council and staff?) 9. Acca lishments/Resuits 01234 i ity to work at a professional level comparable with past accomplish- ments/results or professional standards.) 10. Inter 7 rtmnental Activi 01234 s oe s n e to wor c with other local' county, regional, state or federal governmental representatives in administering ordinances and appropriates to the City?) B. TECHNICAL SKILLS AMID ABILITIES 1. RBRRrting Agenda 01234 s helshe able to provide accurate and complete reports that are readable and comprehensive? Are recommendations timely, fit into the agenda, provide possible solutions to problems which may arise?) •,997 1. ; -4- 2,O 4- 2.laud et 0234 s is/her budget accountable and realistic? LID it provide forlmaximLm city service to the public, adequate financing of these services and achieve economic utilization of monies provided to the proper agencies? Is the budget balanced?) I 3. Kee in Current (Up with the times) s s e e to stay abreast of new level 01234 Are problems which may caar up able to be deaalt with y using management exisof ting 4- system and not result in duplication of effort?) 4. ali Of Work sthequalitY of his/her work able to serve as a model for 01234 continued accuracy .and thoroughness and study by colleagues? Are the results up to current professional standards?) ' 5. ti (Work load) she/she able to adapt his/her work schedule if needed and 01234 maintain a record of consistently high productivity when his/her schedule is amended?) I i j C. PERSONAL CRITERIA ON PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 1, 234 Ob'ectivit rete evelopment of his/her ideas logical and professional, nobiasesor commitments? Information used in his/her recomnendation is based on objective and factual material.) 1. personal Attributes s este energetic, enthusiastic c � 01134 he/she personally committed as well t�easlound f nc , to change? Is of the City?) 3. Professionalism s he/sfie-157e to execute the duties of his/her 01134 educational background, the professional ethics of a mannageir/dregaar'teni head, and leadership?) D. a MINITY RELATIONS 1. Citizen Interests 01234 s e s e e to handle citizen complaints promptly and in a manner which is satisfactory to the citizen and the City?) 9i�7 -6- 2. (:it Interest 01234 es o s o do fond the City, the Council, employees and their respective reputations to maintain integrity, trust and ability in the functions of the City government?) 3. Cit As An FJ le For Others 01234 (Areo er city governments Me to look at the present operations and see how they can improve their own positions and services? Is the administrator able to provide imaginative and proper suggestions to professional consultant or associations [CMA]?) I 4. Covmuni Activit 01234 (Does the manager department head get out and personally see what is going on to get a first-hand idea of what might be recommended or continued in j departmental operations?) CITY'OF IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON ST. IOWA CITY. IOWA 52240 (319) 3E6 1-CCO i i i j May 14, 1984 I Loyal Order of Moose Lodge 41096 Mr, Michael C. Hansen, Mgr. 2910 Muscatine Ave. Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Hansen: The City Council has directed me to obtain certain information from all private clubs in Iowa City which have been issued licenses for Sunday sales under the Iowa Beer and Liquor Control Act. Please indicate your response to the questions below and return this completed form to me by May 31, 1984. Section 123.49 4 of the Iowa Beer and Liquor Control Act states as follows: 4. "No privilege of selling alcoholic liquor or beer on Sunday as provided in sections 123.36, subsection 6, and 123.134, subsection 5, shall be granted to a club or other organization which places restrictions on admission or membership in the club or organiza- tion on the basis of sex, race, religion, or national origin. However, the privilege may be granted to a club or organization which places restrictions on membership on the basis of sex, if the club or organization has an auxiliary organization open to persons of the other sex." Does your club or organization place restrictions on admission or member- ship on the basis of sex, race, religion, or national origin? Yes No If so, please circle the appropriate criteria: Sex Race Religion National Origin. i If restrictions are on the basis of sex, does your club or organization have an auxiliary organization open to persons of the other sex? Yes No Please enclose copies of your organizational bylaws, governing rules of your organization, or other such documentation as will verify the above. I have also enclosed for your information a copy of the enrolled bill known as House File 2466, a bill recently passed by the Iowa Legislature and signed into law by Governor Branstad on April 17, 1984. Please note 1 -11 - that this bill redefines, to an extent, "public accommodation" as it relates to the providing of services, facilities, or other goods to nonmembers of a private club or organization. Your timely response to the above questions will be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. Sincerely /Jyours, Dale E. Helli g Assistant City Manager bdw/sp Enclosure Same letter sent to: VFW American Legion Elks M ■ r HOUSE PILE 2666 AN ALT RELATING To TBT DEFINITION Or PUBLIC ACCONNODATION AMD Er - TENDING TIR TINE MR BRINGING AN ACTION UNDER 7711E IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS LAN. - BZ IT SNACTED BY Tl3 GENERAL ASStNSLY OF THE STATE Or IOWA, ' wetion 1. Section 601A.2, subsection 10. Code 1981, is amended to read an follow: 10. •Public accommodation- wens each sad every place, establishment, or facility of whatever kind, nature, or class that caters or offers services, facilities, or goods es -the "marsh-p"hie for a fee or charge to wreembeFe of an organization or association utilizing the place, establishment, or facility, provided that any place, establishment, or facility that caters or offers services, facilities, or goods to the 6wesal-rdmkis nonmembers gratuitously shall be deemed a public accommodation if the accommodation receives may embseama6ah govertlmmntel support or subsidy. Public accommodation shall at wan my bona fide private club or other place, establishment, or facility which is by its nature distinctly private, except when such distinctly private place, establishment, or facility caters or offers services, facilities, or goods to the 9ewesh-public nommmben for fee or charge or gratuitously, it shall be dewed • public accommodation during such period. "Public accommodation- includes each state and local - government unit or tan -supported district of whatever kind, nature, or clams that offers services, facilities, benefits, grants or goods to the public, gratuitously or otherwise. This paragraph shall not be construed by negative implication or otherwise to restrict any part or portion of the pre- existing definition of the tern "public accommodation". r. r House file 2666, P. 2 Sec. 2. Section 601A.16, subsection 1, Code 1981, is amended to read as follows:, J. An action authorized under this action is barred unless commenced within ninety days after issuance by the commission of a mase under subsection 2 of this section es -r4 s►i m-ane-yese-e6sss-Ue-i6h 6m9-e(-sees-eegle4wrwY6eMves weses-fleas. If a complainant obtains a relay from. the commission under subsection 2 of this action, the commission shall -be is barred from further action on that complaint. DONALD D. AVENSON Speaker of the House ROBERT T. ANDERSON President of the Senate I hereby certify that this bill originated in the House and is known as House File 2666, seventieth General Assembly. JOSEPH O'HERN Chief Clerk of the House Approved 1984 TERRY E. BRANSTAD Y Governor on Ch ■ ■ City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: May 9, 1984 To: City Council From: W.O. 'Bill' Terry, BTC Chairperson Re: Recommendation Concerning the Management and Operation of Public Access Channel 26 The BTC voted 4-0 in its April 17, 1984 meeting to support in principle a recommendation given to them by their Subcommittee on Alternatives to the Management and Operation of Channel 26. This recommendation supports the concept of a non-profit organization managing and operating Public Access Channel 26 and is outlined in point 3 of the attached March 27 memo from this Subcommittee. Channel 26 has been managed and operated by the cable company. The Subcommittee was given the responsibility of studying what alternative options exist to managing and operating Channel 26 by the BTC 1n October 1983. The BTC took this action based on continuing cable deregulatory attempts which would jeopardize the availability of such an access channel and its services and the knowledge that several major cable companies have been cutting back on their access requirements and promises. The Subcom- mittee has Since met with several concerned citizens, studied reports from Boston, Austin and Portland and participated in preliminary meetings with the Library and cable company regarding this matter. Initial discussions in these meetings have indicated that all concerned parties may be agreeable to the Subcommittee's recommendation. Since the Iowa City cable ordinance outlines requirements for and makes a commitment to Public Access, and the City has supported and facilitated these commitments, the BTC wishes to fulfill its advisory role by ensuring this unique service is protected. It is the BTC's and Subcommittee's recommendation that Public Access Channel 26 and its related services, such as workshops and training (now being performed by cable company staff in the Community Programming Center of the Public Library) may best survive and be successful if a nonprofit organization is made the managing and operating entity. It is not the intent of this recommendation to let the current cable company, or any future cable company, withdraw from its access commit- ments. Rather, this recommendation suggests the promised and performed level of financial and facilities support by the cable company which continue but would be allocated to a non-profit organization which would assume the responsibilities associated with Public Access. An opinion from the legal staff, which is attached, indicated such an arrangement would be possible given two amendments to the ordinance are made while the legal opinion addresses both Channel 26 and Channel 27, it Is only Channel 26 we are concerned with here). 2 With the knowledge of a possible transfer of cable ownership; the BTC's studies and recommendation become more relevant and possible. Any transfer of ownership requires Council approval; with contingent condi. tions of such an approval a Council prerogative. This memo and the BTUs recommendation requests no action from Council at this time, but is meant to inform the Council'of the BTC's direction and progress on this matter. However, as 1s pointed out 1n point 9 of the Subcommittee's recommendation, additional assistance will be necessary to draw up a formal RFP to solicit for nonprofit. organization's bids when and if this alternative should be put into effect. It has been suggested that if Council agrees with this recommendation that action be taken to prepare for such a changeover prior to the commencement of negotiations Involving a transfer of the company; if Council decides private ownership is the best route for Iowa City. In the meantime meetings between Interested parties, such as the M. Library, cable company and concerned citizens will continue. the intent of these meetings is to determine more specifically the possible functions; responsibilities and scope of such a nonprofit organization, The BTC will keep the Council apprised of any progress. Thank you for your consideration of this recommendation. Please feel free to call upon me, Mr. Brew Shaffer, or the members of the Subcommittee, Mrs. Flo Beth Ehninger and Mr. Mike Sigrin. tp3/7 Q4q March 21, 1984 REPORT OF THE BTC SUBCOMMITTEE ON ALTERNATIVES TO THE MANAGEMENT/OPERATION OF CHANNEL 26 1. As a result of the national trend of Multiple System Operators in the cable industry towards turning away from active support of access center operations, this subcommittee was appointed in September, 1983. We were charged with investigating alternatives for manage- ment/operation of public access Channel 26 and to return to the BTC with our findings and a recommendation for the Commission to consider. This committee is ready to submit a recommendation and to suggest a next step in the process if the BTC accepts our recommendation. 2. The committee has had discussions with all persons in the community who came forward to meet with us. In addition, we met with the Programming Director of Hawkeye and with the manager of ACTV, the non-profit corporation that operates access channels in Austin, Texas. We have met regularly with the BTS who provided us with materials from Austin, Portland, Boston, and Madison. 3. The subcommittee recommends that the BTC put into action the proce- dures needed to change the management/operation of Channel 26 from any grantee to a non-profit corporation responsible to the City, or that the change be included as a condition or point of negotiation as the sale of the company proceeds, if this method is deemed most appropri- ate (especially by the Legal Department of the City). 4. The rationale for this change as outlined in our memo to the BTC an November 15, 1983, is still valid: 1) Such a non-profit organization may best insure and inherently involve the most community participation and self-sufficiency in the operation and/or management of Channel 26. 2) Such a non-profit organization may eliminate possible conflicts of interest regarding the overall purposes, intents, and uses of the local public access channel. 3) A non-profit organization may best insure the most promotion and integration of access in the community. 5. It is our understanding that Hawkeye would not oppose such a change and that Heritage may also be receptive. Of course, the terms of an agreement with the grantee can be set as a condition or may have to be negotiated. Also, Access Iowa City is extremely interested in assuming an active role in such a change to the extent that they are now drawing up some recommendations for the functions and responsi- bilities of such a non-profit corporation. It is our belief that Access Iowa City has the personnel with the expertise to assist the BTC in any capacity as we proceed on this course if such assistance is needed and if it is your decision to go this route. 9,Ff 6. The subcommittee is waiting for an opinion from the legal staff vis-a-vis legal considerations involved in such a change. The BTS requested an opinion in Oecember. It is necessary for the BTC to know of any legal problems there might be in removing the grantee from labor and service support while continuing the grantee's monetary support. 7. There are two caveats that the subcommittee would like to call to your attention. first, the BTC should be assured that funding for such an organization is in place now through the support Channel '26 has enjoyed from the grantee. In addition, a list of 'extras' that Hawkeye supplies Channel 26 should be made available to the BTC from Karen Kalergis. We expect that there will be grants, gifts, and public funding as in the past, but these sources would be supplemental funds and would not be a basis for funding year-to-year operations of Channel 26. In other words, the cable company would still be expected to fund Access, but the funds would go to a special City fund which would in turn be dedicated to the non-profit organization. 8. Secondly, the responsibility for replacement and maintenance of equipment must have the highest priority in the negotiations between whatever parties would be involved in an agreement, and we suggest that this would be the responsibility of the cable company. In addition, there may be other stipulations for negotiation as suggested In the Triannual Review. 9. Finally, in order to implement this change in management/operation, the necessary time commitment from the BTS would be unreasonable and impossible to expect as his schedule is already more than filled. The subcommittee recommends that a person(s), or consulting group with the necessary expertise, be hired on an ad hoc basis to write the provi- sions of an RFP (or any final agreemenij—The subcommittee can supply the materials from other cities to such persons) and would provide whatever time available from each of us if such help is requested. The contracted assistance would supply regular progress reports to the subcommittee and to the BTS, and ultimately to the BTC and the City Council. Flo Beth Ehninger and Mike Sigrin Members of the Subcommittee AV /City.. of Iowa City frg PAW AA ..MEMRANDVM Date: April 16; 1984 To: 8111 Terry;'B;T;C. Chairperson From: David Brown; Assistant City Attorney Re: Management and -Operation of Channels 26 and 27 It. is my ;understanding that ,the BTC is cur'ently.ezploring alternatives regarding,"s �ei`ppeecttfe'man.epement'end operation of Riblie'Aeeess Channel 26 and Edueetibnal`Aceess'Channel 27; ' Should •'thq•,City `'d8eide 'to • ieiplemient •a new. forest in :this area; it will require amWing,1#ctions .74-83(a) and •(b) of the City ;Code -since the existing .f08nchfse;places responsibility on the grantee for 'said manage- ment and'operation. The sections:cogld',be amended such that the. grantee would continue to'be responsible,for_'.finandial'support of said channels but would no -longer manage and, operate' same. The, amendment process would be `pursuant 'to Section'14-68(a)•which'requires that such revisions•be reasonable and not 'place an undue financial burden on the .grantee.' bcl cc: Bele Helling Drew Shaffer ■ AGEENDA PUBLIC MEETING - CONGREGATE HOUSING Thursday, May 17, 1984 - 1:00 to 3:00 P.M. SENIOR CENTER - Classroom - Ground Floor 1. WELCOME - Fred C. Krause, Chairperson, Iowa City Housing Commission 2. PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION - Krause 3. INTRODUCTION OF MAYOR MC DONALD Progress Report on Congregate Housing to Date 4. BACKGROUND INFORMATION & DIRECTIONS FOR DISCUSSION Development Plan - Lyle G. Seydel, Housing Coordinator Acting Director, Housing & Inspection Services CDBG Requirements - Jim Hencin, CDBG Coordinator 5. PUBLIC DISCUSSION - Fred C. Krause ADVISORY PANEL Professor Woodrow W. Morris Lyle G. Seydel Jim Hencin Carol Thompson, Director Johnson County Human Services Dept. 6. ADJOURNMENT FM City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: May 15, 1984 To: Mayor John McDonald From: Mary Nugent, Housing Specialist Re: Update on Congregate Housing Development Activities in Iowa City The development of a congregate housing project for the elderly and handicapped residents of Iowa City has been a major goal of the City Council and Housing Commission for several years. A congregate housing project would offer elderly and handicapped Iowa Citians a living environ- ment that would enhance their ability to live independently, thus avoiding premature or unnecessary institutionalization. Although the need for such a facility had been recognized by the City for several years, the impetus for action emerged from the Congregate Housing Workshop on September 21, 1981. Out of the workshop, a Congregate Housing Task Force was established to research and define the local needs and to establish criteria on project development, such as financial planning, support service, sponsorship, site location and design. The Congregate Housing Task Force recommended a survey to determine the housing and support service needs of the elderly and handicapped people of Iowa City. Results of the congregate housing study, conducted in August 1982, showed, beyond a doubt, that the current housing options available to the' elderly and handicapped persons in Iowa City were inadequate, both in type and in number. Additional housing options in the form of congregate housing would provide a complementary choice'currently available in Iowa City. In 1983, time and money was directed toward the research, design and feasibility of building a congregate housing project on the Central Junior High School site. However, the plan was eliminated when the site was no longer available for consideration. Since that time, the City Housing Commission and staff have been studying various alternatives and the City Council has budgeted significant CDBG funds for the development of a congregate housing project. About $400,000 of housing funds could be used to attract sponsors, developers and others interested in building elddrly housing in Iowa City. Before developing a request for proposal from these parties, the Housing Commission and City Council need input from medical and social service providers, housing and management personnel, financial planners and, more importantly, the potential residents of a congregate housing project. Given the interest and attention from these various participants, the congregate housing project could possibly begin con- struction this year. bcl 99e) City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: May 15, 1984 TO: Iowa City City Council FROM: City Clerk Marian K. Karr RE: Beer/Liquor Sunday Sales/Conditional Approval FOR YOUR INFORMATION --Conditional approval was given at the 2/14/84 Council meeting to Bo James, 118 E. Washington Street for Class C Liquor Sunday Sales permit. They have submitted, after the 90 -day period, the required information which allows them to retain their permit. 99/ City of Iowa city MEMORANDUM Date: May 10, 1984 To: City Manager and City Council From: Bette Meisel, Senior Center Coordinator Re: Senior Center Evaluation This winter an evaluation committee made up of the chair and vice -chair of the Senior Center Commission, the chair and vice chair of the Council of Elders and the Senior Center Coordinator and Program Specialist met twice weekly to examine the Senior Center in relation to the standards of the National Institute of Senior Centers (NISC). The study took about 25 hours to complete. Staff provided all the documents which needed to be examined and explained areas such as the financial system of the City which affects the operation of the Center but which neither advisory body could be expected to be knowledgeable about. The statement made by the NISC summarizes quite succinctly why we undertook this venture: "the Standards and Self -Assessment Workbook have been designed to provide a means to assis senior centers to identify problems, learn practices and implement changes to strengthen their vital role in providing opportunities and services for older people in communities across the country. Those who participate in the self-assessment process gain increased knowledge and under- standing of the Center's operation and program plus the skills important for improving it. Sponsoring and funding agencies can assist in the implementation of needed changes identified in the self-assessment by providing technical assistance, training and financial support." Since the Senior Center standards had been used as a guideline by the Senior Center Commission and staff in writing the Senior Center operational handbook, and since each section had been reviewed by the Council of Elders and Organization of Service Providers while in progress, and since the handbook is a living document, used and modified as the Center de- velops, it was not surprising that in the nine areas to be judged, we were acceptable in both principal and practice. However, it was also clear that "we have gone about as far as we can go" based on available funding and therefore staffing. In the 2-1/2 years we have been in operation we have doubled attendance and doubled the number of volunteers. The number of activities has increased to such an extent that we cannot fit the titles of events on our calendar nor the cars of those attending in our lot. The variety of services at the Center has also greatly increased, so much so that we have had to open a second demand office on the top floor. The attached report is an action plan based on the self-assessment of the Committee. It was compiled from the 150 page workbook each member completed. It addresses those points within each area of study where there is reasonable room for improvement. These points can be divided into three levels: those we are working on and will continue to, those we can immediately complete and those which are dependent on additional staffing. The Committee will meet in January of 1985 to review its 1984 evaluation and the progress, or lack of, which occurred within that period. cc: Jo.Co. Board of Supervisors Council of Elders /sp 99z Purpose I. Priority goals Should be done by a committee involving commission and staff. Individual responsible: Coordinator Target date: March 1985 2. Council of Elders Program review Council should receive Program Division Statement for review as part of the budget process. Individual responsible: Program Specialist Target Date: November 1984 Organization I. Change Ordinance #79 - 2947 creating Senior Center Commission The Commission should request the City Council to change Section 25- 64C of the ordinance. This will require a review by the Commission and a letter from the Commission to the City Council. Individual responsible: Commission Chairperson Target Date: May 1984 2. A public official should always be on Commission. Target Date: Ongoing 3. The Council of Elders should recruit active representative from the entire county. Target Date: Ongoing 4. The Senior Center needs a full-time Volunteer Coordinator on staff. The City Council will have to approve funds in budget hearings. Both the Commission and the CoE. should organize center participants to appraize the City Council of the center's needs. Individual responsible: Chairperson, Commission and CoE Target Date: July 1984 S. Additional volunteers and direction from center participants is needed. This will require more staff time and more time from volunteers already recruited. The CoE would be stronly involved. Individual responsible: Volunteer Coordinator Target Date: July 1985 6. The Senior Center should increase the size of the Commission. The County Board of Supervisors and the City Council would have to approve any changes. Individual responsible: Commission Chair Target Date: July 1984 Community Relations I. Agreements for mutual referrals between the Senior Center and service providers should be arranged. Individuals responsible: Coordinator and Commission Chair Target Date: September 1985 r 2. Formal meetings of social service agencies' boards and the Commission should be arranged. Individuals responsible: Coordinator and Commission Chair Target Date: April 1984 for Commission discussion 3. Community organizations should be informed about the Senior Center as a resource by staff, Council of Elders and participants. Target Date: July 1985 4. The Senior Center should encourage a provider to offer employment services at the Center. Target date: Indefinite S. The Senior Center should expand volunteer opportunities for elderly in community. Individuals responsible: Volunteer Coordinator Target Date: March 1985 6. The Senior Center should encourage elderly to become active as board and commission members of community organization. The Council of Elders could take a leading role in this effort. Individuals responsible: Volunteer Coordinator Target Date: March 1985 7. The Senior Center should establish a research committee to approve guidelines for research at center. This committee would include Commission, staff and UI faculty. Target Date: December 1984 IV. Program I. Special training for Council of Elders and Commission members to enhance their leadership abilities. This training would be done by professional consultants and staff. Individual responsible: Program Specialist Target Date: June 1984 2. The Senior Center should explore the needs of minority elderly in the community and ways the Senior Center can meet these needs. The j Council of Elders should be involved in this assessment process. Target Date: March 1985 3. Outreach to elderly throughout Johnson County should be increased. This program should use staff, Council of Elders and participants. Individual responsible: Program Specialist Target Date: Ongoing 4. The Senior Center should expand its use of the community and University resources available for educational and recreational programs at the Center. This should be done through recruitment of volunteer instructors and funds from appropriate foundations. Individual responsible: Program Specialist Target Date: Ongoing S. The Senior Center needs exercise equipment for the Prime -Time Exercise class and other future programs. Target Date: When available 6. More and varied programming should be added to the Senior Center calendar. This will require more funding and staff. Target Date: March 1985 �QZ V. Administration and Personnel I. The Senior Center needs a third staff position: Volunteer Coordinator. This position would be responsible for recruitment, training, supervising, and coordinating all volunteers. Funds would be dependent on the City Council. Target Date: July 1985 2. The Senior Center needs more volunteers. Individual responsible: Volunteer Coordinator. Target Date: March 1985 3. The Senior Center needs more procticum students and student volunteers. Individual responsible: Volunteer Coordinator. Target Date: March 1985 4. The Senior Center staff needs more training in the fields of gerontology. Funds would be dependent upon the City Council. Target Date: July 1985 5. The Senior Center staff needs more emergency training. The Fire Department staff could provide this for the staffs of the Senior Citizen Center and the service providers in the building. Individual responsible: Volunteer Coordinator. Target Date: March 1985 VI. Fiscal Management I. The Senior Center needs more autonomy in how it disposes of its annual budget. This issue should be discussed between the Senior Center Commission and the City Council. 2. The Senior Center needs more staff to engage in grantwriting for programs. This would require City funding. VII. Records I. The Senior Center needs a procedure to update the participant registration card files. ,This task could then be assigned to the Council of Elders. Target Date: October 1985. VIII. Facility I I. Contigency fund for equipment upkeep at the Senior Center should be added to the budget. This should be discussed by the Senior Center Commission and the City Council. Target Date: Fiscal Year 1986. IX. Evaluation I. The Evaluation Committee should meet in one year to review the 1984 Evaluation findings. Target Date: January 1985 ME SOUTHEAST IOWA MUNICIPAL _ n:. _ _ '. 1 1984 SOUTHEAST IOWA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE Sec./'peas. P. 0. Box 266 Keokuk. IA 52632 ATTENTION CITY OFFICIALS FROM SOUTHEAST IOWA PRESIDENT: MAc LAW The next meeting of the Southeast Iowa Municipal League will be held MAYOR Of KRONUR at the VICE PRESIDEYIT ROBERT RASMUSSEN. NA10R OF FAIRFIELD Elmhurst Country Club DIRwmz& Oskaloosa, Iowa (MAP ATTACHED) MICHAELRATICHEL MAYOR OF CORALVILLE Wednesday, May 30th, 1984 PHIL PALMLL COUNCILMAN. GRINNELL DONALD PLATT. 5:30 P.M. - Social Hour MAYOR OI MUSCATINE 6:30 P.M. - Buffet Meal, followed by a program and meeting. O A.WtU4ArLJL. AYOR 01 NEW MVIRDINIA WOOODLEY.N There will be a panel of state legislators present reviewing legislative matters from the last General Assembly. Please prepare yourself with MAYOR or EONNELLEON questions that you might have for this special program. Mayor Robert Lynn will address the group. Thanks to Mayor Michael Kattchee and the City of Coralville for hosting the meeting in April. We welcome the following new cities to the Southeast Iowa Municipal League: Kalona, Le Claire, Milton, Sigourney and Walcott The Oskaloosa meeting will be our last meeting for this period. We will recess for the summer months of June thru August and meet again at the Iowa Municipal League meeting at Waterloo in September. President Mac Law and the Board Members thank all the individuals who have actively supported the organization. We encourage your at at the Oskaloosa meeting on May 30th! Sincerely, i A. Finert Secretary/Treasurer *Please complete the Attachment. 593 r� PRECEDING DOCUMENT SOUTHEAST IOWA MUNICIPAL AGU - ' 1 1984 SOUTHEAST IOWA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE Sec.Meas. P. O. Box 268 Keokuk, IA 52632 ATTENTION CITY OFFICIALS FROM SOUTHEAST IOWA PRMIDENT. MAc LAW The next meeting of the Southeast Iowa Municipal League will be held MAYOR O, MEOMUM at the VICE PRESIDENT ROBERT RABMUBREN. MAYOR O, ,AIRFIELD Elmhurst Country Club DutecroR& Oskaloosa, Iowa (MAP ATTACHED) MICHAELKATwHES. MAYOR OF CONALVILLE Wednesday, May 30th, 1984 PHIL PALMS& COUNCILMAN. ONIMMELL 5:30 P.M. - Social Hour DONALDPLArr. MAYOR OF MUSCATINE 6:30 P.M. - Buffet Meal, followed by a program and meeting. MC. A. WuLLA"JR. MAYOR OF NEW LONDON There will be a panel of state legislators present reviewing legislative VIRGINIA WOODUEY. matters from the last General Assembly. Please prepare yourself with MAYOR OF DOMMELLNOM questions that you might have for this special program. Mayor Robert Lynn will address the group. Thanks to Mayor Michael Kattchee and the City of Coralville for hosting the meeting in April. We welcome the following new cities to the Southeast Iowa Municipal League: Kalona, Le Claire, Milton, Sigourney and Walcott The Oskaloosa meeting will be our last meeting for this period. We will recess for the summer months of June thru August and meet again at the Iowa Municipal League meeting at Waterloo in September. President Mac Law and the Board Members thank all the individuals who have actively supported the organization. We encourage your attendance at the Oskaloosa meeting on May 30th1 *Please complete the Attachment. Sinc4.��nerl JPA retary/Treasurer X93 Fill out and mail (or telephone) by May 25 tb to facilitate a meal count. Mail to City Manager, Jim Huff, P.O. Box 1010, Oskaloosa, Iowa 52577. Ph. (515) 673-9431 City Zip Phone There will be in attendance from our community for the 11 May 30th Southeast Iowa Municipal League meeting. (Clip off.) 993 ■ f- Knoxville . 924 A Avenue High Avenue HE r O w N z m z t • L A Avenue Square N O r R From West: Enter Oskaloosa on 92. Turn right at traffic signal an 11th Street. n Go 1.5 miles straight south to Club entrance. From Northwest: Arrive on 163, turn left on 92, then turn right at traffic d f- Knoxville . 924 A Avenue High Avenue HE r O w N z m z t • L A Avenue Square N O r R From West: Enter Oskaloosa on 92. Turn right at traffic signal an 11th Street. n Go 1.5 miles straight south to Club entrance. From Northwest: Arrive on 163, turn left on 92, then turn right at traffic 15th Avenue signal at 11th Street and go 1.5 _ miles to club entrance. From North: Turn left on 92 and go .7 miles to traffic signal at 11th Street. turn right on 11th, 1.5 miles to Club entrance. From East: Enter Oskaloosa on 92, turn left at traffic signal at 11th Street. Lj v Straight south 1.5 miles to club entrance. w II From South (63S): Turn left on 17th Ave. M Which is 1.3 miles north of Industrial Park entrance and immediately south of w railroad crossing. Go .6 miles and turn sharp left at 11th Street. Go .4 miles to club entrance. i From South (137): Turn right on 15th Ave. just inside city limits. Go to 11th Street (stop sign at T intersection) and•turn -right .4 miles to club entrance. fit 17th Ave. El ELMHURST COUNTRY CLUB Sigourney 99.3 -------- - z'- a l r- MINUTES INFORMAL COUNCIL DISCUSSION MAY 15, 1984 Informal Council Discussion: May 15, 1984, 6:30 p.m. in the Conference Room at the Civic Center. Mayor John McDonald presiding. ! Councilmembers Present: Ambrisco, Strait, Dickson, Zuber, McDonald, Baker. sent: Erdahl. i Staff Present: Berlin, Helling, Karr, Jansen, Shaffer, Hauer. Ta e -recorded: Reel 84-C41, Side 2, 476 -End, Reel 84-C44, Side 1, all, e , - 3 . I City Council toured the Scott Boulevard area from 6:30 to 7:30 p.m. CABLE DEREGULATION HR4103: Reel 84-C44, Side 1 Drew Shaffer summarized his memo on HR4103 and the status of the cable plant. McDonald directed staff to contact State officials about the cable deregulation and to refer cable sale issues to the Broadband Telecommuni- cations Commission. Mayor McDonald requested recommendations from the I Commission by June 5th. fOUTDOOR SERVICE AREAS: Reel 84-C44, Side 1 The Council tentatively agreed on beer garden regulations (regulations for operation of outdoor service areas by establishments licensed under Chapter 123 of the Code of Iowa) and referred specific legal questions to the City Attorney regarding discretior of the City Council on approval or disapproval of an application for an outdoor service area. The regula- tions don't apply to businesses on or adjacent to the downtown plaza area. The Council tabled an ordinance to allow temporary sidewalk cafes and requested a legal opinion from the City Attorney whether the City can regulate hours of sidewalk cafes. The Council decided against allowing temporary or permanent building extensions on the downtown plaza area. SUMMER MEETING SCHEDULE: Reel 84-C44, Side 2 Council agreed to staff recommendations for summer schedule with possible modifications if special demands occur. COUNCIL TIME: Reel 84-C44, Side 2 1. In response to a question from McDonald, Berlin said that staff will check on dying trees between Washington and Iowa on Dubuque Street. 2. Berlin said that a news release will be distributed reminding citizens of rollerskating and skateboard prohibitions in the downtown area. 3. Ambrisco expressed pleasure with the May 12th tour of the parks. I MINUTES INFORMAL COUNCIL `ICUSSION MAY 15, 1984 PAGE 2 4. Berlin said that the City's position on Senior Center Volunteer Specialist is very clear and will be explained to the Senior Center Commission at their May 17th meeting. 5. The Council agreed to proceed with the revised plan for channel improvements to partially resolve the flooding problem in the Shamrock and Arbor area. Staff will explore use of the concrete block bank similar to the City Park pond. 6. Jansen said that the issue of newspaper vending machines on City property is the next priority item for the City Attorney's office. 7. The Council agreed that their next semi-annual meeting with the Board of Supervisors will be June 27th. Meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.