Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-12-08 Info PacketI _ i CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION PACKET CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org December 8, 2016 IP1 Council Tentative Meeting Schedule MISCELLANEOUS IP2 Email from Hunter Gillespie to Mayor and City Attorney: Conversion Therapy Ban [Mayor's response included] IP3 Memo from City Attorney: Solicitation (Panhandling) Ordinance After Supreme Court's Decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert I134 Memo from City Clerk: KXIC Radio Show IPS Memo from Sustainability Coordinator: Grant for pilot of Consumption Based Emission Inventory Tool IP6 Civil Service Entrance Examination — Senior Accountant, Accounting I127 Letter from Mediacom: Rate Adjustment IP8 Copy of news release: Winter is right around the corner. Snow Emergency Policies I139 Copy of news release: Applications now being accepted for 201h annual Citizen's Police Academy IP10 Copy of news release: Sample Survey results for Impediments to Fair Housing Choice DRAFT MINUTES IP11 Housing and Community Development: November 17 1 City Council Tentative Meeting Schedule _ �i ti , ®WW � Subject to change IP1 December 8, 2016 CITY IOWA CITY Date Time Meeting Location Tuesday, January 3, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Saturday, January 7, 2017 8:OOA-5:OOP Budget Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall Tuesday, January 10, 2017 1:00-7:00 P Budget Work Session (CIP) Emma J. Harvat Hall Tuesday, January 17, 2017 5:00 PM Conference Board Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall Work Session 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, February 7, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:00 PM Conference Board Meeting Emma J. Harvat Hall Work Session 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, March 7, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, March 21, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, April 4, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall - 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, April 18, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 2, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting Tuesday, May 16, 2017 5:00 PM Work Session Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:00 PM Formal Meeting From: Jim Throgmorton Sent: Monday, December 05, 2016 2:10 PM To: Gillaspie, Hunter; Eleanor M. Dilkes Cc: Council Subject: RE: Conversion Therapy Ban Dear Hunter Gillaspie, Thanks for following up on your earlier question. In a Nov 15 email to you (see below), City Attorney Eleanor Dilkes indicated, "If the Council is interested in exploring a city ban I will need to do some research to determine if there are any issues with state preemption." The City Council last met on Nov 15, and hence I do not know whether the Council as a whole would want to consider banning conversion therapy in Iowa City. The Council's next meeting will take place tomorrow (Tuesday) night, and the following meeting will occur on January 3. We have a very full agenda for tomorrow evening's work session, so I cannot promise that we'll have time to consider your question then. More likely, it will be brought up and considered further on Jan 3. Hope that helps. Mayor Jim Throgmorton Iowa City City Council, At -Large From: Gillaspie, Hunter [hunter-gillaspie@uiowa.edu] Sent: Monday, December 05, 2016 11:45 AM To: Eleanor M. Dilkes; Jim Throgmorton Cc: Council Subject: Re: Conversion Therapy Ban Hello again, I'm just emailing to check in regarding the possibility of banning conversion therapy in Iowa City. Last we talked, approximately 3 weeks ago, I understood that it may not be within the powers of the city council to take this action, but that the city attorney was looking into it. If this is still in process, wonderful and thank you, I just ask that you let me know when it is discovered if this would be possible. Let me know how it's coming along. Thank you, Hunter Gillaspie He I Him ( His University of Iowa ( Class of 2018 Bachelor of Science in Nursing (B.S.N.) Vice President ( Delta Lambda Phi rr Chapter Core Facility Lab Assistant I UI Tissue Procurement Core Certified Nursing Assistant I University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (319) 651-7454 1 hunter-gillaspie@uiowa.edu<mailto:hunter-gillaspie@uiowa.edu> From: Eleanor M. Dilkes <Eleanor-Dilkes@iowa-city.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 9:38:28 AM To: Jim Throgmorton; Gillaspie, Hunter Cc: Council Subject: RE: Conversion Therapy Ban Mayor, The City Code does not address conversion therapy. If the Council is interested in exploring a city ban I will need to do some research to determine if there are any issues with state preemption. I am not familiar with the regulatory scheme other than to know there is extensive state regulation of the practice of medicine/psychology. It appears from press reports that the Iowa Board of Psychology recently rejected a petition by the Iowa Youth Advisory Council to adopt an administrative rule banning the practice. See http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2016/08/12/iowa- psychology-board-rejects-conversion-therapy-ban/88640314/; http://www.kcci.com/article/conversion-therapy-ban- to-be-studied-by-iowa-board-of-medicine/6919135; http://www.lgbtgnation.com/2016/08/iowa-state-board-explains- vote-banning-conversion-therapy/ Eleanor Eleanor M. Dilkes City Attorney City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, IA 52240 Email: eleanor-dilkes@iowa-city.org Phone: (319) 356-5030 Fax: (319) 356-5008 -----Original Message ----- From: Jim Throgmorton Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 9:54 PM To: Gillaspie, Hunter Cc: Eleanor M. Dilkes Subject: RE: Conversion Therapy Ban Dear Hunter Gillaspie, Let me check with our City Attorney to learn what our City Code currently stipulates with regard to conversion therapy, and then get back to you. ELEANOR, could you please let me know whether additional legislation would be required to achieve the objectives Hunter Gillaspie states, or whether our current Code would be sufficient. If additional action would be required, the Council would have to discuss in a work session whether it wants to move in that direction. Mayor Jim Throgmorton Iowa City City Council, At -Large From: Gillaspie, Hunter [hunter-gillaspie@uiowa.edu] Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 1:30 PM To: Kingsley Botchway; Rockne Cole; Terry Dickens; Susan Mims; Pauline Taylor; John Thomas; Jim Throgmorton Cc: Finn, Sean; Solon, Daniel Subject: Conversion Therapy Ban Hello Iowa City City Council Members, My name is Hunter Gillaspie, and I am a student at the University of Iowa and a resident of Iowa City. I am also the Vice President of Delta Lambda Phi fraternity, the University of Iowa's first and only historically progressive and queer inclusive fraternity. As an active member of the LGBTQ community, I have long been aware of the fight to end conversion therapy. I have followed the efforts of my fellow community members that have attempted to lobby various political and medical groups in the state of Iowa. While such efforts have been beneficial in making the issue known to those in power, they have so far been unsuccessful in producing regulations that protect LGBTQ individuals in Iowa from the damaging and traumatic practice of conversion therapy. I recently stumbled across an article with news that Cincinnati, Ohio had recently become the first city in the nation to ban conversion therapy. A few days later, I learned that Seattle and Miami had also banned the practice within their city limits. Upon additional research, I discovered that 5 states as well as Washington D.C. have also imposed similar bans. I have linked both articles as well as a guide to the status of conversion therapy regulations throughout the nation at the end of this email. In the wake of last week's election results, which have invoked a sense of fear and despair from the LGBTQ community across the nation, I think it would be worthwhile to consider adopting a ban on the harmful practice of conversion therapy in Iowa City. I believe that the power to make change as individuals and as communities is more important now than it has been in recent times. I also believe that banning the practice of conversion therapy in Iowa City would bestow a great sense of safety and security upon the LGBTQ community of Iowa City, and that it would contribute to a resounding statement that America's cities will not accept the discriminatory, anti-LGBTQ platform that we are now faced with as a result of the recent elections. Iowa City and the University of Iowa have been at the forefront of pioneering LGBTQ rights and human rights as a whole since its inception, and I see this as a way to continue that progressive legacy. I am emailing you to to see what my next steps would be in order to go about making this a reality for the people of Iowa City. I am willing to take this issue to a city council meeting should you see that be the best option moving forward, and I would appreciate any guidance in what exactly you would like me to bring to the meeting should you see that to be fit. I have also contacted members of the University of Iowa's student government, and I am confident that we could get them to consider endorsing the city wide conversion therapy ban, should you agree to take up the issue. In addition, Delta Lambda Phi and the other undergraduate queer student organizations are prepared to raise awareness of the issue among the campus community, and to rally the student body in support of this regulation. Any thoughts you have would be much appreciated. Let me know what you're thinking! Here are the links to the articles I referenced previously: [http://h rc.org/img/h rc-fb-sha re.j pg)<httP://www. hrc.org/blog/cincinnati-becomes-first-city-to-ba n -conversion - therapy/> Cincinnati Becomes First City to Ban Conversion Therapy ...<http://www.hrc.org/blog/cincinnati-becomes-first-city-to- ban-conversion-therapy/> www.hrc.org<httP://www.hrc.org> Share This. Cincinnati Becomes First City to Ban Conversion Therapy I Human Rights Campaign [http://po rta l.mxlogic.com/images/tra nspa rent.gif)<http://www.huffington post.com/entry/seattle-conversio n- therapy_us_57a0f440e4b08a8e8b5fcf77> Seattle Bans Gay Conversion Therapy I Huffington Post<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/seattle-conversion- therapy_us_57a0f440e4bO8a8e8b5fcf77> www.huffingtonpost.com<http://www.huffingtonpost.com> Seattle Bans Gay Conversion Therapy Five states, the District of Columbia, Miami and Cincinnati have also banned the widely discredited practice. Movement Advancement Project I Conversion Therapy Laws<http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality- maps/conversion_therapy> www. igbtmap.org<http://www. igbtma p.org> NOTE: These laws prohibit licensed mental health practitioners from subjecting minors to harmful "conversion therapy" practices that attempt to change their sexual ... Hunter Gillaspie He I Him I His University of Iowa I Class of 2018 Bachelor of Science in Nursing (B.S.N.) Vice President I Delta Lambda Phi FF Chapter Core Facility Lab Assistant I UI Tissue Procurement Core Certified Nursing Assistant I University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (319) 651-7454 1 hunter-gillaspie@uiowa.edu<mailto:hunter-gillaspie@uiowa.edu> City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: December 8, 2016 To: City Council From: Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attorney Re: Solicitation (Panhandling) Ordinance After Supreme Court's Decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert INTRODUCTION: Section 8-5-2 of the City Code prohibits "solicitation" in certain manners and in certain places in the "downtown." "Solicit" is defined as a "request for an immediate donation of money or other thing of value from another person, regardless of the solicitor's purpose or intended use of the money or other thing of value." "Downtown" is defined as the "central business district, the near Southside commercial area, and the northside marketplace area' as show on the map at the end of Section 8-5-2. A copy of Section 8-5-2 is attached. ISSUE: Does the United States Supreme Court's decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 135 S.Ct. 2218 (2015), have an impact on the legality of Section 8-5-2? CONCLUSION: Section 8-5-2 of the City Code is an unconstitutional regulation of expressive activity based on the content of the expression in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and should be repealed. In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert lower courts addressing solicitation/panhandling ordinances have consistently found those ordinances to be content -based rather than regulations on the time, place and manner of speech and unconstitutional. A determination that an ordinance is content -based is typically fatal to the ordinance because it is rare that the government can satisfy the strict scrutiny standard which requires proof (with evidence not just conjecture) that the ordinance is the least restrictive means to serve a compelling governmental interest. HISTORY OF BEGGING/SOLICITATION ORDINANCES IN IOWA CITY 1966 — Iowa City Code stated: "No person shall be found upon any street, alley or public ground begging from house to house or in a public place." (Code 1966, Section 7.12.5) 1994 — Based on the then City Attorney's advice that the blanket ban on begging was unconstitutional, the 1966 ordinance was repealed and replaced with an ordinance making begging illegal only when: 1) Accompanied by harassment, assault or fraud; 2) Conducted in confined spaces, thereby intruding on the physical privacy of others; or 3) Conducted in an area where the activity will impair orderly movement or otherwise create unreasonable health and safety concerns. (1994 City Code Section 8-5-2). 2007 — An ordinance prohibiting a person standing on the public right of way (medians, curbs) from soliciting from the occupant of a vehicle, which was modeled after the ordinance upheld by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in Acorn v. St. Louis County, 930 F. 2d 591 (8`h Cir. 1991), was defeated on a 4-3 vote of the Council based on policy concerns re: the challenges to the building of the homeless shelter and the availability of the prohibition under the current ordinance against impeding the flow of traffic or creating an unreasonable safety concern (such as walking among the cars on the street). December 8, 2016 Page 2 2008 - After concern was expressed by members of the community regarding the panhandling in the downtown and discussion by Council with the City Attorney regarding the constitutional parameters for any such regulation, the Council requested that the City Attorney draft an ordinance prohibiting panhandling in certain places and in certain manners in the downtown. The Council thereafter adopted Ordinance No. 08-4300 which prohibited "solicitation" not only in certain "aggressive" manners but 10 feet from a sidewalk cafe, entrance or exit to building, border of the playground equipment or mobile vendor and 20 feet from an ATM. Also at this time, the Council passed an ordinance prohibiting persons from sitting or lying in Zone 1 of the pedestrian mall (area closest to stores) or on any sidewalk downtown with a number of exceptions for events where crowds of people gather, medical emergencies, benches affixed to sidewalks etc.' 2010 - On October 23, 2009 the Downtown Association wrote a letter to Council requesting, among other things, that solicitation be prohibited in the entire city plaza and that the distance restrictions in the rest of downtown be increased to 25 feet and include 25 feet from all cross walks. These prohibitions would have effectively prohibited solicitation in the downtown area. I continued to have serious reservation about a complete ban on panhandling downtown and advised against it, recommending instead that any increase in the distance requirements or additional prohibitions must pass the constitutional test for "time, place and manner" regulations of speech — i.e. be narrowly tailored to serve important city interests and leave open alternative forms of communication. With this standard in mind, the Council ultimately adopted Ordinance No. 10-4391 to amend Section 8-5-2 of the City Code to the form in which it currently exists. DISCUSSION In 1980 the United States Supreme Court held that solicitation of money by charities is entitled to first amendment protection, see Village of Schaumburg v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 444 U.S. 620, 632 (1980), and lower courts are in agreement that there is no distinction, for purposes of the first amendment, between begging for charity and begging for oneself. "While some communities might wish all solicitors, beggars and advocates of various causes be vanished from the streets, the First Amendment guarantees their right to be there, deliver their pitch and ask for support. Gresham v. Peterson, 225 F.3d 899, 904 (11th Cir. 2000). At the core of the First Amendment is a prohibition on "content -based" regulation, i.e. the government cannot restrict speech based on the content of the speech. Said another way, a regulation is content -based if the message (rather than the time, place or manner of the expression) determines whether the regulation applies, Whiton v. City of Gladstone, 54 F. 3d 1400, 1404-1405 (8'h Cir. 1994), In a traditional public forum, such as the pedestrian mall or the sidewalks downtown, content based regulation, to survive, "must be the least restrictive means of achieving a compelling state interest." McCullen v. Coakley, 134 S.Ct. 2518, 2530 (2014). This is an exacting standard. Content based regulations are "presumptively invalid", R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul Minn., 505 U.S. 377, 382 (1992), and it is a "rare case" in which strict scrutiny is overcome. Williams-Yulee v. Florida Bar, 135 S.Ct. 1656, 1665 (2015). Essentially, a determination that an ordinance is content -based is fatal for the ordinance. In a traditional public forum government can impose "time, place, and manner restrictions" which are "content neutral" if they are "narrowly tailored to serve a significant government ' Section 8-5-10, "Sitting and Lying on Sidewalks' is not impacted by recent case law. Nor are the prohibitions on storage of property downtown (8-5-14), use of electrical outlets downtown (8-5-15), or Standing, Loitering and Obstructing Persons" (8-5-11). December 8, 2016 Page 3 interest" and leave open "alternative channels of communication." Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781, 791 (1989). In 2008 and 2010 when Iowa City's ordinances were adopted, the prevailing view by the courts was that a prohibition on "all requests for immediate donations of money" without regard to who was asking and for what purpose (as the city ordinance defines it) was content neutral because it did not discriminate or burden a particular idea but applied equally to all. Gresham, 225 F. 3d at 905; ISKCON of Potomac, Inc. v. Kennedy, 61 F. 3d 949, 954-55_(D.C. Cir. 1995); Doucette v. City of Santa Monica, 955 F. Supp. 1192, 1204(C.D. Cal. 1997). Under this standard the city ordinances are constitutional There are many governmental interests that while not "compelling" are "significant" such as the City's interest in preserving the economic vitality of downtown and the free flow of pedestrian traffic. See McLaughlin v. City of Lowell, 140 F. Supp. 3d 177, 189 (D. Mass. 2015)(promotion of tourism and business development are not compelling government interests ); Whiton, 54 F.3d at 1409 (traffic safety and aesthetic beauty are substantial but not compelling government interests). The current restrictions are narrowly tailored to further the City's significant interests in promoting the economic vitality of downtown, protecting persons from fear and intimidation and in the free flow of traffic downtown by, for example, prohibiting solicitation within a reasonable distance of captive audiences (within so many feet of an ATM, at cross walks, at entrances to stores etc.) Because the ordinance allows people to solicit non -aggressively and safely outside of downtown, as well as in many areas in City Plaza and the downtown, the ordinance provides alternative channels of communication. In Reed v. Town of Gilbert, 135 S.Ct. 2218 (2015) the United States Supreme Court held that a sign code that imposed more stringent restrictions on signs directing the public to a meeting of a non-profit group than to signs displaying an ideological message or a political message was content -based and could not survive strict scrutiny. In doing so, the Court provided new direction for determining whether a regulation is content based. Prior to Reed "government regulation of expressive activity [was] content neutral so long as it [was] justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech.'" Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781, 791 (1989) (citation omitted) (emphasis added). The principal inquiry was "whether the government has adopted a regulation of speech because of disagreement with the message it conveys." Id. In Reed the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had determined that the sign regulations were not content based because the town "did not adopt its regulation of speech [based on] disagreement] with the message conveyed and its justifications for regulating directional signs differently from other signs were 'unrelated to the content of the sign"' Id. at 2227. The Supreme Court reversed finding that the Ninth Circuit had erred because its analysis "skip[ped] the crucial first -step in the content neutrality analysis [oq determining whether the law is content neutral on its face." Id. at 2228. After Reed a court must determine whether a law is content -based "on its face". Id. at 2227. In other words, if the enforcement officer must read the sign in order to determine if the regulation applies it is content -based "on its face". A law targeted at a specific subject matter is content -based even if it does not discriminate among viewpoints within that subject matter." Id. at 2230. If a law is content -based on its face, the government's motive is immaterial. Id. at 2228. A regulation that draws distinctions based on communicative content (i.e. what message is being conveyed) is not content neutral "even if those distinctions can be justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech." Id. So, regulations on signs giving directions to a church, political rally, park or high school graduation party are content- based even if the times and places of the events is the justification for the different treatment. Since the Reed decision courts have consistently held that prohibitions on solicitation such as those found in the City Code are unconstitutional content -based regulation of speech. In two instances the courts have reversed their pre -Reed determinations that the prohibitions were not content based. Applying the Reed standard the courts have found December 8, 2016 Page 4 regulations like Iowa City's solicitation ordinance to be content -based because they apply to requests for money but not to other requests such as for a signature on a petition, directions or a donation at a later date. Such regulations are then subject to strict scrutiny and cannot survive. See Norton v. City of Springfield, lll., 806 F.3d 411, 411-13 (7th Cir. 2015), cert. denied 136 S.Ct. 1173 (2016) (reversing previous rejection of plaintiffs' argument that targeting of oral requests for money now but not requests for money later constitutes content discrimination); Thayer v. City of Worcester, 144 F. Supp. 3d 218, 232-34 (D. Mass. 2015)(on remand after Supreme Court reversed and remanded for consideration in light of Reed); McLaughlin v. City of Lowell, 140 F. Supp. 3d 177, 185-87 (D. Mass. 2015) (("It appears at this point clear that regulations of solicitation which single out the solicitation of the immediate transfer of funds for charitable purposes are content -based"); Browne v. City of Grand Junction, 136 F. Supp. 3d 1276, 1288-91(D. Colo. 2015); Homeless Helping Homeless, Inc. v. City of Tampa, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103204, '11 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 5, 2016); City of Lakewood v. Willis, 375 P.2d 1056 (Wash. 2016). Only ordinances that prohibit distribution or exchange of anything on the roadway have been found to be content -neutral and constitutional. See, e.g. Traditionalist American Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. City of Desloge, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21630 (E.D. Mo. 2016) (upholding ordinance providing that "no person shall stand in or enter upon a Roadway for the purpose of distributing anything to the occupant of any vehicle) (emphasis in original). Thayer, 144 F. Supp. at 234. The Seventh Circuit's decision in the Norton case illustrates how the change in the content - based analysis changes the ultimate constitutional decision. Initially, the Seventh Circuit concluded that a city ordinance regulating panhandling was content neutral. Otterson v. City of Springfield, 768 F.3d 713, 717 (7"' Cir. 2014). In reaching its decision, the Seventh Circuit focused on the fact that "[t]he ordinance is indifferent to the solicitor's stated reason for seeking money, or whether the requester states any reason at all." Id. In addition, the Seventh Circuit pointed to the fact that "what activates the prohibition [in the ordinance] is where a person says something (in the 'downtown historic district') rather than what position a person takes." Id. Thus, the Seventh Circuit evaluated the ordinance by the standard for time, place, and manner restrictions and found that the ordinance passed muster under intermediate scrutiny. The plaintiffs in Otterson filed a petition for rehearing, which the Seventh Circuit deferred consideration of until the Supreme Court decided Reed. Norton v. City of Springfield, 806 F.3d 411 (7l" Cir. 2015). After Reed was decided, the Seventh Circuit applied it to the ordinance at issue and found that the, ordinance "regulates 'because of the topic discussed."' Id. (quoting Reed. 135 S. Ct. at 2227). Therefore, according to the Seventh Circuit, the ordinance is "a form of content discrimination" under Reed. Id. at 413. The Seventh Circuit remanded the case to the district court with the instruction that it enter an injunction prohibiting enforcement of the ordinance. Id. Similarly, after Reed the Supreme Court vacated the First Circuit's decision in Thayer v. City of Worcester, 755 F. 3d 60 (2014) finding an anti -panhandling ordinance to be content -neutral and remanded that decision "for further consideration in light of Reed." Thayer v. City of Worcester, Mass., 135 S.Ct. 2887 (2015). While the Supreme Court's summary granting of certiorari and remand is not a final decision on the merits it does indicate that there is a reasonable probability, in the Supreme Court's mind, that the lower court would reject the legal premises on which it earlier relied in light of the intervening Reed decision. McLaughlin, 140 F. Supp. 3d at 186. In Thayer, when the District Court reconsidered the prior decision in light of Reed, it concluded that the ordinance was content -based and unconstitutional. Thayer, 144 F. 2 In prior case history, the reported cases were captioned Otterson v. City of Springfield. The two named plaintiffs were Karen Otterson and Don Norton. December 8, 2016 Page 5 Supp. 3d at 233. The ordinance was very similar to Iowa City's ordinance. It prohibited panhandling in an "aggressive manner" and defined it as follows: Aggressive manner' shall mean: (1) approaching or speaking to a person or following a person before during or after soliciting if that conduct is intended or is likely to cause a reasonable person to fear bodily harm to oneself or to another, or damage to or loss of property or otherwise to be intimidated into giving money or other thing of value; (2) continuing to solicit from a person after the person has given a negative response to such soliciting; (3) intentionally touching or causing physical contact with another person or their property without that person's consent in the course of soliciting; (4) intentionally blocking or interfering with the safe or free passage of a pedestrian or vehicle by any means, including unreasonably causing a pedestrian or vehicle operator to take evasive action to avoid physical contact; (5) using- violent or threatening language and/or gestures toward a person being solicited, or toward their property, which are likely to provoke an immediate violent reaction from the person being solicited; (6) following the person being solicited, with the intent of asking that person for money or other things of value; (7) soliciting money from anyone who is waiting in line for tickets, for entry to a building or for any other purpose; (8) soliciting in a manner with conduct, words or gestures intended or likely to cause a reasonable person to fear immediate bodily harm, danger or damage to or loss of property or otherwise be intimidated into giving money or any other thing of value; (9) begging in a group of two or more persons in an intimidating fashion; (10) soliciting any person within 20 feet of the entrance to or parking area of any bank, automated teller machine, automated teller machine facility, check cashing business, mass transportation facility, mass transportation stop, public restroom, pay telephone or theatre or place of public assembly, or of any outdoor seating area of any cafe, restaurant or other business; (11) soliciting any person in public after dark, which shall mean the time from one-half hour before sunset to one-half hour after sunrise. December 8, 2016 Page 6 Similar "aggressive panhandling" ordinances failed to satisfy strict scrutiny in the McLaughlin and Browne cases cited above. Promotion of business and tourism, while perhaps a "substantial" governmental interest is not the "compelling" governmental interest that is required by strict scrutiny. McLaughlin, 140 F. Supp.3d at 189. While the interest of a city in public safety is compelling, the ordinances still failed strict scrutiny because they were not narrowly tailored to achieve these objectives or the least restrictive means of doing so "[b]ecause, for example, existing laws [such as disorderly conduct and obstruction of sidewalks] are sufficient to address the targeted behavior, or because the prohibited conduct, which constitutes protected expression, is not necessarily intimidating or menacing and therefore, does not constitute a threat to public safety." Thayer, 144 F. Supp.3d at 236 n. 5. The panhandling ordinances "are over -inclusive because they prohibit protected speech that poses no threat to public safety." Browne, 136 F. Supp.3d at 1292. For example, in Browne the Police Chief tested that panhandlers were "very persistent" and the City Manager testified that he had been solicited more than once. This did not, however, demonstrate that there was any risk to public safety, and therefore the court determined that a ban on multiple requests was not necessary to serve the city's interest in public safety. Id. at 1292. The Browne court concluded: The Court notes that certain behavior that may be engaged in by solicitors when soliciting could threaten public safety. For example, the solicitor may engage in conduct that is intimidating, threatening, coercive, or obscene and that causes the person solicited to reasonable fear for his or her safety. Such conduct, in fact, is expressly prohibited by subsection (b) of section 9.05.040 of Ordinance No. 4627. Tellingly, Plaintiffs do not challenge subsection (b). At times, threatening behavior may accompany panhandling, but the correct solution- is not to outlaw panhandling. The focus must be on the threatening behavior. Thus, the problem in this case is that Grand Junction has taken a sledgehammer to a problem that can and should be solved with a scalpel. In attempting to combat what it sees as threatening behavior that endangers public safety, Grand Junction has passed an ordinance that sweeps into its purview non -threatening conduct that is constitutionally protected. Thus, the Court is compelled to strike down subsections (a), (e), (g), (i), and 0) of section 9.05.040 of Ordinance No. 4627 3 The courts' analysis in all these cases illustrate the principle discussed earlier, i.e. that a determination that a governmental regulation is content based is fatal. Homeless Helping Homeless, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. At '15.("[W]ith admirable candor — the City forbears the assertion that Section 14-46(b) is the least restrictive means of advancing any governmental interest.") After the Court struck down Grand Junction's ordinance Boulder repealed their panhandling ordinance and substituted it with only one provision prohibiting aggressive panhandling defined as "Conduct that is intimidating, threatening, coercive, or obscene and that causes the person addressed to reasonably fear for his or her safety." (October 6, 2015 Agenda item, Boulder City Council, amending section 5-3-7 "Aggressive Begging Prohibited" and repealing 5-3-2 "Begging in Certain Places). Other cities such as Fort Collins, Colorado Springs, Boulder and Durango have done the same, often after challenge by the ACLU and at times after payment of the ACLU's attorney's fees. See htti)://www.westword.com/news/update-fort-collins-aclu-settleover-controversial- panhandling" that include all the provisions of the Grand Junction ordinance that the ACLU did not challenge in the Browne case in addition to the provision Boulder included noted above ("fighting words" directed to person solicited that are likely to create a breach of the peace; knowingly touching or grabbing the person solicited; obstructing a sidewalk, doorway, entryway, or other passage way in a public place used by pedestrians or obstructing the passage of the person solicited or requiring the person solicited to take evasive action to avoid physical contact with the person panhandling or with another person.") December 8, 2016 Page 7 RECOMMENDATION Section 8-5-2 should be repealed. I do not recommend waiting for a challenge as such a challenge would subject the City to liability and accompanying attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 (Civil action for deprivation of constitutional rights). Simply not enforcing the ordinance does not help because it is unconstitutional on its face — an as applied analysis is not necessary. As noted by the Court in the City of Grand Junction Colorado case there are some regulations that might be necessary to assure public safety. However, those regulations are already present in the City Code's prohibition on Disorderly Conduct at 8-5-1 and Standing, Loitering and Obstructing Persons at 8-5-11 and the state crime of simple assault. Disorderly conduct includes the following: 4. Acts in a threatening or violent manner toward another whereby a. Any person is placed in fear of safety of the person's life, limb or health; b. The property of any person is placed in danger of being destroyed or damaged; or c. The lawful pursuits of another are substantially curtailed 5. Places their own person in or on any public way so as to halt or impede the flow of vehicular or pedestrian traffic and refuses to clear any public way when ordered to do so. Under Section 708.1 of the Iowa Code an "assault' occurs when a person does "any act which is intended to place another in fear of immediate physical contact which will be painful, injurious, insulting, or offensive, coupled with the apparent ability to execute the act." I have spoken to Interim Police Chief Bill Campbell and Officer David Schwindt about this issue. They concur that additional regulation to protect public safety is unnecessary. However, in our discussions Officer Schwindt notes that the most problematic issue is the panhandling that occurs at sidewalk cafes. In accordance with the above, the current ordinance prohibiting solicitation within 10 feet of a sidewalk caf6 should be repealed. If the Council is interested, however, given the nature of the sidewalk cafe as a leased area within the business' control, an ordinance prohibiting requests for an exchange/transfer to persons within the cafe without the business's permission could be crafted. Please call me if you have any questions. Cc: Geoff Fruin, City Manager Marian Karr, City Clerk Bill Campbell, Interim Police Chief Officer David Schwindt Sterling Codifiers, Inc. 8-5-2: AGGRESSIVE SOLICITATION: A. Definitions: AGGRESSIVE MANNER: Any of the following: 1. Touching or causing physical contact with the person solicited. 2. Blocking the passage of the person solicited. 3. Continuing to solicit after a refusal by the person solicited. 4. Following behind, ahead or alongside a person who walks away from the solicitor after being solicited. 5. Using obscene, profane or abusive language or gestures toward the person solicited. 6. Using a sign to solicit that includes obscene, profane or abusive language. AUTOMATED TELLER MACHINE: A device linked to a financial institution's account records, which is able to carry out transactions, including, but not limited to: account transfers, deposits, cash withdrawals, and balance inquiries. CITY PLAZA: Defined in section 10-5-2 of this code. CROSSWALK: Defined in section 9-1-1 of this code. DOWNTOWN: Central business district, the near southside commercial area, and the northside marketplace area as illustrated on the map at the end of this section. SOLICIT: To request an immediate donation of money or other thing of value from another person, regardless of the solicitor's purpose or intended use of the money or other thing of value. The solicitation may be, without limitation, by the spoken, written or printed word or by other means of communication. ZONE 3 OF CITY PLAZA: "Zone 3" as that term is defined in section 10-5-2 of this code. (Ord. 08-4300, 4-14-2008; amd. Ord. 10-4391, 6-1-2010) B. Illegal Activities: 1. In the "downtown", except for City Plaza, it is illegal: http://www.sterlingeodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php 12/8/2016 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. a. To solicit in an aggressive manner. b. To solicit within ten feet (10) of the anchored or temporary fencing to a sidewalk cafe. c. To solicit within ten feet (10') of any building. d. To solicit within fifteen feet (15') of a crosswalk. e. To solicit within twenty feet (20) of an automated teller machine. f. To solicit within ten feet (10') of a mobile vendor. g. To solicit within fifteen feet (15') of another solicitor. (Ord. 10-4391, 6-1-2010) h. To solicit at the north, east and west entrances to City Plaza as defined as the areas bounded by: North entrance: East: Building line of the northwest corner of 207 E. Washington Street extended north to the curb. North: Curb line. West: Building line of the northeast corner of 101 S. Dubuque Street extended north to the curb. South: City Plaza and Black Hawk Mini Park. East entrance: East: Curb line. North: Building line of the southeast corner of the Iowa City Public Library extended east to the curb. West: City Plaza. South: Building line of the northeast corner of 221 E. College Street extended east to the curb. West entrance: East: City Plaza. North: Building line of southwest corner of 132 S. Clinton Street extended west to the curb. West: Curb line. http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php 12/8/2016 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. South: Building line of northwest, corner of 103 E. College Street extended west to the curb. To solicit on the following sidewalks with parking meters: (Ord. 13-4554, 9-17-2013) 0-99 block of S. Linn Street - East side. 0-99 block of S. Linn Street - West side between the alley and Iowa Avenue. 100 block of S. Linn Street - East side. 100 block of S. Linn Street - West side between the alley and Washington Street. 0-99 block of S. Dubuque Street - West side. 0-99 block S. Clinton Street - East side between the north property line of 18 S. Clinton Street and Iowa Avenue. 100 block E. Washington Street - North side between the east property line of 110 E. Washington and Dubuque Street. 200 block of E. Washington Street - South side. 100 block of Iowa Avenue - South side. 200 block of Iowa Avenue - South side. (Ord. 13-4554, 9-17-2013; amd. Ord. 13- 4563, 12-3-2013) j. To solicit in Black Hawk Mini Park. (Ord. 13-4563, 12-3-2013) 2. In City Plaza, it is illegal: a. To solicit in an aggressive manner. b. To solicit in a location other than the area in zone 3 as illustrated in the map below. c. To solicit within fifteen feet (15') of a crosswalk. d. To solicit within twenty feet (20') of an automated teller machine. e. To solicit within ten feet (10') of a mobile vendor. f. To solicit within fifteen feet (15') of another solicitor. C. Citations: Except for soliciting in an aggressive manner, no person shall be cited under subsection B of this section unless the person engages in conduct prohibited by said subsection after having been notified by a peace officer that the conduct violates the city ordinance. (Ord. 10-4391, 6-1-2010) http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/printnow.php 12/8/2016 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. D. Prohibited: In places within the city other than "downtown", it is illegal to solicit in an aggressive manner or in a manner that will impair orderly movement of pedestrian or vehicular traffic or otherwise create unreasonable health and safety concerns. E. Violation: Any violation of this section shall be considered a simple misdemeanor punishable by a fine of sixty five dollars ($65.00). http://www.sterlingeodifrers.com/codebook/printnow.php 12/8/2016 B-5-2 IOWA AVE a s a �I S $T UNIVERSITY OF IOWA (Ord. 08-4300, 4-14-2008) 8-5-2 Downtown u OYINCTCN ST �❑ Mercy ❑ Hospital A3TERSON $ ❑II❑❑ Iowa city nr --------- I July 2011 City Plaza Soliciting Area 0 '11YifJ..Y ]hem ., o(bodveva ac Eoc po .. .fM. a ,what with , V dlowcd b aq Ph a Iciapmhabvcd Yh mm a aces M.. change. Wdd gup Wbitcdi CHPlazaa t she mcv malad by ®oewiddv: 1. M&:.[w Al 2 1p Eea ofemoble vadm 3. 15 Een o[mm6aeotidmr P"W ! • Y Y (Ord. 10-4391, 6-1-2010) July 2011 Iowa City 8-5-2 ■ 1 1R �j July 2011 Iowa City 8-5-2 r �^_,--..® CITY OF IOWA CITY 1P4 _;."'�� MEMORANDUM Date: December 8, 2016 To: Mayor and City Council From: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk Re: KXIC Radio Show At your December 6 work session, and follow-ups conversations, Council Members agreed to the following schedule for the Wednesdav 8AM radio show. Wednesdav December 7 — Mims December 14 — Botchway December 21 —Cole December 28 — Mims January 4 — Taylor January 11 — Dickens January 18 — Thomas January 25 —Mims February 1 — Cole February 8 — Dickens In addition we are adding a 7:15 — 7:45 AM the first and third Friday of each month: Frida December 16 — Dickens January 6 — Botchway January 20 — Botchway February 3 — Mims ** Please remember that KXIC is very flexible with taping the Wednesday sessions ahead of the show. It is the intent of the Friday interviews to be live. U: radioshowappts.doc r CITY OF IOWA CITYOtt MEMORANDUM IP5 Date: December 5, 2016 To: Geoff Fruin, City Manager From: Brenda Nations, Sustainability Coordinator Re: Iowa City receiving grant for pilot of Consumption Based Emission Inventory Tool Iowa City recently was awarded grant funding to pilot a consumption based emission inventory tool that has been successfully used in Vancouver, Canada. Iowa City proposes to be the first city in U.S. to attempt to use this tool, too determine for its validity in this country. The pilot will gather useful information to understand if the work can be easily replicated with other U.S. cities, or if other methods are required. The goal of the project is to create a consumption -based emissions inventory, as well as create ecological footprint for Iowa City. This analyses will enable Iowa City to be able determine what policy interventions and changes could enable reductions in the city's energy and materials flows, greenhouse gas emissions, and ecological footprint. In January, staff will begin working with a research team at the British Columbia Institute for Technology (BCIT), including the creator of the EcoCity Footprint Tool, and a consultant that has more than 15 years experience in climate change and sustainability planning at the local government level, and who has been trained on the EcoCity Footprint Tool. The Iowa City portion of funds for the grant will go towards hiring an intern for one semester to collect and provide data to the research team, which will analyze and convert the data into U.S. units. This work will be completed in the fall 2017 and will align well with the creation of the City's first Climate Action and Adaptation Plan by providing useful insight to better understand how our individual and collective consumption choices and habits affect our community -wide greenhouse gas emissions. Cc: Doug Boothroy, Neighborhood and Development Services Director Ir IP6 boas '. CITY OF IOWA CITY 310 East Woshinglon Street Iowa City, lows 52240-1826 (3 1 9) 3S6-5000 (3191 356-5009 FAX vvLyw,iegov.org December 6, 2016 TO: The Honorable Mayor and the City Council RE: Civil Service Entrance Examination — Senior Accountant — Accounting Under the authority of the Civil Service Commission of Iowa City, Iowa, I do hereby certify the following named person(s) as eligible for the position of Senior Accountant — Accounting. TaraLynne Atkins IOWA CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION \ p LyrabN. Dickerson, Chair L'd 9690-6913�-61,£ 1100 '0Jd'U0SJ8)l010w1r Mediacom November 30, 2016 Ms. Marian Karr City of Iowa City 410 E. Washington St. Iowa City, Iowa 52240-1826 Dear Ms. Karr 2616 DEC -2 4Il, ►�: j D 1 31 11 = i A. till vI .4�`�� EM7 The purpose of this letter is to inform you that, on or about January 3, 2016, Mediacom will be implementing the following rate adjustments:' Product: New Rate: Net Change: Local Broadcast Station Surcharge $9.22 $1.61 Regional Sports Surcharge $2.61 $0.24 Family TV $72.95 $2.00 The decision to make price adjustments is always a difficult one. We are very reluctant to raise video prices because, when we do, we lose subscribers. However, cable and satellite companies are constantly being pressured by the programmers we buy from to pay more for the channels we carry. The fees we pay to retransmit local broadcast stations like ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC are by far our fastest growing programming cost component. A recently issued Federal Communications Commission pricing survey revealed that the monthly per subscriber fee per broadcast station rose 43% between 2013 and 2014. All told, the fees charged by broadcasters, according to SNL Kagan, grew from $800 million to $7.7 billion annually or 863% between 2009 and 2016. The problems with sports programming are equally as alarming. One look at the skyrocketing rights fees announced with recent deals and it is easy to see that the marketplace for live televised sports is out of control. Broadcast networks and national and regional sports networks are shelling out billions of dollars for the rights to carry pro sports like the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL, the Olympic Games, World Cup and NCAA football and basketball games. Unrestrained spending has become the hallmark of the sports programming business, and the American consumer, whether a sports fan or not, is left to pay the price. In an effort to bring more transparency to the unjustified fee increases being taken by the owners of broadcast and sports television channels, Mediacom previously introduced a Local 1 Depending on the terms of their contract, certain customers on promotional rates may or may not receive this rate change at this time. Broadcast Surcharge and a Regional Sports Surcharge. By identifying the cumulative fee increases being taken by these channel owners, we hope to draw the attention of consumers and their elected representatives to this rapidly escalating problem. Despite the challenges we face, Mediacom has continued to aggressively invest in the communities we serve. As part of a 3 -year, $1 billion capital investment plan announced early this year, Mediacom has been aggressively installing the newest generation of broadband technology throughout its entire internet service territory. By year end, virtually all of the 3 million homes and businesses within the 1,500 communities that Mediacom serves across its 22 state footprint will be upgraded to the latest DOCSIS 3.1 "Gigasphere" platform. In doing so, Mediacom will be first major cable company in the United States to fully transition to the DOCSIS 3.1 network infrastructure. As part of these network upgrades, Mediacom will be making major speed and/or data allowance enhancements to many of our most popular internet services tiers .2 The below table summarizes the changes to our internet service tiers: Current Speed (Up/Down) Current Retail Price Current Data Allowance New Speed (Up/Down) New Retail Price New Data Allowance 3Mb s/512kb s $29.95 150GB 60M bs/5Mb s $34.99 150GB 15Mb s/1Mb s $49.95 250GB 60M bs/5Mb s $54.99 250GB 50Mb s/5Mb s $59.95 350GB 60M bs/5Mb s $69.99 40OGB 100Mb s/10Mb s $79.95 999GB 100Mb s/10Mbps $79.99 1000GB 150Mb s/20Mb s 1 $99.99 1200OGB I 200Mb s/20Mb s $99.99 2000GB In addition, Mediacom will be announcing the availability of our new Gigasphere powered 1 -Gig service tier in your market in 2017. More details to follow. Mediacom appreciates the opportunity to continue to serve your community's telecommunications needs. If you have any questions, please contact me directly 319-395-9699 ext. 3461 or email laras$1ev(a)mediacomcc.com Yours sincerely, o _ a, Lee Grassley Senior Manager, Government Relations t^', _ I'D 2 Moving forward, Mediacom will be moving all its 3 Mbps/512kbps, 15Mbps/3Mbps and 50Mbps/5Mbps internet service customers to a service speed of 60Mbps/5Mbps. The distinguishing feature between these service levels moving forward will be a data allowance of 150GB, 250GB or 400GB. The entry level internet service tier offered to new customers moving forward will be 60Mbps/5Mbps and include a 400GB data allowance. Winter is right around the corner. Be aware of snow emergency policies! Page 1 of 3 IP8 Receive Updates Enter Email Address Go W Winter is right around the corner. Be aware of snow emergency policies! City of Iowa City sent this bulletin at 12/01/2016 04:36 PM CST O SHARE Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page. City of IOWA CITY FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Date: Dec. 1, 2016 Contact: Carol Sweeting Phone: 319-356-5164 Winter is right around the corner. Be aware of Iowa City's snow emergency policies! December is here, and with it, the potential for major snowstorms and City -declared snow emergencies. The City of Iowa City reminds residents to review snow emergency policies and have a plan in place in case a snow emergency is declared. Advance preparation means vehicles can be moved off of snow plow routes so that streets can be cleared as quickly as possible, and also means you can avoid having your vehicle ticketed or towed, which can cost $200 or more. Snow emergencies will be called only when extreme snow and ice conditions exist -- not necessarily every time it snows. The emergency will generally be in effect for 48 hours, and may be extended if conditions warrant. Whenever possible, a snow emergency will be announced the day before it actually goes into effect and will be enacted at 8 a.m. the next morning. People will then have four hours to move their vehicles before towing gets underway. Any vehicles that are parked on the street and blocking snow plow routes, especially those near the central part of the City, will need to be moved or risk being fined and towed to the impound lot. All charges, including impound storage fees, will need to be paid before the vehicle can be released to the owner. Students who park their vehicles on the street are advised to make alternate arrangements over winter break if they plan to leave town without their cars. Parking during snow emergencies https:Hcontent.govdelivery.com/accounts/IAIOWA/builetins/i 7690c5 12/1/2016 Winter is right around the corner. Be aware of snow emergency policies! Page 2 of 3 • If possible, move your car to an off-street parking spot. • The City of Iowa City will provide free overnight parking in City -owned parking ramps as well as in parking lots in City parks when a snow emergency is in effect. Vehicles must exit by 7 a.m. to avoid parking fees. A map of parking ramp locations may be found at www.icciov.org/parkingmeters. • Street parking will still be allowed in most areas on an alternating schedule during snow emergencies. On two-way streets, where parking is normally allowed on both sides, park on the side with even -numbered addresses on even -numbered dates, and on the odd -numbered side on odd dates. • On one -ways or streets where parking is usually permitted on only one side: If the permitted side is even -numbered, you may park there during a snow emergency on even dates. If its odd -numbered, park there on odd dates. Never park on the side of the street where parking is not normally permitted. • All other posted parking regulations, such as "No Parking Any Time," remain in effect and should be followed. • In some areas, normal parking regulations will apply, and parking will not be restricted during a snow emergency. These include metered parking spaces, loading zones, and the Downtown Central Business District, bordered by Iowa Avenue, Gilbert Street, Burlington Street, and Capitol Street. Snow emergency notification systems There are several ways to be notified that a snow emergency has been declared: • Sign up for Iowa City email updates or text alerts at www.icciov.org/e-subscriptions. • Check the City website's home page at www.icgov.org. If a snow emergency has been declared, a notice will be posted there. • Follow the City on Twitter: @CityoflowaCity • Visit the City s Facebook page: www.facebook.com/CitvoflowaCity • Sign up for Nextdoor, a social media neighborhood network used by many Iowa City neighborhoods, at http://nextdoor.com, and watch for snow emergency updates. • Stay tuned to local newspapers, newspaper websites, radio, and television stations, including City Channel 4, for announcements. • Signs announcing that a snow emergency is in effect will be posted at major roadway entrances to the City and on the doors at City Hall. • Call City Hall at 319-356-5000. Do not call 911, the Police Department, or the Streets Division, as those lines must be kept open for emergencies. For more information, visit www.icgov.org/snow or contact Carol Sweeting at 319-356-5164, 319-541- 2385 or e-mail carol-sweetingCcaiowa-citv.org. 1 Questions? Contact Us CITY Of IOWA CITY UKKOCnVO MPARM STAY CONNECTED: https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/IAIOWA/bulletins/I7690c5 12/1/2016 From: City of Iowa City <CityoflowaCity@public.govdelivery.com> Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 3:42 PM To: Marian Karr Subject: Applications now being accepted for 20th annual Citizen's Police Academy © SHARE Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page. 10WACITY FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Date: Dec. 1, 2016 Contact: Officer A. Hayes Phone: 319-356-5273 Applications now being accepted for 20th annual Citizen's Police Academy Applications to participate in the 20th annual Citizen's Police Academy (CPA), sponsored by five area law enforcement agencies, are now being accepted. The goal of the academy is to share information and help promote understanding of law enforcement, build better relationships with members of the community, and provide an overview for people who may be interested in law enforcement careers. The Citizen's Police Academy will meet once a week for 14 weeks, beginning Jan. 30, 2017. A different topic will be covered each week. Classes will be held from 6:30 to 9:30 p.m. at the Johnson County Joint Emergency Communication Center at 4529 Melrose Avenue, Iowa City. Training will include department tours and ride-alongs, defensive tactics, evidence collection, drug investigation, and many other areas of law enforcement and operations. Class size is limited, so early registration is encouraged. Applicants must be at least 16 years of age by Jan. 27, 2017 to participate. A $25 fee is required to cover the costs of materials and supplies. Application forms are available online at www.icgov.org/citizenspoliceacademv or at any of the five participating law enforcement agencies during normal business hours. Completed applications should be mailed or dropped off to any one of the departments listed below. For more information, visit www.icgov.org/citizenspoliceacademv or contact one of the following officers: Officer A. Hayes, Iowa City Police Department, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240, 319- 356-5273 Officer Adam Jennings, Coralville Police Department, 1503 5th St., Coralville, IA 52241, 319-248- 1800 Sgt. Brad Fisher, Johnson County Sheriff's Office, 511 S. Capitol St., Iowa City, IA 52240, 319- 356-6020 Officer Alton Poole, University of Iowa Police Department, 200 S. Capitol St., Iowa City, IA 52242,319-335-5043 Officer Mitch Seymour, North Liberty Police Department, 5 E. Cherry St., North Liberty, IA 52317, 319-626-5724 I ! t awl amr,l Questions? •n�a� Contact Us CITY OF IOWA CITY Uh4X0 CHV Of l If f RA111R1 STAY CONNECTED: SUBSCRIBER SERVICES: Manage Preferences I Unsubscdbe I HBID This email was sent to manan-kau@ioma ity.org using GovDelivery, on behaR of: City of Iowa City 410 EMS � Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 go�.ter' Sample Survey results for Impediments to Fair Housing Choice now available Page 1 of 2 IP10 Receive Updates JEnter Email Address Go Wil Sample Survey results for Impediments to Fair Housing Choice now available City of Iowa City sent this bulletin at 12/07/2016 03:42 PM CST O SHARE Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page. City of IOWA CIN FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Date: 12/7/2016 Contact: Stefanie Bowers, Equity Director Phone: 319-356-5022 Sample Survey results for Impediments to Fair Housing Choice now available In February 2014, 210 users of Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs) were surveyed as to whether they believed they had experienced housing discrimination in the last three years. HCVs are federal subsidies that provide rental assistance to eligible individuals. The Iowa City Housing Authority administers the program. Holders of HCVs are able to lease affordable, privately owned rental housing. The purpose of the program is to provide individuals with safe, affordable housing options. HCV and other rental subsidies are very useful to individuals, particularly in high cost housing markets like Iowa City. To be eligible for the HCV program, an individual/household must meet family composition requirements and must earn no more than 50% of the area median income. In the 2014 survey results, 21 % of HCV users believed they had been discriminated against in the last three years. Discrimination based on the use of HCV was the most cited reason for the discrimination (31 %), followed by receiving other forms of public assistance (28%), race, national origin or color (27%). At the time of the 2014 survey, it was lawful for a housing provider to refuse to rent to an individual who used HCVs to subsidize their rent. 2014 survey results can be located online at http://b it.ly/2fX i btn. In June 2016, Iowa City's fair housing laws were amended to provide protection for individuals who use HCV or other rental subsidies to supplement their monthly rental income. Housing providers can no longer refuse to rent to an individual just because they use HCV to subsidize their rent. Between August and September 2016, the Iowa City Human Rights Office sample surveyed 150 HCV holders with Iowa City addresses. Of that number, 32 individuals responded (20%). The Iowa City https:Hcontent.govdelivery.com/accounts/IAIOWAibulletins/I771107 12/7/2016 Sample Survey results for Impediments to Fair Housing Choice now available Page 2 of 2 Human Rights Office enforces the City's fair housing laws and conducted this survey to determine whether HCV users saw an immediate difference in their ability to rent housing in Iowa City since the new law went into effect. The 2016 Annual Report of the Iowa City Housing Authority cites 826 total HCVs in use in Iowa City. This report can be found at htto://bit.ly/2h6Ef74. In reviewing the results of the 2016 sample survey, the Human Rights Office recommends the following set of action plans. Collaborating with local housing advocates, social service agencies and the Iowa City Housing Authority to provide extensive outreach to individuals using HCV. The outreach efforts are intended to bring awareness and knowledge to individuals so that they are aware that they can file complaints when they believe they have been treated differently based on a protected characteristic in their search for housing, and that Human Rights staff will investigate their complaint at no charge. As part of the work plan, the Human Rights Office will also conduct more training opportunities and educational outreach on fair housing laws and regulations to the public. One of the biggest challenges the Human Rights Office encounters is that violations go unreported either because individuals do not believe that filing a complaint will change anything or they fear retaliation to them or their loved ones if they report it. Any effective outreach must counteract these thoughts and opinions. Human Rights staff quarterly reviews rental advertisings online and in print for fair housing violations. Violations of fair housing laws can include rental listings that use language discouraging individuals from renting based upon protected characteristics and can result in legal action against the housing provider, as well as the publisher of the advertising. Starting in 2017, individuals who believe they have been discriminated against will have the additional option of submitting a housing discrimination complaint via the City's website 24/7, in addition to the written form which is currently in use. The 2016 Impediments to Fair Housing Choice document can be accessed at htto://bit.lv/2gRodo6. t ! � � l at .��� Questions? •n�� Contact Us CITY OF I01VACI1Y wxo an Of ut tlArua STAYCONNECTED. SUBSCRIBER SERVICES. Manage Preferences I Unsubscribe i Helo https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/IAIOWA/bulletins/I M637 12/7/2016 MINUTES PRELIMINARY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 2016 — 6:30 PM DALE HELLING CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Byler, Syndy Conger, Christine Harms, John McKinstry, Bob Lamkins, Harry Olmstead, Dorothy Persson, Emily Seiple, Paula Vaughan MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Kris Ackerson OTHERS PRESENT: Brian Loring, Kristie Doser, Andy Norveisas, Theresa Burns CALL TO ORDER: Byler called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. APPROVAL OF OCTOBER 20. 2016 MINUTES: Olmstead moved to approve the minutes of October 20, 2016 with minor correction. Persson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion passed 9-0. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR TOPICS NOT ON THE AGENDA: None. MONITORING VISITS: FY15 Habitat for Humanity two homes on Prairie Du Chien Road Theresa Burns said they received $70,000 in funding and $60,000 of that was used to purchase two lots (1603 and 1605 Prairie Du Chien Road). 1605 Prairie Du Chien Road is nearing completion and the closing on that home should be soon. Burns shared with the Commissioners the criteria Habitat for Humanity uses when choosing their homeowners. Both of these projects were built by the Women Build project who builds on behalf of women in the community for their service. Last year it honored Mary Palmberg and this year it is Pat Heiden. The homeowners that will be moving into the house that will be complete this year currently live in a mobile home and the conditions of that mobile home are contributing to some health issues so they are very much looking forward to getting into a home that will provide a better environment. Burns then shared information on the Women Build community and said it costs $150,000 - $160,000 to build a home (with land costs and everything). 2. FY16 DVIP Shelter operations (Aid to Agencies) 3. FY16 DVIP facility rehab Kristie Dose r (Director) began by thanking the Commission and noted how lucky they feel to have been able to complete the facility rehab project. Last year with Iowa City and Johnson County residents they had 266 women and children that stayed in the shelter. For these women and children they provided counseling and advocacy services, Housing and Community Development Commission November 17, 2016 Page 2 of 7 emergency support, and assisted them with schools, employment and housing. Doser noted that in total they serve a little over 2,000 women and children within a span of a year for all the counties they serve. A few years ago they had their service area doubled from four counties to eight. DVIP and a Davenport shelter are the only shelters in a thirteen county area in Eastern Iowa. With regards to the facility rehab project to renovate bathrooms, Doser said the facility they have been in since 1993 has served upwards of 7,000 individuals so maintaining the building is absolutely critical. The upstairs of the shelter was built in a dorm -style with bedrooms on each side of the hallway and at each end of the hallway was a community bathroom. Over time that has become more difficult to manage and support. Andy Norveisas (one of the Shelter Coordinators) shared with the Commissioners the state of the bathrooms before the remodel. They were very dorm -like and lacked privacy with three sinks, three toilets, and three shower stalls. With the remodel they were able to divide it into three separate rooms each with a sink, toilet and shower. Norveisas shared some photos of the remodel. Byler asked about the Shelter's operational funding and how much of it comes from federal, state, local, or donation dollars. Doser said that currently the local municipalities support about 24% of their funding so they rely on the state and federal funds as well. Doser confirmed that all of the Iowa City Aid to Agency funds are used on Johnson County residents. About 25% of their funding comes from the state and about the same from federal resources. The rest of the budget is completed through fundraising; they do about $200,000 in fundraising per year. Olmstead asked if the shelter works with elder abuse cases. Doser replied that they have worked with local services around elder abuse and will house individuals when in immediate danger. Doser also shared that the Attorney General has challenged their programs to be broader and serve individuals that are victims of stalking, or victims of human trafficking. Additionally one of the reasons the bathroom change was critical was to be able to serve the expanding community populations, including LGBT communities. Doser noted that their building is inspected every five years and continues to be in good shape and very strong, so she feels they will be in that building for 20 or more years. 4. FYI JC Neighborhood Centers Broadway Neighborhood Center Rehab 5. FYI JC Neighborhood Centers Daycare operations (Aid to Agencies) Brian Loring (Director) began by saying the neighborhood center renovation was a phase two of a project they started back in FYI 5. It began in 2012 with a discussion of immigrating families from the Congo, and at that meeting they invited the families and stakeholders from the community and the state. They anticipated 40 attendees and ended up with over 100. That made them realize the space in their basement was challenging to be used for multi-purpose space because it was broken up into smaller rooms and not one large space. Additionally when there are youth groups down there, the line of sight is not good because of all the separate rooms. So after that large meeting it was decided to open up that basement area into a more useable multi-purpose space. They wanted a kitchen area at one end, a conference room and then the rest of the space to be open. As Housing and Community Development Commission November 17, 2016 Page 3 of 7 with any project, there were also other deferred maintenance items they added to the project such as replacing the doors in the front of the building and some repairs on the parking lot. Loring showed some photos of the finished project. Loring noted that they were able to match about $30,000 for this project. Olmstead asked the visitors if they had any ideas how the Commission could improve their program or process for funding. Doser said she would appreciate having feedback on the applications and grants. She noted her group has talked about how to keep the Commission abreast of their programs. She understands the Commission has a scoring process, but said the applicant isn't always aware as to why the scores came out the way they did. Loring noted that the addition of the project manager/architect was very helpful. Doser agreed. Loring said funding that separately from the grant was helpful as well. Byler noted the Commission has discussed in the past about working with the agency partners on five-year plans to be kept aware of upcoming needs and priorities. DVIP is already doing that and it is very helpful. UPDATE ON FY17 PROJECTS WITHOUT SIGNED AGREEMENT: Ackerson stated that they keep track of the projects that are funded in July and have not yet obtained a signed agreement. He put a memo in the packet that lists the four projects without a signed agreement. • Mayor's Youth Empowerment Program — acquisition of home for rental. They were awarded $50,000 and are actively searching for a property. • The Housing Fellowship — acquisition of home for rental. They received $58,000 to acquire a unit and are searching for additional funding. • Arc of Southeast Iowa — renovation of classroom space. The project is to divide up the multi- use space in their basement. Ackerson spoke with the architect today and he has received feedback from the building department so things are progressing. Ackerson noted that Rorhrbach is doing the architect work for free as a community service. Persson noted that Neumann Munson just received a Human Rights Award for all of the free architectural work they have done to support nonprofits in the community. • Shelter House — construction of Housing First Project (FUSE). They have acquired the property and are waiting on State Housing Trust Fund dollars because the application process is taking a lot longer than anyone expected. It might be summer before they know if that money comes through. Byler asked if that is a concern. Ackerson responded that no, there is progress being made so it should all be fine. On another note Ackerson noted he is concerned about a CHARM Homes project that carried over funds from the previous year and they have a pending deadline. Byler stated that moving forward they need to take into account the housing market in Iowa City. Five to ten years ago there used to be a bubble around The University of Iowa and that bubble continues to grow quickly. There were five houses for sale in his neighborhood in the last three Housing and Community Development Commission November 17, 2016 Page 4 of 7 months (a mile east of downtown) and they all sold to rental companies. Those rental companies also paid well over what the houses were worth because they can garner high rents for the homes. Byler stated that if a partner in this next round of funding asks for $50,000 to buy a rental house, the Commission needs to discuss if that model is sustainable when homes are no longer available for $125,000 and are all now selling for $200,000 and upward. So in the future instead of giving three partners $50,000 each, they may need to start awarding two projects $75,000 each. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF DRAFT FY18 CDBG AND HOME APPLICATION MATERIALS: Byler reminded everyone that a few meetings ago they had reviewed the application materials and it now lines up with the scoring criteria. Additionally they allocated more points on the leveraging criterion. Byler believes the partner organizations will appreciate that the application and the scoring criteria lines up. Of course the Commissioners will still all come up with different scores, but it should be easier to discuss. Olmstead suggested making the font a bit larger for easier reading. Seiple noted that this will allow for feedback to the partners regarding their applications and how the scores are computed. Ackerson noted that the partners are invited to the meetings where the applications are discussed so they can hear the discussion on the scores. Persson added that she has seen minutes being taken so they can take the notes back to their organizations for review. Ackerson noted the application guide has estimated budget numbers, which will be updated upon receipt of the final numbers from HUD. Olmstead asked if the funding would change this year due to the change in administration. Ackerson said the funding that they will be allocating is from the previous year's administration so they are secure for this year. Byler asked if the $347,000 (the HOME section) a higher percentage than previous years. Ackerson said it was not. Byler noted they had $100,000 that came back to the City and asked if that was included. Ackerson confirmed that is included, but it is in the CBDG not HOME funds. Ackerson noted the big variable in the cost estimate is program income (loan repayments) and winter is when the City gets a lot of applications for emergency rehab so depending on the severity of the winter there can be lots of projects or not many. Byler asked about the location model and if that should be a separate discussion at another meeting. Ackerson noted that after he issued this map, the City had annexed some areas that are not included on this map, so he distributed an updated map. He noted that the dark green areas are where funds would be restricted for new subsidized rental housing; owner -occupied and rental rehab can still be done anywhere in town. The areas are based on seven criteria and the City Council developed a weighting system for the criteria. Additionally the Council established a minimum of 400 feet from any existing subsidized housing unit to prevent concentration areas. Seiple noted it had been discussed considering how many units are in a neighborhood all together. Housing and Community Development Commission November 17, 2016 Page 5 of 7 Olmstead asked why school performance was part of the criteria. Ackerson replied that the City Council requested the map per a memo from the school district about where to locate future subsidized units. It was in response to a number of units being built in the Whispering Prairie and Whispering Meadows area and the perception that those units were contributing to the poverty levels at the elementary schools in that neighborhood. Byler noted he likes the map and that it is grounded in data and shows the effect on three or four of the elementary schools. Byler asked Ackerson to put this item on the agenda because Byler felt the objectives from the City Council were based on school district goals. He feels that these bubbles prevent a housing partner to take a single family unit and develop it into a duplex, which is really what they should be doing to make more affordable housing available. The goal is that the areas need to be opened up, there needs to be more areas where affordable housing goes because there just isn't much room. Lamkins agreed, by looking at the map the City is basically saying we are full, take your affordable housing to Coralville or North Liberty. Ackerson showed a table that indicates the three criteria the City receives from the school district and he's ranked them based on various rates and it shows the great disparity between the schools. Twain and Hills have 75% free and reduced lunch rates and then there are other elementary schools with less than 10%. And the disparity is also seen in standardized test scores. Mobility rates are a little less correlated but it is the factor the school district said was the most important because having students come into and out of their classrooms is disruptive. Seiple questioned that being included in this model, it makes sense to her as an issue for teachers, but the families she knows that have been faced with potentially moving to a different school it is overwhelming to both find a home that will allow assisted housing and stay in the same school. Persson stated the whole community is unstable and it's difficult for neighbors to connect with everyone moving around so much. Children depend on stability and if that is constantly disrupted it is a huge factor. Byler asked if it would be possible to change the map, obviously for the upcoming application cycle this is the map that will be used. Ackerson said if the Council can adopt something new soon then that could be used. Most applicants have not identified a location when they are applying so there is some flexibility. Byler asked if it's possible to create two new maps, one which exempts homes up to two units (up to a duplex). Seiple asked if there were larger units, and yes there are four-plexes and multi -unit rooming houses throughout. There are legal issues with the location maps, the Fair Housing Act for example. The map has to be justified on data. Ackerson said he could create a map exempting homes up to the two units and also create something using the school district data. Byler said they can then discuss the new maps at the December meeting. Ackerson said he would do so, and the maps would need to be vetted by the City Attorney and City Manager for their input. Conger moved to approve the application with changes discussed. Lamkins seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion passed 9-0. Housing and Community Development Commission November 17, 2016 Page 6 of 7 DISCUSS THE STATE OF IOWA CONSOLIDATED PLAN FOR HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2017 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN: Ackerson said this is regarding the State's Consolidated Plan. Olmstead said it is too late for public comment on the State Plan but feels this is something that the Commission should stay on top of in future years. STAFF/COMMISSION COMMENT: Ackerson shared a letter from the Johnson County Affordable Homes Coalition to the Iowa City Council that advocates for more affordable housing. ADJOURNMENT: Olmstead moved to adjourn. Persson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and motion carried 9-0. Housing and Community Development Commission November 17, 2016 Page 7 of 7 Housing and Community Development Commission Attendance Record Name Terms Exp. 1/21 2/18 3/10 4/21 5/19 6/16 8/1819/15 = Vacant 10/20 11/17 Byler, Peter 7/1/17 X X X X X X X X X X Conger, Syndy 7/1/18 X X O/E X O/E O/E X X X X Harms, Christine 7/1/19 --- --- --- --- X X X X X X Lamkins, Bob 7/1/19 X X X O/E X O/E O/E X O/E X McKinstry, John 7/1/17 --- --- --- --- X X O/E O/E X X Olmstead, Harry 7/1/18 X X X X X X X X O/E X Persson, Dottie 7/1/17 X O/E X O/E X X X X X X Seiple, Emily 7/1/18 X X X X X X X X X X Vaughan, Paula 7/1/19 --- --- --- --- --- --- X X O/E X Key: X = Present O = Absent O/E = Absent/Excused --- = Vacant