Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-06-02 Bd Comm minutesIOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMMISSION May 14, 1981 Iowa City Civic Center Members Prrsent: Sauegling, Phipps, George Members Absent: Redick, Dieterle Staff Present: Zehr, Brown, Wright Guest Present:. Norvall Clemons Vice -Chairperson Sauegling called the meeting to order at 7:50 p.m. The minutes of the April 9th, 1981, meeting were considered and approved. Manager Zehr presented the bills for the month of May and explained them briefly. Some of the expenses were incurred because the drainage grates on runway 6124 are falling in and the runway has been closed until repairs can be made. There were also some sewer problems which have been repaired. George moved to approve the May bills for payment; second by Phipps; the motion. passed. The film presentation was delayed until the end of the meeting. Moving to Item (b) of the agenda; Zehr explained the available space in the new corporate hangar has been advertised, but he has not had any good responses. The Iowa City Flying Service is willing to lease the space for $416 per month and will provide their own insurance. The members present agreed to this. Zehr read a resolution authorizing the chairperson to sign and the secretary to attest to the signing of a lease with the Iowa City Flying Service. George moved to pass the resolution; second by Phipps; all present voted aye. Zehr reported the Uni-Comm System is old and not working well. It would be possible to get a new one with a 50/50 grant from the State of Iowa, for a total price of $1400, the Airport's share being $700. George moved to approve the purchase; second by Phipps; all voted aye. Zehr reported L. R. Kimball and Associates has updated the Pre -Application for the MasterPlan, and explained the details of the revisions. There was no chairman's report. Norvall Clemons requested a place on the agenda of the next meeting to present a plan whereby a group of interested parties would lease land at the'airport for the purpose of financing and building their own T -hangars. A general obligation bond would then be necessary in order for the Airport to build the necessary taxiways. The meeting was adjourned at 8:35, and Zehr then showed a film made by the General Aviation Manufacturer's Association entitled "Making the Difference." Recorder: Priscilla Wright 4_ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES 7413 i /y f MINUTES DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MAY 13, 1981 ENGINEERING CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Seiberling, Alexander, Haupert, Lafore, Lilly, Summerwill. MEMBERS ABSENT: Sinek, Wegman, Wockenfuss. STAFF PRESENT: Chiat, Hauer. GUESTS PRESENT: Frank Roberts, The Breese Co., Inc. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL: The Committee recommends approval of the preliminary design plans for landscaping submitted by The Breese Co., Inc. The Committee finds that the j trees to be planted - red oak and crab - with juniper bushes and ground ivy for cover are satisfactory. THE BREESE COMPANY: PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLANS FOR LANDSCAPING Frank Roberts, Manager of Breese's, appeared to present the plans for landscaping of the Breese's parking lot. He indicated that red oak and crab trees, juniper bushes, and ivy would be planted. Committee members indicated i approval of the plan. Seiberling suggested that future landscaping plans presented to the Design Review Committee show the variety of plants being used; she thought this would avoid problems with nuisance trees and shrubs being planted. Haupert moved and Alexander seconded that the Committee recommend approval of Breese's landscaping plans. The motion carried unanimously. Seiberling thanked Mr. Roberts for appearing before the Committee. EAST COLLEGE STREET PORTION OF CITY PLAZA: PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLANS Chiat presented preliminary design plans for the unfinished portion of City Plaza adjacent to the new library (the portion of College Street directly west of Linn Street). Chiat explained that these plans were designed to provide a i continuation of the amenities found on the other portions of City Plaza. He pointed out the location of lighting, trees, shrubs, trash receptacles, benches, i and tables. Bicycle racks are to be placed by the Linn Street and library entrances. Chiat said the portion of the plaza by the hotel/department store site was basically left undesigned to allow for an integration of the hotel/department store with the plaza amenities. Seiberling said she thought several additional trash receptacles should be considered, especially near benches and tables, and the entrance to the library. She also wanted to know if the elevation showing the Linn Street face of the library was accurate. Chiat indicated that the elevation may not be entirely representative in that the number of trees and shrubs for Linn Street has not yet been determined. Chiat said these plans will also be reviewed by City staffinembers. The staff and Design Review Committee comments will be sent to Jack Leaman of Reike Carroll Muller Associates, Inc. of Ames, Iowa, for any changes or modifications that are necessary. Seiberling asked if there would be a horticultural review h MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES [� � - �-' - - . � _ �. -_= � � -'- -� _ •__,ALL-a� �. �— �- - -'�_ _ -� ,__ mid .. .... 2 of these plans. She expressed concern that the plants located in the City Plaza should be heat tolerant due to the amount of heat -radiating materials in the area. Chiat stated that these plans would be sent to Gretchen Harshbarger for her review and comment. Chiat said these plantings probably would be installed next fall. The Committee indicated general approval of these plans, subject to the consideration of review of plantings and placement of an additional number of trash receptacles on the Plaza. NEWSPAPER DISPENSERS Chiat presented copies of material on newspaper dispenser styles and a diagram showing potential locations for the dispenser units. The Committee agreed with the proposal that a large dispenser for four to six different newspapers should be sited in the planter opposite the Jefferson Building to replace the individual racks by the Jefferson Building. Several damaged plantings in the planter would be removed and replaced with additional shrubs that would compliment the dispenser unit. The unit would be painted VanDyke Brown. The Committee suggested that if a second dispenser unit was required, it should be smaller and located on College Street. The Committee wanted to know if the 'alcove' in front of Hardee's could be used. Chiat indicated that an agreement would probably be necessary because the alcove is on private property. A second alternative location on College Street near the Clinton Street entrance to City Plaza was then suggested. The issue of who would pay for the dispensers and maintainance was raised. Lilly suggested a letter should be sent to the different newspapers requesting their interest in using the dispenser units. Chiat said he would continue work on the issue. Seiberling asked if the storage mailbox by the Washington Street entrance of the City Plaza could be relocated in a more accessible location for the mail truck. She also wanted to know if a sign could be put on the storage mailbox indicating that the consumer drop mailboxes were in the kiosk. Chiat replied that he would contact the Postal Service with these suggestions. APPOINTMENT OF NEW MEMBERS At the April 21, 1981 City Council meeting, two vacancies for the Design Review Committee were announced. These positions will be filled at the June 2, 1981 City Council meeting. Meeting adjourned. Prepared by: ! civ a+,Lt� Andrea Hauer Planner/Program Analyst 4_ i MICROFILMED BY ' JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140INES 701 MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY 7, 1981 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Barker, Harris, Vanderhoef, Hall MEMBERS ABSENT: Bartles STAFF PRESENT: Siders, Woito, Boothroy, Tyler FORMAL ACTION TAKEN: V8102. That an application by David C. and Joyce A. Stochl for a variance to Secticn 8.10.23A of the Zoning Ordinance to permit construc- tion of an addition to an extisting residence within the required rear yard be approved. V-8104. That an application submitted by Micki Soldofsky for a variance to 8.10.21E to permit construction of an addition to an existing residence located at 229 Lowell be deferred until May 26, 1981. Douglas Boothroy was appointed Secretary for the Board. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Chairperson Harris called the meeting to order. Woito called the roll. APril 7, 1981, bHall seconded nhh and edeferreduntilnextme ting since the cmembers9had not had adequate time to review them. Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE ITEMS V-8102. Public hearing on an application submitted by David C. and Joyce A. Stochl for a variance to Section 8.10.23A of the Zoning Ordinance to permit construction of an addition to an existing residence within the required rear yard. Boothroy pointed out that the item was deferred from the previous meeting. Boothroy recapitulated that the applicant lives on Pinecrest Avenue and Willow, a block north Of Muscatine Avenue. The applicant is requesting a variance to the rear yard setback requirement in order to build a family room at the rear of the existing structure. The proposed structure is approximately 20 feet long and 16 feet wide and would encroach upon the rear yard setback by one and one-half feet. 7ys j MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB t CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES c_ Board of Adjustment May 7, 1981 Page 2 Boothroy noted that redesigning the room had been discussed previously. Staff recommends denial because they could find no grounds of uniqueness or significant hardship. He added that the neighbor to the south whose property would be most impacted had expressed support for the variance. Stochl pointed out that staff will probably be submitting a proposal to Planning and Zoning to reduce the rear yard requirement. He stated that he was merely asking the Board to allow him to build his addition now instead of next year. Barker responded that technically the Board was not allowed to decide a case on the basis of future proposed legislation. Woito agreed that the Board did not have the authority to act on speculated legislation. Barker moved and Hall seconded that an application submitted by David C. and Joyce A. Stochl for a variance to Section 8.10.23A of the Zoning Ordinance to permit construction of an addition to an existing residence within the required rear yard be approved. Motion carried 3 to 1 with Harris voting nay. V-8104. Public hearing on an application submitted by Micki Soldofsky a variance to 8.10.21E to permit construction of an addition to an existing residence located at 229 Lowell. Boothroy explained that the applicant has requested a variance to a section of the Iowa City Code which states "no building may be structurally altered in a way which increases or extends its non- conformity." This action is requested to allow the construction of a "studio addition" on the rear of a garage. The subject property is a corner lot. The Zoning Ordinance defines a front lot line as follows: "in the case of a corner lot, the shortest street dimension shall be considered the front lot line..." Therefore the frontage on Wilson Street is considered the applicant's official front yard and what appears to be the side yard is actually the rear yard. The existing garage violates the rear yard requirement and is thus non- conforming. Since the addition is proposed on the rear of the garage, this would entail an extension of that non -conformity. The proposed placement of the addition provides the least expensive alternative as well as the most functional in terms of the applicant's needs and leaving the most usable yard area. However, the application does not show an unnecessary hardship as the owner is currently receiving a reasonable return on the property and the hardship is not unique as many homeowners have non -conforming buildings and face similar restrictions. Boothroy added that letters had been received from the neighbors support- ing the application. However, the neighbor to the north objects to the addition. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INES 4� 7PIS 7 J Board of Adjustment May 7, 1981 Page 3 Staff recommends denial. Boothroy stated that it appeared that the house had been constructed in violation of the Code of 1947 as the garage was constructed 10 feet from the rear lot line rather than 24 feet. He added that the provisions of the ordinance in effect in 1947 were essentially the same as those in effect now. Siders stated that in the past three years the Ordinance has been amended to lessen the restrictions. Previously, if a structure was non- conforming, it could not be enlarged at all. Micki Soldofsky spoke in favor of her application. She explained that her work involved toxic dyes which required ventilation. She stated that she had investigated renting space in Iowa City but had not been able to find anything that was adequate and affordable. An architect had investigated several designs and had advised her that an addition to the breezeway would cost $5000 or more than the addition to the garage and would also create problems with the roof line. She stated that the "back yard" had always been used as a side yard. Malcolm Orth of 203 Lowell, also representing Miss Hughes of 201 Lowell, spoke in favor of the application. He stated that he thought the addition would improve the neighborhood. Tom Gilpin, attorney for Soldofsky, spoke saying that with the particular configuration of the house, this addition is the most aesthetically pleasing. He noted that the addition would merely be an extension of an existing nonconformity, not a further encroachment on the land to the north. He pointed out that the neighbor to the west, towards whose property the encroachment would be directed, had not objected to the addition. He stated that the addition would only add 15 feet to the garage and would not be visible from the street. He stated that denying the variance would create a hardship because this addition is the only practical and affordable alternative available for Soldofsky who needs the space in order to pursue her art work. Harris stated that he was troubled by the issue of viable alternatives. He stated that he could visualize other alternatives which would not demand extending the nonconformity. Soldofsky responded that the house had no basement; that it was on pilings which would require that the entire house be reseated if a second story were to be added. Placing an addition off the breezeway would change the whole roof line and be very expensive. Sylvia Strongen, the neighbor to the north, spoke against the variance. She stated that the addition would invade her privacy by jutting living space towards her property line. She stated that the addition would cause a loss of airiness and light. She pointed out that her lot was somewhat triangular in shape and that the addition would be cutting towards the narrowest part of the lot. She stated that the rooms closest to the 4_ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INES 7yd V_. Board of Adjustment May 7, 1981 Page 4 addition would be bedrooms and a utility room. She added that previously the garage had served to separate living spaces but with the addition, the living spaces would be brought significantly closer together. Furthermore, the addition would block her present view. Gilpin responded that the houses were presently approximately 18 feet apart. He stated that if the yard were treated as a side yard, the amount of space would be adequate. He further stated that the neighbor does not technically have a right to the view of adjacent property. and that Soldofsky's could construct a fence which would obstruct the view, therefore, Strongen's complaint about the view being reduced did not stand up. Soldofsky ascertained that the required side yard requirement was 5 feet. Harris noted that, nevertheless, the land in question was defined as a rear yard. Barker noted that the ordinance limited and restricted what the owner could do with the property and what the neighbors could do with their property. This was to protect all parties. Vanderhoef moved and Barker seconded that an application submitted by Micki Soldofsky for a variance to 8.10.21E to permit construction of an addition to an existing residence located at 229 Lowell be granted. I Barker stated that he was concerned that the application did not meet the criterion. He added that he could understand both the neighbors' concern and Soldofsky's need for the addition. Harris stated that he was not convinced of the negative impact but that he was concerned about granting a variance when possible alternatives were available. Vanderhoef stated that he saw Soldofsky's situation as being a true hardship but that his concern rested with the neighbor's complaint. Hall stated that he was concerned over the Board's charge not to extend an existing nonconformity. He stated that he was not convinced that the case represented enough of a hardship to grant the variance. Boothroy suggested that all the Board members view the property with the concerns raised at the meeting in mind. Both Soldofsky and Strongen invited the members to also view the insides of their residences so they could understand their concerns. Vanderhoef withdrew his motion. Barker moved and Hall seconded that the case be deferred until May 26 at 4:30 PM. Motion carried unanimously. IN MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 7SS Board of Adjustment May 7, 1981 Page 5 Woito informed the Board that a Writ of Certiari had been filed in regard to the Sanhueza property at 615 South Governor. This action challenges the legality of the Board's decision. Harris responded that he was glad that the issue was back with the Court as the Board had been concerned over its jurisdiction in the case. APPOINTMENT OF NEW SECRETARY Barker moved and Vanderhoef seconded that Douglas Boothroy be nominated for the position of Secretary to the Board of Adjustment. The Board cast a unanimous ballot in favor of Boothroy. Boothroy replaces Donald Schmeiser as secretary. Vanderhoef suggested that it might help both the Board and staff if P&Z enacted an amendment to the rear yard requirement. Harris suggested that perhaps the drafted rear yard regulation from the new Ordinance could be accepted in advance of the whole Ordinance. Siders pointed out that that might be problematic because the proposed new Ordinance refers to new zones from the Comprehensive Plan which is to be adopted at the time the ordinance is adopted. Presently, some of those zones do not exist. He added that changing the rear yard requirement would not alleviate the problems. He stated that there will always be people whose lots are nonconforming and who will appeal to the Board for variances. Boothroy informed the Board that a regulation is under consideration which would allow more felxibility in the rear yard requirement. He noted that the regulation would not help in Soldofsky's case, but would in Stochl's. Barker requested that staff compute the number of cases which come before the Board dealing with rear yard requirements. Boothroy stated that he knew the frequency of these cases was increasing. Siders and Boothroy both stated that they would try to gather statistics on the matter. Meeting adjourned. Prepared by: .,.�tie•e� �,C Andrea Tyler Approved by: Douglas Boothroy Secretary 70S 1, MICROFILMED BY 'DORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES F MINUTES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MAY 7, 1981 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS I MEMBERS PRESENT: Blum, McDonald, Horton, Jakobsen, Jordan, Seward. MEMBERS ABSENT: Heaney. STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Tyler, Woito. RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL I S-8105. That an application submitted by Southgate Development for approval of the preliminary and final plat for Lot 163, Pepperwood Addition, Part 3 be approved subject to the legal papers being in order and the utilities being signed. That the Lower Ralston Creek Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan he approved as submitted. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION_ Chairperson Jakobsen called the meeting to order. The new member, Horst Jordan, was introduced. The minutes of April 16, 1981 were approved as circulated. SUBDIVISION ITEMS S-8103. Public discussion of an application submitted by Dean Oakes and Thomas Wegman for preliminary and final subdivision plat approval for Wegman's First Addition, located at the northwest corner of Miller Avenue and Highway 1. Boothroy reported that no further information had been submitted and that the application was still being deferred. S-8105. Public discussion of an application submitted by Southgate eD v Tpment for approval of the preliminary and final plat for Lot 163, Pepperwood Addition, Part 3; 45 -day limitation period: 6/5/81; 60 -day limitation period: 6/20/81. Boothroy stated that only two deficiencies remained, the legal papers being in order and the signature of the utilities. He stated that Staff recommended approval of the application subject to these two deficiencies being addressed. _ j MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES -MOINES 7016 V - L". Planning R Zoning Commission May 7, 1981 Page 2 The Chair moved that the Commission recommend that an application submitted by Southgate Development for approval of the preliminary and final plat for Lot 163, Pepperwood Addition, Part 3 be approved subject to the legal papers being in order and signatures of the utility companies. LOWER RALSTON CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Jakobsen stated that a letter had been received from attorney Bill Meardon questioning haw the Lower Ralston Creek Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan has been established. Woito explained that the letter questioned whether adequate notice had been given in establishing a 403 Urban Renewal Area and whether the City had adequately followed the regulations set forth by the federal government. Woito stated that since no,condemnations of property had taken place under the 403 regulations, by re -publishing notification the regulations should be adequatley met. Milkman added that republication would include a map and detailed descrip- tion of the area included in the 403 area. Woito noted that the City was also being challenged on the grounds of public purpose. She stated that she thought there would be a law suit when the City began to condemn property in order to reassemble parcels for commercial redevelopment. The Chair moved that the Commission reapprove the Lower Ralston Creek Neighborh000d Redevelopment Plan as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS Loren Horton was appointed as the Planning and Zoning representative to the Riverfront Commission. Blum reported that the dissolution of the West Benton right-of-way agreement had caused some controversy with the City Council. Two meetings previous the Council had requested additional information. Boothroy stated that the Council had been provided with a map and infor- mation Developmentabout submittedepreviouslyDevelopment by Maceana Braverman.for CouncilPlanned passedmthecial resolution 4 to 3 releasing the property owner from the West Benton right-of-way agreement. Prepared by r� aAu n ���1�5lLs� -- n rea y er O Minute Taker Approved by"^ Loren Horton 7416 Secretary MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MINUTES RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION MAY 11, 1981 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Fett, Gartland, Hotka, Sanders, Schwab, Sheehan MEMBERS ABSENT: Hamilton STAFF PRESENT: Tinklenberg RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL None. REQUESTS TO THE CITY MANAGER None. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTIONS TAKEN Sanders called the meeting to order and the minutes of April 20 were approved as read. The Nature Conservancy Sanders reported on what the Nature Conservancy does. Solar Homes Tour Report Sheehan reported on her impressions of four solar homes in Iowa City that she toured on Sun Day, May 3. She suggested that Energy Directories be made available, to the public, at future tours. Hotka reported that he had attended several seminars on solar energy and that each seminar leader emphasized conservation first before solar. Agenda For Joint Meeting With City Council Sanders reported on his attendance at Lhe City Council meeting. rhe Commissioners tentatively set June 15 as the date for the joint meeLiny and scheduled Commission meetings for May 18 and June in order to formulate the agenda and relevant information for the joint meeting. The meeting adjourned at 5:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Roger Tinklenberg. Pat Fett, Secretary. MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES s MINUTES BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION TUESDAY, 4:30 PM APRIL 21, 1981 CIVIC CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Eskin, Terry, Johnson, Madsen, Pepper MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Hindeman, VanRiper, Koester, Blough, Kalergis of Hawkeye Cablevision; Pat Hyde of the University of Iowa; Tanya Updegraff of the Journalism Department, University of Iowa STAFF PRESENT: Shaffer RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None MATTERS PENDING COMMISSION -COUNCIL DISPOSITION: None. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTION TAKEN: ou,lA Hawkeye filed annual reports and payed the City the 3% franchise fee which was $4,876. Hawkeye subscriber agreements and extension policies were considered. Shaffer presented complaint and information request record, Shaffer presented outlook on present and presented access equipment usage (including the new public libary situation). The 3% franchise fee uses towards access channel and user support were discussed. The tri -annual review of the cable system (required by Ordinance 78-2917) will be started in a few months (to be completed next April, 1982). Hawkeye introduced new employees. Hawkeye has 233 homes left to pass, and several apartment complexes. Issues involving what programming services are offered in Iowa City and why and who controls or has input into what services are selected, was discussed. Johnson requested that ATC company issue statements on these issues. Pepper and Terry were re-elected as chairperson and vice -chairperson respectively of the BTC. Fund raising and telethon guidelines were discussed - the issues being on which cable channel they should be shown. The BTC decided channel 5 was the most appropriate option until further research can be done. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 4:34 P.M. MINUTES; Moved by Terry, seconded by Madsen to approve minutes. Unanimously approved. ANNOUNCEMENTS: The NFLCP (National Federation of Local Cable Programmers) Midwest Regional Conference is being held in Chicago April 24-26. Several car loads of persons from Iowa City are going. _t MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES r- PUBLIC DISCUSSION: None. SPECIALIST REPORT: Shaffer reported BTC and Hawkeye have filed their annual reports, including performance tests of the cable system and financial reports. These are filed with the City Clerk. This is required by Ordinance 78-2917 and had been complied with by the cable company. The 3% franchise fee from Hawkeye for 1980 revenues has been received by the City, totaling $4,876. Hawkeye's extension policy was submitted to the BTC. This policy affect those persons living 200 or more feet from an existing cable network. Shaffer passed out copies of Hawkeye's subscriber agreements. Shaffer presented his complaint book which records all Iowa Citians complaints and/or information requests about the cable system. Also included in this record are all information requests from other cities, access centers and companies (a total of 63 requests). Shaffer reported the equipment housed at the public library was being used at maximum capacity. Equipment housed at Hawkeye is being used at maximum capacity as well (this includes production and editing equipment). Shaffer stated the facilities in the new public library should ease this situation. The library facility will be composed of Hawkeye's video and control room with one editing system and two color portapaks and the library's AV lab with a second editing system which is 1/2 to 3/4 inch and three 1/2 inch color portapaks and an audio recording and editing facility. Some of this equipment was funded by NTIA (National 1 Telecommunications Information Administration). Although more facilities will be made available (with the addition of the library's AV lab) there will be no staff to run the library section except Shaffer. Only projects that are cable TV related can be worked on in the AV lab and Shaffer, and/or one of his part- time staff or interns must accompany anyone who is working there. Perhaps at some point funds from the franchise fee could be used in part to help staff a position in the AV lab. Eskin inquired about a second studio at Hawkeye. Blough stated the second studio would exist at Hawkeye's offices primarily for channel 5, local origination company purposes. Johnson inquired what would happen if someone complains if there was no equipment available when they needed it. Pepper responded they could file a complaint with Shaffer who would try to mediate the situation. Pepper spoke to the responsibility on behalf of the cable company and the City in seeing that the production capability of the community access channels and the users ke developed to keep up with the demand. The -current situation is an indication of success Shaffer and Kalergis have had in developing the local access uses of the cable system. Also Pepper spoke of the need to create a non-profit public access group who could also and more specifically work in the interests and needs of the community access channel (26) and the users of this channel. This group could include raising money for staffing, production equipment, etc. for channel 26. Pepper and Johnson believed it important that the 3% franchise fee continue to be used for the regulation, administration, facilitation and promotion of the access channel uses. Johnson queried what incentives exist to keep Hawkeye interested in and supportive of access over the balance of the franchise period? Blough responded that they were interested in keeping this franchise, and knowing the community support of the access related channel and programming, and provides an incentive for us to remain supportive of access. Shaffer reported that Ordinance 78-2917 requires a three year review of the cable system which the BTC needs to undertake in the next few months. Shaffer reported there were 16 complaints in the preceding month, most of which dealt with not having cable yet (which should be completed by the end of April, 1981 according to Hawkeye) or underground IN MICRDFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40INES 7fe? clean-up which is being attended to. Shaffer said the NTIA grant equipment has been ordered and should be arriving in 30 to 60 days. Shaffer reported he and Johnson had been working as a subcommittee to get the word about access out to the public (as well as legal rights, services available, etc) which Johnson will report on later. Finally, Shaffer noted the City Council live cablecasts' were underway and noted most of the 8 production crew were trained volunteer community producers and that to date there was a positive public response to the City Council cablecastings. HAWKEYE'S REPORT: Blough introduced Dick Hindeman the new production person for Hawkeye; Jay VanRiper the new marketing director for Hawkeye and V. Koester the new chief engineer for Hawkeye. Hawkey has 233 homes left to pass in Iowa City, including Westwind Condominums, MacBride Avenue, Westgate Street (apartments) Esther and Dover Streets, Bloomington to Van Buren, Grant and Rundell, North 7th Avenue and Lower West Branch Road. Blough said Hawkeye has over 6000 subscribers now. Ten thousand subscribers is the long-range goal of Hawkeye. Blough said there were still several apartment buildings in Iowa City not wired because the landlord did not sign an agreement with the company (affecting possibly as many as 1000 units). Johnson queried about the activities of the newly formed County Telecom- munications Commission. It was concluded little would result from the commission for a while. Madsen asked for a clarification of the Extension Policy from Hawkeye which read, as submitted, "Ten new requests for service for 1/4 mile of new plant including necessary new interconnecting trunk". It was suggested Hawkeye include a density figure or cost per foot figure or another alternative so customers could better expect or understand how they were affected by the extension policy. The extension policy affects those persons living beyond 200 feet of an existing cable network and will clarify under what conditions Hawkeye will pay for the necessary wiring to reach those units. A second and necessary question is what will it cost customers who do not qualify under the extension policy (a per foot figure or some variation thereof).. Blough said he would submit two alternative policies at the next BTC meeting. Kalergis distributed a package describing the various satellite services available and which are received in Iowa City (as requested by Johnson). Pepper inquired about ATC Arts, a new cultural arts package offered by satellite free of charge. Blough offered some incite into how ATC decides what satellite offerings can be carried on their systems. The factors included: utilization of the limited channel space, .long-term contracts offered by the packagers, complete marketing programs offered by the packagers, etc. Blough contended ATC has the right to put on whatever they wish with regards to programming. Pepper framed the issue, saying the basic question seemed to be: Is cable a common carrier, or should it be? and should cable operators be able to control the hardware and software of the cable TV busines? Finally, is not the market place supply and demand situation (so that all programming is offered in that which there is a demand for will survive) a very good way to pursue it? Johnson and Pepper expressed their objections to communities not having more to say in what programming it may receive. ATC is now bnth programmer and distributor of signals. It was brought out that initally Iowa City chose ATC as the franchisee and the program offerings they included in their original proposal. The issue the BTC faces i MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES F n ri u applies primarily to ongoing determinism in programming. Questions such as these will be brought before Congress in the next session, as well as issues involving the telephone industries entrance into cable TV competition. Johnson requested a statement from Blough on ATC's policies at the next BTC meeting pertaining to the company's perspective on: 1) why the cable companies should not be common carriers; 2) why it is not desirous to have local input or choice of what can or can't be seen on cable TV locally; 3) why the best way to pursue programming is to have large multiple system operators acting as gatekeepers. Kalergis brought attention to prototype guidelines for fundraisers/telethons on channel 26 that she and Shaffer have worked on. There were a variety of responses to the guidelines and having telethons on channel 26, ranging from prohibiting such activities to regulating them in some form. The only current regulation affection these policies come from the Access Guidelines which state the local access channels cannot be used for commercial purposes. The issue needs to be dealt with soon because a telethon has bee scheduled May 9 on channel 26. There was no agreement on the proposed guidelines. There was concern expressed for using the public access channels for any commercial or profit purposes. Terry moved the telethon should be on channel 5 (Hawkeye's local origination, commercial channel) or a leased cable channel. Madsen suggested at the next BTC meeting the issue of telethons as a viable programming form and/or whether they should be on channel 26 or another channel be discussed. Kalergis reported a new show on the first and third Monday of each of month, the first show being on May 4 (on channel 26, the community access channel). This show will include five minute live free time segments for anyone interested in participating. Eskin inquired about the $5,000 per year for two contiguous years offered by HawkeyeA n support of local access programming. Kalergis said the first meeting of a citizen advisory committee would take place about the time of the opening of 'the new public library and money should start being administered in July, 1981. Terry moved Johnson's report on citizen information and Madsen's records report be moved to the next BTC meeting. Seconded by Madsen. i ELECTION OF BTC OFFICERS: Moved by Madsen, seconded by Johnson the current chairperson (Pepper) and vice - chairperson (Terry) continue in their present positions. Unanimously approved. ADJOURN: Madsen moved to adjourn. Seconded by Terry. Unanimously approved. Adjournment at 6:50 P.M. Respefully submit d, William Drew Shaf er Broadband Telecommunications Specialist 4- MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES 7fe? a, " Minutes Broadband Telecommunications Commission April 28, 1981 Page 1 MINUTES BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION - SPECIAL MEETING TUESDAY, CIVIC CENTER OCONFERENCE I 1981 ROOM ohnson, Pepper, Madsen, Terry. MEMBERS PRESENT: Eskin, J MEMBERS ABSENT: None. urn ir OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Wal ,Synthesis Young ArtssWorkshop,Gazette;NewUnbted &Acta on from for Youth; Glenn Dickinson; Kalergis of Hawkeye. i STAFF PRESENT: Shaffer and Scholten. I RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: None. MATTERS PENDING COMMISSION -COUNCIL DISPOSITION: The BTC needs to consider whether fund raisers or telethons are viable annel 26, or morerappropriately belong on Hawkeyeasnlocal hcommercial Cha nel 5do they , SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTION TAKEN: jI The BTC discussed the advantages and disadvantages of having telethonson channel 26, the public access channel. Several issues arose, including what the definition of a commercial activity was and to whether a telethon If this is interpreted for non-profit agencies was a commercial activity. as a commercial activity it should not be permitted on the public access channel (commercial activities prohibited on the public access channel 26 by Ordinance 78-2917). The BTC decided to permit the May 9 telethon to take place on channel 26 as an experimental project. The results of this project are to be reported on by Shaffer and Terry in lieu of further discussion clarifying commercial activity. A formal motion was passed to this effect. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER: Meeting called to order at 4:45 P.M. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. _i 1 MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 4-- a - L - __ -AW - 'r - a 1 Minutes Broadband Telecommunications Commission April 28, 1981 Page 2 GUIDELINES FOR TELETHONS AND CHANNEL LOCATION OF TELETHONS: Pepper summarized the issue of whether telethons should be permitted as programming and whether they should be allowed on channel 26. Though Hawkeye had foreseen no problem with the BTC's suggestion to hold the telethon on Channel 5, they have subsequently felt this presented problems and should be held on Channel 26. Pepper stated the ordinance states the access channel cannot be used for commercial purposes. The public access guidelines state no advertising can be placed on the local access channels. To be determined is whether telethons put on by non-profit agencies requesting donations can be considered commercial activity. If not, there is no problem. If telethons are considered commercial activity, the BTC would find the telethon activity inappropriate for channel 26. The BTC could recommend the Council amend Ordinance 78-2917 to permit commercial (fund raising) activity by non-profit agencies on channel 26, if appropriate. In an effort to further clarify the nature of the problem, Madsen requested the people organizing the telethon explain why they feel it should be on channel 26. Blair, the coordinator for the May 9 telethon, stated he started the project six months ago, after examining ways to promote the participating j agencies in the hope that this would bring participation in and viewing of jI access Channel 26. He believed the community access channel is most appropriate because of the community involvement by local agencies in this project. Kalergis indicated that many of the community agencies involved i are interested in having the telethon on Channel 26. Pepper posed to Scholten the question facing the BTC. Is a telethon put on by non-profit agencies necessarily a commercial activity? Pepper stated the only analagous rules the FCC has applies to public broadcasters, which states such fund raisers cannot be used to benefit a third party (public broadcasters can hold fund raisers or telethons on behalf of the public broadcaster itself). There are no FCC rules governing such uses of the public access or cable TV channels. Kalergis indicated that there is, in fact, no definition on non-commercial in either the ordinance or the public access rules. Scholten stated this was an area within the BTC jurisdiction to determine. He stated "commercial" can be broadly defined to include any exchange of funds or narrowly to include only those activities by profit-making entities to enrich themselves through the sale of goods or services. Madsen sought to clarify, and was assured by Scholten that there are currently no definitions that would forbig our taking a stand for or against this telethon and that there is no legal rule that we are bound by and we may come to whatever conclusion we wish. Johnson queried as to what the underlying and/or practical advantages to Iowa City for having the telethon from channel 26 the public access channel would be or what is lost by putting the telethons on channel 5. MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 1:: L". Minutes Broadband Telecommunications Commission April 28, 1981 Page 3 It was brought out that philosophically the community groups can use channel 26 as a way of getting more information out about themselves (in fact, one of the intents of the channel). Using this channel to ask for fund raising is an extension of that philosophy. The community channel is therefore for any community use. Eskin supported this saying this project was initiated by and is being done for and by community members (which is one of the determining factors for putting programming on channel 26 as opposed to channel 5). Putting the telethon (or any program) on channel 5 conotes cable company initiation, producing and/or control and that the only relevant rulemaking by the BTC should be to require that those soliciting contributions must identify themselves and tell where the money they raise is going. Papper asked that a general policy (as opposed to one for this telethon) be formulated that is not arbitrary and would not involve us in making ad hoc decisions in the future. Johnson clarified the issue as saying no one is disapproving the telethon. Th only issue is should it be on Channel 26 or .Channel 5. Kalergis said the resjponsibility for determining what goes on Channel 5 is Hawkeye's alone. Shaffer reported he had done some research on other access systems' experience with telethons. Shaffer contacted four of the largest and oldest access centers in the country. Madison, Wisconsin MCAC, a three year old access center, permits telethons and has had one telethon in their history. Bloomington, Indiana access center, seven years old, said they also permit telethons. The San Diego, California access center does not permit telethons or fund raisers because the cable company (Cox) prohibits activities of this kind. East Lansing, Michigan access center does not permit telethons. None of these access centers have any defined access policies. Scholten added the BTC can make some kind of policy now and can feel free to'change the policy as necessary. He also said he believed whatever was decided upon there would be no need to amend the ordinance, as determining what goes on this channel can be, in part, determined by the BTC. Concern was expressed that telethons might take too much of the available cablecasting time. A priority listing of programming (i.e. standard) programming gets first priority while fund raisers get last priority, etc.) was one method of resolving this issue suggested. Attempts were made to define commercial vs. non-commercial activity to the BTC's satisfaction. Pepper said a distinction could be made between "commercial" non-profit activity such as Girl Scouts selling cookies over "non-commercial" non-profit programming. The average access program does not solicit funds. Eskin drew the distinction between solicitation of donations for products and in support of ongoing services as distinct from the sale of products and services. j MICROFILMED BY JORM MICRO_ LAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 17yr I C� i Minutes Broadband Telecommunications Commission April 28, 1981 Page 4 Kalergis defined non-commercial as any activity or sales performed by a non-profit entity. Johnson said the selling of a christmas tree is a commercial activity, although the activity may be performed for non-profit purposes. Based on his observation with the BBC and public broadcasting in this country, both of which started as wholly "non-commercial" enterprises have developed to the point where commercialism is allowed. This commercialism (the displaying of acknowledgement of sponsors) has slowly crept into both insitution. Is the we onet channels nnel (channel 26)ethateis rn by rany9pperson's Dr is it t definition for non- commercial purposes only. Pepper framed the issue at that point saying that it was not whether the telethon should take place. The issue is whether fund raising for non- profit organizations is a commercial activity that should be prohibited from channel 26 or whether fund raising for non-profit organizations is appropriate for the access channel. Shaffer interjected the problem of the community's ability to identify the access channels. This is a problem faced in many cities across the country, including even the Iowa City access channels. This telethon is sponsored by, produced by and for community agencies, who through their use of the access channel, could better identify it as a useful resource for themselves. By this proposed use, the audience could also better identify the channel as a place for community related activities. Terry had concerns for (1) the possible monopolization of the channel for fund raising purposes, (2) the act of fund raising being to him a profit endeaor and (3) the roblem of r the inis ration fundsvrai ed to see how watching m ch of the f ndinoseactually kept locally. of the Madsen raised the point that in this case the main agency involved is United Way. This agency has a respectable reputation in Iowa City. Also, whatever the BTC decides to do today can be changed. The BTC can remain flexible and responsive in future cases. Kalergis mentioned the public access channel was now being used for spots created by the character generator to communicate the promotion of events and the sale of such items as tickets to benefits for non-profit groups. This use concerned some of the commissioners. Eskin reported she spoke to David Korte, CTIC (Cable Television Information Center) consultant, who believe ereHeisa o thatlem with using the access channel for fund raising Purposes. is no FCC regulations governing use of access channels and that the decision whether to use the access channel for fund raising purposes was up to the BTC. Terry moved to allow the present request for the telethon, May 9, 1981 to go on channel 26 as an experimental project in the absence of a clear %4g MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES M...., %'IN Minutes Broadband telecommunications Commission April 28, 1981 Page 5 definition of non-commercial or commercial activity as defined in paragraph A, Section 14-83 of Ordinance 78-2917. Terry further moved the BTC will address the issue of non-commercial as pertaining to fund raising on channel 26, and the extent to which it should exist, if at all. Seconded by Madsen. Unanimously approved. It was requested Shaffer and Terry work as a subcommittee to keep up with the telethon project and report back to the BTC at the next meeting. The next meeting will be May 19, 1981, 4:00 PM in the Civic Center Conference Room. ADJOURN: Terry motioned to adjourn. Seconded by Madsen. Unanimously approved. AdMo ment6.3 P.M. Respectfully sub 'tted, William Drew Shaffer, Broadband Telecommunica- tions Specialist. MICROFILMED BY IJORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES ...7 MINUTES COMMITTEE ON COMMUNITY NEEDS MAY 6, 1981 IOWA CITY RECREATION CENTER, ROOM B MEMBERS PRESENT: Pecina, McCormick, Cook, Whitlow, VanderZee, Bonney, Daly, Lockett, Haldeman, Barker MEMBERS ABSENT: McGee STAFF PRESENT: Milkman, Tyler, Hencin, Barnes SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION Minutes of April 1, 1981 were amended to read that the minutes of the March meeting were approved. The date of the Public Hearing was April 21, 1981. Minutes were approved as amended. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Vicky Grube of the Community Coordinated Child Care program explained the work done by the organization and their need for funding. She stated that one of their largest expenses was publishing a directory of child care facilities in the community. Previously the University of Iowa has subsidized the printing costs. However, the costs have risen sharply in the past year and the University has indicated that it will not be able to cover the full cost. 4 c's needs approximately $500 to pay the remainder of the printing costs. McCormick suggested charging a small fee for membership or from centers which are mentioned in the directory. Bonney stated that the Committee would make a recommendation on this matter at the next meeting. Hencin stated that the City Council had discussed two potential uses for CDBG funds. One was using contingency funds for curb ramp repair. Certain Council members had cited approximately 10 curbs downtown which need removal. The estimated cost for the project is $4,000. Hencin stated that more specific cost estimates and location maps would be presented to the Committee. McCormick pointed out that the City might pay for the curb removal. The second area Is the excess contingency funds set aside for the Senior Center. Hencin stated that $114,000 had been set aside for cost overrun. 'Thus far, approximately $75,000 has been encumbered. Council members raised the possibility of using the remaining $39,000 to complete the third floor of the Senior Center. No users of the space were designated by the Council. Bonney requested that both items be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES If'? i COMMITTEE ON COMMUNITY NEEDS May 6, 1981 Page 2 KURZWEIL READING MACHINE Milkman recapitulated that the machine was not an eligible item for CDBG funds. Lockett suggested that the Library Services Construction Act might be an avenue for obtaining federal funds which could be used to purchase the machine. Revenue sharing funds were also suggested as a possible source. HOUSING COMMISSION REPORT VanderZee reported that the Housing Commission had supported CCN's proposals for site acquisition and housing rehabilitation and code enforcement. However, the Commission had questions about the proposed funding for the Frail Elderly project. He stated that the Commission was scheduling a workshop on congregate housing in order to investigate alternative possibilities for providing facilities for the frail elderly. CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING y Whitlow reported that the advocates of Independent Living and the Family Life. Home had made very impressive presentations at the City Council meeting. DATES FOR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS The Creekside Neighborhood Strategy Area Meeting will be held May 18, 1981. VanderZee, Haldeman, Whitlow, and Barker stated that they would attend. The North Dodge Street Area Neighborhood meeting will be held May 20, 1981. Whitlow and Daly stated that they would attend. The Iowa Avenue Area Neighborhood meeting will be held May 27, 1981. Barker and VanderZee stated that they would attend. Milkman explained that she saw the format for the meetings as follows: first, a presentation by CCN and staff on the specific proposals made concerning the particular neighborhood; second, comments from the residents; third, discussion of readjusting the proposals. I She suggested possibly encouraging the formation of Neighborhood Committees. Bonney pointed out that these committees might help accommodate the varying interests in the neighborhood. 1 WEATHERIZATION Hencin explained that his memo was meant to be a recapitulation of the Committee's position on weatherization which will be part of housing rehabilitation. Monies for weatherization will not be specifically earmarked but taken out of the total housing rehabilitation allocation. This would allow people to take out loans solely for weatherization; however, most homes will probably need more than just weatherization. MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I40INES %yi COMMITTEE ON COMMUNITY NEEDS May 6, 1981 Page 3 i OTHER BUSINESS light of the fact that the parcel of land whose sale was Bonney asked about the Progress being made on the undergrounding of utilities in to undergrounding had not been sold. pay for the Hencin explained that the undergrounding is already underway with the two alleys south of Burlington nearly completed. The bid for Phase II was recently let. The bids have been coming in significantly lower than engineering estimated. Hencin stated that the work is being done in anticipation of the sale of the hotel site. McCormick recommended that although the 4 C's is a worthwhile group, that supporting them financially would be committing the Committee to a project which needs to be annually refunded. She suggested giving the group verbal support and suggestions for other avenues for funding. Bonney suggested keeping a file a possible projects so that if any funds were left over the Committee would have a list of items to consider. Meeting adjourned. Prepared by: Andrea Ty er Minute Taker MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES -MOINES 7�vf MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION APRIL 27, 1981 CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Barcelo; Baumgartner; McCartt; McGuire; Portman; Reyes; Turner; Watson MEMBERS ABSENT: Yates (excused) STAFF PRESENT: Helling; Mejia; Williams GUESTS PRESENT: None RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: The Commission desires to discuss policy statements procedure for boards and commissions prior to implementation of a policy on this matter. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY MANAGER AND STAFF: Williams to send letters regarding speaking engagements to service clubs in the community; Portman and Baumgartner to write letter to Council regarding policy statement on boards and commissions. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: 1. Meeting called to order at 7:40 p.m. by Chairperson, Jeff Portman. 2. Turner moved and McGuire seconded that the minutes of February 23, 1981, be approved as submitted. Passed unanimously. 3. Staff Support. Linda Woito will be replacing Roger Scholten as staff support to the Commission. Commissioners' concerns regarding adequate legal staff support were discussed. Cases are presently up to date and no action was taken at this time. 4. Complaints Pending. a. E/S, 5-2-7905. Recommendation of Compliance Director of Iowa State Human Rights Commission is to administratively close. b. E/R, 7-10-7906 and E/R, 7-10-7907. Met with the complainant who is willing to cooperate; will now meet with respondent. MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 7-f0 MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION APRIL 27, 1981 PAGE 2 c. E/R, 9-18-7909. Will be brought up to date. 5. Cases Opened. Four cases were opened since last meeting. There are approximately 22 cases open at this time. 6. Cases Assigned. E/S, 1-2-8101 and E/A & S, 1-2-8101; Portman (Chair), Baumgartner and Watson. HAA, 1-20-8101; McGuire (Chair), Turner and Reyes. 7. Comments by Chairman. Portman encouraged Commissioners' involvement in all aspects of the Commission including training sessions, agenda setting and participation in educational projects. 8. Public Service Announcements. Watson rewrote old announcements and wrote some new ones. It was suggested that they be taped by Commis- sioners and sent to various radio stations on a rotating basis. Portman to contact radio stations regarding taping the announcements and notify Commissioners. Turner suggested an additional public service announcement regarding other pregnancy and discrimination problems; Watson to rewrite these. McGuire to write a sexual harassment public service announcement. 9. Iowa City Public Forum. Plans for a public forum in Iowa City were discussed. The purposes of the forum are: (1) to introduce state and local Commissioners, and (2) to elicit a response from the local community regarding their concerns. The proposed date for this forum is fall, 1981. Barcelo and Reyes will co-chair with Turner and Baumgartner as committee members. 10. Speaking Engagements. Letters were sent to the schools, however, no response was received. It was suggested that the fall would be a good time to recontact the schools. Williams to send letters regarding speaking engagements to service clubs in the community. Portman and Barcelo to work with Williams on a mailing list of service clubs. 11. Newsletter. McGuire to write sexual harassment section. Commissioners encouraged to call in suggestions for articles. One suggestion received from the citizen input questionnaire was to have a section in the newsletter discussing local legislation. 12. Brochures for Local Businesses. Watson requested information from the Small Business Association regarding personnel policies. Will report again when information is received. 13. Prisoner Assistance at Law School Bill. The bill did not pass out of committee; .may be brought up again in the fall. Baumgartner attended area legislators meeting regarding this bill. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INES 160 7" MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION APRIL 27, 1981 PAGE 3 14. City Communication Policy. Helling expressed Council's concern that boards and commissions do not make policy statements on behalf of the Council. Council wants policy statements to be made through the Council or with their approval. Helling advised that he is writing a Policy procedure at this time and he anticipates distributing it within 30 days. This will probably be discussed at the Commission meeting after it has been formulated. The Commission expressed their desire to give input prior to submission to City Council for action. Helling said he would convey their desire to discuss this to the Council. Portman and Baumgartner will draft a letter to Council regarding this issue. 15. Non -Discrimination Ordinance - Section 18-32. It appears there are gaps in the policy. Marital status not covered in housing; children and sexual preference also not covered; credit section lists only physical disability, not mental disability. This is to be reviewed by the Commissioners and put on the agenda for next month. 16. HUD Equivalency. The Human Rights Commission could qualify for financial assistance because of the housing section of the I ordinance. The present ordinance appears to satisfy the requirements. Planning and Program Development will apply for this using information supplied by Williams. 1 17. Staff Report. The previous month's activities were discussed by Williams. She explained the Fact Finding Conference method which she has scheduled. This is done after a complaint has been filed to get clear on the issue and attempt to mediate. Both the complainant and respondent are present with the Civil Rights Specialist as mediator. Two conferences have been scheduled and a report will be given at the next meeting. 18. Next Meeting. May 27, 1981; 7:30 p.m.; City Manager's Conference Room. Agenda setting May 15, 1981. 19. Reyes moved and Barcelo seconded, that the meeting adjourn. Passed unanimously. 17-00 MICROFILMED BY 'JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES .I