Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-12-18 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES BOARD OF EXAMINERS OF PLUMBERS November 27, 1979 MLMBLR PRESENT: Ronald J. Burke Lt, Jamos Christensen, Paul Kent STAFF PRESENT: Ralph Taylor, Mike Kucharzak, Glenn Siders, Irene Shima OTHERS PRESENT: Fourteen people consisting of Master, Journeyman, and Apprentice Plumbers and other interested public. Meeting called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Taylor. Mr. Kucharzak indicated in opening comments that the staff had requested this meeting to discuss several concerns brought to the attention of the administra- tion. One concern deals with the practice of using the "Dawson Loop" in Iowa City. It has been alledged that the "Dawson Loop" although used occasionally by all the licensed contractors is not in the Uniform Plumbing Code and we have difficulty finding written evidence that it has been approved by any other municipality in the State of Iowa. He requested some guidance from the Board and from the trade industry regarding this practice whether or not it should be included in the Code as a Code Amendment or whether we should modify our practices of allowing this type of installation. Lengthy discussions followed regarding the first item on the agenda; 1. The "Dawson Loop". Should we allow it or not? The audience was asked for views regarding the need for a Code Amendment. Other questions were raised; "What is the "Dawson Loop"?" "What does it look like?" Ralph Taylor made several diagrams of the "Dawson Loop" vent on the blackboard and explained it to the Board and audience. Comments were made by local plumbers regarding the origination of the "Dawson Loop" and the good and bad conditions surrounding the use of this vent. More discussion regarding the installation of "Loop" vents in other cities such as Omaha, Des Moines, Davenport, and Cedar Rapids. The question was raised as to what procedure should be taken to make a decision to permit the use of the "Dawson Loop" vent or not to permit its, use. Mr. Kucharzak offered his help in this area by stating that if the Board moves to recommend to the City Council to amend the ordinance, the code itself would be amended to provide this type of venting system. If the Board moves to not allow this system, then an administrative directive would go out to the staff indicating that the code would be enforced as it is presently written on the books. Discussion followed with the request for a vote of the plumbers in attendance for continued use of the "Dawson Loop" vent. 10 votes - aye. 4 votes - nay. The Board tabled the matter until a future meeting. a 30a MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES mDimes -2- For clarification, Mr. Kucharzak informed the Board that until such time then the Board does take some action, we are going to have to suspend approval of any installations of this type. Mr. Kucharzak encouraged the Board and trade industry to bring this issue up again as soon as possible. Item #2: The Licensing Application and renewal procedures; Kucharzak ex- plained that criticism has been leveled against the staff and the Board in that we have not properly reviewed license applications regarding the length of apprenticeship or experience as a journeyman prior to receiving either journey- man or master's license as appropriate and the staff would certainly like discussion with the Board and the industry re: the role of the staff and the role of the Board in the licensing procedures. He also stated that we as staff appreciate the new application forms we are now using and we have simply been obtaining information from those forms and submitting them to the Board for review; we have not been doing any of the verifications. Apparently, the basis of the allegation is that there has been fraudulent material pre- sented to the Board at the time of licensing. Mr. Kucharzak indicated that he had not been able to find anybody that did receive a license based on erroneous information, nor did he find any incorrect facts given to the Board, in his limited research period. He also requested the opportunity to discuss this at this public forum for recommendations from the industry or from the Board as to how we should change our applications for licensing process. Suggestions were made for revisions regarding the length of apprenticeship along with the requirements of a letter of confirmation from the previous employer. Summary remarks - Staff understands that the Board will get together sometime in the future on the "Dawson Loop" for further guidance. Staff would also appreciate further discussion with trades people on code enforcement policies; we are doing the same thing with the electrical trade and we are finding this very helpful to give guidance not only to the staff but to the City Council. Kucharzak indicated that he would request consideration of several items in future meetings. The items are: 1. He would like some guidance from the Board and Industry on licensing fees and permit fees for 1980; 2. Area of pressure relief valves on water heaters in residential installations; code requirements and field practice. Kucharzak welcomed any other items for discussion that could he put on future agendas. None was submitted. Meeting adjourned by the Chairman. Respectfully submitted, Ralph J� Taylor, ecretary MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES '10111ES LA MINUTES COt•LMi'PrEI? ON COMMUNITY NEEDS DECEMBER 5, 1979 -- 12:00 NOON RECREATION CENTER -- MEETING ROOM B MEMBERS PRESENT: Swisher, Amidon, Hall, Pecina, Bonney, Barker, Clark, McCormick, VanderZec MEMBERS ABSI'.NT: Barfuss, Johnson, Ilaldeman, Horton Glll!S'I:S PRESENT: Ann Gorman (Citizens for Lighting and Safer Streets) STAFF PRESENT: Milkman, Wilkinson, Knight, Flaherty, Schmeiser, Keller RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: 1. That the City Council take into consideration all the aspects of the request from the Citizens for Lighting and Safer Streets for improved lighting in the area defined by the boundaries of Brown/Burlington and Clinton/Dodge. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Chairperson Swisher called the meeting to order and called for consideration of the minutes of the October 31, 1979, meeting. Barker moved, and Ilall seconded, that the minutes be approved as circulated. Motion carried unanimously. Citizens for lighting and Safer Streets: Anne Gorman, representing the Citizens for Lighting and Safer Streets, explained that this group is interested in improving the lighting on streets where instances of assault and harassment are prevalent. A test area has been established using Brown/Burlington and Clinton/Dodge as the boundary. In answer to questions by Committee members regarding the installation and billing of these proposed lights, she explained that Iowa -Illinois Gas and Electric Company would be responsible for installing the lights while the City of Iowa City would be responsible for the bills. Estimates for yearly billings ranged from $5800 to $8400 per 100 lights. She further explained that the group is in the process of assembling a petition that will be presented to the City Council in the future. McCormick expressed concern that the petition not be overloaded by students while forgetting about the permanent residents in the area. Ms. Gorman also indicated that the City Council will be making a walking tour of the test area some time in the future. McCormick moved, and Hall seconded, that the City Council take into consideration all the aspects of the request from the Citizens for Lighting and Safer Streets for improved lighting in the area defined by the boundaries of Brown/Burlington and Clinton/Dodge. Motion carried unanimously. Committee Business: Committee members were asked to consider the following items for action at the January meeting: (a) election of officers, (b) goals and objectives, (c) bylaws, and (d) vacancies on the Committee. ,230.3 FIICROFILMED By JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES H INES Committee on Community Needs December 5, 1979 Page 2 Update on Neighborhood Site Improvements: Pat Keller, Planner/Program Analyst, presented an update on the tree planting project which was funded under the Neighborhood Site Improvements Program. He explained that a total of $21,000 had been allocated for the project and that 361 trees had been planted. The total amount spent on this project was $18,500. He also explained that if any tree had not been planted within a week, it was picked up and given to someone on a waiting list for a tree. The Camp Fire Girls provided assistance to those elderly and handicapped who requested help in getting their tree planted. Bruce Knight, Planner/Program Analyst, presented an update on the Northside, Hickory Hill, and highland Neighborhoods. He indicated that meetings had been held with the residents of the Northside and hickory Hill areas and that the residents had decided to proceed with the sidewalk repair program as outlined by the staff. He further explained that the curb and gutter project planned for the highland area has proven to be much more expensive than the budget allocated because complete sidewalk re- placement would also be required. The staff recommends that this project be dropped and replaced with something else. It was the consensus of the Committee that a neighborhood meeting be held in order to get the residents' ideas for another project. shelters to help keep the cold air from blowing through. Marker asked if anything could be done to put a skirt around the bottom of the bus shelters that are now on order have been ordered with skirts Keller indicate) that the and that it would M probably be possible to add skirts to the existing shelters. Barker indicated that this project. RP escrow funds for bus shelters could in all probability be used to help with Monitoring of CDBG Comprehensive Planning Elements: Don Schmeiser, Senior Planner, was present to update the Committee on several elements of the Comprehensive Plan. tie indicated that the new zoning ordinance is being reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission and that the new zoning map will be the final item reviewed by Planning and Zoning. The City Council would like to adopt the new zoning ordinance sometime next spring. The Planning and Zoning Commission will be holding a public hearing sometime in March and will then forward their recommendation to the City Council. Regarding the Foster Road Study, Mr. Schmeiser indicated that the draft of the study hos been completed and has been sent to the Planning and Zoning Commission and to staff for comment find review. Ile further indicated that in all probability Foster Road will not be developed as a continuous network. Ile also explained that in order to amend the Comprehensive flan the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council must both hold public hearings. A public hearing has been scheduled for the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on December 20, after which a recommendation will he sent to the City Council. Area studies will be conducted by staff in an attempt to identify certain developed areas and undeveloped areas for detailed study. Two of the areas suggested are the Northside area and an expanded area to the east which includes the Small Cities area (near Southside area). In looking at the Southside area, particular interest MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Committee on Community Needs December 5, 1979 Page 3 will be placed on two items, (a) the land consumptive use designation and (b) retail uses for the area. Regarding the Northside, he indicated that staff will be looking at the study prepared jointly by the University of Iowa and the City of Iowa City under the Innovative Grant Program. In reviewing the study, staff will be evaluating the data provided and looking at what can be done to help alleviate the problems identified. Regarding the Subdivision Ordinance, Mr. Schmeiser indicated that a rough draft of this ordinance is complete and will be reviewed and completed in final form immediately after the new zoning ordinance is completed. This ordinance will include design standards for new developemnt. The annexation study is being reviewed and studied by a joint city/county fringe committee with regard to areas outside the city limits that will be developed in the future. An outline for this study has been drafted. Marianne Milkman, Planner/Program Analyst, updated the Bikeways Plan progress. She explained that a draft has been completed and that a public hearing is planned for February by the Planning and Zoning Commission. She further explained that this plan will include elements to assist in (1) education, (2) implementation, (3) maintenance and (4) enforcement of regulations. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Prepared hycAAlru:17(i/CG [l e:r� Sandra S. Wilkinson, PPD Secretary MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 11011JES h MINUTES IOWA CITY PLANNING $ ZONING COMMISSION INFORMAL MEETING NOVEMBER 13, 1979 -- 7:30 P.M. LAW LIBRARY MEMBERS PRESENT: Lundquist, Vetter, Jakobsen, Blum, Lehman MEMBERS ABSENT: Kammermeyer, Ogesen STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Schmeiser Review of the draft Bikeways Report and Plan. Discussion; no action taken. Review of the proposed new zoning ordinance. The Commission reviewed sections of the proposed new zoning ordinance. Changes discussed are on file in the Department of Planning and Program Development with Don Schmeiser. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Prepared MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES 0230el 8 MINUTES IOWA CITY PLANNING $ ZONING COMMISSION INFORMAL MEETING DECEMBER 3, 1979 -- 7:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Lundquist, Blum, Ogesen, Jakobsen, Vetter MEMBERS ABSENT: Kammermeyer, Lehman STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Schmeiser, Ryan, Milkman, Laverty SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Public discussion of any item not included on the agenda. Blum indicated he had received a letter from the City Council requesting the Commission develop criteria for determining public housing sites. lie requested the staff to place the letter on the Commission's formal agenda for Thursday for discussion. Public discussion of an ordinance amending Sections 8.10.3A.8, .47 and 8.10.8.1E, and adding Sections 8.10.3A.64C and 8.10.8.4 to Appendix A of the Code of Ordinances of Iowa City, Iowa, providing a definition for Rooming House and regulating its permitted use. A memo regarding the subject ordinance from Mike Kucharzak, Director of Housing and Inspection Services, was discussed. Further discussion; no action taken. 5-7926. Public discussion of a final Planned Area Development Plan of Arborhill, Phase II, located on Washington Street, cast of Green Mountain Drive; 45 -Jay limitation period: 12/20/79. Mr. Bruce Glasgow, the applicant, indicated that a preliminary and final LSRD plan and final PAD plan had already been approved by the City for the entire tract, in- cluding the subject property. Boothroy stated that he had found no evidence to support Mr. Glasgow's contention, but would certainly work with Mr. Glasgow to resolve j the matter. No action taken. I Bikeway Report and Plan discussion. Marianne Milkman gave a short presentation of the Bikeway Report. The Commission decided that a public hearing on the report should be set in January when the University resumes classes so as to permit as much opportunity for public input. Further discussion; no action taken. Foster Road Report. Kevin Laverty gave a presentation of the Foster Road Report taken. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES Discussion; no action c2 3011 if Planning and Zoning Commission December 3, 1979 Page 2 i LSRD Pentacrest Garden Apartments. Blum requested that this item be placed on the Commission's agenda for discussion on Thursday. No action taken. FORMAL 61EETING DECEMBER 3, 1979 Consider holding a public hearing on Thursday, December 20, 1979, at 7:30 p.m., on the following amendments to the Comprehensive Plan: 1. An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map deleting Foster Road in part or in its entirety, and/or changing Foster Road's location and functional classification. 2. An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan (Trafficways Plan) modifying Trafficway Design Standards. The Commission voted to set a public hearing on December 20, 1979, by a 5-0 vote. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Prepared by: \ \: - ..� ` ��•t,Ca j Douglas Boothroy, P1 nner rogra Analyst MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES FIOIDES NJ I NU'IT S IOWA CI'T'Y PLANNING f, ZONING COMMISSION I1f:CIihIISIEI( L, 1979 -- 7.30 P,h,. CIVIC (:ENI'EI1 COUNCIL CIIAMBI:RS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lundquist, Vetter, ,Jakobsen, Blum, Ogesen MEMBERS ABSENT: Kammermeyer, Lehman STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Wilkinson, Cook, Milkman RECOMMENDATIONS 'f0 THE CI'T'Y COUNCIL: None None SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND ACTION TAKEN: Chairperson Blum called the meeting to order and asked if anyone present wished to discuss any item not included on the agenda. No one responded, Ile then called for consideration of the minutes of the meetings of October 29, November 8 (special meeting), and November 15, 1979, There being no corrections or additions, the minutes were approved as circulated. 5-7926• Public discussion of a final Planned Area Development Plan of Arhorhill, Phase 11, located on Washington Street, cast of Green Mountain Drive; 45 -day limitation Period: 12/20/79 Boothroy Presented an overlay of the area and explained that the request is for approval of a final Planned Arca Development Plan. proposeedd to intersect wIle further explained that the d in 1971 and that there was only one minor change preliminary PAD had been approve shown the final plan. This change shows eliminating one of the private drives ith Washington Street. He further explained that past records show that a preliminary and final Large Scale Residential Development Plan has been submitted and approved only for Arhorhill, Part I. Staff recommendation remains as stated in the Staff Report (that action be deferred). Bruce Glasgow, developer, stated that he had no objection to this item being deferred he does until theot December 20 meeting, Ile also indicated that he felt the records showed that however, nthatcheawoluldelikepPlanninproval of g andZonin efinal PAD submitted. because ofNtilelslightindicate, chan e. g g approval PP roval Jakobsen moved, and Vetter seconded, that action on the final Planned Area Development Plan of Arhorhill, Phase II, located on Washington Street, ountain cast of Green M Drive, he deferred until the next regular meeting. Motioncarried unanimously, ,Z3oy MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES t1011IES Planning and Zoning Cununission December o, 1979 Page 2 Public discussion of the liikeway Report and Plan. David Christ was present representing (1) his interest as part owner of a bicycle shop, (2) Bicyclists of Iowa City (BIC), and (3) his personal interest, lie expressed concern regarding bicycles as related to (1) bridges, particularly on Burlington and Iowa Avenue, (2) the cast/west problems of getting through the downtown area, and (3) the sidewalk problems on Park Road. Marianne Milkman, Planner/Program Analyst, presented a letter to the Commission from Tamara Schoenbaum in which Ms. Schoenbaum expressed her concerns regarding this topic. (letter attached) LSRD Pentacrest Garden Apartments. Blum expressed concern regarding the non-compliance of the Pentacrest Garden Apart- ments with the originally approved LSRD plan. His main concern centers around the fact that the driveway onto Court Street has remained open with parking spaces immediately opposite, allowing the residents to back directly onto Court Street. The Commissioners discussed possible alternatives for contacting the developer re- garding this matter. Jakobsen indicated that a letter had been sent to the developer but that he had failed to reply or submit an amended LSRD plan. Alternatives discussed included (1) individual contact with the developer, possibly by telephone, (2) communication with the City Manager and/or City Attorney, and (3) request for staff assistance in resolving the matter. After much discussion, the consensus of the Commissioners was that Mr. Blum would contact Mr. Clark and discuss the matter in ;in attempt to resolve the problems. Letter from City Council regarding public housing site. Blum indicated that he had drafted a letter in response to the letter received from the City Council. After some discussion regarding this item, it was decided to request time at the informal Council meeting on December 17 at which time several Commissioners would be present to discuss this matter with the City Council. Bruce Glasgow, developer, indicated that he thought it might be appropriate for someone to suggest to the Council that an attempt be made to purchase single family homes in Iowa City for this purpose. lie referred to Sioux City and their purchase of homes for this purpose. There heing no further business, the meeting was adjourned. i Prepared by � L (�["'C. �_ G(ic G�L r.,r c Sandra S. Wilkinson, PPD Secretary Approved by / I /, Jan Jakobs , Pf,Z Vice Chairperson MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIDIn ES 617 Holt h.enue Iowa City, Iowa 5224o 4 December 1979 Marianne Milkman City of Iowa City Re: Bikeways Dear Mrs. Milkman, Thank you for your memorandum. Since I cannot come to the meeting on December 6, I write to you to express our hopes and concerns. 1) We would like to see all main city roads offer better protection for bicyclists, e.g. Dubuque, Muscatine, Kirk- wood, Lower Muscatine etc. Although automobile drivers have learned in recent years to show more consideration, these streets are still harrowing stretches for people on two wheels. 2) Everything possible should be done to facilitate the use of bicycles for school children. If the streets leading to the schools are of low priority and lanes cannot be in- stalled, the curbs should be leveled - as for the handi- capped - to allow children to ride on sidewalks. In the case of junior and senior high school students, it seems particularly desirable to make their bike routes safer, since the distances are considerably greater and it is in vveryone'e interest to reduce teenage driving. (The Coral- ville strip,as an accessory route to Northwest Junior High School and West High School, is a particularly serious problem.) 3) In Europe, where roads are often narrow and traffic is heavy, many school children are killed in accidents invols- Ying bicycles. We should not promote bicycle transportation for children without continuous, practical, and comprehen- sive instruction in the safe use of bicycles. 4) Finally, a case where cars passively endanger bicyclists: We have had difficulty with the fact that on the two one-way streets which have bike -lanes, Jefferson and Market, vehicles are often parked in the bike -lanes, forcing cyclists dangerously far out into automobile traffic. This long list of desiderata should not, however, obscure our appreciation for the many improvements to promote the use of bicycles which the City has undertaken in recent years. Sincerely, Tamara Schoenbaum MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DEs MDLMES MINUTES RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION DECEMBER 11, 1979 4:30 P.M. CIVIC CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Gormezano, Hotka, Shepherd, Singer. MEMBERS ABSENT: Bolnick, Denniger. STAFF PRESENT: Tinklenberg. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL None. REQUESTS TO THE CITY MANAGER None. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTIONS TAKEN Hotka called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Singer moved, Gormezano seconded, to approve the minutes of the November 29, 1979 meeting as read. Approved unanimously. Solar Grants Project Tinklenberg reported on the status of the project. The only thing remaining, is to sit down with the four applicants and determine what will be done on their homes, prior to the solicitation of bids and proposals. Budget Review Singer moved, Shepherd seconded, that the RCC approve the budget as presented. Approved unanimously. Transportation Issues Tinklenberg distributed the City Manager's December 7, 1979 memo to the City Council re: Iowa City Transit System to the RCC members. After a short discussion the RCC deferred this item until the next meeting. Goals and Objectives Natural Resources: The RCC listed the following items under natural resources: o2,305— MICROFILMED 23oS MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Minutes Resources Conservation Commission Page 2 - solid waste - sewage treatment plant - physical resources Community Design: The RCC listed the following items under community design: - zoning - subdivision ordinance Singer left at 6:00 p.m. I The Commissioners decided to meet next on January 17 at 4:30 p.m. j Agenda: li - Solar Project update - Transportation - Natural Resources - Community Design i Chairperson Hotka adjourned the meeting at 6:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Roger Tinklenberg. James Shepherd, Secretary. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NES MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION November 28, 1979 CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Costantino, Kuhn, Marcus, McCartt, Munzenmaier, Yates. MEMBERS ABSENT: Braverman, McGuire, Reyes. STAFF PRESENT: Brown, Mejia, Ryan, Zukrowski. VISITORS: Karen Kalergis, KXIC; James Gogek, Daily Iowan. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: None. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF: Commissioners request Pat Brown to send letters to the following: (1) City Council regarding selection of new commissioners; (2) Human Rights Committee at the University; (3) citizens regarding the Sunrise Breakfast. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: I. The November 28, 1979 meeting was called to order at 7:15 pm by Agnes Kuhn. 2. The minutes of October 22, 1979 were approved as submitted. 3. In House Training: Conciliation Process. It was suggested that this discussion might be more useful in January when the new Commissioners could participate. Some comments made were that the phraseology not be too specific, you must assess the dynamics of the situation. It was suggested that more training is necessary at the time of the actual case; possibly model cases could be presented and discussion of the process held at that time. It was mentioned that generally the meetings should be held at the civic center for the purpose of neutrality although prior experience and cooperation of the respondant should be taken into consideration. The chair should do most of the speakin� and there should never be disagreement (at the conciliation meeting amongst the commissioners. Objections to the conciliation agreement should be noted but not specifically agreed upon at this time. 4. Commission's Annual Report. Thanks to Sophie the report was very complete and thorough. Some suggestions made for the next report were the addition of a statement by the chair as to the significant accomplishments and cases. It was also mentioned that the settlement specified should be put in the report as a learning device. 5. "Affirmative Action Compliance Analyst" job description. It was noted that in the requirements for the position, education v. experience do not exclude each other. Eight years experience was chosen using the formula of two years experience substitutes for one year of education. The possibility of adding " or related areas" to public or business administration degree was discussed. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Iowa City Human Rigrrts Commission Minutes November 28, 1979 Page 2 6. Letter to community organizations and individuals. Carla and Angelita drafted a letter which is now ready to be mailed. Marcus felt that the letter might be ill timed with other concerns on the citizen's minds. It was suggested to add to the letter an invitation to a Sunrise Break- fast. The purpose of the breakfast is to elicit a response from concerned people/organizations and show a solidarity of comnittment to human rights among the community. The Commissioners requested Pat Brown to rewrite the letter to be appropriate at this time and to include an invitation to the Breakfast. The date for the Sunrise Breakfast is Friday, December 7 at 7:30 a.m. 7. Cohabitation memo. Two points were made in regard to this: marital status is protected by the law and the no -spouse rule has been upheld as a business necessity. Secondly, it is generally accepted that if it looks like a marriage you can treat it as a marriage for the same policy reasons, i.e. scheduling vacations, potential discord on the job. Selection of New Commissioners. At last check there were only three applicants for three positions. Recruiting by commissioners appears to be necessary. Due to the time schedule for selection of new Commissioners by the City Council it was suggested that Pat Brown send a letter to the City Council expressing the Commissions' desire to be involved and requesting a postponement of Council action. This involvement is meant to be an aid to the Council and not an attempt to usurp their authority. A letter being circulated at the University of Iowa by one of the staff members regarding affirmative action was passed around. Costantino moved that the Commission send a letter to the person saying that this kind of communication is not to be treated lightly. Affirmative Action is not a joke and should be taken seriously. Pat Brown suggested that a letter from our Commission to the University Human Rights Committee might be more effective. Munzenmaier seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 10. Notification of Public Meetings. There is an internal policy that for a meeting to be held, Lorraine Saeger must have a copy of the agenda by noon two days in advance of the meeting. It was also stated that only items on the agenda could be discussed. Commissioners were reminded to call Sophie to put items on the agenda. Munzenmaier request- ed clarification of what is a "government body" in regard to the open meetings law. How are committees and conciliation teams classified? Sophie has sent a memo to legal regarding these two items and is await- ing their response. This will be put on the agenda for next month. 11. Committee Report on Ordinance Revision was deferred to next meeting. 12. Compliance Monitoring Guide. This was distributed and Munzenmaier noted that most of the provisions are geared to employment because most cases are in this area. He requested input on the report by Commissioners. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEmAR RAPIDS.DES '10111ES Iowa City Human Rights Commission Minutes November 28, 1979 Page 3 13. Open House. Specific areas to concentrate on were listed and additions requested from Commissioners. These areas are: a. Small business employment discrimination b. Sex role stereotyping c. Impact of economics on discrimination (possible keynote speaker) d. Development of new civil rights law e. Housing discrimination f. Universal implications of provincial music g. Jazz workshop (not lecture) h. Sociological and cultural adjustment for new Iowa Indochinese, Indians, Chicanos, migrant workers, Blacks, Spani,sh speaking people. i. Interracial family unit. J. Law enforcement effect on minorities k. Incorporate into the event a public hearing by the Commission where the people voice their impressions and concerns to the Commission. 14. Education Subcommittee report was deferred to next meeting. 15. Affirmative Action. Letter of introduction was sent. Mace is to send letter regarding why Carla Marcus, as the Commission representa- tive, was not notified of the last meeting. 16. Staff Report distributed. It was mentioned that The Iowa Civil Rights Act of 1965 which was distributed has additional amendments. Commissioners were reminded to supplement their reports with current amendments. 17. Complaints a. E/R, 10-11-7911. In investigation, waiting for response to questionnaire. b. E/RBS, 9-25-7910. In investigation, waiting for response to questionnaire. c. E/R, 9-18-7909. In investigation, waiting for response to questionnaire. d. E/Re, 9-13-7908. Respondants attorney claimed rights under the first amendment. This appears to be the case and administrative closure is sought. Costantino moved and Yates seconded for administrative closure. All voted aye. e. H/D, 7-23-7902. No cause finding. f. E/R, 7-10-7907. Awaiting response from respondant. g. E/R, 7-10-7906. Awaiting response from respondant. M MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Iowa City Human Rights Commission Minutes November 28, 1979 Page 4 h. E/S, 3-27-7903. Resolution reached; complaining party will request closure after terms of agreement have been met (proba- bly mid-December). Commission was not involved in settlement. i. E/R, 2-15-7902. Team to review. j. E/S, 5-2-7905. Representative of Commission is party to the agreement. This goes to legal and then to the Commission for final approval. k. E/R, 12-22-7810. Conciliation agreement drafted. Meeting to be scheduled. i 1. E/A, 11-28-7912. Discharge in employment on basis of age. 18. Morris et. al. v. Ambrose-Lovetinsky d/b/a Woodfields. Sophie and Roger Scholten will be going to the Liquor Board appeal meeting in Des Moines on November 29, 1979. 19. Next Commission meeting scheduled for December 17, 1979, 7:00 pm. Munzenmaier moved and McCartt seconded that the meeting be adjourned. Passed unanimously and adjourned at'10:00 pm. i i I j MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION JULY 26, 1979 7:30 pm COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Braverman, Costantino, Kuhn, Marcus, McCartt, McGuire, Munzenmaier, Reyes, Yates. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Scholten, Assistant City Attorney; Allen, Zukrowski. RESPONDENT: Harry Ambrose represented by J. Patrick White, Attorney at Law. VISITORS: Visitors in the audience were not asked to sign in. Members of the press as well as interested observers were present. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: The Commission accepted the public hearing officers' report, as amended, and directed the staff to certify the report to the City Council. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF: Staff was responsible for making the accepted modifications in the public hearing officers' report. Final copies of the report were to be available on July 27, 1979 by noon for signing by each Human Rights Commission member prior to submitting the report to the City Clerk. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: The meeting was called to order at 7:30 pm by Braverman. The public hearing panel's report was submitted to the Commission. A copy was made available to Patrick White. Several copies were distributed to members of the audience. Both attorneys requested of the Commission to be able to address various points of the report. Yates requested to know the purpose and nature of comments; and the length of comments. White indicated he wanted to address the various points of law in the report but not to reiterate points already made. His comments would address issues and points raised by the public hearing panel's report. The purpose of White's comments would address errors of law and other errors in the report. White felt it was his obligation to focus attention on those items he felt were in error. Scholten indicated he felt it would be beneficial for the Commission to hear White's input. McGuire felt such comments would be educational for the Commission. If such comments were prolonging the special session, McGuire felt appropriate action could be taken. Yates suggested a time limit for comments. Scholten suggested comments be made on a point by point basis. White would address those points of interest and concern as they were reached by the Commission. Marcus moved, and Costantino seconded, to allow both attorneys to make comments on the report. All Commissioners voted "aye" except for Yates who voted "naye." The motion carried. a 30(V FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOImES Iowa City Human Rights July 26, 1979 Page 2 Reyes moved, and Yates for attorneys' comment. item separately. After was defeated. ..mission Minutes seconded, that there be a five minute time limit per item Costantino preferred to be flexible and to address each discussion, all Commissioners voted "naye." The motion Braverman and McGuire then read the report to members of the Commission and to the public. The Chair opened discussion to Commission members. Scholten, after discussion began, requested that Conciliation Team members sit with the audience to avoid any possibility of Conciliation Team members privately discussing the report with other Commission members. Conciliation Team members left the panel and sat in the audience. Following are the changes that were made in the hearing panel's report and the discussion of the report. (For purposes of clarity and ease of reporting, all items addressed are aggregated by the page on which the item appeared in the public hearing panel's report. Consequently, all references are to the report submitted by the panel to the Commission.) PAGE FIVE: On Page 5 of the report, Marcus requested that the word "random" in point N4 be restricted or deleted since "random" indicates a nondiscriminatory practice. McGuire said her understanding was that the Commission could amend the Recommendations but not the Findings of Fact. Yates indicated that discussion could occur but that substantial changes, especially in the Findings of Fact, could not occur. Scholten was requested to clarify what changes the Commission, excluding the Conciliation Team, could make in the Report. Scholten said the Commission could accept, modify, or reject the report in whole or in part. Yates preferred to discuss the Findings of Fact but not to make substantive changes. Discussion would be for the purpose of clarifying the report. No action was taken on Marcus' input. The Chair called for questions on pages one through four up to the Rulings on Objections and Motions. There were no comments from Commissioners. PAGE TWO: White requested a change in wording in point N4. White requested the punctuation be clarified to show reference to one exhibit. A clarification was made by the Commission. PAGE FOUR: In reference to point H1, White requested the Commission to re-examine including Nelson as an aggrieved party. White indicated there was no evidence in the record that Nelson as a person was discriminated against. The record was not sufficient to show discrimination. Scholten indicated that while her complaint was the only factor in the record, there was no evidence either that she was not denied as well. Scholten said there is a question as to her entitlement to receive a remedy, but this is the Commission's decision to hear and act on her complaint. White said there was no chanceto cross-examine Nelson although the Respondent is entitled to this under the non-discrimination ordinance. Braverman indicated the public hear- ing officers reached a consensus to include Nelson since her complaint was valid. Braverman requested Commissioners to vote on whether Nelson as a complainant be included. McGuire abstained from voting; except for the conciliation team, all other Commissioners voted "aye." Nelson's complaint was included. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ,_. Iowa City Human July 26, 1979 Page 3 PAGE FIVE: Rights ._,mission Minutes Costantino, in agreement with Marcus, requested that the word "random" be deleted in point #4. After discussion, all Commission members, except for the conciliation team, and Yates who voted "naye," voted "aye" to remove the word "random." White reiterated his objection to point #5 and indicated that there was an error made in this ruling. Costantino also questioned the use of the word "free" in point #7. Commission members, except for the conciliation team, voted "aye" to change "free" to "equal." White objected to the clause "was the final and most obvious attempt to exclude Blacks" in point #7 since it refers to previous actions or events that are wholly outside the scope of the complaints because the hearing dealt only with the events of June 23. The finding was improper. However, Reyes indicated that public testi- mony on those other policies was raised, addressed and subsequently appropriate. Scholten indicated that these allegations are relevant since they act as proof of intent. Costantino felt this item important to showing "knowingly and recklessly." No one favored any other change in point 97 except to change "free" to "equal." Marcus requested a clarification of the meaning of point #8. Marcus questioned how this statement was a finding of fact. White requested the time involved be specified since he believed this critical to later conclusions and recommendations. Scholten did not address White's request. Yates indicated the time of 11:00 pm could be stipulated. Braverman favored not mentioning a time but Yates felt a time could be established. McGuire felt including a time strengthened the report. Costantino did not feel including a time was necessary since all facts cannot be included in a report. Except for Costantino and Braverman who voted "naye" to include the time, the other voting members of the Commission voted "aye." All voting Commissioners subsequently voted "aye" to include "at or about 11:00 pm." In reference to point #8, Scholten indicated that Tadlock should be excluded since he was not in the premises and did not have conversations with Ambrose. Tadlock was deleted. PAGE SIX: White, in reference to points #11, #12, and #13 indicated that the Respondents did not have notice that these items (no hats, music, and termination of a former employee) were alleged as discrimination. There were insufficient facts to support those find- ings of fact. However, the Commission agreed to sustain these three items in the report. In addition, White suggested that point #14 should also include the time. Scholten indicated it would be difficult for the Commission to identify the specific time and did not feel it was necessary. McGuire expressed that points #14 and #15 become clarified when a time is included in point #8. Braverman indicated the time will be included in point #8 on page five instead. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•OES riOnlES Iowa City ,Human Rights Commission Minutes July 26, 1979 Page 4 White questioned the reference to Ambrose in point 016 as a respondent. This needed clarification. Although Ambrose was named in the complaints filed, all other proceedings identified the "respondent" as Ambrose-Lovetinsky, Inc., d/b/a Woodfields. The public hearing had not considered Ambrose individually as a respondent. McGuire felt he was a respondent but may not be the only respondent. White felt there was a difference between Ambrose as an individual and an officer (of the corporation). White preferred not referring to Ambrose as a respondent. Scholten indicated that the notice of public hearing included Respondents (plural form) and was addressed to Harry Ambrose, Danny Lovetinsky and Ambrose-Lovetinsky, Inc, d/b/a Woodfields. Scholten also raised the point that there was no evidence regarding Lovetinsky's involvement as a personal respondent. There should be a finding of fact to that effect. Marcus questioned whether then the "Respondent" on page one of the report should be changed. A change in point 016 was approved to show Harry Ambrose's relationship to Woodfields as president of the corporation and manager. PAGE EIGHT: All voting Commissioners voted "aye" to clarify reference to "Respondent" in point 02. White objected to Ambrose being included; and that the findings of knowingly and recklessly were not supported. White felt this was a significant error. White indicated Ambrose did not commit the discriminatory act of a carding policy. This was not supported by findings of fact. Scholten indicated the intent of the language of the finding was sufficient to find a violation of Section 18-33(a). After some discussion by Commission members, point 02 on page eight, with the one aforementioned change, was upheld. White indicated the corporation was a person as was Ambrose; the question is who violated Section 18-33? White said that the Commission can not blur a distinction between a corporate entity and its officers. In point 02, Marcus moved to delete Ambrose as a respondent. This died for lack of a second. PAGE NINE: McGuire moved, and Reyes seconded, to clarify "Respondent." All voting Commissioners voted aye:/ Referring to the last paragraph prior to was not given considering the language it that the issue of an authorized practice White said notice was not properly given. was given pursuant to Section 18-43. the Orders, White indicated proper notice 18-43. Respondents did not have notice would be considered by the Commission. Scholten felt that sufficient notice White indicated a reference that no discriminatory act occurred by Lovetinsky be added as a conclusion of law. Scholten did not object. Marcus moved, McGuire seconded, to include the following: "the complainants failed to prove the Respondent, Daniel Lovetinsky, committed an unfair or discriminatory practice as prohibited by the Iowa City Human Rights Ordinance." Reyes, McGuire, Marcus, and Yates voted "aye" while Costantino and Braverman voted "naye". This was included as a fourth conclusion of law. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MolnEs Iowa City Human Rights Commission Minutes July 26, 1979 Page 5 McGuire questioned which discriminatory practice was referred to in point N1. Costantino suggested to Include in point N2 that other entrance and service Policies be nondiscriminatory. The intent was to include other policies so that they are not arbitrary and everyone has equal access to the establishment and its services. After substantial discussion of the appropriateness of the language and possible modifications, the Commission decided to retain N2 without any modification. The word "each" was to be included in point N4. White addressed damages for three complainants. White felt time spent in attending the public hearing was an inappro- grievanceriate factor thisconsidering notthe appropriate.damages. White stressedspent Nelson shouldsnot get damages because the record does not show the extent of her damage; Messrs. Martin and Penny should not be awarded damages since, although they have the right to file complaints, damages go to person who have been damaged. Filing a complaint and pursuing a complaint does not entitle a person to damages unless the individual is actually damaged. Scholten indicated that, based on other states' actions, there are sex discrimination cases that do not require a showing for each person that was damaged. Nelson's situation could be analogized. Damages to Martin and Penny were shown and sustainable. Braverman favored modifying the sum for Ms. Nelson to $400 to treat her equal with other complainants. White stressed that the amount of aggrievement and damage to Nelson is subjective since she was not present to testify and the right of cross-examination was not available. After Commissioners discussed the inclusion of Nelson and the amount of damages, Yates moved, and Costantino seconded, that all monetary damages be $400 to each complainant. Costantino, Marcus, Yates, and Braverman voted "aye" while Reyes and McGuire voted "naye." PAGE TEN: White indicated in reference to point N6 that the Human Rights Commission did not have the right to issue the order to certify to the licensing agency. Scholten recommended clarifying both references to "Respondent." McGuire moved, Yates seconded, to clarify the first "Respondent" with Ambrose-Lovetinsky, Inc. and the second "Respondent" with Harry Ambrose. All those voting, voted "aye." White made three additional closing points. He requested the Commission set aside their proceedings on the following grounds: I. The Commission failed to consider all the evidence as required by Section 18-43(a) of the ordinance; 2. All evidence, even if considered, would be insufficient to support the Finding of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and the Orders; and 3. The Commission invalidated its proceedings by engaging an outside attorney. authorityThere was no There was no formalor official a cial acts nrecorded ino so. it was not an ethe ooffir a ciallminutes. All proceedings should be set aside and remanded to the Commission. Scholten indicated the Commission considered all the evidence. Scholten would not address himself to the notice that was given; and said nothing prohibits the hearing panel to have an attorney. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110111ES Iowa City Human Rights Commission Minutes July 26, 1979 Page 6 The Commission rejected White's three point objection by accepting the report as modified. Staff would file a copy of the final report with the City Clerk after the report was signed. report. This would meet the requirement to certify the Yates moved, Reyes seconded, to accept the report as modified. All voting members voted "aye." I Yates moved, and Reyes seconded, to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 10;41 p.m. For purposes of additional reporting, a copy of the public hearing panel's report is attached. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIDIIIES