HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-12-18 Info PacketCity of Iowa C!'y
MEM®RANUUM
DATE: December 18, 1979
TO: GENERAL PUBLIC
FROM: DALE HELLING, ASST. CITY MANAGER
RE: AMENDMENT TO INFORMAL AGENDA
Special Informal Meeting of the Iowa City City Council at
7:30 P.M., Thursday, 12/20/79 in City Manager's Conference
Room:
7:30 P.M. - Capital Improvements Program Presentation
(Staff)
9:00 P.M. - Report on Freeway 518
(Staff)
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES td01RES
a 33q
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: December 13, 1979
To: Cit Council
From: Cit Manager
Re: Capital Improvement Program
Attached
'a the
may. At the iformal
Council ses ion of 1December 17,Capital ro1979,�tthe ostaff gram willrlrpresent additional
information concerning these projects.
As we discussed previously, the detailed Capital Improvement Program will
be submitted to you at a later date based upon the comments, questions and
suggestions which develop in our discussion next Monday.
bdw/sp
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
a�s9
0
S
FY81 C.I.P. (PUBLIC WORKS)
1. PROJECT: RALSTON CREEK CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS
COST: FY81
Reserve fund for land & property
purchases along the entire channel.
Engineering from F Street to
Memory Garden Cemetery.
FY82
Construction of project from F Street
to Memory Garden Cemetery.
Engineering from Glendale Court
to Sheridan Ave. & Sheridan Ave.
to F Street.
FY83
Reserve fund for land & property
purchases along the entire channel
Construction of Glendale Court to
Sheridan Ave. & Sheridan Ave. to
F Street.
$450,000
$ 50 000
500,000
$441,000
55 000
496,000
$185,000
300 000
4 5, 0
12/79
FY84
Construction and engineering
Washington Street to Clapp Street $610,000
GRAND TOTAL $2,091,000
Description - Construction of two dry -bottom detention ponds on the north
branch and south branch of Ralston Creek will reduce flood flows on the
creek. The existing channel must be improved to handle the remaining
flows after storage of a major portion of storm water runoff. These
channel improvements will improve the carrying capability of the creek so
that it can carry the ten year flood in most locations and the 100 year
flood in that section of the creek from Glendale Court to Sheridan Avenue
and from the river to Gilbert Street.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES
W
■
FA
2. PROJECT: NORTH BRANCH DETENTION STRUCTURE
COST: FY81 $909,450
Descriation - This project provides for the construction of a dry -bottom
detention structure with a height of approximately 30' above the creek
bank. The length of the structure is 580' and the width at the top is 16'.
The average width at the base will be 240'. The structure will reduce
peak flows from 3,703 cubic feet per second to 264 cubic feet per second
in the 100 year storm directly below the dam.
3. PROJECT: SOUTH BRANCH DETENTION STRUCTURE
COST: Previous Years $597,303
FY81 608 400
Total $1,205,703
Descripion - This project provides for the construction of a dry -bottom
detentiotn structure across the south branch of Ralston Creek at Scott
Boulevard. The structure will be an earth filled embankment approximately
19 above the creek bed. The dam will be 71' wide at the top and
approximately 190' wide at the bottom with four to one side slopes.
4. PROJECT: EQUIPMENT SERVICE BUILDING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
COST:2�lt
/�
stock pile cover -""Do-
Fuel island facility 48,000
Locker room 12,000
Traffic Engineering 36,000
Machine room & equipment office
and restrooms 84,000
$264,000
FY82
Vehicle storage building, phase 1
6000 sq. ft. @ $40/sq. ft.
FY83
Vehicle storage building, phase 2
6000 sq. ft. @ $45/sq. ft.
SOO-
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES W0111ES
$240,000
$270,000
y`;eou
._.
91
FY84
Warehouse space
5000 sq. ft. @ $50/sq. ft. $250,000
Landscaping and fencing 42 000
$22tM
GRAND TOTAL $1,066,000
Des�criPtion - Development of the equipment service building garage at the
R vei rside Drive site began over 20 years ago. As the equipment fleet has
increased in size, the facility has continued to be used with only minor
modification. The City's fleet has increased three times in size while
the maintenance facility has remained the same. This project will remedy
safety deficiencies, poor working conditions, lack of storage, lack of the
physical facilities needed to repair equipment, and lack of warehouse and
office facilities. !
S. PROJECT: TRANSIT SERVICE INCREASE/FACILITIES AND COACHES
COST: 1. Bus garage, Garage area for
40 coach operating facility.
21,000 sq. ft. @ $40/sq. ft. $840,000
i
2. Operating base with office,
lobby and employee area.
i 5,400 sq. ft. @ $50/sq. ft. $270,000
3. Bus wash facility building.
2400 sq. ft. @ $40/sq. ft. $ 96,000
i
4. Equipment washer, cyclone
cleaner, fuel pump/tanks. $ 96,000
5. Site improvements including
roadways, parking area, fencing,
lighting, landscaping. $123,000
i
6. Bus equipment repair area.
5000 sq. ft. @ $50/sq. ft. $250,000
I �
7. Major equipment systems
(hydraulic lifts, exhaust
system, compressed air system,
paint booth) $120 000
Subtotal $1, 9955,E
Architectural fees $179,500
Subtotal $1,974,500
20% contingency and inflation $394,900
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
M
4
TOTAL OF TRANSIT FACILITY $2,369,400
Cost of Transit coaches
12 coaches @ $125,000 per unit $1,500,000
GRAND TOTAL $3,869,400
This would be split between years as follows:
FY81 $726,000
FY82 $3,143,400
Description - This project is construction of a new transit facility and
purchase of 12 buses to allow 15 minute time periods between buses. This
project will allow the citizens of Iowa City to choose the mode of
transportation in Iowa City for many years to come. The project proposal
would double rush hour service during peak hours and would provide one-
half hour headways, as we now have, during off-peak hours. This program
provides for a 5000 square foot repair area, a new 21,000 square foot bus
transit storage facility to store 34 buses and purchase of 12 new coaches.
The operating budget of transit would increase by approximately $200,000-
$300,000 per year. Because adequate Federal funding for this project
probably will be delayed at least several years, the City Council may wish
to submit this proposal to the vote of the electorate. If approved by the
voters, the project could be expedited.
I
6. PROJECT: BUS STOP SHELTERS
I
COST: FY81 $24,000
Federal $19,200
State 2,400
Local 2,400
Description - Erection of small neighborhood shelters at ten locations
throughout Iowa City.
7. PROJECT: BUS STOP SIGNS
COST: FY81 $20,250
Federal $16,200
State 2,025
Local 2,025
Description - Installation of bus stop signs at all bus stops throughout
owI a City. The installation of bus stop signs will improve the efficiency
of the transit system in three ways. First, bus routes will be visible in
the community; secondly, disagreements over stop locations will end, and
last, trip times will be reduced as close together stops are consolidated.
i
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
. _<
5
8. PROJECT: CAMP CARDINAL ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
COST: FY83 $ 18,000
FY84 $198 000
21 00
Description - This project would be funded one-half with City funds and
one-half special assessment against the abutting property owners. The
Camp Cardinal bridge serves an area south of Clear Creek. A combination
of City funds and special assessments may strike the proper balance
between City participation in this project and the fact that this bridge
serves only a limited number of property owners south of Clear Creek.
Ideally, this area would be deannexed to Coralville since their sewage
treatment plant is very near this area and could provide sewer service.
The City of Coralville would be unwilling to accept this area prior to
reconstruction of the bridge.
$18,000 is budgeted in FY83 for design and $198,000 in FY84 for
construction.
9. PROJECT: IOWA AVENUE BRIDGE
COST: FY82 $ 60,000
FY83 $74-
TOTAL
Description - This project would completely rehabilitate the existing
owa venue bridge over the Iowa River. An extensive rehabilitation
project has been recommended by our engineering consultant.
10. PROJECT: BURLINGTON STREET BRIDGE
I
COST: FY83 $ 80,000
FY84 $820 000
TOTAL 900,000 j
Description - This project provides for an engineering investigation and
subsequent design and reconstruction of the eastbound bridge over the Iowa
River at Burlington Street.
11. PROJECT: RECONSTRUCTION OF THE BENTON-RIVERSIDE INTERSECTION
COST: FY84 $275,000 for right-of-way
FY85 $550 000
TOTAL P25,'000
Descri tion - This project would provide for construction of five lanes on
vers a rive (two lanes each way and a left turn lane) and construction
of three lanes on Benton Street. The project would involve acquisition of
right-of-way, replacement of pavement, additional turn lanes, and new
signalization to reduce congestion and improve safety.
i
i
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES W111ES
6
12. PROJECT: MELROSE AVENUE CORRIDOR TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
COST: FY82
$250,000
Descri tion - As an alternate to the Melrose Avenue diagonal, this project
Provides two lanes in each direction between Riverside Drive and Woolf
Avenue near Kinnick Stadium. To accomplish this, Melrose Avenue must be
widened to four lanes between Woolf Avenue and South Grand (South Grand
runs north -south in front of the Field House). Additional improvements
would include widening of South Grand between Grand Avenue and Melrose to
three lanes to allow bus traffic to continue to operate northbound to pick
up passengers in front of the Field House.
13. PROJECT: CITY SHARE OF EXTRA WIDTH PAVING
COST: FY81 $50,000
Description - By City ordinance the City pays for any subdivision street
in excess of 28 feet wide. The concept is that collector and arterial
streets serve the general public and should be paid for fro:a general City
revenues.
14. PROJECT: SCOTT BOULEVARD
COST: FY81 - Phase 1 $400,000
FY82-FY85 - Phase 2 $800,000
After FY85 - Phases 3 & 4 $650,000
TOTAL $1,850,000
Description - This project would improve Scott Boulevard to a paved
section 31 feet wide between Highway 6 Bypass and Rochester. The project
would be done in four phases.
Phase 1 -
Total Cost $400,000
-City $160,000
Special Assessment $240,000
This would provide for paving of Scott Boulevard from Highway 6 to the
railroad tracks. The roadway would be built within the existing right-of-
way with dedication of the land on the west side by special assessment.
This would provide truck access to the BDI industrial park via Highway 6.
The large City contribution to this project would be necessary since the
vacant land will not stand a special assessment. As development occurs
additional right-of-way can be obtained.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I10t0Es
7
Phase 2 -
Total Cost - $800,000
-City Share $200,000
-Developer's Share $600,000
This would provide for construction of Scott Boulevard from the south
branch dam to Rochester Avenue. Except for a short segment this phase
would be done by adjacent land developers as now occurs in subdivisions
throughout the City. The City would need to participate in the over width
paving (31 feet versus 28 feet). This phase will take several years
depending on the pace of the land development near it.
Phase 3 & 4 -
Total Cost - $650,000
-City's Share $425,000
-Private Share $225,000
Phase 3 would provide for construction from the south branch dam south to
Muscatine Avenue. Right-of-way will be acquired immediately as part of
the construction of the south branch detention structure. Phase 4 would
be construction between Muscatine Avenue south to the railroad tracks. A
large portion of this project would be paid for by special assessment.
15. PROJECT: LINN STREET IMPROVEMENT
COST: FY82 $175,000
Description - Linn Street is the remaining link in the downtown area which
needs to be improved as part of urban renewal. The curb lines on most of
the street are in good shape or will be rebuilt as part of urban renewal
construction. This project would provide for some architectural curb line
changes and an asphalt overlay between Burlington and Washington.
Deficient sidewalks that will not be replaced as part of new building i
projects would need to be repaired by property owners.
16. PROJECT: CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ALLEY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
COST: FY82 $ 40,000
FY83 $ 40,000
Description - This project would reconstruct two alleys each year for two
years. This could be scheduled in conjunction with the underground work
to be done by Iowa -Illinois Gas & Electric.
17. PROJECT: TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT IOWA AND GILBERT
COST: FY81 $ 15,000
Description - This signal needs the standard justification for
installation of a traffic signal based on the number of pedestrians
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110 RIES
E
crossing the street. Pedestrian signals are available on Gilbert Street
both one block north and south of this particular intersection. If
adequate road use tax funds are available to signalize, the project should
be done. If adequate funds are not available, the project can be deferred
or eliminated since other signals are available for a safe pedestrian
crossing.
18. PROJECT: TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT DUBUQUE AND CHURCH
COST: FY81 $ 15,116
Description - This intersection meets the warrants for a traffic signal
based on accident experience in a previous twelve month period.
19. PROJECT: GILBERT STREET RAILROAD CROSSING PROTECTION
COST: FY81 $ 40,000.
($36,000 federal, $4,000 local)
Descri tion - Installation of flashing light protection for the railroad
j cross ng on Gilbert Street just south of Lafayette Street.
20. PROJECT: WASTE WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT
COST: In previous years $ 829,900
FY81 $ 1,680,000
FY82 $ 5,000,000
FY83 $14,000,000
FY84 $10,000,000
FY85 $ 2,500,000
GRAND TOTAL $34,000,000 S70oo.000.
Federal $21,125,000 --
State $ 1,375,000
Local $11,500,000 -
Description - This project provides for the abandonment of the current
waste water treatment plant and construction of an entirely new facility
south on Sand Road. This project is necessary to meet federal and state
regulations governing the discharge of waste water to the Iowa River.
21. PROJECT: EAST SIDE WATER STORAGE TANK
COST: FY85 $770,000
Description - As the City continues to grow on the east side water
pressure will continue to drop resulting in poor service to residents.
There will also be a negative impact on fire fighting capability due to
substandard water flows. This project provides for the installation of a
two million gallon underground water tank on the north side of Rochester
at Post Road. The land for this project has already been acquired.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MoIllES
M
"
22. PROJECT: WATER PLANT SOLIDS DISPOSAL PROJECT
COST: FY84 $880,000
Description - The United States government and State government have laws
Iowa River from the Iowa City water treatment plant
banning the return of filter backwash and alum sludge discharge t . This pr�jcct will the
provide for the construction of two holding tanks to level out flows from
the water plant. Alum waste would be discharged to the river corridor
sewer now under construction and filter backwash would be recycled to the
water treatment plant.
23. PROJECT: ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE SPACE
COST: FY81 $ 60,000
FY82 $440,000
FY83 $100.000
i
TOTAL $600,000
Description - This project has two alternatives. The first alternative is
an addition to the Civic Center and the second alternative is remodeling
of the old library. he choice depends upon whether it is possible to
T
sell the old library. If the library is sold the addition would be added
to the Civic Center. If the library does not sell it could be used for
expanding office space.
24. PROJECT: CIVIC CENTER AIR CONDITIONING
COST: FY81 $155,000
i
Description - The heating and air conditioning system at the Civic Center
is inoperative much of the time. Working conditions are intolerable
during these time periods. The present system is extremely energy
inefficient. This project provides for a new system.
25. PROJECT: CIVIC CENTER ROOF REPAIR
COST: FY81 $ 50,000
Description - Repair a portion or all of the roof over the Civic Center.
FY81 C.I.P. (FIRE)
26. PROJECT: TRAINING TOWER FACILITY
COST: FY84 $300,000 i
Description: This project is designed to provide training in all aspects
of fire fighting, essentially multistory and high rise buildings, where
the need is greatest.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES :10111Es
10
FY81 C.I.P. (POLICE)
27. PROJECT: ANIMAL SHELTER
COST: FY81 $243,500
Description: This project provides for construction of a new Animal
Shelter facility. If constructed the Shelter should meet the minimum
standards for such structures and be in conformance with regulations set
forth in the State Code. The proposed facility will double the present
capacity for holding animals (32 dog runs and 24 cat cages). In addition,
j the proposed shelter will provide isolation areas for diseased and injured
animals. It is recommended that with some earthen filling, the proposed
facility could be located near the site of the present shelter.
28. PROJECT: OUTDOOR POLICE FIRING RANGE
COST: FY81 $144,500
Des�criCtion This facility would provide an adequate facility to train
owI a City police officers in the proper and safe use and handling of
police arms. The range would be used for police qualification firing and
would include target frames; hardware; cement and earthen work; range
house; control tower; electrical work; fencing and parking. Land
acquisition would also have to be considered unless City property might
become available. The Department has the personnel and ability to
properly train in this and all aspects of police work but surely needs
this facility.
FY81 C.I.P. (Planning and Program Development)
29. PROJECT: LOWER RALSTON CREEK CHANNELIZATION $ FACILITY
IMPROVEMENTS (CDBG/SMALL CITIES PROJECT)
COST: FY81
FY82
TOTAL:
$ 775,000
$ 695 000
Description: This project is designed primarily to alleviate flooding
problems of Ralston Creek in the area from Gilbert Street to Kirkwood
Avenue.
30. PROJECT: BIKEWAYS
COST: FY81 $105,000
FY82 $ 30,000
FY83 $ 30 000
TOTAL: bttL6_6b
Description: Three bikeways are involved in this project which will be
coordinated with the Iowa City Bikeways Plan when adopted. The bikeways
will be constructed on the west side of Rocky Shore Drive; in City Park
between the end of the existing paved trail and the gravel trail
(including paving of the gravel trail; and on the east side of the Iowa
River between Park Road and the University Music School footbridge.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FIo1NES
I
FY81 C.I.P. (PARKS AND RECREATION)
31.PROJECT: ADDITION TO RECREATION CENTER FOR FOUR RACQUETBALL/
HANDBALL COURTS
COST: FY82 $150,000
DESCRIPTION - This project would provide for the design and
cosn— truct on of four racquetball/handball courts, each 20' x 40', as
an addition to the Recreation Center. Additional handball courts are
the most needed sports facility for Iowa City, as identified by
citizen and user surveys, and comments to the staff. The addition
can be heated by the existing boilers.
The site must be secured from the Rock Island Railroad. Some of the
existing parking spaces would be eliminated, and the addition would
need to be flood -proofed since it is in the Ralston Creek flood
plain.
32. PROJECT: SCHOOL DISTRICT -CITY JOINT INDOOR POOL
COST: FY82 $250,000 (City's share - 4 of total
cost of $1,000,000)
DESCRIPTION - There are no indoor pools in the Iowa City school
system. The schools have been using the Recreation Center pool for
practice and competitive meets. For this project to be successful,
it needs to be shared with the school district - both the cost of
construction and maintenance - with the City paying approximately
25% of the cost of both and operating the pool in June, July, and
August. This would free the Recreation Center pool for its intended
use, which is to serve the general public.
33. PROJECT: NEW SWIMMING POOL, CITY PARK
COST: FY84 $750,000
DESCRIPTION - This project would replace the existing pool at City
Park with a new outdoor pool. The existing pool is 31 years old, and
has been leaking water badly. The normal life of an outdoor pool is
25-30 years. At any time, a major breakdown, such as collapse of
return pipe, which is under the center of the pool, or failure of the
filter system (which was replaced in 1957) could make it impractical
to repair, and reopen the pool.
34. PROJECT: NEW NEIGHBORHOOD PARK IN THE SOUTHWEST PART OF IOWA CITY
COST: FY81 Approximately 8 acres, $80,000
DESCRIPTION - This project is needed to provide a new neighborhood
park and sports field in an area of the city that is rapidly
expanding. Because of the nature of Willow Creek Park, it is
preferable to have open field sports activities in another location.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111ES
12
35. PROJECT: NEW NEIGHBORHOOD PARK IN SOUTHWEST PART OF IOWA CITY
COST: FY82,
8 acres, $90,000
DESCRIPTION - This project would provide a new neighborhood park west
Of Mil er Avenue, between Highway N1 and Benton. There is no park in
this area to serve residents. This would serve existing residents,
and the proposed high density area south of Benton and west of
Miller. Some of the proposed park has existing shade, and could
become an "instant park".
36. PROJECT: NEW NEIGHBORHOOD PARK IN THE NORTHEAST PART OF IOWA CITY
COST: FY83 10 acres, $70,000
DESCRIPTION - This project would provide a new neighborhood park in
northeast Iowa City, east of Caroline Court, 1'h blocks east of
Prairie du Chien. There is no park in this area to serve residents.
The site is mostly wooded, and is an excellent wildlife habitat. An
excellent nature trail could be developed here. A small area of the
park should be developed as a playground, and the balance preserved
for its ecological significance.
37. PROJECT: NEW NEIGHBORHOOD PARK IN SOUTHEAST PART OF IOWA CITY
COST: FY84 8 acres, $100,000
DESCRIPTION - This project is needed to provide a new neighborhood
par approximately 5/8 mile east of Mercer Park. The park is located
west of Scott Boulevard, and approximately 1,100 ft, north of the
railroad tracks. The area between the park and railroad tracks is a
proposed storm water detention area for Village Green South.
There is no park in the immediate area, the closest being Mercer
Park, which is over used. The area would serve as a neighborhood
park and sports field.
38. PROJECT:
COST:
NEW NEIGHBORHOOD PARK IN NORTH PART OF IOWA CITY
FY85
8 acres, $80,000
DESCRIPTION - This project is needed to provide a new neighborhood
park north of the proposed Foster Road extension, and south of I-80,
west of Prairie du Chien. There is no neighborhood park in the area
at present. The park contains some existing shade and is well suited
for a neighborhood park containing some open play fields.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDs•u[� %mines
a:
I
i
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
Ralston Creek Channel Improvements
North Branch Detention Structure
South Branch Detention Structure
Equip. Service Bldg. Improvement
Transit Service Increase/Facilities
Bus Stop Shelters
Bus Stop Signs
Camp Cardinal Road Bridge
Iowa Avenue Bridge
Burlington Street Bridge
Reconstruction Benton/Riverside
Melrose Avenue Corridor
City Share Extra Width Paving
Scott Boulevard
Linn Street Improvement
CBD Alley Improvement
Traffic Signal Iowa/Gilbert
Traffic Signal Dubuque/Church
Gilbert Street Railroad Crossing
Waste.Water Treatment
East Side Water Storage
Water Plant Solids Disposal
Administrative Office Space
Civic Center Air Conditioning
Civic Center Roof Repair
Training Tower Facility
Animal Shelter
Outdoor Police Firing Range
Lower Ralston Creek
Bikeways
Four Racquetball/Handball Courts
School District -City Joint Pool
Swimming Pool, City Park
New Neighborhood Park (Southwest)
New Neighborhood Park (Southwest)
New Neighborhood Park (Northeast)
New Neighborhood Park (Southeast)
New Neighborhood Park (North)
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
FY81 - 85
500,000
496,000
485,000
610,000
--
2,091,000
909,450
--
--
--
--
909,450
608,400
--
--
--
--
608,400
264,000
240,000
270,000
292,000
--
1,066,000
726,000
3,143,400
--
--
--
3,869,400
24,000
--
--
--
--
24,000
20,250
--
--
--
--
20,250
--
--
18,000
198,000
--
216,000
--
60,000
740,000
--
--
800,000
--
--
80,000
820,000
--
900,000
--
--
--
275,000
550,000
825,000
--
250,000
--
--
--
250,000
50,000
--
--
--
--
50,000
400,000
200,000
200,000
200,000
200,000
1,200,000
--
175,000
--
--
--
175,000
--
40,000
40,000
--
--
80,000
15,000
--
--
--
--
15,000
15,000
--
--
--
--
15,000
40,000
40,000
1,680,000
5,000,000
14,000,000
10,000,000
2,500,000
33,180,000
770,000
770,000
880,000
--
880,000
60,000
440,000
100,000
--
--
600,000
155,000
--
--
--
--
155,000
50,000
--
--
--
--
50,000
--
--
--
300,000
--
300,000
243,500
--
--
--
--
243,500
144,500
--
--
--
--
144,500
775,000
695,000
1,470,000
105,000
30,000
30,000
--
--
165,000
--
150,000
--
--
--
150,000
--
250,000
--
--
--
250,000
750,000
--
750,000
80,000
--
--
--
--
80,000
--
90,000
--
--
--
90,000
--
--
70,000
--
--
70,000
100,000
--
100,000
80,000
80,000
6,865,100 11,259,400 16,033,000 14,425,000 4,100,000 52,682,500
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOINES
�3V0
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -OEC IIOIRES
December 12, 1979
Neal Berlin, City Manager
City of Iowa City
410 East Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Mr. Berlin:
Enclosed are preliminary plans and other materials
regarding the CBD Streetscape Improvement
Project,
Phase II, for review by the City Council.
The original project schedule called for the const-
ruction of the project in
three segments:
A. Capitol St. and Washington St. paving
B. Capitol St. and Washington St. sidewalks
and amenities
ames
engineering
and testing
C. Clinton St. paving, sidewalks, and amenities
company
f
ii
It is recommended that this schedule be altered.
Phase A has been
ekeCadiaryo/
assecatesrnculler
kj assac/atesmc.
completed. Because both phases
B and C will be constructed beginning in the
engineers
I ""0
spring,
1980, it is desirable that these phases be combined.
recommend, We d0
rveyors
planners
"
however, that the plant materials
and the installation
landscape architects
of the plant materials be a
separate contract, to provide the City high
'i
a level
of quality control without the necessity of working
through a
generalcontractor.
N
The Preliminary Plans contilnue
y
many of the design
elements previously used on Washington Street
and
propertyin City Plaza. eadjacent areas
have beendesignedwithUniversity
extensive participa-
tion by the University's consultants
and staff, and
contain a number of features requested by them.
The Project Schedule has been structured to minimize
the conflict with the
closure of Madison Street for
Corridorthe River Sewer Project.
ltoladhereetolthe
important,however,that webeable
schedule, which
requires early guidance from the City
Council, and approval to
proceed with final plans
and specifications.
2730 Ford street.
p o. box Bol.
The Preliminary Cost Summary identifies total
ames. iowa Soolo
,
Project costs for the Council's information.
15151 272.7271
�3V0
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -OEC IIOIRES
Mr. Berlin
page 2
These costs are for the complete balance of the
sts tbe
andject. The Old Capitol oAssociates swould hared reduce thisy the
for the City. tota
We look forward to meeting with you and the City
Council on Monday, December 17. We are prepared
to discuss the project with you i
time.n detail at that
_
Sincerely you s, ,0
-} . :�/
Jack Leaman,�2CP SLA ~04-
Director of Landscape
Architecture and Land
Planning Services
HICROFILMEO BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES
o?_3yO
I
0
PRELIMINARY COST SUMMARY
Iowa City CBD Streetscape Improvement: Phase II -B
CAPITOL STREET
East Side $ 69,000
West Side
146,500
Snb Total $218,000
WASHINGTON STREET
South Side
North Side 95,000
80,000
Sub Total
$175,000
CLINTON STREET
Sub Total
$520,500
BURLINGTON STREET
Sub Total $ 22,000
i
I
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $933,000
Ames Engineering and Testing Company
December 12, 1979
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I101NES
123YO
9
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I-0DIIIES
mi
a
UlW
�7
1Z
w
6 V
Z
0
2
}
�
w_
v
7
t
111
z
T
�C
}
Q
Q
z
U
d
a
�
�
Vv
a
l�
tl
�j
Z
C_
vv
U
p 7
tl
9
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I-0DIIIES
mi
a
UlW
�7
1Z
w
6 V
Y
' • .tl
I
IN
� t
^ ie
. 9
I
I {{)7
� C017(rB'l'B
Sea. dies!
Corr�tAlp E
eon�reAe
r. tNG NG BU/GAO/�/b j
i
ti
° zoo
�WASHINGTON STREET AMENITIES
CONC -r MAN � pNAZE 1L•S yTfZfnCTUGAPE IMp120YEMENYS
IOWA GI'TY IOWA
AP(1B6 faN&INEEJUN& ANO TESTING carArpNY JULY f979
REVfSGD. TH¢°ubH 11• IG�'79
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAP RAPIOS•OF: 'IOIDE S
Wa Atwo
fhia ares. 1
/Kwa
P,
1,
1l
t
m NMI
mNMI 0
elm
P E /v T A e- A2 E S 7-
J �
Traditlona/ Pedtstria.� Li9/tt
wifh Trash Recepfac% `
Brick Crosswalk
Trea in Crate
Bvpc h
con--* wa/kauatr
/---Pe4Pltriern U9/rl (4-tobe)
3
I O G O G A p/ T O L G E N "r E R
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DE', 'IOIIIE;
1�
r
t
P E /v T A e- A2 E S 7-
J �
Traditlona/ Pedtstria.� Li9/tt
wifh Trash Recepfac% `
Brick Crosswalk
Trea in Crate
Bvpc h
con--* wa/kauatr
/---Pe4Pltriern U9/rl (4-tobe)
3
I O G O G A p/ T O L G E N "r E R
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DE', 'IOIIIE;
JE S T
walkway
¢dPIlLri/n U9/,t (4-
�:
t�zNand Bus Sh¢hlar
'""'FOa�+chos in sy, Axc)
rick Crosswalk Prdostrian Liryht
and Trash Receptnc%
NO -
r Brie Wa/.i-way ;-6anch
S ,
I,
•I
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEOhit NAI'IU$•Uf'• 9010Cs
rick. Crosswa/k �Prdastrian (,fight
• and Tresh Receotvc%
Brick Walkway -Bauch -
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DE, tI0II1C5
W
ti
b
0
V
I
L/Nz>qulsT e- ENT 0 J
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
LCOAR RAPIDS•Df., 5101t7FS
0
r�
A
�
r
1
•
o
i
`
'..Bench ane(
Gontref¢ Walkw"ty
'.
Trash Rtceptvc%
41
;-
1. •t
- l-' . /.' '.
-�~
pZp
P4Rk//V6
RAMP
F
r.
CAPITOL
t✓TR EET
AME ISI I T_ I EFS
GONGEpT PLAN:
FH/1i6 IC• % c>Ti<EEr4 GgpC 1MPKGY�fYI�r{T�
:t-
IONA 6111, IOWA
AME6 ENG.lry�EnlN�
r4NA 'TLC,~'1tNCr
c��+r�ANY JVI.`(r ly'7�
1'
RCVlben "T7•IGG'tJfnl-1 11 • I(p •'79
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
LCOAR RAPIDS•Df., 5101t7FS
0
r�
A
reel Li ht
a/strian 1-;Iht (2- kube)
GLINE stow.
^-Te rY) p orarx
As pi,o It GYfve
,Retain;n Wall—
and sift Rack
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DE, MOIgES
SRCUR/7-�
BeidAL Wa/Ewa
i
9rick Cross wa /
Concrete Bo//a
I'edertrian [i9
�alk wIl
y
oaa WA I't
e Bollard
•! an 1.1 ht
in Grape
Wel.. .
COAG/eft N/a/kWdy
ENG/NLe�l4/NG BL,
' Ilrmm®
I
GonL/P?I.t Re fa in in9
Wall
Concrete Wal4Way
D
� OLO CAP/TOL GE°NT�iQ
rr
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS.00. 'IOINES
ReeepfQLle
Pedestrlan 6!q/�
4 �
ENG/NEER/NG BLOC.
irlf Wall
waj/ --tree+ Ci9ht Pedestrian GioPub (2-kubB�
a✓u( Trash Rectptoc%
Trash Reeep*ac% ike Rite
Pedestr/a✓� 6� ht (2- kub¢)
DORM MICROLAB
done anrins•or', lu)uIEs
orncrete
Curb
I
i mo,�� , L Mm
1 -
k
CLINTON STREET AMEN (TIES
tuAJA crrY` IOW
A -M&S
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tiollIES
my
WAII
�e
WHITE WA Y
ti
Brie Wu/k wu--
4' Bench ,-ee,;12 GratE
8' Be neh I
Trash Receptacle J�
Aele.rfriarl Gid/'if I¢-�ubt� I
I
8'Bonch I
5ea7-
t 4' Bench
Fli
47�-
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 10II1F.S
/(o" Pedes!-rian
Li M C9-,C•ubr)
Vick Wall"Way
'imber Pbrnfer
O G O G A P/ r o L.7T
G E N T E R
I L�
/\ \Concre-le watkwa B' Bench
B' -ick wa/kwa ti / 4' Sench
Bicyc/e Tack.
k CrOSSwa/k-
Trash Reeep-fac/e
4' Dench
rn � I � Seat
\/
® f
7-,q//I/c5 S'3
rcN=LER '5
57' e6AIA2 ..JOHNSON
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ROIDES
t/re'f Lighf'
V,_�
RO14W
SCA 630" (,6
1
Britt C/OSSWa liE
GE /OWA 5TA7E BANK
1
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•D[S MOIRES
I%
City of Iowa
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 14, 1979
TO: City Council
FROM: Bette Meisel, Senior Center Coordinator -,_Z,
RE: Senior Center Construction
Attached you will find material containing relevant data as to the cost
of the project and revenue to fund it.
The first document was prepared by the architect. It breaks down the
major sections of the independent estimate by Burger Construction leading
to the total cost of $1,290,400. It then goes on to show those alternates
which whould be added to the project and those which could be cut if
absolutely necessary.
The second document, which I prepared, explains the consequences of
cutting each item and the rationalefor completing the project at this
time.
The final document, prepared by Jim Hencin, shows the present CDBG
allocations and the possible distribution of the CDBG Contingency
fund.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MD n+ES
2 3 4; f
G
SENIOR CENTER CONSTURCTION
Projected Costs:
Revised estimate of Burger Construction
$
1,340,400
Architect amended fee
108,000
Fee to Burger Construction
2,000
$
1,450,400
Established Sources of Revenue:
N16$
1,006,000
County
100,000
$
1,106,000
Estimated Cost over Budget
$
343,900
Possible Sources of Revenue:
* Historic Grant
$
37,000
Sale of land to Ecumenical
48,500
Return to General Fund of Sr. Ct. Budget (12/30/79-6/30/80)
35,000
Additional CDBG Contribution
200,000
$
320,500
Additional Funds to be Obtained
$
23,400
* The City Grant application asks for $25,000 to $50,000
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES
The Architects Office
UJehner, Nowysz, Pattschull and Pfiffner
201 day buidrg, Imw cf ty, Mw o 52240
December 12, 1979
Neal Berlin, City Manager
City of Iowa City
Civic Center
Iowa City, Is 52240
Re: Iowa City Senior Citizens' Center (revised estimate summary)
Dear Mr. Berlin:
As per your instructions, I have asked Mr. Burger to up date his preliminary esti-
mate of November 1, 1979 for the above reference project. This revision was based
on the completed set of plane and specifications dated November 1979.
Enclosed Is the revised estimate plus separate costa for work which may be excluded
to order to facilitate planning of the total construction budget. The revised
coats are as follows:
1. .General Contract --------------------------------------- $680,450.00
2. Elevator -------=------------------------------------- 40,000.00
3. Mechanical Con[ract------------ -------------------- ----- 447,000.00
4. Electrical Contract ----------------------------- -- ---- -- 122.950.00
TOTAL-- ---- ------------------ —------------- --------------- $1,290,400.00
5. Alternate1011--------------------------- add 20,710.00
Exterior concrete work on Washing ton•Street.
6. Alternate 021 -------------------------------------------- add 17,680.00
Exterior concrete work on Linn Street
7. Alternate 03: -------------------------------------------- add 45,000.00
Kitchen equipment (allowance 50,000)
8. Alternate 04:
Square foot price for wall covering, add $1.00 per square foot.
rokuld wehner
wllllom nowVsx
rkhord pottscWl
John pf ff rrw
members of the omedcon Institute of architects TEL. 319.338.9715
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tIONIE5
Mr. Berlin r,
December 12, 1979
Page 2
9. Alternate d5: --------------------------------------------- deduct 98,850.00
Work on second floor (outside of that required by stairs and
elevator shaft).
10. Alternate U6: --------------------------------------------- deduct 84,000.00
Leave out mezzanine floor entirely.
11. Alternate 07: --------------------------------------------- deduct 22,000.00
Repair roof versus total replacement,
12. Alternate A8: --------------------------------------------- deduct 50,000.00
Install storm windows versus all new windows,
13. Alternate p9, --------------------------------------------- deduct 5,000.00
Eliminate loading dock and install stairs and landing.
14. Alternate 010: -------------------------------------------- deduct 7,000.00
Replace all carpeted areae with vinyl asbestos tile,
15. Alternate 011: -------------------------------------------- deduct 6,000.00
Replace wood floor with vinyl asbestos tile.
If you have any questions on any of the above, please contact me at your convenience.
Yours Very Truly,
The tArFPATTS + PFIFFNER
W1111= Nowyez, AU
,WN/bw
V
N
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONIES
i
SENIOR CENTER CONSTRUCTION
Projected Costs:
Revised estimate of Burger Construction
Architect amended fee
Fee to Burger Construction
Possible areas of Reduction in Cost
Eliminate Mezzanine
Consequence - a) County may withdraw their $50,000
contribution which was directed specifically toward
this portion of the remodeling. b) Library, Multi
office space, Conference Room, Program specialist
office moved to 3rd floor. Limited space available
for any City office.
Actual savings if the above occurs
Eliminate 3rd Floor
Consequence - City loses 7,160 feet of office space
and continues paying $17,556 per year for 3,580 sq. ft.
of inadequate, inefficient and inaccessible space.
If the City were to occupy this space for 5 years. they
would save a minium of $87,780 in rent. The present 2
year contract contains an escalating clause after 1 year.
Thus, one can be reasonably certain that the savings to
the City would increase each year.
Repair Roof rather than replacing
Consequence - A patch job could not be expected to
last as long as a new roof. The City would have to
E; plan on further repairs in the future. At some point
even repair might not solve the problem and a new
roof neeaed after all.
Retain existing Windows
Consequence - Adding storm windows to crumbling
frames and heavy awkwaro-to-operate windows will
cut down on heat loss. However, as with the roof
this would be a temporary rather than a final solu-
tion. Money not requested now would be spent in
later years in repairs and replacement.
Eliminate Loading Dock
Consequence - Because the first floor is not on
ground level,stairs and a platform would need to
be built in any case. The dock would be more con-
venient both for deliveries and to aid the volunteers
delivering the heavy boxesof meals to the homebound
elderly.
01;7... _V
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
$ 1,290,400
108,000
2,000
$ 1,400,400
$ 84,000
34,000
22,000
50,000
5,000
Replace Carpeting with Asbestos Tile 7,000
Consequence - Tile is harder on the feet and adds
no warmth to a room. More over, it has an institutional
"feel" which in the high ceiling spaces of the center
will be accentuated. It also provides no sound absorption.
Replace Wood Floorin Dining Room with Asbestos Tile 6,000
Consequence - Same as above. In addition this
space is planned as a room in which to dance and
to hold public meetings. Wood is a better flooring
for physical activities and for sound absorption than tile.
In conclusion, certain decisions must be made at this time:
1. Should we complete the building at this time?
2. Should we allocate funds today or depend on future
funds for additions or collections?
3. Should we continue to pay rent for office space or
invest the money in a City owned facility?
4. Are we prepared to meet increased demand for programs
and services resultant from a rapidly increasing
elderly population?
5. Does the actual allocation of local money reflect the
Citys commitment to the elderly population?
In 1978 when the allocation of 1 million dollars toward the renovation
of the old post office was made, it appeared sufficient. In early 1978
the architects estimated that they could renovate only the basement and
1st floor for the sum. The present estimate, based on 1980-81 construction,
is that it will take 1 million two hundred thousand to complete just
the 1st and 2nd floors.
It is difficult not to conclude that inflation is eroding our construction
dollar. Unless there is a major turn around in our economy we cannot
expect tomorrow's dollar to buy more than today's. In fact, we can expect
it to buy less. Completing the entire project as quickly as possible
would appear to be far more cost effective than planning to complete it
in stages.
The elderly are the fastest growing minority in the country. Presently
1 in 5 Americans are over 55. In the 70's whereas the general population
grew 5% those over 65 grew 18%. Iowa is one of 9 states with a population
of 12% or more. Johnson County elderly are estimated as being 10% of
the population.
Senior Citizens are yearly becoming more politically aware of their power
as a group to demand those services or programs which address their need
to remain independent and their desire to maintain an acceptable quality
of life. We have an opportunity in Iowa City to build a model Senior
Center, with what will become cheap space,,to expand Center activities as
the population and the demand grows. Instead of waiting until future
Federal regulations and citizen expectations force us into providing these
spaces, we are able at this time to anticipate demand and plan logically
for Vie present and the future.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIMts
1
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 14, 1979
TO: City Mangers and City Council
FROM: J. Jim Hencin, CDBG Program Coordinator
RE: CDBG Budget / Senior Center Project
j
Following our staff meeting on the issue of SMSA designation with HUD
officials in Omaha on December 3, we determined that the City's
fiscal year 1981 will involve the transition from hold -harmless
entitlement and Small Cities discretionary CDBG programs to a metro-
politan formula entitlement program. We expect to proceed in a manner
as outlined on the attached schedule.
Concurrent with Council's consideration of the revised Senior Center
plans and construction budget, we are asking you to review the allocation
of unemcumbered CDBG funds which we anticipate at the end of FY 80.
No firm decisions on reallocation are requested at this time; however,
we recommend that Council set aside $200,000 from the CDBG Contingency
(see attached FY 80 budget statements) for the Senior Center project.
sIt
should be noted that this amount may be off -set by funds received
from the sale of the Block 64 hotel site.
I will be available to answer any questions regarding this information.
a
Y.
3
is
1
n
i
I
I
i
023
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES NOIRES
City of Iowa city
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 14, 1979
TO: City Council / City Manager
FROM: Rosemary Vitosh, Director of Finance R_J
RE: FY81 Budget Revenue Projections and Financial Status
The following information provides our current projections on revenues
which will be used in preparing the FY81 budget. All revenue figures
are subject to change. The tax dollars and levy amounts shown on Page 2
are by no means final but are presented as a starting point. As budget
discussions continue, decisions made on program cuts, program additions
and changes in other funding sources will in many cases change the total
tax dollars needed and the resulting tax levy. Council will be presented
sufficient information during budget discussions to monitor the tax levy
amount and will be able to determine how budget changes will increase or
decrease the tax levy amount.
These revenue projections do not include increases or decreases in any
fees currently being charged by the City, however, the Council will be
presented recommendations on some fee changes as a part of budget
discussions.
a 3 41--�
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIEs
RECEIPTS - FY81
The FY81 receipts will be presented in two parts, first by source of
income and second by fund. Source of income is defined by the type of
receipt and the method by which the City is paid. These receipts are
credited to the fund established by the function or service provided by
the department or division.
PART I
Total receipts include seven major sources of revenue and the transfers
between funds. The transfers do not increase available dollars but do
allow one fund to be reimbursed for administrative expenses, services
provided, etc. from another fund. Special revenues not included in these
revenue projections are the CBD Block Grant Program, Leased Housing, Urban
Renewal, Police and Fire Retirement, and Small Cities Program. Also, only
the interest income portion of the Capital Projects Fund is included.
Each of the seven major sources is explained more completely using the
letter designation in the figure below.
SEVEN MAJOR SOURCES OF REVENUE
A. PROPERTY TAX
1. General Fund Levy
i The General Fund levy for FY81 is expected to be $4,765,040 or
an 8.1% increase over FY80. The General Fund levy cannot exceed
the 8.10 per thousand limit imposed by Chapter 384.1 of the Code
of Iowa. In addition, under Chapter 384.1 the City may levy for
agricultural land not to exceed three dollars and 3/8 cents per
thousand of assessed value. ($5,783).
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
Source Projection
for FY81
% of Total
A.
Property Tax*
$ 7,227,420
44.53
B.
Charges for services
4,060,315
25.02
C.
Intergovernmental Revenue
2,881,564
17.76
D.
Use of Money & Property
1,300,517
8.01
E.
Fines & Forfeitures
335,500
2.07
F.
Licenses & Permits
234,600
1.45
G.
Miscellaneous Revenue
189,040
1.16
TOTAL
$16,228,956
100. on
****
A. PROPERTY TAX
1. General Fund Levy
i The General Fund levy for FY81 is expected to be $4,765,040 or
an 8.1% increase over FY80. The General Fund levy cannot exceed
the 8.10 per thousand limit imposed by Chapter 384.1 of the Code
of Iowa. In addition, under Chapter 384.1 the City may levy for
agricultural land not to exceed three dollars and 3/8 cents per
thousand of assessed value. ($5,783).
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
2
****
TABLE I
THREE YEAR PROPERTY TAX REQUEST AS ALLOCATED
j
FY79 Actual FY80 Estimate FY81 Budget
*General Fund Levy* $3,820,514 $4,448,270 $4,807,171
Tort Liability
208,547 263,306 0
Debt Service 1,153,316
952,851
Trust & Agency 494 083 1,509,024
596 327
Subtotal 5,6 ,460 905 442
54
,260, 2 ,63
Ag BITOTA & Land 6 308
5 783
5 , 7 , 4 0 $� 16 X62 2�
*Includes: Monies & Credits - $28,416; Military Credit - $13,715. i
TABLE II
OF
ASSESSMENTEPERA10000TY OFRTOTALXASSESSEDSON VALUATION*
FY79 Actual FY80 Estimate FY81 Budget
General Fund 8.100 8.100
5
Tort Liability ,447 8.100
b
Debt Service 2472 .484 ---
. 1.752
4
Trust & Agency 1.059 2.570
1.096
Subtotal 1P— 1.539
11.432 12.209 '
yya
9
Ag Bldgs. & Land** 3.004
3.004
* Assessed valuation for FY81 is $588,276,551.
**Assessed
valuation fo FY81 for Ag Bldgs. & Land is $1,925,145.
i
****
As iFi FY80, the City's assessed values (the values upon which the
property tax levy is based)
I
are being subjected to a rollback. In
FY80 this rollback was .782516 on residential
I
property and for FY81
the rollback will be .643801 on residential property.
In projecting the property tax revenues for FY81 it should be noted
that the state legislature is
considering an additional rollback of
.89 on commercial property and utilities. This
j
would mean General
I
I
i
j
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES
r.
O rw �e 9nn Htiw n+n.a; _ _
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
M-
3
Fund property tax receipts increasing at a lower rate than in the
previous fiscal year. This rollback is included in the above
projections as we anticipate that the state legislature will approve
this rollback.
2. Tort Liability
During the past two years, an amount had been levied for a self-
insurance reserve fund. It has been determined that the levy cannot
be used to set up a reserve fund. At this time because of a large
fund balance, it will not be necessary to levy in FY81 for tort
liability. This fund, therefore, pays for such costs as Insurance
Premiums, insurance deductibles, and judgements and damages.
3. Debt Service
The debt service levy provides funds for the payment of the principal
and interest on general obligation bonds of the City. It can also be
utilized to fund the payment of any judgments against the City,
unless other funding sources are provided by State Law. The City has
issued general obligation bonds for various purposes. Two bond
issues for sewer construction and water treatment plant improvements
are paid from sewer and water revenues. In addition, two issues
include sewer projects as part of the total bond amount and sewer
revenue funds the sewer project portions of these issues. The
property tax levy does not include any amount payable from revenue
funds. The FY81 levy will be for the payment of interest and
principal on the general obligation bond issues, excluding the sewer
and water projects. In addition, the levy of $44,550 will establish
a reserve for bond payments. The City Finance Committee allows this
reserve in the amount of 50% of bonds due in the fall of FY81 minus
50% of bonds due in the spring of FY81. The intent of this reserve, is
to provide better cash flow for payment of bonds and coupons due each
fall and was created at the time cities changed from calendar year to
fiscal year accounting.
4. Trust & Agency
The Trust & Agency levy established for payment of pension and
related employee benefits includes unemployment insurance, workman's
comp, Public Employees Retirement System, Social Security benefits,
Police Pension and Retirement and Fire Pension and Retirement.
B. CHARGES FOR SERVICES
Charges for services total $883,815 for the General Fund. The Fire
Protection Contract provides service for the University of Iowa, and
the Library services include $53,515 for services to Johnson County.
Mass Transit receipts reflect revenue based on 2,000,000 riders with
an average fare of 21.3 cents. The average fare is lower than 254
due to bus pass usage and all free or special program fees.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FIOIREs
4
Recreation revenue includes $61,000 for admissions and lessons,
$19,000 from entry fees and $13,000 from family and group pool sales.
Miscellaneous revenue is derived from police escort service, animal
control fees, zoning and subdivision fees and other miscellaneous
items.
TABLE III
The Sewer revenue increase from 1979 actual receipts allows a 2% growth
rate per year in anticipation of new housing starts plus a $40,000
projection from new industry. Water revenue has shown a strong 8% growth
rate in FY79 and the first quarter of FY80 and will be increased by the
addition of new industry. Refuse collection will remain at the FY80 level
of $2.00 per month per dwelling unit or apartment and $1.00 per month per
sleeping room. Landfill fees will remain at $5.10 per ton in FY81.
C. INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
Intergovernmental revenue is the third largest source of income
which includes state, local and federal assistance.
Bank Franchise Tax
State of Iowa - Police
and Fire Retirement
TABLE IV
FY79 Actual
$ 33,679
60,238
FY80 Budget
$ 28,000
59,770
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES !TORIES
FY81 Budget
$ 60,000
1m
FY79 Actual
FY80 Estimate
FY81 Budget
Fire Protection
Contract
$ 217,481
$ 235,000
$ 300,000
Mass Transit
393,058
400,000
425,000
Recreation
93,353
85,085
95,200
Library
50,251
51,980
58,915
Sewer
905,310
887,150
966,900
Water
1,357,673
1,429,700
1,585,700
Refuse
47,084
240,000
240,000
Landfill
320,440
341,700
351,900
Other
3,431,542
37 $3,708',3554
4, 66 700
TOTALServices
,315
The Sewer revenue increase from 1979 actual receipts allows a 2% growth
rate per year in anticipation of new housing starts plus a $40,000
projection from new industry. Water revenue has shown a strong 8% growth
rate in FY79 and the first quarter of FY80 and will be increased by the
addition of new industry. Refuse collection will remain at the FY80 level
of $2.00 per month per dwelling unit or apartment and $1.00 per month per
sleeping room. Landfill fees will remain at $5.10 per ton in FY81.
C. INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
Intergovernmental revenue is the third largest source of income
which includes state, local and federal assistance.
Bank Franchise Tax
State of Iowa - Police
and Fire Retirement
TABLE IV
FY79 Actual
$ 33,679
60,238
FY80 Budget
$ 28,000
59,770
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES !TORIES
FY81 Budget
$ 60,000
1m
5
Transit Assistance 85,336
Liquor Profits 266,874
Municipal Assistance 270,258
Revenue Sharing 630,090
Road Use 1,314,401
TOTAL
200,000
250,000
270,258
607,616
1 532 582
2,948,226
200,000*
274,528
294,580
594,000
1 408 448
2 88u564
*There is a possibility that a new State transit grant formula could
reduce this amount to approximately $70,500.
The bank franchise tax is a state tax levied on net income of financial
institutions. he state retains 55% of this tax with the remainder
divided 60% for the cities and 40% to the county within which it
originated. The FY81 receipt projection is based on actual receipts in
FY80 of $46,270 and information received from local banks.
The State legislature approved special funding for benefits of HF914 for
Police and Fire Retirement systems. Iowa City will continue to receive
annually the bu gete amount until future legislation changes or ends
this funding.
State Transit Assistance is state funding to local governments to assist
In the operat on of mun cipal transit systems. The City of Iowa City uses
these funds for the operations and maintenance of the Transit Division.
Liquor profits are 10% of gross revenue of State liquor stores. In FY80,
the estimate equaled $5.24 per capita and in FY81 the estimate is $5.75
per capita.
State Municipal Assistance distributes state revenues on a ratio of each
My s population to total state population, which can't exceed one-half
of the city's property tax levy. The FY81 projection is based on $6.17
per capita.
General Revenue Sharing is received by the City quarterly and the budget
amount Is based on funding throughout FY81. However, present legislation
has authorized General Revenue Sharing through September 30, 1980 or the
first two quarters of FY81. Pending legislation will determine if the
program will be extended for another three year period.
Road use tax collected by the State from the registration of motor
ve is es, uel tax, license fees and the use tax on motor vehicles,
trailers and accessories and equipment is apportioned to each city on a
ratio of the city's population to the population of all Iowa cities. The
per capita estimate for FY81 is $29.50. This is $2.60 less than the FY80
per capita estimate. Although more cars are being licensed, they are fuel
economy models which have reduced gasoline sales.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
0
D. USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
Revenue from investments has become an important source of revenue
reflecting interest rate increases from 7.5 percent to 9 percent in FY79
to 13 percent in mid-FY80. The FY80 budget will be below actual receipts
because of the variance in interest rates. The budgeted amount was based
on an anticipated market yielding an average 11 percent rate in FY81. Use
of property includes parking revenue for metered and attendant lots
totalling $554,000 and revenue from rental of properties totalling
$38,822.
i
TABLE V
FY79 Actual FY80 Budget FY81 Budget
General Fund $ 67,302 $ 65,000 $ 89,740
Debt Service 3,654 -- 10,000
Capital Projects 295,598 200,000 300,000
Enterprise Fund 603,530 447,390 782,752
Trust 8 Agency 40,787 60,000 40,000
Special Assessment 7,707 -- --
Special Revenue 74
225 28 000 ,504 746,390 1,308
025
TOTAL1, 9 ,517
i
� xxxx
E. FINES AND FORFEITURES
Fines and forfeitures reflect $122,500 for $5.00 illegal parking fines and
$122,500 for $2.00 overtime parking fines. Library fines are assessed for
overdue or damaged property and fines from Magistrate Court are for
collection of fines assessed for violation of the City or State codes such
as motor vehicle violations and animal control violations.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIDES
x x x x
TABLE VI
FY79 Actual
FY80 Budget
FY81 Budget
Parking Fines
$245,699
$222,000
$255,000
Library Fines
11,996
12,000
18,000
MagistratesCourt
66 795
324,490
50 000
284,000
62 500
335,500
TOTAL
x x x x
Fines and forfeitures reflect $122,500 for $5.00 illegal parking fines and
$122,500 for $2.00 overtime parking fines. Library fines are assessed for
overdue or damaged property and fines from Magistrate Court are for
collection of fines assessed for violation of the City or State codes such
as motor vehicle violations and animal control violations.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIDES
7
F. LICENSES AND PERMITS
Under licenses and permits major revenues
for Housing and Inspection are
building permits ($80,000); plumbing and
electrical licenses ($3,000);
plumbing, electrical and mechanical/heating/air conditioning permits
($15,700); and rental permits ($24,000).
Miscellaneous receipts include
licenses or permits for bikes, peddlers, signs, trailers, and dance halls.
* * * *
TABLE VII
FY79 FY80
FY81
Housing and Inspection
Permits and Licenses $113,643 $109,000
$133,600
Engineering Sewer and
Paving Inspection 8,599 2,500
6,000
Animal Control 6,625 6,000
7,500
Beer & Liquor Permits 52,874 53,500
53,500
Cigarette Permits 12,875 13,500
13,500
Burial Permits 12,089 4,000
7,000
Misc. Licenses & Permits 12,089 37,135*
13,500
TOTAL $212,851 $225,635
$234,600
*In FY80, Housing Permits were budgeted under Miscellaneous and in FY81
it is budgeted under Housin- and Inspection Permit— s and Licenses.
****
G. MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE
****
TABLE VIII
FY79 FY80 FY81
$36,035 $112,526 $189,040
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES
9
3
Miscellaneous revenues are composed of refunds; reimbursement of
expenses and damages; miscellaneous sales; mass transit advertising;
sale of grain and commissions or concessions. The reason for the
increase from FY80 to FY81 is that workmen's camp reimbursements were
not included and we did not budget as conservatively on
reimbursements and refunds.
PART II
The General Fund revenue is used for general operating expenses such as
administration, police, fire, library, recreation, etc.
The debt service fund revenue must be used for payment of bonds and
interest on general obligation bond issues of the City.
Enterprise funds such as parking, sewer, water, refuse, landfill and the
airport are utilities or services supported primarily from revenues for
services rendered. In addition, parking, sewer and water revenues are
used to pay bonds and interest on revenue bond issues of the City. In
FY81, $223,136 of sewer revenue and $118,750 of water revenue will be
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIEs
REVENUE
BY FUND
TABLE IX
Receipt by
General
Debt
Capital
Trust
Special
Source
Fund
Service
Projects
Enterprise
& Agency
Revenue
Property Tax
$4,812,954
$1,509,024
905,442
Charges for
Services
849,815
$3,144,500
$ 66,000
Intergovern-
mental
852,980
$ 50,008
$1,978,576
Use of Money
& Property
89,740
10,000
$300,000
782,752
40,000
78,025
Fines & For-
feitures
213,000
122,500
Licenses &
Permits
234,600
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
45 650
7,0 3
98 390
4, 148, 1 2
45 000
1 450
1, 1 ,024
30 00
2,056,601
The General Fund revenue is used for general operating expenses such as
administration, police, fire, library, recreation, etc.
The debt service fund revenue must be used for payment of bonds and
interest on general obligation bond issues of the City.
Enterprise funds such as parking, sewer, water, refuse, landfill and the
airport are utilities or services supported primarily from revenues for
services rendered. In addition, parking, sewer and water revenues are
used to pay bonds and interest on revenue bond issues of the City. In
FY81, $223,136 of sewer revenue and $118,750 of water revenue will be
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIEs
transferred to pay general obligation issues which were sold to finance
sewer and water projects.
The Trust and Agency fund is established to cover pensions and related
employee benefits. These include social security, the Iowa Public
Employees Retirement System and the Police and Fire Pension contributions
of the City.
The Special Revenue Fund projection includes Federal Revenue Sharing and
Road Use Tax, and interest income from investments of these monies.
Although Federal Revenue Sharing funds can be used for general operating
expenses, Road Use Tax must be used for the maintenance, operations and
supervision of the public streets.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES
FY81 BUDGET FINANCIAL STATUS
According to the Revenue Projections report, total General Fund Revenue
is $7,098,743 (Page 8). This amount does not include transfers -in which
are estimated as follows:
General Revenue Sharing -
The assumption is being made that the General Revenue
Sharing program will be extended for another three
years and thus available for a full twelve months in
FY81. The total $594,000 projected to be received
will be used in the General Fund to fund Aid to Agencies
and Mass Transit. In the FY80 Budget $550,953 was
budgeted as General Revenue Sharing funding for these
two programs.
Road Use Tax -
The revenue projection of $1,408,448 will be allocated
to Street Maintenance and Traffic Engineering operating
costs first with any remainder being allocated to
capital project street improvements.
Administrative Expense Transfer -
This transfer constitutes a reimbursement to the General
Fund from Enterprise Funds for general administrative
costs and utility billing and collection costs. Since
expenditure budget amounts are not finalized, the actual
transfer has not yet been computed. An estimate based
upon the FY80 budgeted amount is $275,000.
$2 Parking Tickets -
This revenue is receipted into the Parking Revenue Fund.
Since it is not anticipated that it will be needed for
Parking Systems Operations, it will most likely be
available to transfer to the General Fund at year end.
Prior to 1979 and the sale of Parking Revenue Bonds,
the revenue from these tickets had been receipted into
the General Fund for general operations.
Adding the above transfer amounts to General Fund Revenue results in
total receipts as follows:
Per Revenue Projection Memo $ 7,098,743
Transfers: General Revenue Sharing 594,000
Road Use Tax 1,408,448
Administrative Expense 275,000
$2 Parking Tickets 100,000
$ 9,476,191
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOIIIES
FY80 budgeted receipts adjusted to be comparable is:
Total Receipts $ 9,468,948
Less: Contingency Amount (251,938)
Tort Liability Levy 263,306)
$ 8,953,704
A contingency amount of 3% was added in FY80 to both receipts and
expenditures in an effort to avoid having to formally amend the budget
a second time during the fiscal year. It is deducted above because
the FY81 budget figures do not as yet include a contingency. As per
the Revenue Projection Report, a tort liability will not be needed in
FY81. Likewise, the expenditures listed below do not include any
expenses which would be paid out of the available tort liability fund
balance.
FY81 Revenue _ $9 476191 _ 5,g% increase
FY80 Revenue$8:953:7044
Thus the FY81 revenue is a 5.8% increase over the FY80 budgeted revenues.
Expenditure budgets submitted by all City departments are now being
reviewed by the Finance Department and the City Manager. Separate
budgets were submitted for the current service level and expanded
service levels. A preliminary expenditure total for current service
levels only is $10,080,153. This includes a subsidy of $184,206 for
Refuse Collection Operations, assuming that the Refuse monthly fee
remains at $2 per month. The following expanded service levels (new
programs or first-time funding out of General Fund) may be considered
necessary additions to the current service levels:
Housing Inspection $ 111,276
Senior Center (6 months) 86,074
Asst -Transit Manager 16,388
Total Current Service Level $ 213,738
Level Expenditures 10,080,153
GRAND TOTAL $ 10,293,891
As of these projections, expenditures exceed revenue by $817,700.
The expenditure budget requests are being thoroughly reviewed and the
total expenditure amount can be expected to be reduced somewhat when
the proposed budgets are presented to Council.
One alternative for a major decrease in General Fund expenditures is to
budget for health insurance and life insurance under Trust & Agency
instead of the General Fund. Total group insurance costs included in
the General Fund expenditure budget figure above amounts to $349,330.
This would cause an increase in the tax levy amount for Trust and Agency
of $0.594 per $1,000 of assessed valuation and would enable the City to
increase total property tax revenue. This would reduce the variance
between total receipts and total expenditures to $468,370.
This information is presented to apprise Council of the financial status
in the General Fund Budget for FY81. Not taken into consideration in
the above computations is the proposed formula for State Transit Grants
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES :101nE5
and the possibility that use of such a formula could reduce those revenues
listed above by up to $125,000. Included in the revenues listed above is
the reduction in property tax due to the expected rollback on commercial
property. However, if legislation on this rollback is not passed, it
would mean an additional $200,000 could be added to total revenues. Both
of these items could significantly affect the variance between receipts
and expenditures.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIIIES
H
P
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
FY 80 CDBG BUDGET
CURRENT VS. PROJECTED STATUS
ACCOUNT NUMBER/PROGRAM
TOTAL
APPROVED
FUNDS
CUMULATIVE
FUNDS
EXPENDED
10/31/79
ANTICIPATED
EXPENDITURES/
ENCUMB.
6/30/80
ANTICIPATED
UNENCUMB.
BALANCE
6/30/80
8110 CDBG Administration
140,040
71,165
140,04)
-0-
8131 Housing Rehabilitation
172,460
71,489
172,460
-0-
8132 Neighborhood Site Improvements
396,510
35,806
396,510
-0-
8133 Ralston Creek Flood Control
1,559,905
35,037
1,259,905
300,000
8134 dousing Code Enforcement
101,000
29,411
101,000
-0-
8135 Aid to Victims of Spouse Abuse
80,000
365
80,000
-0-
8141 Senior Center
986,282
4,555
986,282
-0-
8142 Nelson Adult Center
50,000
50,000
50,000
-0-
8151 Comprehensive Planning
40,775
5,336
25,775
15,000
8152 Human Needs Plan
8,136
8,136
8,136
-0-
8153 Energy Conservation
34,280
3,536
20,280
14,000
8154 River Corridor Improvements
74,050
4,920
74,050
-0-
8160 Urban Renewal Activities
212,797
16,941
62,797
150,000
8171 Architectural Barrier Removal
50,000
54
50,000
-0-
8172 Neighborhood Park Improvements
31,535
8,503
31,535
-0-
8180 Contingency
402,701
-0-
-0-
402,701
0 _.
PROGRAM TOTALS
4,340,471
345,254
3,458,770
881,701
* Note: See attached statement.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
Attachment to FY 80 CDBG Budget Status
Anticipated unencumbered balance for June 30,1980 is as follows:
$ 300,000 Ralston Creek Flood Control - remaining funds for
North Branch dry dam
15,000 Comprehensive Planning - may be reallocated to
Ralston Creek Flood Control
14,000 Energy Conservation - may be reallocated to Ralston
Creek Flood Control
150,000 Urban Renewal Activities - leave intact to pay for
outstanding R-14 relocation/acquisition claims
and redevelopment monitoring in FY 81
402,701 Contingency - reallocate as suggested below
$ 881,701
Contingency must be reallocated to specific projects prior to June 30,1980.
Following is a suggested reallocation:
$ 10,000 Housing Rehabilitation - FY 80, 312 Administration
200,000 Senior Center - FY 81, Construction Budget
27,693 Senior Center - FY 81, 6 months Administration
77,015 CDBG Administration - FY 81
87,993 Ralston Creek Flood Control - FY 81, North Branch
$ 402,701
O
Additional funds ($250,000) resulting from the sale of the Block 64
hotel site may be budgeted during FY B1 for the Ralston Creek North
Branch project.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: Deramber 12, 1979
To: City Council l
From: Rosemary Vitosh, Director of Finance (Z J
Re: Purchase of New Library Site
Since central libraries are not eligible for CDBG activities, it is
necessary for the new library site to be purchased from the CDBG Program.
Council has indicated that they wish to sell the old library site for
commercial redevelopment and use the sale proceeds to purchase the new
library site.
HUD regulations require that the land purchase be made when the Library
Board takes possession of the site for construction. The bond proceeds
will be disbursed over time during the construction period. This allows
for the disbursement of the land price to the CDBG program from the bond
proceeds at this time.
As soon as construction is far enough along to accurately predict the
completion and occupancy dates for the new library, plans can be made for
the sale of the old library. The current construction schedule projects
completion in January, 1981. This would call for marketing of the old
library site in the fall of 1980. Any major construction delays would of
course change this timing.
'The sale of the old library site would be timed to coincide with the move
from the old library to the new library. However, it is possible that a
two to three month lag could occur between construction completion and
actual occupancy of the building due to the installation of carpeting and
the amount of time needed for moving. This would necessitate a temporary
transfer from the General Fund of $155,000 to the Library Construction
Project Fund. Upon sale of the old library site, the General Fund will be
reimbursed from the sale proceeds. If this occurs between January and
June, it can easily be taken from the fund balance with little cash flow
affect. However, the General Fund must be reimbursed by the end of June
in order to avoid cash flow problems due to the low rate of revenue
received in the first quarter of the fiscal year. It should be possible
during FY82 budget planning to foresee any such problems and make
allowances for it in that budget so that a cash flow problem is averted.
This temporary use of bond proceeds has been discussed with Lolly Eggers,
Library Director and the attached memo did go to the Library Board.
bj/sp
°235/.3
FIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOIIIES
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: December 12, 1979
To: Library Board
From: Rosemary Vitosh, Director of Finance
Neal Berlin, City Manager
Re: Purchase of Land from CDBG
It is necessary to purchase the site for the new library building from the
Community Development Block Grant program (CDBG) at a cost of $155,000.
The bonds sold for library construction did not include this land cost as
it was the intent of the Council to sell the old library building and use
the sale proceeds for purchase of the land from CDBG. HUD regulations
require that the CDBG program be paid for the land when the Library Board
takes possession of the land for construction. The timing variance
between the purchase of the new site and sale of the old building
necessitates that funds be found in the interim for the land purchase.
Therefore, the $155,000 will be paid out of the bond proceeds at this
time. When the Library Board needs these funds to complete the project,
the $155,000 will then be taken from the General Fund and transferred to
the Library Construction Project Fund. The General Fund will be
reimbursed at such time as the old library building is sold.
Because of the delay in construction of the Library Building, a sufficient
cash balance is available in the project fund to allow this payment.to be
made without reducing current investments of the bond proceeds.
Therefore, this action will not result in a reduction in the amount of
interest income already projected to be earned from the temporary
investment of the bond proceeds ($329,818).
cc: City Council
bj3/1
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES rD]InES
City o4 lova Cl
Date: December 13, 1979
To: City Council
From: Richard Plastino, Director of Public Works
Rosemary Vitosh, Director of Finance
Re: Assistant Transit Manager/Designated Bus Stop Signs
In an earlier memo, it was suggested that the City immediately retain an
Assistant Transit Manager and install designated bus stop signs throughout the
community. This particular item was discussed at the Monday informal meeting
December 17.
The expense for these two items is as follows:
Designated bus stop signs $15,000
(material only, labor will be absorbed
by Traffic Engineering)
Assistant Transit Manager - 6 months $10,625
($17,000 plus 25% fringe benefits for
k year)
Total $25,625
The source of revenue is as follows:
Unanticipated payment from University Hgts. $11,800
Return of 1978 transit grant $13,825
Total $25,625
The City recently received reimbursement for the State portion of the 1978
transit grant. The total received was $69,700. Some of these funds are being
used to cover the cost of two extra buses that were started August 1979. $25,000
of this money must also be used to cover the difference between the anticipated
FY80 state transit grant and the actual FY80 state transit grant.
Another potential source of additional revenue is fare box revenue. Following
standard financial procedure, the City was very conservative estimating fare
revenue (we estimated it low). It appears that actual fare revenue will exceed
the budgeted amount. This means that at the end of the year (July 1, 1980) there
will be some amount of additional revenue in the transit system. Additional
fare revenue could be used as a source of extra income to fund the Assistant
Transit Manager and designated bus stops. We felt it was better to use firm,
identifiable sources such as the University Heights payment and return of the
1978 transit grant.
In summary, identified available money is available to fund an Assistant Transit
Manager and designated bus stops immediately. Public Works does recommend that
we start the signing program immediately and begin hiring procedures for an
Assistant Transit Manager immediately. .
cc: Hugh Mose
bj4/8-9
MICROFILMED BY
JORM M'CROLAB
CCDAk RAPIDS -DES HOMES
231/5
Date
To:
December 10, 1979
Dick Plastino and Neal Berlin
From:
Hugh
Mose
'
Re:
FY81
State
Transit Assistance
At a meeting in Des Moines last Friday Frank Sherkow of IDOT's Public
Transit Division unveiled the state's funding formula for FY81.
�> As incredible as it seems, the state has developed a formula that is even
r t than the former discretionary program, e
declares that sustenance fun ing Rs o be assisted
by federal programs, and that state operating assistance will be based
mainly on improved performance.
The new formula is designed to compare each transit system against its
performance in the previous year. For instance, ridership,
ridership/expense, revenue/expense, ridership/capita, revenue
miles/capita, and revenue miles/expense are compared for FY78 and FY79.
Also, two subjective performance factors are considered: an overall
system evaluation and an assessment of accomplishment of contract
objectives. The final factor included in the state's formula is an
j evaluation of local transit support.
The proposed formula adversely affects all of the larger systems in each
of the three categories (large urban, small urban, regional). Operations
such as Des Moines, Iowa City, and Region 10 all lose substantial funding,
a or show substantial increases.
ercen a eowa Cit is the biggest os our state assistance
rIB 1 drop by approximate y o , alville, on the other
and will actually receive more
hand, receives a tremendous increase,
dollars ($74,932) than Iowa City.
The state's position seems to be that the new Section 18 funding will make
up for the lost state assistance. In my view, this is contrary to the
intent of the whole Section 18 program, as we are simply substituting
federal assistance for local support. Also, this type of formula, which
is based on performance evaluation, has been severely criticized by the
American Publc Transit Association (APTA), the Urban Mass Transit
Administration (UMTA), as well as other transit interests around the
country.
It is imperative that Iowa City, either singly or in cooperation with the
other adversely affected properties, move immediately to pursuade the
state Public Transit Division to modify their formula proposal. I
understand the end of
ec r. We should use all means available, particularly wit
legislators, to insure that this formula concept is not implemented. i
cc: Rosemary Vitosh
Mel Jones
bjl/18-19
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROIAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ?10111E5
3516
City of Iowa Ci.y
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 13, 1979
TO: City Council /
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Director of Planning $ Program Developmentl'�J1
Marianne Milkman, Planner/Program Analyst M
RE: Riverfront Improvements - Rocky Shore Drive Trail
Congress has finally approved the Surface Transportation Act. Appropriations under
this Act include $4 million for bikeways nationwide. Steve Larson, Bikeways
Coordinator for IDOT, has informed us that neither the State Federal Highway Admin-
istration (FHWA) nor the Regional FHWA Office in Kansas City have any information
on how these federal bikeway funds will be allocated, nor what regulations will be
used. However, they assume the funds will be allocated regionally, with states
forwarding requests to their region on a first come first served basis.
Larson has therefore suggested that we prepare a preliminary application for federal
bikeway funds for the Rocky Shore Drive Bikeway. He feels that the Rocky Shore
Bikeway project is a strong one because of the link with the Finkbine Commuter trail
which was constructed with 80% Federal Bikeway Demonstration funds.
Larson points out that there is no guarantee that this is the way the federal funding
will work, but there is a lot of interest in bikeway funding around the state, and
forwarding an application by January 31, 1980, would be a good way for us to get a
head start.
At a meeting on Wednesday, December 12, 1979, the Riverfront Commission recommended
that we proceed with a preliminary application as soon as possible, in order to
encumber the FY80 CDBG Riverfront Improvement funds to be used as part of the local
match.
Funding for the trail would be approximately as follows:
CDBG (Riverfront Improvement) $ 22,000
Project GREEN 5,000
Federal Aid Highway Act Bikeways Funds
(75% match) 81,000
Total $108,000
If it appear) by April 1, 1980, that we will not know whether federal funding for
this project will be approved (or if federal funding is not approved), the Riverfront
Commission has recommended that as much as possible of the trail be constructed with
CDBG Riverfront Improvement funds.
With your concurrence, we will proceed with the application for federal bikeway
funds at this time, and if necessary, make an alternative recommendation on use of
the CDBG Riverfront Improvement funds in April, according to the figures below.
a 3y;p
- - .-,
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Ito IDES
City Council
December 13, 1979
Page 2
Riverfront Commission ReCe1N11011au L1
Funds ($75,000)
Alternative 1
Sturgis Ferry Park Boat Ramp
Rocky Shore Drive Trail
Completion of City Park Trail
Administration
Total
Y
4
e Alternative 2
Use
$20,000
22,000
25,500
7,500
$75,000
Sturgis Ferry Park Boat Ramp $20,000
Rocky Shore Drive Trail 47,500
Administration 7 500
Tota] 75,000
DRK/MM/ssw
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101rIES
City of Iowa City'`
MEMORAN UM
DATE: Dec r 12, 1979
TO: Planning and Zoning Commis o� ,,_Q. �1
FROM: Don Schmeiser, Senior Plan n /I,/�ui �
RE: New Proposed Zoning Ordinance and Map Review and Adoption Schedule
Consistent with the Council's desire to "adopt the new zoning ordinance and map
sometime next spring" and your desire to submit a formal recommendation to Council
concerning said zoning ordinance and map an or before April 1, I have developed a
schedule for continued review and ultimate adoption of the zoning ordinance and map
as follows:
January 3 Regular formal meeting
7 Review of "River Corridor Overlay Zone" with Riverfront Commission
10 Review of "High-rise Multi -family Residential Zone"
14 Regular informal meeting
17 Regular formal meeting
21 Review of "Mobile Home Residential Zone"
24 Review of Zoning Map
28 Review of Zoning Map
31 Review of Zoning Map
February 4 Regular informal meeting
7 Regular formal meeting
11 Review of "additional regulations"
14 Review of "sign regulations"
18 Holiday
19 Regular informal meeting - set zoning ordinance and map for public
hearing
21 Regular formal meeting
25 General review of zoning ordinance and map
28 General review of zoning ordinance and map
March 3 Regular informal meeting
6 Regular formal meeting - public hearing on zoning ordinance and map
10 Formulation of recommendation to City Council
13 Continued formulation of recommendation to City Council
17 Regular informal meeting
20 Regular formal meeting
24 Continued formulation of recommendation to City Council
27 Final recommendations approved.
You will note by the schedule that it represents a rather ambitious effort on the
part of the Commission to complete review of the zoning ordinance, particularly in
review of the zoning map. The Commission, therefore, should make every attempt to
review the ordinance at regular informal and formal meetings and/or on Saturdays
between January 5 and February 9. Following are the dates of the Saturdays between
the above dates:
.�23yr
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS.OLS II01:jtS
Planning and Zoning Commission
December 12, 1919
Page 2
January 5
12
19
26
February 2
9
Finally, the "Tree Regulations" and the "Flood Plain Overlay Zones" are not indicated
for review by the Commission. These sections are regulations and zones which were
previously adopted by ordinance and have been rewritten to place them in the new
zoning ordinance format.
DS/ssw
cc: D nis Kraft, Director of PPD
7eal Berlin, City Manager
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES FD)Ir1Es
City of Iowa Cif,
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 12, 1979
TO; Neal Berlin, City Manager
City Council
FROM: Lyle G. Seydel, Housing Coordinator%
RE; Section 8 Preliminary Proposal - New Construction
IA05-0043-002
Highview Manor Apartments
Iowa City, Iowa
Developer: Larry Carlson
I. The Des Moines HUD Office has referred the above referenced proposal to
the City for comment in accordance with current regulations. Those re-
gulations state objections to approval may be based on one or more of
the following:
(a) The proposed number of dwelling units exceeds the 3 -year
HAP goal by housing type or by household type.
(b) The proposed location is not within the locations in the
applicable HAP, and is objectionable for specified reasons.
(c) The proposed housing assistance is inconsistent with any other
limiting factors set forth in the HAP.
The regulations also state that the local government may choose not to com-
ment, and, further, that other comments relevant to a determination by the
Field Office may be offered.
2. The proposal was submitted by Larry Carlson, Moline, Illinois. It con-
tains provisions for 100 two-bedroom units, (10 Buildings, 2 story)
placed on a tract of 12 acres situated at the Southwest quadrant of the
intersection of Highway 1 and Old Dubuque Road.
3. The parcel is now zoned RIA and could not be developed at proposed den-
sity without rezoning action. The comprehensive plan designates the
area as "Office and Research Park"; therefore, before rezoning could
be accomplished, the Comprehensive Plan would have to be amended. The
terrain in this specific instance is quite rough and contains several
sharp ravines and probably is not suitable for Office and Research Park
Development.
4. Development at proposed density could be serviced by public utilities.
Water, sewer, gas, electricity are, or will be, available at or near
the site.
S. The city bus passes the proposed site twice in the morning and twice in
in the evening. The nearest regular bus stop is at Prairie du Chien Road
and North Dodge Street, approximately 'i mile from the site.
�? 377
FIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
2
6. The three year housing program goal (July I, 1979 - June 30, 1982)
is as follows:
Housing Assistance for Renters = 265 (40 eldc-rly
(202 Small Family
(23 Large Family
Further broken down as follows:
New Rental Units = 145 20 Elderly 11.6 Small Family 9 Large Family
Rehabilitation 20 10 Small Family 10 Large Family
Existing Sec. 8 100 20 Elderly 76 Small Family 4 Large Family
In view of the above the propos.; is in accord with the HAP.
7. It is recommended that HUD be er,..uraged to approve the allocation but
advise them of the potential problem with zoning and suggest the developer
submit an alternate site(s).
LGS/cf
FIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES
CITY OF IOWA
CITY
CIVIC CEITEf? 41U E WASHINGION SI IJVVA CI1Y 1CM/A 5224(-) (319) SS•=; 1=;'.:.
December 12, 1979
Norman C. Jurgens, Supervisor
Department of Housing $ Urban Development
Des Moines Service Office
Federal Building, 210 Walnut Street
Des Moines, Iowa 50309
Re: Letter Your Office dated December 6, 1979, Subject:
Section 8 Preliminary Proposal - New Construction
IA 05-0043-002
High View Manor Apartments
Iowa City, Iowa
Developer: Larry Carlson
Dear Mr. Jurgens
Pursuant to 24 CFR Part 891.204, the following comments are provided
concerning the Section 8 Preliminary Proposal referenced above:
a. The proposal is in accord with the Housing Assistance
Plan submitted and approved for this city.
b. Utilities (water, sewer, gas, electricity) are avail-
able at or near the site.
c. The city bus passes the site four times daily --current
schedule is 7:30 $ 8:00 a.m., 4:00 6 4:30 p.m. Nearest
regular bus stop is approximately ]S mile.
d. Current zoning will not permit development at proposed
density. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan designates the
area as "Office and Research Park"; therefore, rezoning
to a residential designation would require amending the
Comprehensive Plan. This would be time consuming and
there are no assurances that the area can or will be re-
zoned to permit development at the proposed density.
e. The city is pleased to know that private enterprise is
willing to participate in providing housing for low in-
come l�mlilies and encourages approval of the allocation
of units to this community. The proposed site is ques-
tionable; therefore, it is suggested that the developer
be asked to select an alternate site or sites.
Sincerely
Robert A. Vevera
Mayor
cc: Eastern Iowa Association of Regional Planning Commissions
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROIAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
M r
o? DEP,
1 DEP. EM ENT
I OF HOUSING AND URBAN G
+' IIIIIIII i•r, cLOPMENT
SERVICE OFFICE
FEDERAL RUILDIND, 710 WALNUT STREET
•�!"O �� DES MOR!
CS, IOWq 50707
RN(IIU\ V11
PrA. uJ 011e. IWiLhr y;
r,Il Wb luw 4N n.l
,114101, December 6, 1979
Honorable Robert A. Vevera
Mayor of Iowa City
i City Hall
Iowa City, lows 52240
aDear Playor Vevera:
Subject: Section 8 Prelininary Proposal - New Construction
IA05-0043-002
High View Manor Apartments
Iowa' City, Iowa
DEVELOPER: Larry Carlson
IN NI:V�y MEIEN 141
We have received and are considering a Preliminary Proposal to develop
housing in your jurisdiction under the Section 8 Housing Assistance
Payments Program for new construction. The proposal consists of 100 units
at Route 1 and Old Dubuque Road.
The proposed construction would include the following units:
BUILDING UNIT SIZE NUMBER OF UNITS
TYPE No. of Bedrooms
otafi�jy
Ualk-up TwD-herb —
Pursuant to Section 213(a) of the Housing and Community Development Act
of 1974, your unit of government has the opportunity to object to our
approval of any application on the grounds that the application is
inconsistent with your Local Housing Assistance Plan as approved by HUD
for your jurisdiction.
The review criteria to be considered by your unit of government are
outlined in Subpart B, Applications for Housing Assistance in Areas With
Housing Assistance Plans, of the regulations in 24 CFR Part 891, Review
of Applications for Housing Assistance published in the Federal Register
October 30, 1978,
s
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEIIAR RAPIDS -0[s IIOIIIES
r'.
2.
You are required to submit any objection by your unit of government
based on these grounds no later than 30 days after the date of this
letter. If your unit of government does not intend to object, please
notify us as soon as possible, so that we can expedite the completion of
our review. Any other comments your unit of government might have which
are relevant to my determination concerning approval of this application
for the housing assistance (e.g., site related comments; whether the
Proposal is approvable under local codes and zoning ordinances) would be
appreciated.
Sincerely,
' Norman C. Jurgens
Supervisor
Attachments
P.S. A copy of this letter is being sent to the A-95 State and Areawide
Clearinghouses serving your jurisdiction for coordination purposes.
cc: Office of Planning and Programming
Eastern Iowa Association of Regional
Planning Commissions
s•
1;
as
a;
'i
a 3v�
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MINES
I yuan Apporred
EVARAp� OMR NO. 63410676
B
I{EPAR Thir F"o1,. INr:ANTI Vk11AN III:Vt:LOPMCNT
NfENrl FC DI.n AL IIOUSINLAUAIINISIIIATIrIN .'�iri APPLICATION - PROJECT MORTGAGE INSURANCE
11401 View Manor
•
❑M.nu/aewred [yconrentlonwr euW
rnA.'NpmWr.-- -
IA050043 —DO;�,
TO: U.S. Dep[. of Ilou :in); d Urban Uevelopml•ul
'
__�ZDf-700
The undersigned •loon she
and the FEDERAL ROUSING COMMISSIONER.
principal amount It E
221 (d) (4) of the National Housing Act, mid Inun to be accused by
National
al Hotta ,
to be insured under the provisions of Section
a !fust mortRHEe un
Insurance of adduring construction b7 is, ❑ u not desired.❑ Feasibility (Reha),)
the property hereinafter described.
[I
Type it Mortgagor. O Phi ❑ LD ❑ II -S ❑ NI' Permanent hlnrtRsge Interest Itale
SAh1A ❑ Conditional ❑ Firm Sect ion 8
7. S
.a. Ar1.tlunJrlp- Do".... Personal or
Other µatwean S.Wr
%..NMA Preliminary
A. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION Of PROPERTY:
he Allcorn
I. NUe<I Nur. 2:5trretI oliu J. Aluelldpd lty (. Cl... Toll
--- old Dubuque Rd. Iowa City 22
b. CoonsY O.Snbmd2lPCode
11.1.,•.
Johnson Iowa
Z Tyra of holerL ❑ tlavato. a Walkup N, Nu.."oll.4 U. soundest .... :
❑ Row IT.11.1 ❑ pebchad ❑ 7 Stab un Fu11
Pu0.1 L'nwl Va. O 1 Flour.
S[mnurel
Serol-Iluaehed G1.dr ❑ Hasemen[
I u•
inclul Nlen un
❑ H.rnt. ❑ Spare ❑Slab E5 Grade
I1. Number of Unita 12. Numhe, 13. List Aer.." HUUding. and An.Lbt
1,l us, tidings
o
Ree,tlon Flemlle. and Ana
C&,apo.rd Revenue Nnn-A.r,
1'lavgrounds, Low Density
.�L,bunt 10010
1'rees, Large Green Spaces
rmnE
SITp rN Chou am,n.•
x1,11.111NG INFOIIM ATION
11. DImrnOON: laL 12 Acres I6.Yr.Vuut I6a.
❑M.nu/aewred [yconrentlonwr euW
I. by
I. by (Lor so. ft. Ned ❑Modulo ❑Cempunenb
C..p{
15.'Lorsinp ltYrnl)'C ! 11, rN1 epi 71CP I6b. Eaterlor F'm1sil 17. Ntmrtunl SY,tem
1<-I (.•ee Letter) 17a. Floor Sy,; lLa.. Ilollna•A/c
)
I•.'ood Wood Food Joist F.lec
It INFORMATION CONCERNING
'
LAND Oil PROPERTY:
IU.
ti.Ir
Ac ved
20.
Pureh.- Prier
21,
Addltluu.l (:wb
Paid
•L 2. Ir Lra,ehold
Mmual Ground
2,I.,
'i:l b.
Oust N,d.N
.a. Ar1.tlunJrlp- Do".... Personal or
Other µatwean S.Wr
he Allcorn
Renl
Totd Cort
11.1.,•.
and HYYet
11-29-79 { 84,000 { None s ------ 84,000 clone
{ .84,000
2S• Utihan: tibµc Co.munt[Y Dialusr 26. Unusual Site Feature.:
fm. bill
Were, Cy ❑ to Site ❑ Cub ❑ FW. ,.y
❑ µoak Form.tlan. ❑ Erosion None
sewers CIC= ❑ to Site 1.'l
❑ Poor Drainage ❑ plRlr Water Table CJ µebinlnt Walla
Cl Olhar(SprcUy) ❑ OffSOe imp rove... to
C. ESTIMATE OF INCOME:
27. Numbs of Llrin{Ana U
nit Ileo! Total Alonitd
Family Type Unit (Square Feel)y Reof
Composition of
Per Month Vnll Type PBR
100 876 sC 2 BR, 1B, k, DA,s 349
$70
I �crr�s
r
OV 30
iL=F-sI.
WO° CASss
12N.
T(ITAL ESTIAIATED RENTAMILI' VNITSt'1.'J.
NumWt u! PukbR Swed:Attended
oh, n No." 200 . per ntnnlh
- O-
IJ'S,lf Park 200—
Corned Nyne. eI' Per."hill
- Duund
Lrrrl sr.IL,4't_- per M.. t t. I.....InOther
Level. 11.. x tPer ro. It.l:nunW34,900TOTAL
ESTIMATEDGROSS PROJECT INCCCUPANCY
{
:12,
TOTAL
TOTAL ANNUAL RENT (I enOI.1' 12numi IO) * 418,800
aa. l.nn• FI"ur Air.; Net R.M.- ' Ar.idenlial Aru; OS, Net 1lenbbir Cpmmereid Mea:
IIf•.600
87,600
M. Il. .a. It. - 0 -
ai. M. is.
NON -REVENUE PRODUCING SPACE
Typr or Employ,, No. IWnmr. Corm osi Onn of Unil Location .l Unit in Pn.feel
D. EOUIPME.NT AND SEIf VIdXS INCLUDED IN RENT: ((,lu'r'k .I ) )re enile Ilenl.rl
,17. t: V 111YM t:N T.
u lu
Inra IGo hr Elrcl EJ U.drwa.hn
.l N. SEII VICt:N:
❑Ilea
:441. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS:
.V glint 141,1,* Else.) ❑ C.qut
❑ 11.1 war.,
GAS: [) CouFmt [J Au CnnAluonmt
.. ❑Repayable
❑ Non•heor Y.hle
Au Cond. IEouip. Only1J Dupe.
�_
ELEC.: ❑ Ilnt Ilnt Wan'
b. Procip.l
knrhrn L.Ir.Nt Iln ❑ hwtmmin Y"nl
❑ Cnnkint ❑ Au CanAmonlnt
B.I.C. t
_ L.undr, I.rdu.n Q Tennb Chun
❑ Lphp, etc.. in Unit
e. Annual
Uupu..l [I'Ulba lyy ri0/
OTHER FUEL: ❑ Ileo CI Ilnt W.br
Payment f
All- l.(i�1IL.L ion i
Sl rl'VeS
lis❑ WATER 1`j oTREA Trash
- -----
d. 7trmunlnt
Removal
Tom
G;;,- ✓ 7-/
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES :101MES
BEST -
IPO*QL0IENT ^�
kVAR ABLE
I. NA11 ES, yll t:SXFs AND TF1.1:1'II(Nf: NI11d If CltN UF'I'III•: FULLIIN'INC:
L NYUNM)IIaN): N.nv. AJdr... ,W ZIP CGN.:
!-' �; R. CON'TRACTI)It: N.mr. ndda ...e.•1 LII• L'uJ.:
Larry Carl::on I ��
3527 12th Avenue �I
Flollne, Illinois 61265
TO Ill., NMIIiU
Trlrnena. N.lmb.r. (309) 797-8508
�: Trlrnhnnr Mmtlwr
J
•- _ name. tinny.. �mJ /.IP Cuda^ ;I :1. NI•UNMlIt . Al I (IIrN1.1 : N. mr, Alhoe . an I LII• I: nrle:
Don 3'. Nordstrom l "-I
I
224 18 Street
Rock Island,Illinois 61201 •l'(( Illi NMIRD
I'
_j
T.I.abml. Na ml.rr. (309) 786-714.1 b
li...... ........ ._
14.
r—
I
Name. Addicts and "LIP Cadr,
Sam Cnatovicll
3433 52 Street
Moline, Illinois 61265
Num
�i i.A11C111TECT: Name,Addm..andzll•Cudr.
Non Nordstrom
Murdstrom 6 Associates
501 Rock Island (tank Rldg,
I' Rock Island, Illinois 61201
I'
NnmAvr; (309) 786-7143
The undersigned, as the principal spomur of the propuu•d mortgagor, certifies that he is familiar with the proviamns of the Regula•
lions of the Federal Housing Commissioner under the above identified section of the National Housing Act and that to the brat of his
knowledge and belief the mortgagor has complied, or will be able to comply, with all of lho lu n•quurnnrnls thereof which are pra•n•ry uisik•
insurance of the mortgage under such acetion.
The undersigned further certifies that to the beat of his knowledge and belief nu information or data contained herein or in lh, es•
hibils or attachmen(a listed herein are in any way false or incorrect and that tile) are truly dv.%vriptive of the project or proPrrty which is
intended as the security for the proposed mortgage and that (lie proposed construction will out viulate zoning ordinances ur restrictions
of record.
The undersigned agrees with the Federal llousing Administration that pursuant la the rtnryirements of life F FIA Regulations, la)
neither he nor anyone authorized to act for him will drelin , to sell• rent orptjrerwisa• make available any of the properly or hou.ing in
the multifamily project ill prospective purchaser or tenant because of itis tilde, color, religion or national•onei'l; (r) he will comply
with fa•dMai, stat, ,,if lural laws and ordinances prohibiting discrimination; and (r) his failure ur refuvll to t•ougdy wllh the ra•y uirrnu•nls
of either (a) or (b) shall be proper basis for the Commissioner to rejecl rete tp for (afore business with the complyflotation will,idenIt,,
ifivil fl to laky
any, olhei corrective action he may deem necessary,
! L ��� //�/i� RECEIVED FHA BY
Dale: "ovembcr 29, 1979 ..{Sigo. / (/G� _�i
L.Lllllwaa) I NOV 30 1979 � t,
IfE(ll'l:,il'I'lIR(:f)illll%'Ill:\'l'r ❑l:nnditnnnl UI•irm L CODE CASH SCH
'Ill: l'lildiltal. Hill .il\C lYLIIIiI.i,illh\l:'ll: ta••- —•_-.r
hirtunia fu IIIc it the .\'reline. pj Ihr Animin l Ho,,00p :Irl uL•nri/irrl in Ihr Inrrp;uur_ nlrlrLrnhnn wnl 111 I f6•euinGrun
upplural.Ir then -to. rrgru•.rt is In•rrbc rnndr aur Ihr utunnrr• rr/n ruuuu mil ......I In in, nrr a nu.rlpgcl• ..nervine der• prup,vlc dr.rriLrJ uL..rr.
:I f err-.Ianonnfinn u/ I/,,- upphrtn m
naol Ihr i u r c vl r •ptil r, der oadrrnleI'll runsull•r.' It• la he h%orahh•
oprop'e'l .uid,l.. inlr2.b•d m
aWkilipu loan fit the pnripld .... rmnl of F I•t •y6ft. jfiU I .
u lrlr•h will I.r•nr lal.v`
rtl til ., willrrquvr n•larvuuvlr uI prinrgad nrr, n prrind o/ nuua chs nrr•nrdolg fn nnrnrMulion Ida", ggn•I•r/tip, ur —_--
Innrrnure of odvnnr,,t during ron.slrucfion El IJ. Ort not desired.
11.0 und�rt¢..nl Ihm Ill,- Iuourring vIpense. in III,, nruuunr o/ g
nor e.l. 1.1; .., .
'�. til Ihr nrnuunl n/ vnur rnrn roil uu•n I.
llr•rrlrlfh it rh". L h•r ,.'
Idonn..
Iddract n/.Ilnrltna.•I': 'fu Cr \salla
11 3111111"'t to nripmonvni... that Ito• tool gill
n•Inrh a or Irrvnrnf of rhe npphrv:lurn l•'•• rv,p ord LI I // 1 16•r•n
.irgnr•J: _�_
IYrmaurd Murl[a[rrl .—... —
FOR FHA usr rwi v
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DCS MOINES
ti.
�
IOWA CITY CRISIS INTERVENTION CENTER
112% E. Washington Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Memo To: Crisis Center Funding.Boards
From: Kay Duncan, Director
RE: Crisis Center Fiscal and Program Activities,
July 1 --September 30, 1979
71979
Cribs Line: 351.0140
Business Office: 3512726
Enclosed you will find Quarterly Financial Reports for both the
Crisis Center and Transient Services.
A summary of program activities is as follows:
* Crisis Intervention Procram
Crisis intervention counseling, information and referrals,
and emergency transportation was provided on a 24-hour,
7 -flays per week basis to anyone who contacted the Center for
assistance. Such assistance was provided by trained volun-
teers and free of charge.
* Food Bank Procram
Local residents needing emergency food assistance were pro-
vided with canned food items from our food bank and vouchers
to purchase perishable food items at local grocery stores.
The canned food items and funds for vouchers were donated
by local churches. A summary of financial transactions for
the program between July -September are as follows:
Carry Over $120.80
Income 0
120.80
Expenditures
on Food 111,34
Balance $ 9.46
* Spouse Abuse Victim Advocacy Program
Specially trained advocates were available 24 -hours per day,
7 -days per week to provide counseling, information and
referrals and advocacy services to victims of domestic vio-
lence.
* Transient Counseling Services
24-hour crisis intervention counseling was made available
to transient persons stranded in the Iowa City area without
means to,meet their food, lodging and transportation needs.
When direct financial assistance was warrented, individuals
were referred to the Crisis Center's Transient Service.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEOAR RAPIDS•DLS MOVIES
a.3.5
-2-
' A statistical breakdown of number of•clients served will not be
available until January, 1980 as our data collection system is
currently being changed.
Action taken by the Crisis Center Board of Directors during the
Quarter:
I.
Board accepted bids for remodeling of Center to provide
for more private counseling space, larger work area for
volunteers and more office space for staff and practicum
students. Contractor was selected and $1,000 in savings
was used to cover costs.
2.
Proposed budgets for Calendar Year 1980 and FY80 were
approved by the Board.
3.
The Board approved contracting for services with Adams
Answering Service to patch calls through to volunteers'
homes between 2:00am and 11:00am. The current system where
callers receive a recorded message and phone number of
a volunteer will be etrminated January 1, 1980 and switched
over to utilizing the answering service.
4.
The Board formed a Staff Advisory Committee at the request
of staff. The committee is made up of four Board members
j
who will assist staff with management and personnel issues.
j
The Board also adopted an updated organizational chart for
the Crisis Center.
The next report you will receive will be in January, 1980.
Copies: Mary Ann Volm, United Play
Carol Peters, Administrative Assistant, Johnson County
Board of Supervisors
Neil Berlin, City Manager of Iowa City
Michael Kuttchee, Mayor, City of Coralville
Julia Steffen, Treasurer, U of I Student Senate
Ed Heininger, Chairman, Ecumenical Consultation
KD/JS
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MO HIES
Iowa City Crisis Into,vention Center
FY80 Financial Report--- 1st Quarter ending September 30, 1979
Expenditures
Director
Actual
Proposed
Assistant Director
Year To
Budget
Income
Date
FY80
United Way
3,249.99
13,260.00
Johnson County Board of Supervisors
3,650.00
14,600.00
Iowa City
1,250.00
5,000.00
Coralville
1,000.00
1,000.00
U of I Student Senate
36.00
1,660.00
Work Study Match
571.66
2,800.00
Donations/Reimbursements
100.00
500.00
Sale of Training Manuals
112.00
50.00
Transfer from Brd. Designated Savings
1,360.00
1,360.00
Other (Donated Printing Services)
6.74
----
Crisis Center Transient Service
----
400.00
Carry Over in Checking
1,599.79
1,599.79
Total
12,936.18
42,229.79
Expenditures
Director
3,000.00
12,000.00
Assistant Director
2,568.75
10,275.00
Work Study Student
843.33
3,500.00
Medical Insurance
247.20
1,039.00
Malpractice Insurance
----
1,100.00
Employer's FICA
341.39
1,368.00
Unemployment Tax
66.61
324.00
Worker's Compensation
----
368.00
Office Supplies/Duplication
145.19
625.00
New Goods and Equipment
307.54
200.00
Telephone
434.09
1,775.00
Postage
----
350.00
Office Rent
900.00
3,600.00
Liability Insurance
----
180.00
Gas/Electricity
107.25
500.00
Water/Sewer
7.37
75.00
General Supplies
66.94
250.00
Pager Rental
110.79
390.00
Typewtiter Rental
36.00
144.00
Equipment Maintenance
23.96
75.00
Building Maintenance
1,167.38
1,100.00
Printing (publicity)
8.40
300.00
Subscriptions
----
80.00
Publications
11.75
70.00
Media (ads)
130.92
500.00
Bookkeeping
40.00
720.00
Conference Fees
40.00
150.00
Miscellaneous
23.06
75.00
Answering Service
----
435.00
Total 10,623.92 41,568.00
Balance Checking $2,312.26
Balance Brd. Designated Savings $2,289.28
FIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101flE5
Crisis Center Transient Service
FY80 Financial Report--- 1st Quarter ending September 30, 1979
Income
United Way
Churches
Iowa City
Coralville
Donations
Reimbursements
Other
Carry Over Checking FY79
Total
Expenditures
Food
Lodging
I
Transportation
iSpouse Abuse Fund
Miscellaneous
{ Supplies
Telephone
Postage (Paid to Crisis Center)
Bookkeeping
Rent (Paid to Crisis Center)
Total
I
f
Balance Checking $65.59
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES r10 R7E5
Actual
Proposed
Year To
Budget
Daee
FY80
499.98
2,040.00
617.50
3,257.54
625.00
2,500.00
500.00
500.00
----
300.00
325.00
480.00
189.96
189.96
2,757.44 9,267.50
700.25
1,300.00
812.62
3,600.00
693.96
2,000.00
115.23
100.00
237.71
1,000.00
----
147.50
52.08
80.00
----
50.00
80.00
720.00
----
270.00
2,691.85 9,267.50
MINUTES OF STAFF MEETING
November 21, 1979
The Finance Director gave a presentation on revenue projections. The City
Manager requested the following items from the department heads:
1. What suggestions do you have for increased revenues for the City?
Do not limit it to your department.
2. Prepare another level of adjustment downward in your budget. Use the
same form for a 15 percent reduction.
3. What suggestions do you have for restructuring the City government
that would bear favorably upon expenditure levels?
The City Manager advised that he is considering going to the City Council on
December 3 with a more detailed explanation of the revenue projections, where
we currently stand at the end of the first quarter, and a proposal as to how
they are going to handle the budget. We will not go to the City Council
initially with a bottom line budget. 'rhe budget proposals will go through
the Finance Department and the City Manager's office where they will be analyzed
and we will try to construct a preliminary budget. Then we will go to the
City Council and review these proposals and ask the City Council to provide
some sense of direction in program priorities. There will be so many
alternatives to be considered this year by the Council that it doesn't make
much sense to bring in a balanced budget for Council consideration.
The City Manager noted that with a new Council member, it is an appropriate
time to go through things that relate to general operations. For the most
part City employees are responsive to the public, however, we do receive
some complaints. We are trying to deal with this through the Union. The
department heads were asked to stress to their employees that they must be
courteous. Also, when a decision is made by the City Council, the staff
should accept this decision even if they disagree with the decision. Coordi-
nation with other departments was also mentioned. The City Manager stated
he doesn't want to be a referee between departments. He encouraged coordination
and cooperation with each other and to deal reasonably on a day-to-day basis.
The City Manager also encouraged the staff to be conscious of the number of people
working on a job. Be conscious of the appearance to the public. Also, there is
a need to provide reminders to staff. When directions come to the departments
from the City Council or the City Manager, it should not be necessary for
the City Manager to provide reminders.
Departmental referrals from the Council meetings of November 19 and 20 were
distributed to the staff for review and discussion (copy attached).
o239*1
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 610INE5
MINUTES OF STAFF MEETING
November 21, 1979
Page 2
Items for the agenda of December 4 include:
Public hearing on Magoo's liquor license. The Police Chief will make a
recommendation regarding the length of suspension of license.
Inspection contracts for parking ramp
Resolution on snow removal
Public hearing on Block Grant budget amendment
The resolution to adopt the Rehabilitation Manual will be put on the agenda of
December 13 to allow time for review by the City Manager and Legal staff.
Prepared by: /
Lorraine Saeger
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES
A
Informal Council Meeting DEPARTMENT REFERRALS
November 19, 1979
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES
SUBJECT
DATE
REFERRED
DATE
~
RECD
M
DUE
COMMENTS/STATUS
W
Youth Homes, Inc.
11-19
Finance
Make $4,000 advance as requested.
One -side parking prohibitions
11-19
Public Wks
Relocate signs as discussed to
facilitate existing snow
ordinance.
City -owned land disposition
11-19
H&IS
Lyle to ensure that all adjacent
property owners are notified
when public hearing is held on
disposition of various public
housing sites.
Dennis Kraft provide information or.
Block Grant information
11-19
JP&PD
Bob Embry to Mary Neuhauser before
11-23-79.
Confer with City Manager re, r'- iod
Budget - Parks and Recreation
11-19
Parks & Rec
of projecting expenditures ana'-'
income. Are income projections
i
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES
Regular Council Meeting
November 20, 1979
DEPARTMENT REFERRALS
47-
IIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
0
w
SUBJECT
DATE
REFERRED
DATE
DUE
COMMENTS/STATUS
I
RECD
TO
9
W
Send all correspondence , etc., re.
Cook's easement problem to John
Steve Cook Property
11-20
Public Wks/
Hayek who will follow up with Cook';
Le al
Send notice to Council and Lai '
Assistant
Today
lynch re. date of next Airport"
Airport Commission
11-20
City Mgr
11-21
Commission meeting.
Beldon Avenue Zoning Appeal
1-20
Assistant
Today
11-21
Advise Mary Neuhauser when hearing
City Mgr
will be held.
Cemetery Wall Project
1-20
Parks 8 Rec
Go ahead with sidewalk projecton
fill.
Rehabilitation Program
1-20
H&IS
Discuss with Council at December 3
informal meeting.
High poles wobble considerabl' I
Floodlights in City Plaza
1-20
P&PD
the wind. Is this a design feocure
or a problem?
Reort to Council cost of supplying
Beepers for on-call streets crews
1-20
Public Wks
be9pers and answering service.
Re. meeting of 11-14-79. Advise
Board of Electrical Examiners and Appeals
1-20
H&IS
City Manager when notice was posted,
le
when letters were sent to local
ect ci t Was notice
sent to Stan Barta?
Thru-traffic signs near CBD
11-20
Public Wks
11
Refer to Chamber and Downtown Assn.
for Int and then Council for final
ri�
47-
IIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
MINUTES OF STAFF MEETING
December 5, 1979
Referrals from the informal and formal Council meetirgs of December 3 and 4
were distributed to the staff for review and discussion (copy attached).
Items for the agenda of December 11, 1979, include:
Resolution setting fees for sidewalk snow removal
Appointments
A discussion regarding the rehab manual should be added to the informal agenda
of December 10.
The City Manager advised that at Monday's informal meeting, two of three things
will be discussed, depending on how much work is accomplished. The Director of
Public Works and the Transit Manager are preparing an extensive memorandum to
the City Council about transit routes and schedules plus some background. It
appears that will be ready for Monday's meeting. Betty Meisel is getting together
a presentation to the City Council regarding the final plans for the senior center,
the cost estimates, and the contract revisions. This will go on the agenda on
Monday if it is ready. If that is not ready, we will have the preliminary capital
improvement projects presentation. The material is being prepared. The City
Council will receive a summary of all projects and each department head will
make an oral presentation. The department heads were asked to contact the City
Manager's office Thursday to see which items will be on the informal agenda.
The Assistant City Manager distributed some forms pertaining to the CTIP
j (Cormunity Technology Initiative Program). The priority list of needs is
being revised. CTIP has furnished ten categories on which they want information.
! The categories do not necessarily align with departments of the City and it
will be necessary for department heads to coordinate with other departments to
get the needed information. This information should be provided to CTIP by
January. The department heads are to contact the Assistant City Manager if
there are questions.
The City Manager advised that the City Council had turned down the Police contract.
A lengthy discussion was held at the informal meeting on Monday regarding fire
negotiations and the City is ,just starting to get into negotiations with AFSCME.
At the informal meeting of December 10 a discussion will be held on the process
of negotiations. The department heads were requested to give to the City Manager
any input on roles or responsibility in collective bargaining.
The City Manager advised that the capital improvement project presentation will be
handled differently. Each project will have the same basic background information.
Later on the more traditional detailed financial information will be furnished.
The City Manager felt that there are some areas which are extremely weak in the
project presentations. He will be reviewing each project from three aspects:
1. What is the relationship of this project to other departments in two
respects: a) demand for personnel time, and b) financial resources
from other departments.
2. What are the energy considerations? There are a number of projects
which indicate energy consideration is "nominal." Adding together the 3S%
4;=-- ...__
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOImES
Minutes of Staff Meeting
December 5, 1979
�Page 2
number of "nominals" will amount to a significant amount.
3. A detailed time frame. The time frames in the projects are not
explicit. This especially applies to Public Works' projects.
This will not go to the City Council in the first presentation, but it will go
at a later presentation.
The subject of an employee appreciation party was discussed. It was felt that
perhaps this event should be postponed until after negotiations and budget
discussions were completed.
It was also suggested that this event was a good time to present employee pins.
The Director of Parks and Recreation suggested that awards be given other than
the pins which have been used in the past. It was also suggested that five -years
service be omitted from the awards program.
The Human Relations Director informed the staff about the Human Relations Sunrise
Breakfast to be held Friday, December 7, 1979, at the Iowa Memorial Union. This
is being held in conjunction with the University's Human Rights Commission.
^Pre paired by:
Lorraine Saeger J
NICROFUMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ?I0111ES
jpformal Council Meeting
December 3, 1979
DEPARTMENT
REFERRALS
FIICRDFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES .do I17Es
0
W
SUBJECT
DATE
REFERRED
DATE
DUE
P
COMMENTS/STATUS
RECD
TO
W
dvise on current status of bus
IA'
P&PD/
shelters and on possibility of
Bus Stop Shelters
12-3
Public Wks
placing one at the Autumn Park
Hhij,_qtnn and when -
Advise if an absence of any heig
Block 64 Hotel, etc.
12-3
POD
limitation complies with the current
(and new) zoning ordinance.
Postpone appointments one week.
Human Rights Commission
12-3
City Clerk/
Staff report to Council on recom-
Human Rel
mendations from Human Rights Comm.
Check with HUD (Bob Embry) re.
POD
possible changes in regulations on
Spouse Abuse Shelter
12-3
(Kraft)
relocation payments, etc.
No budget hearings to be scheduled
Council Budget Hearings
12-3
Finance
for third Wednesday of the month
due to JCRPC meetings.
Re. crew assignments - report of -ne
Sanitation Pickups
12-3
Public Wks
person on white goods truck and, j
on paper pickup. What is rationale?
i
FIICRDFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES .do I17Es
-Regular Council fleeting
December 4, 1979
SUBJECT
Street Lights
Benton Street Bridge
Lights, Dubuque and 80
Sidewalk Snow Removal
Relrose Court
DEPARTMENT REFERRALS
DATE
REFERRED
TO
DATRECD
DUE
TEIPW
W
COMMENTS/STATUS
12-4
Public Wks
Publicize how to report lights out.
When will lights on bridge be
repaired?
Is there any projected date for
repair to fused circuits?
i
Will be rescheduled for further
informal discussion on 12-10-79.
i
Has this been dedicated to the City
as a public street?
I
1
i
i
I
12-4
Public Wks
12-4
Public Wks
12-4
MIS
12-4
Legal
i
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES
NEWSLETTER
for Lower Ralston Creek Neighborhood
STATUS OF SMALL CITIES PROJECT
ACQUISITION
Acquisition procedures have begun for Phase I of the Small Cities project. Appraisal
inspections, conducted by Iowa Appraisal and Research Corporation, have been completed.
Appraisal reports will be submitted to the City by December 15, 1979.
The appraisal reports will be reviewed by a second appraiser, as yet to be determined, for
accuracy and validity. The review process should be completed by February 1, 1980.
City Council will establish "just compensation" based on the appraisals and will authorize
staff to make purchase offers to each property owner. It is possible that purchase offers
will be made by as soon as March 1, 1980.
RELOCATION
The staff of the Department of Planning and Program Development will begin scheduling
interviews with residents and businesses which will be displaced by Phase I of the Small
Cities project. The purpose of the interviews is to gather preliminary information
necessary for relocation of those being displaced. Persons affected will be receiving
informational letters concerning the interviews.
Staff will also begin comparability studies to determine current market values of housing
which is available for relocation purposes. The comparability studies will be used in
establishing replacement housing payments for home owners and tenants and will also serve
as a referrals listing.
A "notice of displacement" will be issued to eligible residents and businesses effective on
the date that the purchase offer is made to the property owner. This notice of displacement
will establish eligibility for relocation assistance and payments. The notice will include
an estimate of the replacement housing payment which the displaced resident will be
eligible for.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW RECORD
The Environmental Review Record (ERR) for the Small Cities project has been completed. The
report concluded that there will be no significant adverse environmental effects caused by
the project.
A "Notice of Finding of No Significant Effect on the Environment" was published December
10, 1979 in the Iowa City Press -Citizen.
The document is available for citizen review and copying at the Iowa City City Clerk's
office, the Iowa City public library and the Department of Planning and Program
Development. Anyone disag�aeing with the findings of the ERR may submit written comments
to the City by December 26. 197y.
December 1979
CITY OF IOWA CITY 354-1800
a3S;2---
JORM MICROLAB
CITIZEN INFORMATION AND INPUT
The application process for the second year of the Sma11 Cities project has begun. A public
meeting was held on November 28, 1979 in the Civic Center. A slide presentation outlining
the overall three year project was presented and proposed second year activities were
explained.
A public hearing was held during the City Council meeting of December 4, 1979. A proposed
second year budget totaling $775,000 was presented as follows:
Aquisition $290,000
Relocation 88,000
Demolition of acquired structures 75,000
Ralston Creek improvements 232 000
TOTAL $775;66
A second public hearing will be held on the finished application for second year funding
prior to its submission to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. A timetable for
the second year application process is found below.
Timetable - Second Year Application
Nov. 28, 1979 Public Meeting on application proposals
(completed)
Dec. 4, 1979 Public Hearing on application proposals
(completed)
Feb. 26, 1980 Public Hearing on final application
March 3, 1980 Submit application to A-95 Clearinghouses
March 17,1980 Submit application to HUD
CITY OF 1()'.IA CITY UPDSIAI;DEP'. i. 1'i.r•.1Idii'�G & PAID
PR0'2:.:*.�i f. EVELOPMENT
CIVIC
IOWA Ci T Y, IA 52210
"IC Q0 It. If:, H•
JORM MICROLAB
[-,nKF,
.,,,.
CIVIC
IOWA Ci T Y, IA 52210
"IC Q0 It. If:, H•
JORM MICROLAB
RECEIVED
DEC 6 1979
LEGAL DEPARTMENT.
BEFORE THE IOWA CIVIL RIGH' CA441ISSION�
*
THOMAS J. MILLER,
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF IOWA,
*
Complainant,
* CP N 01-79-5630
VS.
*
CITY OF IOWA CITY and
CITY OF IOWA CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT,
i *
Respondent.
i *
*
*
LINDA EATON,
*
Complainant, * BR•IEF OF COMPLAINANT'S,
*
I
VS. * THOMAS J. MILLER,
CITY OF IOWA CITY and * ATTORNEY GENERAL OF IOWA
CITY OF IOWA CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT,
i * and
3*
99 Respondent:. * LINDA EATON
6 *
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Complainant Firefighter Linda Eaton is the only
t female firefighter for the City of Iowa City as well as
being the first female firefighter ever hired by the
Respondent. (T. 64) Only twenty-eight. ppr cent-. (28%)
of I:hcr Re;pondunL's work frn:ce i.0 female (T. 82) while
Johnson County has a femal.o labor force of rorty--Lhrue
per cent (43%) . (111.1.1.97)
The Iowa City firefighters work a twenty-four
hour shift beginning at 7:00 A.M., during which time they
l cannot leave the premises. (T. 447,448) At all times during
the shift each firefighter must be on-call to respond to
fire alarms and to obey any orders given by supervisors.
(T. 11.32 ) At no time did Eaton ever ask to be relieved
z
of either of these responsibilities. (111. 702,7(14)
A
It is the usual. custom and practice at the fire sLLlLion
during each twenty-four hour workday that there is time
BLb.
( DOCUMENT
(AVAILABLE
• a -3S3
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
{ CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES
-2-
during which no duties are assigned to the firefighters.
('11. 1135,1136) On weekdaysthe scheduled duties begin at
8:00A.M. and, though it can take between a half hour and
two to three hours to complete them, the duties are usually
finished by 9:00 A.M. (T. 449,450) Lunch is served at
11:30 A.M. and until 1:00 P.M. there are no scheduled
duties. The afternoon's scheduled duties take one to
two hours to complete (T. 459), the evening meal is eaten
at 5:00 P.M. (T.464) and the firefighters usually go to bed
at 10:00 P.M. (T. 448) On weekends the firefighters'
afternoons and evenings are generally free.(T. 528)
Firefighters use their unscheduled time to watch
television (T.460,615), take naps, read, relax (T. 454,455,
458;459,623,7)4) and engage in other social or personal
activities, such as having visitors (T. 469,528) In good
weather firefighters sit outside the station'at a picnic
table or strand outside visiting and watching traffic.
(T. 468,469,556,615) How a firefighter fills his or her
unscheduled time "just depends on the individual"
according to Firefighter Nathan Hopkins. (T. 459) Fire-
fighters eat, sleep, go to the bathroom and take showers
at the fire station. (T. 529)
There are frequent visitors to the fire department.
The public is invited to come to the station to get
bicycle licenses and blood pressure tests. (T. 461,465)
School children take tours of the department: which usually
last twenty to thirty minutes. (T. 463) Sometimes an
individual will bring a child into the station to look at
the trucks. (T. 464) Spouses, children and friends of
the firefighters visited the fire department prior to
January 22, J979 (T. 714) and yet no firefighter had ever
been suspended for having visitors prior to Eaton's
suspension for nursing her child once on January 22, 1979,
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIIIEs
a
--3-
ccurflinfl Lu I.irc ChiuL' kuhei I. Noo(Anry. ('1'. '752)
The only wrLLLen rules in efLec-L in January of: 1.979
regarding visitors were the 1936 Rules and Regulations
of the Fire Department which prohibit women loitering about
the fire station. (J. Ex. 29) The Chief maintained a loose-
leaf notebook of memos which reflected the informal "rules"
of the Department, but as of January 22, 1979, there was
no written rule relating to visits at the firehouse. (J. Ex. 14)
The City now contends that there was an unwritten rule
in the firehouse prohibiting "regularly scheduled visits".
(T. 373) Complainant Eaton contends that there was no
such rule and that having her son brought to the fire station
twice during each twenty-four hour shift'to nurse is com-
patible with the use of unassigned time. Chief Keating
admitted that when he made the decision that Complainant
could not have her son brought to the fire station to
nurse during her unassigned time there was no written or
unwritten rule that guided that decision or covered
Eaton's request. (T. 670,671)
On January 22, 1979 and January 24, 1979 Eaton was
suspended without- pay for the rest of her shift for
nursing and on January 24, 1979, she was warned that
nursing her child again in the fire department would
result in the termination of her. employment. (,J. Ex. 11)
It is clear that Linda Eaton was disciplined solely for
breasLfeeding her son and not for any violation of a
supposed visitors' policy. (T. 725, 382,383; J. Exs.
11,22,23; C. Ex. 43A)
In order to halt the City's imposition of disciplinary
measures, Linda Eaton petitioned for and was granted a Tem-
porary Injunction in the Johnson County District Court.
Upon the complaint of the Attorney General pursuant to
Chapter 601A.5, 1979 Code of. Iowa, the Iowa Civil Rights
$EST
Docrimz
AVAu,Aj�
-
IIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
♦.. M
-4-
Commission intervened in this court action and succeeded .in
obtaining primary jurisdiction of the complaint. The Iow,i
Civil Rights Commission assigned an investigator, whose
case summary was completed upon February 20, 1979, recommedd-
ing a finding of probable cause. (J. Ex. 24) This finding
was agreed upon by the appropniatc staff person, with
conciliation being conducLed and upon failure of conr.il.iation,
a public hearing was set.
Since Eaton has complained of sex discrimination, the
i
Respondents have taken several measures against her in
retaliation: a pattern of monitoring and surveillance
began with the start of a:log of visitors to the fire station
on January 31, 1979, (Stipiilation);the Fire Chief began
j issuing rules and regulations, which would not have been
I
issued had not Eaton complained of discrimination (T 416,487,596)
and evaluations of Eaton's work performance became extremely
negative whereas during the first six months of EaLon's
i
tenure at the Fire Department her evaluations were
excellent and she received a merit raise on that basis.
(T. 897,931; J. Ex. 11) Complainant Eaton as been
i
subjected to continual stress as a result of the discriminatory
acts of Respondents. (T. 931)
i
1
1
t
!j
I
BEM%,
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
-5 -
BRIEF POINT ONE
WAS THERE A SEX NEUTRAL RULE IN THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WHICH
IN OPERATION HAD A DISPARATE•' IMPACT ON WOMEN?
AUTHORITIES
Dothard V. Rawlinson 433 U.S. 321 (1977)
Albemarle Paper Co. V. Moody, 422 U.S. 405 (1975)
Griggs v. Duke Power Co. 401 U.S. 424 (1971)
Wilson -Sinclair Company v. Griggs 21.1 N.W.2nd 133 (Iowa 1973)
Schlei and Grossman, Employment Discrimination (1976)
International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States 431 U.S.
I
424 (1977)
Firefighter's Institute for Racial Equality v St Louis
I
549 F. 2d 506 (8th Cir. 1977)
I
Hackley v. Roudebush.,5,20 F.2dS108 (D.C. Cir. 1975)
Yukas v. Libby -Owens Ford Co. 411 F.S. 77 (N.D. Ill. 1976)
DISCUSSION
i
In order to establish a prima facie case of discrimination
the Complainant may show that a facially neutral standard or
rule in operation impacts on women in a significantly
discriminatory pattern. Dothard V. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321
(1977); Albemarle Papdr. Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405 (1975);
Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971); Wilson -
Sinclair Company v. Griggs, 21.1 N.W.2nd 133 (Iowa, 1973).
The Complainant has the burden of proof of showing
disparate impact. Griggs, supra; Schlei and Grossman,
I
Employment Discrimination (1976). However, there is no
"inflexible formulation" of what constitutes a prima
i facie case. International Brotherhood of Teamsters v.
United States, 431. U.S. 324,358 (1977). Proof of
discriminatory motive or discriminatory intent is not
required. Teamsters, supra; Albemarle, supra; Firefighter's
Institute for Racial EaLiality Ny. St. Louis, 549 F.2d 506
i
(8th Cir. 1977).
Complainant's contend that the "rule" in question
BEST
DOCUNIENT
AVAILABLE
NICROFRMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES raDlaEs
I
i,
was a."no breastfeeding" rule while Respondents' contend
that it was a "no regularly scheduled visits" rule. Indeed,
the City Manager asserted that his staff "excluded breast-
feeding in making the decision." (T. 860) The veracity of
that statement is open to question, especially since the
Assistant City Manager Lesti.f.ied that Linda Eaton's breast-
feeding was '!a contributing tactor towards the disciplinary
action." (T. 336) Even the City's Civil Rights Investigator,
Sophie Zukrowski's file on the matter shows, in :her
handwriting, that the bottom line was "no nursing." (T.382,
383; C. Ex. 43A):. The explanation for this conflicting
testimony can be found in the fact that the City administration
had contact with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(T. 37 4) at a key point in the decision-making process and
took to heart their position that expressed rules must be
facially neutral. (T. 371) The City would avoid the impact
of their rule by expressing it as "no regularly scheduled
visits" but this is a mere change of form over substance.
The defense premised upon the wording of the rule is simply
a subterfuge for discrimination. Hacklev v. Roudebush, 520
F.2d 108 (D.C. Cir. 1975)
In fact, there was no written visitor policy prior to
April 1.2, 1979. (T. 469,470) Prior to Linda Eaton no one
had been suspended or threatened with termination for, the
number or lenths of visits. (T.397) The outdated 1936 Rules
and Regulations of the Fire Department have neither a "no
breastfeeding" rule nor a "no regularly scheduled visits"
rule. (J. Ex. 29) Nor was there anything in the notebook
of memos, which functioned as an informal rulebook, on the
subject of. .Length or number of: visits. (J. Ex. 14)
After the decision to suspend and terminate, the City
went to great lenths to prevent the "no nursing" rule from
being arti.cu.latud. For example, the Fire Chiel' asserted
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
FIICRDFILHED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES
i
\..
Um L 13a Lon was reprimanded for "imaibordinat.ion." (T. 72`x)
The documentary evidence is sufficient refutation: the
written letter to her, (T.332) and the Assistant City Manager's
press release reveal the emphasis was placed upon nursing
rather than visiting .in the creation of the rule. (T. 344)
The demeanor and credibility of the City's own employees
on this issue was weak. The City's Civil Rights Investigator,
Sophie Zukrowski, evaded questions on this topic but finally
admitted that the "stated purpo.ge" of the City's rule was
i
no breastfeeding ori the job. (T.389) Also, the City's
Personnel Assistant, June Higdon, testified with smug
assertiveness bf her concern as expressed to the City's
! doctor: What is to be done if the fire bell rings and the
baby is having lunch? (T. 288)
While many city employees initially testified that•
Eaton was reprimanded for violating a policy in relation
to "visiting -,,their own notes, actions concurrent with
I i
the event and testimony under cross-examination support
Complainant's contention, that the real rule promulgated by
the City for Eaton's benefit was "no breastfeeding."
However, assuming arguendo that Respondent's rule is
"no regularly scheduled visits", it can be demonstrated that
even if the rule was fair in form it was discriminatory in
operation. First, there wasno documentation of visits until
Eaton started breastfeeding at the firehouse. (T.471) Second,
there were no firefighters suspended other than Eaton. (T.471)
Third, after Eaton star tEd`!nvinq "regularly schdduled visits"
I
I! i.e. breastfeeding, and Wassuspended and threatened with
! dismissal after only one visit and an announced intent of
having other visits, male firefighters were notsimiliarly
i
treated for the .length or frequency of their visits. For
example, Firefighter Dick Craig was not suspended for visits
i
longer than twenty minute, (T. 562), nor was Firefighter Steve
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
FIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES NOIRES
PIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101RE5
Dolan (T.601), nor was Firefiqhtor Jesse King (T.622), nor
)
was Fi of ightor llill Crow (!%-50), no a:lr ,,, 1 hr+ wa l r+ ( 1 Yf'( I+J 111 r.t •.
who had ninety visits in oxc•us:; of twenty minutt•:1 llttoL Linda
Eaton started breastfeeding.
And while the "no regularly scheduled visits" rule
evidently applied to suckling babes, it did not apply to
other regular visitors who happened to be adults. (T748,
749)
{
Therefore, it is apparent that the "rule" as articulated
(
by the City was not uniformly applied to the male firefighters
{
i
and the only female firefighter, Linda Eaton. If the rule
was as the City contended, "no regularly scheduled visits",
then its disparate impact is demonstrated in its pattern
of application only to Lhe woman in the fire department.
Yukas v. Libbv-Owens Ford Co. 411 F.S. 77 (N.D. I.11. 1976)
Once the verbal subterfuge is eliminated, we are faced
with the rule it its real terms: no breastfeeding. It
is axiomatic that breastfeeding is gender specific to
women.
As testified to by the City's breastfeeding expert,
Dr. Pitkin, on medical grounds there are no objections
to a child being breastfed in the work place. (T. 237)
While breastloodi.ng has exLencled thrOLIghoul: human history,
bottle feeding has been practiced for only about sixty
years. (T.250-51) The reliance of women on this natural
method of infant feeding is increasing (T.257) and
his "opinion is that all other factors being as they are,
the best food for the infant ... is human.•.milk." (T.236)
The City's second breastfeeding expert, Dr. Fomon,
reiterated the increasing popularity of breastfeeding,
I
(T. 1023) and explained that the age of natural weaning
in literate societies was between eighteen and twenty-
four months.
/ BEST
A "no breastfeeding" rule will never be able to
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
be applied to any man. The increasing popularity of
breastfeeding indicates it can only be applied, inereasinctly,
to more and more women, and indeed, City Manager Berlin
PIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101RE5
-9-
testified that he expects the issue to come up again.
(T. B64) Thus, the Complainant has met her burden of
showing the disparate impact of a facially neutral rule
i' or standard of the Respondent.
BRIEF POINT TWO
IS THE DISPARATE IMPACT OF THE RESPONDENT'S RULE
i
� JUSTIFIED BY BUSINESS NECESSITY?
AUTHORITIES
Schick v. Bronstein 447 F.S. 333 (S.D.N.Y. 1978) j
Schaefer v. Tannian, 394 F.S. 1128 (E.D. Mich. 1974),
remanded on other grounds, 538 F.2d 1234 (6th Cir. 1976)
Draper v U.S. Pipe and Foundry Co., 527 F.2d 515 (6th Cir. 1975)
i
Robinson v. Lorillard 449 F.2d 791 (4th Cir. 1971)
I
U.S. v. St. Louis -San Francisco Ry. Co. 464 F.2d 301 (8th Cir.)
cert den. United Transp. Union v. U.S. 409 U.S. 1107 (1972)
I
Donnell v. General Motors Corp. 576 F.2d 1292 (8th Cir. 1978)
U.S. v. City of Chicago 411 F.S. 218, affirmed .in part,
I
reversed in part, 549 F.2d 475, on remand 437 F.S. 256 i
cert denied Adams v. City of CHicago 434 U.S.875 (1976)
DISCUSSION
Linda Eaton had been breastfeeding her son Ian at
the firehouse for more than six months at the time of the
hearing. No evidence was presented that the safety and
efficiency of the firehouse had diminished. (T. 400)
For, in fact, Chief Keating's concerns about Eaton's
breastfeeding were really, "the impact this would have
on other people in the deparment".(T. 677) The .
jY
i irrelevancy of the Chief's stated concerns is clear when
1
i
the law i., consulted, which holds that "employee morale and
customer preference are impermissible bases on which to
i BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
FI ICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 14011JES
_10-
I)rudicaLu an empLoyment. decL:;ion. " ur{�Llc_ v..-U _;__11_131r.._;i1d._.
I_oundry Co., 527 P. 2d 515 (61 It Cir. 1975) Keat.hiq was lo:;:;
than forthright .in addressing the issue as to how the
safety and efficiency of the department had been lessened
by Eaton's breastfeeding. (T.693,694) His employees were
more direct. Firefighter wissink saw no lessening of
service during the six months Linda Eaton had been breast-
feeding. (T. 1122) Firefighters Irving and Wombacher saw
slight problems due to the media
1 9 P publicity, but not due to
!
the breastfeeding. (T.1127) And, lastly, Firefighter Jesse
King had no fears "that it (breastfeeding) would in any
1 wayhinder the fire service for the City." y1 (T. 639)
jThe very fact that the Department has successfully
functioned since Linda Eaton has been breastfeeding on
i
the job suggests the City's "rule", which impacted only
on women, was not required by business necessity. Schick
I ..
v. Bronstein, 447 F.S. 333 (S.D.N.Y. 1978); Schaefer v.
Tannian, 394 F.S. 1128 (E.D. Mich. 1974) remanded on other
grounds 538 F.2d 1234 (6th Cir. 1976).
After a showing of disparate impact the burden shifts
to the City to donlonstraLe that "business necessity" justifies
i
the rule. Robinson v._Lori.Itard 449 V.2d,791 (4Lh Cir.1971)
articulates the business necessity defense: "whether there
exists an overriding legitimate business purpose such that
the practice is necessary to the safe and efficient operation
of the business." Robinson sets out a three prong test to
i judge the defense of business necessity. First, that the
business purpose must be sufficiently compelling to override
the sexual impact of the rule. Second, that it must carry
I
J out the business purposes it is alleged to serve. Third,
Lhore exist no acceptable alternative policies or practices
with lesser sexual impact. USS. v. St. Louis -San Francisco j
i
Ry. Co. 464 F.2d 301 (8th Cir.) cbrt den United Transo.
Union v. U.S. 409•U.S. 1197 (1977.).
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
i
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIMES
l:
-1.1-
The firaL two prongs of the test arc discussed .i.nL'ra.
Under tho third, the City must show "there exisLs no
acreplablu all(-rn.rL]ve polici-::; or pnu:lirr.:;." The evidence
at hearing was devoir] of any c]Ly's actions in Lhis area.
They seem to have attempted to shift this burden unto Complainant
by asserting that manual expression or a breast pump would
yield sufficient milk and therefore there was no need to
have the child feed during the day. Both Drs. Pitkin and
Dr. Eamon. refuted this argument. (P..246, 1040) While not
accepting this burden of proof it should be noted that the
Complainant testified that her milk yield was insufficient
with other'methods of expression than breastfeeding. (P..908)
These purported alternatives suggested liy the City are
also irrelevant since all. city employees testified Lhey
knew next to nothing about breastfeeding and made no
attempt to find out either before suspending -Eaton or
afterward. In any event, it is the City's burden to
establish "that there are no acceptable alternative policies
or practices with a lesser sexual impact." Donnell v. General
MoLors Corp,_ 576 10.2d .1297. (8th Cir. ].978) -
It is no dofunrc to Chu City's "no breast. fc:c:dind"
rule, which had o grossly die;pr11por'1 ionoLo ]mp:rcl. upon women,
that other fire dupar Cments u:;e :similar pot ic.icc;• 'It � S.._v_
City of Chicano 411 F.S. 2.18, affirmed in part, reversod in
part. 549 F'.2d 475, on remand 437 F.S. 256 cert. den
�damt v. City of Chicago 434 U.S. 875 (1976). Thus,
Norm Elgen's testimony has neither relevancy nor materiality.
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DEs IIOITIES
-L2 -
BRIEF POINT THREE
WAS LINDA EATON DENIED EQUAL ACCESS TO THE USE OF UNSCHEDULED
TIME AT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT?
AUTHORITIES
McDonnell Douglas Coro v Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973)
International Brotherhood of Teamsters v United States 431
U.S. 324 (1977)
The principles of McDonnell Douglas Corp v Green,
41.1 U.S. 792 (1973) control a differential treatment employment
discrimination case. In McDonnell Douglas the U.S. Supreme
j Court suggested the order and nature of proof of discrimination
IIin a Title VII case which is the federal counterpart of the
Iowa Civil Rights Act, Chapter 601A of the 1979 Code of Iowa:
"The Complainant in a Title VII trial must carry
the initial burden under the statute of establishing
a prima facie case by showing (i) that bet:belongs
to a racial minority; (ii) that he applied and was
qualified for a job for which the employer was
seeking applicants; (iii) that, despite his qualifications,
he was rejected; and (iv) that, after his rejection,
the position remained open and the employer continued
to seek applications from persons of complainants'
qualifications."
411 U.S. at 802.
When Complainant meets these four criteria a prima
facie case of discrimination is established and the burden of
proof then shifts to the employer to "articulate a .legitimate,
non-discriminatory reason" for refusing to hire the complainant.
The complainant- is then allowed to rebut the employer's defense
by showing that the Justification given was merely a pretext.
411 U.S. at 804. It .is not possible to fit every discrimination
case into the model laid out in McDonnell Douglas and the
Supreme Court said that .it did not intend " to create an
inflexible formulation" International Drotherh1pod of Trams_Lcars
v. United States 431 U.S. 324 (1977).
r
Complainant Linda Eaton is alleging, among other things,
that the use of unscheduled time in the fire station is not
made availiable to males and females on an equal basis. Using
McDonnell Douglas as a guide, we propose that the following be
$QST
rc-ogn.izod as the elements of proof in this case:
DOCONIENT
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
e
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
-.13-
l.. that Complainant- is a woman
2. that there existed a custom and practice of
nonscheduled time at the fire department
3. that Complainant asked for and was denied equal
access to the use of nonscheduled time
4. that after she was denied the use of unscheduled
time to breast-feed her child, unscheduled time
continued to be made availiable to the male
firefighters.
Complainant Eaton established her prima facie case
by proving the above four elements (see Statement of the Case).
In Respondent's attempt to show that others had been denied
access to unscheduled time,they introduced evidence of a very
few oral reprimands,but were forced to reach back to one
incident sixteen years ago, others ten or eleven years ago
and one four years ago. It is critical that in each of these
instances cited by Respondents there were other factors involved:
the activity complained of took the firefighter away from
his scheduled duties or interfered with the fire department
telephones or disturbed the operations of the fire department
by its location (T. 1123, 1123, 1119, 1120, 1079-1076).
on January 12, 1979 Complainant Eaton asked Chief
Keating if she could use her unscheduled time to breast-feed
her son (T. 674, 679, 683) and her request was formally denied
on January 16, 1979 (J.Ex. 11). By denying Eaton the right
to nurse her child Respondents denied her equal access to the
use of the unscheduled time which every firefighter has.
After Eaton was denied equal access,the male firefighteps
continued to have free use of their unscheduled time (see
Statement of the Case).
BRIEF POINT POUR
WAS THE DENIAL OF EQUAL ACCESS 'TO UNSCHEDULED 'TIME JUSTIFIED
BY A BUSINESS NECESSITY?
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MO RIES
"` -14- .
AUTHOR ITT Es
ha:ur-.v.•. N;•w Yr,rk '1'uw!; _flrn,ull.•i:{Lit1,L;t, i'vi ;41. 1•'2cl 3G';
(6Lh Cir. 19•/6)
Cedar Rajids CommuniLY School U1rLricl v_ Purr 227 N.{•1.2d
486 (1975) -
Newman viDelCa Ai.r pines Inc_ 347 F. Supp. 238 (N.D. Ga. .1973)
Gunther v. Iowa Slate Men's Reforms_ tory_ 466 F. Supp. 307
(N.D. Iowa 1979)
Robinson v. Lorillard 449 F.2d 791 (4th Cir. 1971)
Sullivan v_. McCoy-Stamufer's Inc. CPHs 2690 and 2.693,
November 21, 1977
____.. .,nu rnnnan I(el.11i.ons .19 EPD 8945 (1978)
Vil.lajL,j_of AclAngton 112i4hts v,_ Mclro)pol..itrin Housinc De velo�mr.nl,
Corp_. 429 U.S. 252 (1977)
Donaldsony_ Pillsbury (:o. 554 F.2d 825 (8th Cir. .1977)
McDonald v_ganto I_c_frail Corp. 427 U.S. 273 (1976)
Having established our prima facie case of discrimination
tinder the differential treatment theory according to the test
enunciated in MrU�nncll Douulthe burden of proof shifts
1
to the Respondents to either show (i) a bona fide occupational
qualification excepl.ion or (ii) a business necessity for the
I
discr.im.inatory pracLico. EEOC v, Ncw York 'Pimcs
- _ ❑roadadstinq �
Service 542 P.2d 365 (6th Cir. 1976)1 C<�dar It_.rpids,Communit�
School_ Uist.cict v_ I+,irr 227 N.W.2d 486 (1975) .
Respondents have nidde no attempt to argue that
their refusal to allow Eaton toebreast-feed her child during
her non-scheduled time is Justified by a bona fide occupational
qualification. To do so they would have to prove that "all
or substantially all" breastfeeding women "would be unable to
I
i
perform safely and officiently Lhe duties of the Job .involved"
Newman y_ Ih_1Ln fir I.inc:;,c _tine,_ 374 F. Stipp 238, 244-245
i
and that the essence of. Lhe incLituL.ion unci its goals would br_
BEST undermined .Guutherv. Iowa SLaCe f4on'S Iteformalor� 466 F. Supp.
nOCUNIENT307 (N.D. Iowa 1979).
AVAILAEI'E'
i
IL• appears that Respondents are relying on a business
j i
necessity defense under Robinson v_I.or.illacd 449 F.2d 791(4th Cir..l
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
i
MICROFILM BY
j JORM MICROLAB
I CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110111ES
I
-.15 -
and .later adoptc I by the Iowa CLvi.I Right!, Commission in
Sullivan v. McCoy-Stampfer's Inc. CPNs 2690 and 2693, November
21, 1977:
"The applicable test is not merely whether there
exists a business purpose for adhering to a challenged
practice; the test is whether there exists an over-
riding legitimate business purpose such that the practice
is necessary to the safe and efficient operation of
the business. Thus, the business purpose must be
sufficiently compelling to override any discriminatory
impact; the challenged practice must effectively
carry out the business purpose it is alleged to serve;
and there must• be availiable no acceptable alternative
Policies or practices which would better accomplish
the business purpose advanced, or accomplish it
equally well with a lesser differential impact on
affected classes."
RespondenttS arguments are confusing at best-. Respondents'
attorney mentions "management rights" in her opening argument,
but we assume that she would concede that Respondent does not
have the "right" to violate Chapter 601A of the 1979 Code
of Iowa.
Complainants' Exhibit 44, a videotape of a news
program of ,January 26, 1979 reporting a Eire call which occured
while Eaton was on duty and nursing her son shows that Eaton
was the first firefighter on the truck despite having to run
up a flight of stairs from the women's locker room to the
main floor,which no other firefighter had to do (J. Exs. 18 and 19),
and defeats any argument by the Respondents• that nursing in
any way interferes with Eaton's ability to respond quickly to
a fire call. Eaton has never asked to be relieved of the
responsibility of responding to fire calls (T. 702).
Respondents argue that because Eatons nursing of her
child occurs in the women's locker room in the basement, she
is less availiable to an officer who might: have a spontaneous
request that she do some work outside of her regularly scheduled
duties. it was the City administration who decided that a women's
locker room would be built in the basement• and who chose not
to build a women's locker room on the main floor of the fire
-de.narIzLaIat where the men's locker room and bathroom is located
along with all other essential areas of t•he fire department.
• BEST
DOCUMENT
AMIABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401IIES
-1.6-
Respondents cannot argue that breast--Eceding interferes
with Eaton's ability to perform routine scheduled chores
as Eaton hhs never asked to be relieved of routine duties
(T. 704).
Respondent argues that Eaton's nursing has
caused inconvenience at times in that other women using the
locker room have complained about noise, number of visitors
or a male in the locker room. Testimony clearly shows that
these are isolated instances and refusing Eaton equal access
to non-scheduled time is not the least restrictive means of
alleviating inconvenience. Nor does mere inconvenience to
police women constitute a business necessity for Respondents.
Respondents are then forced to make classic "floodgate"
arguments using imaginary horribles: "if everyone had the
number of visitors Eaton does,", It is immaterial that in one
year women as a class, may have more visits at the firehouse
in any one week, month or year. It does matter that individuals
are treated as individuals and equally in terms of conditions
of employment even if they may have conditions arising out of
factors.peculiar to their sex. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.
v. Wisconsin Department of Industrial Labor and Human Relations
19 EPD 8945 (1978).
Clearly Respondents have failed to establish any
business necessity which justifies denying Eaton equal access
to the use of non-scheduled time under the test outlined above
Assuming arguendo that Respondents have shown a business
necessity, the burden shifts back to Complainants to prove
that the justifications advanced are mere pretext.McDonnell
Douglas, supra, at 804.
We believe the record contains ample evidence of
motive and intent on the part of Respondents to discriminate
against• Complainant on the basis of sex. This evidence is
equally applicable to the prima facie or rebuttal case.
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 11011JES
Village of.Arlt.nrtLon_Ilciaht_;_v._MiI.roR_Olil_an Ilou_itI(I
Development Corp. 47.9 U.S. 252, 266-68 (1977) field that
statistics "may prove an importanL starting point" in establishing
motive and intent.
The City of Iowa City was charged with discrimination
by four EEOC complaints(T 86-7) and entered into an EEOC
conciliation agreement in 1974 (T. 100) which required the
City to increase the perce.itage of women in its work force
to thirty-three and one third per cent (331/3 %). The
City has never reached the goal required by the agreement (T 101).
Respondent's knowledge and toleration of racial and
sexual slurs in the workplace is well documented in the
record (C. Ex. 6, T. 856, 431, 262, 279-280-281) as is their
knowledge of the attitudes of the male firefighters towards
the only female firefighter and their failure to conduct any
human relations training within the fire department (T 844,
847, 848, 858 C. Ex. 49).
The City employs a Human Relations Director who has
not seen the necessity of investigating the situation at the
fire department or Firefighter Eaton's complaint (T. 426, 427).
The City used a physical fitness and agility test
in the hiring of firefighters which had never been validated
(T. .122, 165) .
The City Council, despite its obligation imposed
by the City Charter to maintain the principle of non-discrimination
within City employment (J. Ex. 17, T 810) has condoned the
treatment of Linda Eaton and supported the City Manager's and
Fire Chief's actions (T. 818, 819, 820, 844, 850, 855).
Respondents have a history of failing to hire women
proportionate to their labor force participation (see Statement
of the Case). Statisitics regarding the employment of women
and minorities can be used as circumstantial evidence of intent
behind a challenged employment practice. Donaldson v. Pillsbury Co.
554 F2d 825 (6th Cir.. 1977) International Brotherhood Of
Teamsters, supra.
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVA-nA LU
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES HOMES
5
J
I
j
,-IN -I ti -
intent to discriminate "can in some situations
be inferred from the mere fact of differences in treatment"
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, supra at p. 335, n. 15.
In order to establish that the Respondentts asserted justifications
for denying Eaton equal access to the use of non-scheduled
time are p-^texi;ual it is not necessary to show that they
are tota'1"- -rrclevant to the denial or that: sex is the
sole reoson for Che denial. We must simply show that
SOX was one reason for the denial. McDonald v. Santa Fe
Trail Corp. 427 U.S. 273 (1976) at 282 n. 10.
Insensitivity and mnresponsiveness to the problems
e �
of women and minorities on the part of the City officials
)
is documented throughout the transcript p (T 179, 175, 176,
186, 268, 270).
I
Therefore, both statistical and testimonial evidence
supports the assertion that the City's business necessity
defcnscs, are merely pretcxLua.l.
t I
i
CONCLUSION '
Methods of proving sex discrimination in employment-
may rely on either a differential treatment or disparate
impact theory. Under either theory the Respondents have
been shown to have violated Chapter 601A•in their treatment
of Linda Eaton.
i
I
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLI.;
i
47-- -
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES VIDIMES
B
a
- 19 -
BRIEF POINT V
COMPLAINANTS ESTABLISHED A PRIMA FACIE CASE OF RETALIATION
IN VIOLATION OF IOWA CODE §601A.11 (1979), WHICH WAS UNRI.BUTTED
EXCEPT BY PRETEXTUAL JUSTIFICATIONS.
AUTHORITIES
Iowa Code §601A.5(4) (1979).
Iowa Code §601A.6 (1979).
Iowa Code §601A.11(2) (1979).
42 U.S.C. §2000e -3(a).
Tanner v. Calif. Physician's Serv., F.Supp. ,
(N.D. Cal. 1979), 20 EPD 1130,148 (Oct. 10, 1978,
as modified by orders of January 9 I}nd February
13, 1979).
Grant v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., F.Supp._,
—(S.D. N.Y. 1977), 16 EPD ¶8261
Reyes v. Mathews, 1128 F.Supp.300 (D. D.C. 1976).
Francis v. American Tel. & Tel. Co., 55 F.R.D.
i� 1973 CCH EEOC Decisions ¶6202 (Decision No. 71-
3 83, October 10, 1970).
I' 1973 CCH EEOC Decisions ¶6145 (Decision No. 70-
683, April 10, 1970).
I
EEOC Decision 71-288 (Sept. 17, 1970), 8 PEP
Cases 1124.
I
i The proscription against retaliatiori embodied in the Iowa
j Civil Rights Act is found in §601A.11 of The Code:
i, "It shall be an unfair or discriminatory
practice for:. . .2. Any person to dis-
criminate against another person in any
of the rights protected against discrimina-
tion on the basis of. . .sex,. . .by this
chapter because such person has lawfully
;i opposed any practice forbidden under this
chapter, obeys the provisions of this
chapter, or has filed a complaint, testi-
fied, or assisted in any proceeding under
this chapter. .". Iowa Code §601A.11(2)
(1979). -
Retaliation consists of subjecting a person to adverse con-
sequences for their participation in protected activity. The
Iowa Code prohibits such punitive treatment of persons enjoying,
or asserting their rights and the definition of retaliation as
an unfair or discriminatory practice serves to permit the im-
position of remedial sanctions upon the offenders
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILAB� R
�i
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
From the
- ?0 -
testimony and documents
Produced at the hearing on the complaints
Of Linda Eaton and the Attorney General, it is clear that the
I
City, its departments,•Lnd agents. consistently engaged in a clear,
pattern of retaliatory conduct, designed to harass and intimidated
PIs. Eaton in her expression of her rights under Iowa law. Such 1
conduct by the respondents must be recognized for what it is and
remedied accordingly.
Under the federal civil rights law, retaliation is forbidden
by section 704(a) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 19611,
42 U.S.C. §2000e -3(a)
One case examining the proof necessary
to establish a case of retaliation stated:
Ij "To establish retaliation under §704(a),
a plaintiff must demonstrate that he
suffered adverse treatment as a conse-
quence of his participation in protected
j activity. . . .Proof of a causal connec-
tion between protected activity and ad-
verse consequences must of necessity be
i, indirect for the simple reason that al-
leged retaliatorscan hardly be expected
to confess to punishing plaintiffs for
protected acts. Accordingly, courts have
found a prima facie case of retaliation
to be established when protected activity
I; is followed by adverse treatment. `
The burden then shifts to the defendant
I' to explain its actions with legitimateL2Cc
II
rreea_psons. . " Grant V. Bethlehem_Steel I
16 EPD ¶8-2615(citations omitte)977}3
d.IIII
The threshold
•; question in a retaliation case, therefore, is
what is the 'protected activity?' Irt
lI Y. The Iowa Code establishes
ithe protected activity in this case, and for others, in the terms I
dol §601A.11(2).
It is important to note that the protective arm
lof the law reaches those "rights protected against discrimination"
!b,y Iowa law, e.g., the right to non-discrimination in employment. i
u
!Sec, Iowa Code, §601A.6(1.979). The activities protected by the
i;law are three -fold: (1) the lawful opposition of unfair ordis-
';criminatory practices under chapter 601A, (2) the obedience to
j!
the requirements of that chapter, and (3) the filing of a com-
:plaint or participation in proceedings under that chapter. Iowa
BEm,
DOCUMENT I
AVAILABLE
I'
i
II l
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIRES
21
I' Code, §601A.11(2) (1979). Having stated the answer to the thresh
i old question of what are protected activities, the next point of
�I inquiry is whether and in what fashion Linda Eaton enp,aged in
If
ii such activity so as to grant her the protection of the Iowa civil
rights law.
Ii Linda Eaton delivered Ian on October 2, 1978 and preparatory
.1 to her return to work in January, she contacted Chief Keating to
!I make arrangements for, the breastfeeding of Ian once she returned
II to her full work schedule. (Tr.p.903). She met with resistance
'
as examined infra, and in order to maintain her status as both a
Ilifirefighter and a mother, she was forced to seek a temporary in-
!
Junction through the District Court of Johnson County. (Stipula-
I;tion-Tr.p. 1051). The filing of this petition constitutes the
1;
;!making of a complaint of discriminatory activity and i; suffi-
'r
cient to trigger the protections of the law against retaliatory
ll4Imeasures. Further, the intervention of the Iowa Civil Rights
Commission in this Johnson County matter, EDuity Case No. 411750, I
i solidified this fact. The Attorney General's complaint of
January 26th, Joint Exhibit d25, was based upon the identical
fact pattern as that involving the Fire Department's discrimina-
tion against Linda Eaton for her exercise of her rights under
i I
Iolra law. The intervention of the Commission in the court hearin
�j was accomplished pursuant to Iowa Code, §601A.5(4) (1979), which j
permltsthe seeking of a temporary injunction.. Thus, Linda Eaton's
IjPetition for Temporary Injunction and her participation in the .
court hearing provide one of the initial threshold facts of pro-
tected activity from which stemmed the retaliatory measures so
it
tran:tparent throughout the transcript. In any event, Linda
'Eaton's attempt to fulfill the responsibilities of both her
i
'-employment and her motherhood was, and is, in the highest t-ra-
edation of the policy of non-discrimination spoken to in §601A of
;Ithe Iowa Code. Even if she had never filed a complaint to trig-
Ilger the provisions of §601A.11, Linda Eaton's attempt to enjoy
/BE
DOc �' T
ht. I
I. AVAI�L�
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MINES
WO
- 22 -
U the benefits of non-discrimination and hence to oppose lawfully
�i the discriminatory practices of the Fire Department, suffices as
i
a triggering event for the purposes of that section.
tl
Once a person has engaged in "protected activity" or in some
other manner triggered the retaliation provisions of the law, the
.I
'j next Issues to he resolved involve the nature of the retaliatory
I� acts flowing from one's assertion of rights and whether any pos-
I
sible Justification for retaliatory measures can be' promoted.
Because of its "chilling effect" upon the assertion of one's
�i rights, any attempt at retaliation must be dealt with severely.
iIRetaliation is not a fixed and definite concept; its tentacles
pervade and affect an entire work environment. This pervasive
nature of retaliation was examined in a recent federal court case.
t
Although the complainant had failed to perform adequately on
li various occasion: these
problems were viewed by the court within!
Ithe context of a retaliatory atmosphere which rendered adequate
� performance impossible. The record revealed that the complainant)
Ms. Tanner, never missed a merit advance until she filed a charge!
of discrimination against the corporate hierarchy. The court
noted that
no direct evidence of a scheme to retaliate for the
filing of
the charge existed, for there seldom is such direct
evidence:
All the circumstances of the case, however,
!
indicate that Ms. Tanner was Riven an im-
possible task and that her ultimate failure
was inevitable. Ms. Tanner's dismissal
j!
from Blue Shield was for poor performance.
Ij
Certainly one must not disregard the hosti-
lity which existed in her relations with her
co-workers and its contribution to the cri-
tical view of her work. However, this hos-
tility must be attributed primarily to Ms.
Tanner's EEOC complaint and lawsuit,
. . .Accordingly, it is the view of the
!�
court that the case of constructive, if not
deliberate, retaliation has been clearly
established. While the court endorses the
concept that a person who files an EEOC com-
plaint and later a lawsuit does not thereby
become immune from discipline and even dis-
missal for performance which falls below the
standards demanded of other employees, it 1s
li HEST
14QCUMENT
AVAILABLE
�I
iI
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 'IDIOES
A
another matter where an employer through
his act of discrimination and subsequent
recriminatory attitude, creates an atmos-
phere of such hostility and suspicion that
normal performance of duties by the victim
of the discrimination becomes a virtual
impossibility." Tanner v. Calif. Physi-
cian's Serv.,F.Supp. N.D. Cal.
1979T, 20 EPD _!130, 148 Oct. 30, 1978, as
modified by orders of January 9 and
February 13, 1979.)
Other examples of retaliatory measures include increased
surveillance and harassment of complaining employees. The EEOC
and federal courts have found such activities to be illegal. In
Decision No. 70-683, (April 10, 1970), the complainant filed a
charge with the State Fair Employment Practices Agency against
his company supervisors and complaining of derogatory remarks
about his national origin and that they refused to schedule his
summer vacation. The employer assigned two other employees to
"tail" the complainant and take notes on his activities, but de-
lfended these actions on the ground that the complainant was
I� spending too much time in the cafeteria. This surveillance was
initiated immediately after the charge was filed and the EEOC
found this fact significant: "In light of the timing of the har-
assment, we find reasonable cause extstc.to believe that Respon-
dent harassed charginFS party in retaliation for, his opposition to '.
practices made unlawful by the act." 1973 CCH EEOC Decisions
(!16145. Further, a federal court found a Respondent's reprisals
in the form of increased surveillance and unnecessary checking
!I on the complainant to be a form of reprisal, "a particularly
i
vicious form of discrimination. . .the subtleties and in terrorem
effect of reprisal against those who seek to vindicate constitu-
tional and statutory rights [must] be erased." Reyes v. Mathews, i
1128 F.Supp. 300 (D. D.C. 1976). See also, 1973 CCH EEOC Decisions;
%202, No. .71-383 (10/30/70) .¢unexplained keeping of precise
attendance record solely regarding complainant was retaliation.)
The timing of measures which adversely affect a complainant
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
- 211 -
ii is especially important in determining whether retaliation has
it occurred. Both the EEOC and federal courts have recognized the
iI
! gravity of a situation in which a complainant suffers a sudden
:1 reversal of fortune after asserting his or her rights. In De-
cision 71-288, the EEOC found retaliation was established when
II the complainant was subjected to the employer's keeping of an
unusually close track of his activities and his subsequent dis-
charge. Contrary to normal policy, the respondent did not inform
11 the employee of its concern about his time card disrrepenices.
Rather, they kept a confidential monitor of his actions. The
EEOC could only conclude that the close surveillance was "for the
ji
!! sole purpose of compiling a record which would justify discharg-
IIng him." The EEOC stated:
"The surveillance began within a few days
of the charging party's return from a
leave of absence during which a Title VII
j charge he filed against Respondent was
¢ i investigated. The conclusion is unavoid-
able that but for the charge he filed
9 I against Respondent, charging party would
i not have been subjected to treatment which
we find Respondent did not accord similarly
d placed ernployeeds." EEOC Decision 71-288,
(Sept. 17, 1970), 8 FEP Cases 1121.
Reference must also be had to b'rancis v. American Tel. & Tel.
Com•, 55 F.R.D. 202, 207 (D. D.C. 1972), wherein the court found j
that the special detail of another employee to monitor complain- !
ant's actions and associations was suspiciously "directed to
;I
complainant's conduct occurring subsequent to the filing of the
�I EEOC complaint." The building and documenting of a case solely
i !
for the purpose of providing a defense to an EEOC complaint was,
iif'ound to be retaliatory conduct in violation of M4(a) of Title
IVII. Id. Unfortunately, the timing of the various activities in-
volving Linda Eaton and engaged 1n by the City Of Iowa City and
!lits Fire Department is likewise suspicious in nature and leads to
jlthe inevitable conclusion that actions were taken against Linda
is
N Eaton solely for the purpose of retaliation.
I
II I
, I
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
i CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MORTES
I
0
i
r�
- 25 -
Some sJx areas of retallatory treatment may be found upon a
review of the records: (1) changes in the administation of d1s-
li cipline, (2) changes in the evaluation made of Linda Eaton's
iiwork performance, (3) the creation and maintenance of the visitor
log, (11) the surveillance and monitoring resulting from her as-
�i sertion of her right to be a firefighting mother, (5) the esta-
blishment of rules and regulations pertaining to the work en-
vironment, and (6) the involvement in numerous city employees
In the personnel matters relating to a sole individual.
As a result of Linda Eaton's attempt to be both a parent
and firefighter and her resultant complaint of discriminatory
action, there was an increased number of reprimands riven in
general and, in particular, to Linda Eaton. (R. E.x. 19 & 20; T.
723).
As a result of Linda Eaton's actions, a significant change
can be seen from her previous evaluations to those subsequent
I� to the complaint. For the first six months of her tenure at the
Fire Department, Linda Eaton's ratings on her work performance
Ii were "excellent". In fact, she received a merit increase. (T.
897). Having; filed a complaint of discrimination and challenged
:the Fire Department's decision to prevent her from nursing her
j; child, Linda Eaton's evaluations became negative. (T•. 722). She
was given an evaluation in April, 1979 (T. 1056, 1063). Since
that time, her evaluations have been better. (T. 1070).
Most significantly, a special Visitors Log was created and
�! maintained from January 31st, following the hearing on Complain. -
11
I
ant's Petition for Temporary Injunction, until July 27, 1979,
Just before the commencement of the hearing before the Iowa Civil
' Rights Commission's hearing officer. (J. Ex. 20, C.Ex. )10, R.Lx.I
f
li 22)• No Visitors Log was maintained prior to the initiation of
Linda Eaton's complaint. (T. 899), The Chief, Robert Kenting,
IIasked his battalion chiefs to maintain a record of visitors to
the station, focusing upon Linda Eaton. (T. 1078). The crr_atlonl
I
�I
II
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES F10 RIES
d
■
W
of this tor; is subject to vary -Ing raLfon:ilea and ,i Usti flvat lant;
on the1
part of the respondents, if one is Co listen to the
i
sertlons of their wltnessc:;.1
3upposcdly, the lop was created in 1order to document the nuDiber of visitors to the Fire Department.
(T. 743, 7118-A & 1101). This is belied by Respondents own ex-
hibit #16, which i:; a comp:llat.ion of the visitors received rp0ct-
fically by Linda Raton, rather than the entire fire department.
Second, Respondr.nt states that :it kept Lire log in order to rind
lut how long Linda Eaton nourished her son (T. 753, 1101) and.
i
.':ally, in a Justification of some recency, the log was commenced
to stop theft and for security reasons. '(T. 755 & 1101).
The variety, scope and fantastical nature and recency of
these Justifications for the creation of the log in January
virtually forces the conclusion t.hnt there ;u e suhr0 uenL 1
q Just:i-
I; ficati.onr for ,in Il1cI;a1 act, i+c., the cr-eation of ti log Co
Iimonitor the life 01' Linda Eaton. It lD clear that Linda Eaton
was the focus of the �lop. (R. E'x. 16 & T. 779). It is equally I �
I' obvious Lhat the focu., of t10 log VMS upon Linda Eaton's
breast; -feeding activities, rather than any visitors to the fire station.I
!; (T• 293, 363, 383, 792, 836, 903, 915). The rule against visitors!
was in fact a rule against breastfeedin
g (Brief, suiira; T. 293, I
II 363, 373, 383, 792, 861, 903 & 915)• In fact, Captain Felstad j
admitted under oath that he kept a separato note book
I ,lust for
Linda Baton; only in Linda Eaton's case were nursing vi:lts and
I
bathroom v:i.elt:; :logged. (T. 1080-85, 1105). The fireflghtcrs
who testified at the hearing all tied the maint•enanc0 of the
vis:Itors log to Linda Eaton's actions. Nathan llopklns (T. 471-2),i
Richard Craig ('r. 569), and Steve llolan (T. 590), all saw an I
obvious connection between Linda Eaton's determination to pursue
oncurrently her status as a firefighter and a parent and the
aintenance of the visitors log. This evidence of retaliation
D forthright, unrobutted and without Justification.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES
!; 27
In
In addition, the surveillance and monitoring of Linda Eaton
I resulted from her assertion of her right to be a firefighting
u
!I mother. (T. 931). Sophie Zukrowski, civil rights specialist
for the City, admitted "peeking" in on Linda Eaton (T. 385-6)
I although that was certainly not part of her Job duties (T. 394).
1 (T• 913). In addition, the maintenance of the visitors log was
I
seen by some of the firefighters as a form of surveillance and
monitoring. (T. 569, 596).
The rules and regulations g
Ij
( Pertaining to the work environment
at the fire department were first established in 1936. GI Ex'.
II29)• They lay dormant, covered by dust and rarely, if ever, con-
. i
salted. Then, in January, 1979, Linda Eaton decided to breast-
feed her son and these mold s
y pages were dusted off, their antique
Ij provisions were rediscovered, and it was det6rmined that new rul
`( and regulations would have to be created. (T. 328-29, 720) In
fact, in the first six months of 1
I i 979, in response to the Linda
Eaton situation, twenty-four regulations were issued, equaling
I
in quantity if not quality the entire work product of Chief
�I Keating in all of 1978. (T. 715-21). A rule was issued esta-
i
I' blishing a twenty minutes maximum visit limitation and yet while
Linda Eaton suffered the consequences of exceeding this limit,
II others were not reprimanded. (T. 1095-8, 1126). In_fact, one
I
Iifirefighter stated that there was only one rule known to the
firefighters before January of 1979, a rule against women in the
Idormitory. (T. 615). Finally, the "Visitor Memo" within Joint
1 Exhibit #14 was tied by testimony directly to Linda Eaton's as-
sertion of her rights. g (T. 469-70, 532-33, 624, 7488, 764).
Finally, contrary to the established and clearly mandated
l+ policy of leaving I g personnel matters to the City's administrators,�
j� the City Council involved itself sua sponte, and at the ins.is-
fIJ
li I
tence of others. (J. Ex. 17; T. 124-5, 339, 845). In fact, City employees were pressed into service and involved in a
I
personnel matter involving a sole individual. The City utilized
IIthe scarce resources of various City employees in the surveil-
lance and monitoring activities directly related to Linda Eaton.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES
■
e�
i; Thus, a press release regarding breastfeeding was issued (J• Ex.
I. 23), June Higdon maintained a specific file on Linda Eaton (c. -Ex.
41), Dale Helling and Sophie Zukrowski maintained specific notes
I
on Linda Eaton
(C -Ex. 42 & 43), Sophie Zukrowski checked Linda
I
Eaton's visits and the time her son spent in the station (T. 394-
5) (although that was not her job), and strict monitoring occurrec
from and after January, 1979• (T. 569). Indeed,.this involve-
ment of numerous individuals in a private, personnel matter con-
vinced the firefighters that Linda Eaton was the catalyst .for the,
I
various bureaucratic steps taken by the Fire Department and City.
(T. 456, 569, 596 & 624). l
All of these activities, taken separately or together,
clearly indicate a conscious pattern of retaliation taken against
Linda Eaton for her assertion of her rights under Iowa law.
What is so vicious about this pattern of retaliation is its per I
vasive quality, reaching beyond the imposition of adverse con-
sequences upon Linda Eaton, to the broader and more questionable
practice of rule and regulations changes and implementation and
the maintenance of the Visitor Log. This sort of activity must
not be countenanced and must be clearly dealt with as a violation.
of Iowa law.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES
h
-30-
!1 motion are clearly insufficient, both in terms of their nature
as jurisdictional defenses and as unsupported by the evidence.
Respondent purports to raise a "jurisdictional" defense by
I.
its motion to dismiss on the ground that Linda Eaton's complaint
I' of June 18, 1979, was too late to invoke the Commission's powers.
I! Obviously, this defense cannot go to any question of personal
lJurisdiction, as that power was acquired by the Respondent's
Ilparticipation in the hearing conducted over some five days and
I any such defense was waived by the delay in its assertion. Rathe
this purported defense must rest upon some defect in the Commis-
sion's assertion of jurisdiction over the subject of the action.
That this defense is patently without merit is obvious from the
reading of cases examining the Iowa Civil*Rights Act.
The Iowa Civil Rights Commission was created by the adoption
in 1965 of the Iowa Civil Riehts Act, with the goal of effectua-
ting the policy of non-discrimination clearly stated in its Title:
An Act to establish a civil rights commission
to eliminate unfair and discriminatory prac-
tices in public accommodations, employment,
on-the-job training programs and vocational
�I schools. . .". 1965 Iowa Acts (61st G.A.)
!; Chap. 121.
Not only .is the policy and purpose of the statute obvious
to any reader of the Code, but the legislature commanded that any
:reading of the statute must be broad in nature, in order to ef-
',fectuate its purposes. Iowa Code, §601A.18 (1979); Iowa Civil j
i
I'Rights Comm. v. Massey -Ferguson Inc., 207 N.W.2d 577 (Iowa 1973).1
This statute establishes a detailed method whereby those aggrieved
by discriminatory practices can seek redress. City of Iowa City v.:
Ii
IlWestinghouse Learning Corp., 264 N.14.2d 771, 772 (Iowa 1978).
I
IilThese procedures speak to the manner in which jurisdiction over
i -the subject matter is exercised; they do not speak to the method
II j
llby which jurisdiction is acquired or retained.
The concept of jurisdiction is a concept of
'I p power. It is a i
concept of definition and limitation; the jurisdiction of a partl-'
'cular body defines and limits the exercise of that body's power.
jl f
' I
II �
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
i!
I'
II
j - 31 -
I
r•
Thus, the validlty of' a courl: or an agency's exorcise of it:
i
Il power is dependent upon the delineation of its jurisdiction.
ii In light of the Respondent's motion to dismiss, therefore, the
question is whether the Iowa Civil Rights Commission had juris-
diction to conduct its procedures in the Eaton matter. This is
:i
II a basic question of subject matter Jurisdiction, easily resolved
i;
upon examination of Chapter 601A. It is important to remember
�I
.I the exact nature of subject matter Jurisdiction and what it is,
I
I and isnot, about:
I
"Jurisdiction of the subject matter is the
power to hear and determine cases of the
l general class to which the proceeding be-
longs. . . .It is an abstract question
unrelated to the rights of the parties on
the merits of a given case. . . .Subject
I� matter jurisdiction cannot be conferred
or ousted by acts of the parties or pro-
cedures employed in particular litigation."
'1 State ex. rel. Iowa State Hwy. Comm. v.
Fu_!;22 N.4I.2d 199, 202 Iowa 1975
(citations omitted).
This statement fairly summarizes the extensive Iowa Supreme
Ij
Court discussions of the concept- of subject matter jurisdiction.
Central to the inquiry at hand is the question of whether the
i
Commission enjoys "the poorer to hear and determine cases of the
I
general class" involved in its administrative procedures. With-
in the text of Chapter 601A may be found the answer to that
question. The Commission is specifically empowered J'to hold
hearings upon any complaint made against. . .an employer." Iowa
Code, 5601A.5(5) (1979) (emphasis added.) This power to hold
I
l hearings on complaints of discriminatory practices is delineated
II
further in the specific procedures fashioned by §601A.15 of the 1
L• r
Act. The discriminatory practices forbidden by the Act encompass;
various grounds for complaint, foremost among them beim; the
I discrimination in employment against an employee because of his '
II or her sex. Iowa Code, §601A.6(1)(a)(1979). Further, discrimi-
ii natory acts in retaliation for/against a person's adherence to
li the philosophy and strictures of this chapter is forbidden.
� I
: 1
it I
II
I'
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES F101NES
i
0
.Iowa Code, §601A.11(2) (1979)
-32-
Taking these Provisions tolrother,
and viewing the legislation as a whole, it is obvious that the
subject matter of the Eaton complaint of June 18th, (i.e., the
discriminatory practices of the Fire Department on the basis of
sex in employment) was first brought to the attention of the
Commission by the complaint of the Attorney General in January.
Linda Eaton's subsequent complaint almost identical to that of
the Attorney General's, was a mere technical procedural solidifi-
cation of the matter.
The seminal case in the area of discrimination in Iowa is
Iron Workers, Local No_67 v. Hart, 191 N.W.2d 758 (Iowa 1971).
In this case the court examined the question or a party's stand-
ing as it related to the Commission's exercise of its Jurisdiction
and the fashioning of relief. The Court stated:
I
"Under the language of this legislation, a
complaint may be initiated by persons
other than one aggrieved by a discriminatory
or unfair practice. The Commission, a com-
missioner or the attorney general may file
a complaint [§601A.15(1)]. The complaint's
main function is to trigger Commission in-
vestigation and if probable cause is found,
conference, conciliation and persuasion
will follow. The agency decides if liti-
gation is necessary. Complainant's im-
portance as an adversary party Is not
established by the statutory provisions.
We hold strict procedural rules in this
area are not applicable. We do not imply .
we hold procedural rules, made necessary i
by due process and fair play, have no ap-
plication to Commission proceedings. .
We have before us, however, an administra-
tive proceeding foundation upon a legis- i
lavtive enactment designed more to imple-
ment broad public policy than to adjudicate
differences between private parties." 191
N.W.2d at 766. (emphasis added.)
I; The filing of any complaint is the event which invests the
ilCommission with subject'matter jurisdiction. Iowa Code, §§ 601A.5,
i;
(5) and .15(1) (1979); Iron Workers, supra. The entirety of
';Chapter 601A establishes "a complete and comprehensive legislative
.;plan for procersing, complaints concerning discriminatory practices)
i!
I
I! �
' I
i
II
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MDIIIES
i
- 33 -
Westinghouse Learnin , 264 N.W.2d at 772 (emphasis supplied). The
subject matter with which the Commission is concerned is "dis-
criminatory practices" and that is the scope of its
p jurisdiction;
the process by which these practices come to the Commission's
attention is simply an administrative methodology, devised by
the legislature to best effectuate the goal of Chapter 601A, the
voluntary adherence to a policy of non-discrimination.
That certain persons may be present or absent as Complainant
jj is irrelevant; subject matter jurisdiction is not determined in
that fashion. See, In Re Damon's Guardianship, 28 N.W.2d 118, 51
j� (Iowa 1947). This rule is even more evident in light of another
itcase involving the Iowa Civil Rights Commission.
In Pottawattamie County Dept. of Social Serv. V. Landau, 210
I� N.W.2d 837 (Iowa 1973), the argument was made that the Iowa Civil
Rights Commission lacked subject matter jurisdiction because of
i;
�the absence of certain parties to the matter before it. The
I court refused to pass upon this defense, for :it was clearly in-
sufficient to divest the Commission of subject matter jurisdlctlol
Reviewing the various cases examining the concent of jurisdiction
over the subject matter, the Iowa Supreme Court stated:
"'Phe Iowa Civil Rights Commission was
created by Chapter [601A] of the Iowa
Code. Pursuant to that statute as
applied to this case, the Commission has
Jurisdictional authority to hold hearings
'upon any complaint made against a person,
an employer, an employment agency, or a
labor organization, or the employees or
members thereof', charging discrimination
in employment practices. §105A.5(4), The
Code, 1971. [Iowa Code, §601A.5(5)(1979).]
Jackson Graham, on November 9, 1970 filed
a complaint with the I.oia Civil Rights
Commission charging; his employer with
discriminatory rractices in regard to his
discharge from employment. The complaint
was clearly within the realm of authority
given the Iowa Civil Rights Commission by
Chapter 105A [601A]." 210 N.W.2d at 843.
The focus of the Commission must be upon "discriminatory
practices" and not upon technical niceties. As the Iowa Supreme
Court recognized in Iron Workers, an "erroneous assumption is
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES
M,
N
is
I
the legislatLon involved must be interpreted as affording merely
�I a remedy In a specific dispute rather than correcting a broader
,I
6 pattern of behavior. It is the latter goals toward which this
i.
legislation is directed." 191 N.W.2d at 770.
'i
Respondents also contend that the conciliation process in
which it participated was ineffectual, and therefore the Commis-
sion is without jurisdiction to hold a hearing in the Eaton
Imatter. Obviously, it is the failure of conciliation efforts
I which serves as the triggering event for a public hearing pur-
i it
Isuant to Iowa Code, §601A.15(5-8)(1979). It is the Complainants'
I position that the procedure of "conciliation" was sufficiently
II engaged in so as to permit the holding of a hearing under the
statute. In any event, whether or not conciliation was "ineffec-
tual", that question is obviously irrelevant to the issue of
subject matter jurisdiction.
j; The concept of .conciliation as a significant step in the
i. i
Iowa Civil Rights Commission's procedures Is exemplified by the
language of Chapter 601A of the Iowa Code (1979). The Legislature
recognized the importance of encouraging voluntary adherence to
the principle of non-discrimination. Thus, It created a procedure
designed to focus upon and eliminate discriminatory practices, I
while providing a remedy to those aggrieved by the effects of
those practices. Indeed, the mission of the Iowa Civil Rights
Commission is not limited to the award of relief to those harmed
i'
j by discrimination, for its powers reach beyond that goal; the
I
I' Commission's purpose is to hasten the eventual elimination of
I it
I practices which illegally discriminate against persons, such as
I� Linda Eaton. Therefore, the Legislature designed the Iowa Civil
I' Rights Commission to have a variety of powers and duties, chief
among which are:
I'
2. To receive, investigate, and finally
determine the merits of complaints alleging
I; unfair or discriminatory practices.
3• To investigate and study the existence,
character, causes, and extent of discrimina-
tion In public accommodations, employment,
apprenticeship programs, on-the-job training
I.
programs, vocational schools, credit prac-
II
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES
I
A
- 3'1 -
tices, and housing in this state and to
attempt the elimination of such discrimi-
nation by education and conciliation.
Iowa Code, §601A.5(1979),
Respondent challenges the conciliation process engaged in by
the Commission as ineffectual, evidently because it did not in -
j volve sufficient quantities of "mediation and persuasion". (T,
1012). This allegation is
j patently without foundation, as is
II clear from the testimony of Respondent's own witness, Vernell
j Warren.
Called by Respondent in support of its motion to dismiss,
Ms. Warren was the complaince supervisor from the Iowa Civil
Rights Commission assigned to attempt the conciliation of the
matter of the Fire Department's alleged discriminatory practices
against Linda Eaton. (T. 989), Ms. Warren testified to review -
Ing the entire file and determining the appropriate remedies for
ILinda Eaton, in light of the probable cause finding. (T. 990).
!She then provided both Linda Eaton's attorneys and the City's
ii attorney with a copy of the proposed Conciliation Agreement prior
ito the scheduled conciliation meeting. This meeting was held on
j'April 41 1979, with Angela Ryan, Assistant City Attorney; Robert
Keating, Fire Chief; Pat Brown, Human Relations Director; Lela
!;Waller, Legal Department Secretary; Jane Eikelberry and Clara i
'01eson, Linda Eaton's attorneys; and Raymond Perry, Assistant
PAttorney General, being present. (T. 1003). This conciliation
j!
jIwas memorialized in a Case Progress report by Ms. Warren, entered
j;into evidence as Complainant's Exhibit 55 and a tape recording
made on behalf of the City, Complainant's Exhibit 57. (T,1008)..
As Ms. Warren testified, the meeting primarily involved re=
;viewing the various provisions in the proposed Agreement in order j
iito determine which were acceptable to either party. (T. 990).
JIMs. Warren attempted to determine why the rejected provisions
were not acceptable and "tried to suggest other alternatives for
i'
11those proposals that were not acceptable." (T, 991), I
n
i.
I
• I
Ij
it
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES II0171E5
■
W
F;
n
r�
36
At this meeting the City made an offer Of -conciliation which
i was reviewed by Linda Eaton and her attorneys and rejected as un-
lacceptable, although they told Ms. Warren they would present a
j counter -proposal to the City. (T. 992), Following the con cilia-
tion meeting, Ms. Warren "attempted to encourage all parties to j
I�
'!compromise in an effort to settle this matter."
(T. 9921. She
had several contacts with each party after the meeting itself,
although none of these contacts resulted in an Agreement resolving:
lithe matter. (T. 992), Although proposals for settlement were l
iiput forth by both the City and Linda Eaton, significant'
points
hof difference remained and this situation resulted in a failure
ii of conciliation, leading to the public hearing, held in July,
11-1979.
While it is certainly in the best interests of the Iowa Civil
;'Rights Commission, the State and all persons involved in a matter
I
it conciliate allegations of discrimination to a positive con-
iclusion, neither the law nor common sense mandate settlement.
, Chapter 601A focuses upon the identification of discriminatory
l:practices, the encouragement of voluntary resolutions, and, if
!that fails, the holding of hearings and
Provision of relief.
n IiIowa Code, §601A.15(5)(1979). Conciliation is not required, al -
I; though it is desireable. It is certainly not desireable nor re-
!quired where the discriminatory
y practice complained of is not
as would be the case were Linda Eaton to acceed to
,the overtures of the City. The City's proposal, Respondents Ex-
Ihib1t la, did not fairly meet in the crux of the matter, "whether
for not Linda Eaton would be allowed to breastfeed whileon duty."
'i(T• 992). For I,:tnda Eaton to bend over backwords to reach settle-
1inent without a concommitent effort on the part of the City would
i.not be a settlement; it would be an abdiction. The operative word I
llin the statute is "conciliation", not concession.
i+ Various courts examining the necessity and adequacy of con-
leiliation efforts by the EEOC have noted the miniscule mandate of
i
1Title VII, Actual conciliation efforts by the EEOC are not a pre- i
requisite to a subsequent civil action under Title VII. "All that
II
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES WoI11E5
i
BEST
A00y�MEiE I
Ls roquired 1:;
that the
plaintiff
first present:
his charms to
the Commission,
so that
it han an
opportunLty to
pursue concilia-
tion." Dyprcc_
v. Ilut_tz
Coal., 1119
F. Su pp. 7611,
n.I at 768 (E. D.
Fa. 1976). 3lmtlar•l,y, a federal. dinLr•ict. court in Nr.ta York ha:;
met the issuer square on:
". . .the ltrw is clear that Title VI7 re-
quJres only that the Commtssion have an
oL.�porLunl.ty to bring about a voluntary
settlement; there is no requirement that
conciliation efforts even take place, let
alone a Jurisdictional prerequisite that
the charging party come to the bargaining
table with demands that the other side
considers reasonable." I.o Re v. Chase
Manhattan Corp., 1131 P.Supp�l, 1971
S.D. N.Y. 1977)•
Although conciliation is a preliminary procedure to the
holding of a hcrnrl.ng and granting of rclicr, tho extent to which
parties must conciliat:c is not ostab:ished h,y ntat:utn, nor could
the law require, a rut.i.lc •jeaturo. Iloth povt.ica to thin rnrll.tor
presented offer:; of conciliation, which wore ro,jcctod by the
`1 I
)� opposing party. Efforts at conciliation were made, as requ.lred
by law. In a racial discrimination case under Wisconsin's Pall•
i
Employment Act, the Wisconsin Supreme Court examined the concl.IRI
tion process in that State. The court re.cognizod that, prior.AtyWao
placed upon end.itig dincr.iminat.ion through concillat.i.on and that
conciliation was a "mandatory preliminary procedure" to tho en-
trance of enfor'cr:m(.,tlt orders. HowOVOT', I:hc court; clearly rr.cor-
n:Lzod the nature of conciliation an a process involvintr compro-
mase:
"Conciliation requires the asr»nt of both
disputing parties to the proposi.tLon that
the dispute has ended. Unilateral ofrers
by the employer and union, when they are
threatened with a finding of discrimination,
do not in and of themselves, constitute
conciliation. " Watkins v. Do t. or Ind.
Labor & Human Rel.,T9 Wis.2d 782,- 233
N.W.2d 3TO , 3 1 197 5)
The Commission's agent, Ms. Warren, the parties and the
attor•no,yn herein till cngn(;ed In numprou:; ; I:tompta to ronol.vc: the
matter Jit a non-11tigatory Pa:;hlun. Thrnt having, l';rl]erl, Cho m-
ce;nary step leas a public hcru•Ine, conducted 1,111a pa:;, July -
August, 1979.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES tIo1NES
■
M
i
BRIEF POCNTVlf
THE DEPOSITION 01+ DR. DERRICK JEL[,[pI'E (CO14PLAIUAIIT'S EX-
HIBIT 11$) SHOULD BP' ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE AS IT MEETS THE STAN-
DARDS ESTABLISHED IN THE IOWA ADMINISTRATIVE' PROCEDURE, ACT.
AUTHORITIES
Iowa Code, 5517A.14(l) (1979).
Prior to hearing, counsel for both sides of this matter ar-
ranged to handle pre -hearing discovery and preparation in an
efficient, if relaxed, manner. Certain stipulations were cntcred
Into and accord:; reached, all In tire, Interest of- obtaln.in,r, In
the fullest and most expeditious f.lshion ,III oC the evidence rc-
levant to the Eaton case. In this veln, counsel for both stcicc+
agreed to the taking of Dr. Derrick JelllPfe's deposition through,
a specially arran,^•ed telephone conference, as he is a resident
of California. (See, Respondent's Resistance to Motion to CoD!npl
i
ii Discovery, 1-2). Upon review, liespondent's attorney tardily i
is rescinded her earlier, assent and Mod the aforementioned Resis-
tance. Then, at the hearing on the rnerlts, counsel for Respon-
li
dr.nC reasserted the pot;iti.on tukcn In Loll otirller Resistance. and
objected to the ruccipt into evidence of Dr. Jolliffe's deposition
I
(T. 798-99). Subject to this objection, Dr. Jcll.iffe's s',aorn,
i'
it verified deposatlon was offered by Complainants as their Exh.lbit.
118, to which was appended Dr. Jclli.ffc's Curriculum Vitae and !
i certain graphic representations from his tczi:, Human Milk in the
I� t1q-0ern World, (C. Ex. 3, 4, 5).
Throughout the discovery phase of tills case, Complainants
made clear' their determination to Utilize Dr. Je111ffc's testi-
mony.
(Complainant
Answers
to Interrorator.les,
No.
o for
Linda
Eaton,
No. 1.0 for Thonurs
J.
Pt.iller). Humcrcnis
Respor.sr.n
to
Ron-
pondent'n Motion to Pf'pollee likewise made explicit the detprminn-1
tion to utilize Dr. JOIllffe's expertise. Tn fact:, In two :;uch
$EST 11
Responses, the apparent agreement of all. part:.lca to a tclephnno
DVAj conference call and recordation of Dr. Jel li ffe's ans!•Icr:; t:o
A questions was evident. (Responses to Motion:; to [induce; Sec
also Notice of Expert Witness).
,I
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONIES
-39-
I
Arrangements were completed in early July to allow r such fo
I ;
'i a telephone conference call at 1:00 p.m. on July 17, 1979. (h;o-
tion to Compel Discovery, til, filed July 16, 1979; Resistance to '
M I� i
Motion to Compel Discovery, filed July 30, 1979). At 8:30 a.m.,
i
ithe day prior, to the scheduled conference call, the Rrspondent's
�I attorney rescinded hor assent, necessitating various emergency
I I�
legal maneuver::. (Tel.)
The aforementioned Motto,, wa:; filed to obtain Respondent's
I� attorne
j II y's compliance with the deposition methodology previously
�l agreed to by the parties and scheduled for July 17, 1979• The
i I
(Hearing Officer denied this Motion, afterwhich a simllar Motlon
i
to Compel Discovery was filed (Motion, July 20, 1979). This
iMotion was ruled upon by the Hearing Officer in an Order dated
� I
July 24, 1979, netting the guLdelines by which the utilization
of the Jelliffe Lolcphone dopnsit..1oil m.il;ht. bo nccompl Ishcd, an
!i
lsuch. (ituli.ng of July 211, 1979, pages 2-3). TheroaCter, at the
hearing on the merits, Respondent's attorney objected to L'ho
h_
receipt of the i
p Jell.iffc reposition into evidence upon numerous �
grounds. (T. 798-99).
I.
In light of Hearing Officer Stansber•r`y ruling of July 711,
1979, the nonparticIpati oil of the Respondent's attorney in the
telephone conference call, either orally or in writinj; pursuant
to Iowa P. Civ. N. 1118(a), vitiates one rationale or her objection.
ii Respond ent'n attorney was at all times informed of the arrange-
. i
i
iment.s,, of the call and her voluntary withdrawal from particlpat.lpn
'estops her from j clalml.ng any prejudice. Indeed, Complainants ;I 1
attorneys offered to read the Deposition into tho record In orrier '
I ;I ,
!Ito permit Respondent'r, attorney to i.ntrrposr an;,' obicrtiona, bill.
,
werc rebuffed in this attempt. (T. 801-803)• i
I , Another ground of the objection to the use of Dr. Jell
1(To ';
I�deposition is the failure to moet the requi.rernentn of Iowa R. C1v.1
�I'. 147(a)• Obviously, tho t1mc frame allude(l to above and 0., I
i
,$EST I s" )Md :1 1 the doc:umtinL be CO re the Ilea rLil; Officcr, did not
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE j1
it ..
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICR01_AB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES notnES
W
DODUM�II
INVp1L�
permit the propounding; and annwori.ng or written intorrogatorLes.
Nor could answers or sufficient clarl.ty and spcclPicity be pro-
vided gJvcn the Ln:;url'Lcacnt. time 1'ramc, Dr. J0111fre's schodulc
and the oclentific nature of the testimony. (Motion to Compel
Discovery, 15). The issue of whether Linda Eaton needed to
breastfeed her son,.Ian, Is paramount to both the Complainants
and Respondents cases in this matter. The :Lmportance of this
issue is evidenced by repeated references to nursing or breast-
feeding In documentary evidence. (e.g., R. Ix. N1-(,).
In testimony (e.g., T. 293, 363, 383, 792, 836, 903, 915) and,
moreover, 1n the evidence or two phynlc.i.ans called by the City.
Dr. Samuel. Fomon (T. 1020-51.); Dr. Hoy M. Pl.tk:in, (T. ?On -59).
For the CLt-y to now deny the :Importance o1' breastfeeding as an
issued Is to deny the obvious. Therefore, any rationale based
upon Iowa. R. Civ. P. 1117a, is patently without merit-.
It is important to note that the contents of Dr. Jelliffe's
deposition were reviewed, corrected, certified, and sworn to by
I
him. (Deposition, Cp. lix. 48, pal;e 36). This. certified, sworn
i testimony was then offered into evidenco. (T. 803).
,I
The .Iowa Admintstr';ttive Procedure: Act provIde;, for• the re -
I
� ce:Lpt into evidence of items not Cradat.lonnlly ruilnitted. �>17A.11t �
r
(1) establishes a broad standard by which evidence may be re-
ceived; and considered:
"A finding shall be based upon the kind of
evidence on which reasonably prudent per-
son: are accustomed to rely for the con-
duct of their serious affairs, and may be
based upon such evidence even if it would
be Jnadmissi.ble in a jury trial. . .Subject
to these requirements, when a hearing will
be expected and the Interests of the parties
will not be prejudiced substantially, any
part of the evidence may be required to be
submitted in vera.rJcd wrAtten t'orm." Inwa
(.'Ode, S17A.111(1) (1979). ---
Thu:;, the t:cr.t of whether a Noce of writing; may be admitt(:tl
into evi(lence 1.s Llircr.cold: (.1) .It ir verirind, (P) will It.:; iI:;e
in written form expedite the hearing, and (3) w.l.11 subrtanl:Larl
prejudice to a party rosult? The problcnnr; oncountered after
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MORIES
i
II
July 17, 1979, cautioned tile Complainants' counsel and the writtnll
I� introduced (Cp. Lx. 48) was therefore cert:iried and sworn to by
JI Dr. Jc1l:Ifre; Lhuc, the verLfication requirement has been met.
The use of the verified deposition obviously is analogous
i
to the use of an affidavit.
I Seen in that light, the efficiency
i nccOmplJshud through its rcccption and use in a writtne form I.
I; oLrar. I+urther, Respondent;; attorneys la -St -minute maneuvers pre-
It
iteluded any resort: Lo :In-por•son deposLtion proccedin
i, i4by either
counsel or to 1110 use of Dr. Jc111ffe as Respondents witness.
Finally, as to the question of prejudLce, Respondents attor-I
1 ney waived any objection to the use or this document on this
1
ground. When she refused to participate in the telephone con-
ference on eLther of the two dates, or to state her specific
objections as theGiuestions i
and Answers were read into the record.'
In any event, the testAmony or both or Respondont's medical wit-
nesses confirms the varoc.Ll,y or Dr. Jell: rr(.,'s tentimony a!; .it
rlppcar's In th0 (101jonIALon.
Dr. r(oy M. )""In tastLrIud that he had seen Ur. ;i01'lil'l'0'•
I work, Human 141.1.1: In The Modern World and Ila(1 read others. (I,
I'
2113) • Ra t:e:;L'1ri.ed that one diagram from ghat work, Cp.
is an accurate representat;los or the let -down response ('f. 211)
li
it and that breastfeeding is a dyadic and biological process. (T. I
li 249). i
1, Dr. Samuel J. Vomon test.iflec] that Dr. JelliCte is a breast-'
feeding "enthus.last", who had done,a good (10.,11 of work in dov0.ln-!
li pi.ng countr1es, ('I'. 1037) • �Dr. I�on:on at, that; his approach I i
�! deals with the cornpononts of m:l.lk r+halc Dr. ,7c11aff0.'s focuses
it
in the social, economLe, andhiolo;icnl.
i process of I ast. Veer] I ng. l
I• (T. 1038). While Dr. A'omon conceded that he. and Dr. ,ielliffa I
ymay have disagreements on the silbJect of lactation because he
does not consider himself an cy.pert In that area (T. 1038), he
i
BEST
I
DOCUM
AVAILA i LE j
II
I
1
I
, I
FIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1,101MES
I.
ii
:I testified that he recommended that "babies should, IC possibl(!,
i
be breastfed" and that "any woman who has an inclination to
breastfeed should be given every possible help and support so
that she finds it as pleasant and successful as possible." (11'.
1022).
�I
II For all of the above reasons, Complainant's Exhibit 48, 1:
ij admissible and should be examined and considered by the Hearing
Officer because of its reliability, relevancy, and importance.
i
p i
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
i
■
HI?(ORI? THE LOI:A CIVIL RLcn•rS COMMISSi0,1
••
'THOMAS J. MLLI,L•'R, . °�c,_
,/
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF IOWA,
I
*
Complainant,
*
CP 11 0.1-79-5630
vs. *
*
CITY OF IOWA CITY and
CITY OF IOWA CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT,
*
Respondent.
*
*
------_—.-------k
------------
LINDA L•'A'L'UN,
*
'
Complainant
* COMPLAINANT -S POST -HEARING
VS.
* BRIEF RE: ATTORNEYS'
FEES
1
CITY OF IOWA CITY and
Y
CITY OF IOWA CITY FIRE•' DEPARTMENT, k
Respondent.
*
i
*
,
ISSUE 7
7
UNDER WHAT STANDARD SHOULD AN ATTORNEY FEE AWARD BE MADE TO
A COMPLAINANT
UNDER CHAPTLU 601A AND HOW IS THAT S'T'ANDARD
APPLICABLP' TO '1'111•;
INS'TAN'T CASE?
AU'I'IIuR 1'1' L ES
e
Iowa Codg h01A.16
United States_Cod('f 42 U.S.C. �2000e
Cedar Rapids Co,m_nunil
rr
237, School District v. Pa
—P
N.W.2nd 486 (Iowa -1975) --"",
Newman v. P1Dg-t Park Ent�r�r.ises 390 U.S. 400 (1968)
Ablcm=nrle Pager Co_ v_MOOdIZ 422 U.S. 403 (1975)
'
Parham v _SOLIthwestern Bell Te.lcpfiOne—Co_ 433 F.2d 421
((8th
Cic. 1970)
Fairle�v. IaL,tec,Oq 493 F.2d 598 (5Lh Cir. 1974)
"Lawyers and Involuntary Clionts in PLIh.11C Inl.arest
Litigation'', 88 _Iorvanl 849 (1975)
g
Gunther v. Iuwa ;Late Men'.s kkcEormatary 466 I.I.S. 367
(Iowa, 19'19)
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
j
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
-2 -
Lea v Cone Mills Corp. 438 F.2d 86 (4th Cir. 197.1.)
Miller v. Amusement' Enterprises Inc. 426 F.2d 534 (5th
Cir. .1970)
Torres v. Sachs 538 F.2d 10 (2nd Cir. 1976)
Fitzpatrick v. nitzer 427 U.S. 445 (1976)
Hutto v. Finney 437 U.S. 678 (1978)
Iowa Code 94.1(36)
DISCUSSION
The Iowa Civil Flights Act of 1965, Chapter 601A, 1979
Code of Iowa, was amended effective January 1, 1979, to allow:
"Payment to the complainant of damages for an
injury caused by the discriminatory or unfair
practice which damages shall include but are
not limited to actual damages, court costs and
reasonable attorney fees." 1
3
Sec. 601A.15 (8) (a) (8). Together with amended Sec. 601A.16
(Complainant can bring District Court action without Admin-
istrative Agency after 120 days) this evidences a legislative
intent to encourage private enforcement of the statute's goals.2
1. Other Iowa statutes which allow for payment of a "reasonable"
attorney fee include Sec. 17A.4(4)(b) (invalidated administrative
rule making); Sec. 229.19 (mental health commitments); Sec. 232.
141(1)(g) (juvenile justice); Sec. 327D.16 (treble damages
against intrastate carriers); Sec. 511.17 (illegal contracts
with insurance companies); Sec. 567.6 (alien escheat proceedings);
Sec. 553.12 (anti -competition cases); Sec. 573.21 (claims on
public contracts).
Other Iowa statutes allow a "reasonable" attorney fee as
compared to some statutory standard: Sec. 302.33 (school fund
mortgage foreclosures); Sec. •472.26 (condemnation); Sec. 633.198
(probate): Sec. 649.5 (quiet title action); Rule Civi.l_Procedure
294 (partition proceedings). •
A few statutes limit recovery of attorney fees to actions
brought maliciously or without probable cause: Sec. 106A.12
(navigation cases against non-residents); Sec. 321.510 (use of
motor vehicles on a state highway by non-residents); Sec.321.510
(use of motor vehicles on a state highway by non-residents).
Lastly, the statute may specify that the Court fix the
"reasonable" attorney fee: Sec. 639.14 (release of a wrongfully
obtained attachment); or, rely on "the ordinary and customay
clarges for like services in the community," Sec. 815.7 (court
appointed attorneys in criminal matters). See, Rodriquez v.
Taylor 569 F.2d 1231,1249 (3rd. Cir. 1977) (Court appointed criminal
attorney fee award not an appropriate comparison for Title VII or
1983 attorney fee awards).
2. within the Eighth Circuit Federal Court -of. Appeals, Iowa's
statute has the broadest language for payment of attorney fees.
Arkansas does not have a state civil rights law. Missouri's
statute, Chapter 296 Fair Employment. Practices Act, has no pro-
vision for an award of attorney fees. The Nebraska statute',
Chaptar 25.129(6) and the Minnesota statute (Section 363.14(b))
each•give the district- court discretionary authority to award it
reasonable attorney fee to the prevailing party. The North
Dakota statute (Section 34.061.05) allows an award by 0c
Court of "reasonable" attorney fees in a wage discrimination rasp.
111;7._. -
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ?10IDE5
■
-3 -
The legislative purposes served by allowing attorney fees are
twofold:
1. to enhance enforcement of the statute by assuring
complainants that they will not be burdened with
attorney fees; and,
2. to deter discriminatory behavior of respondents.
i
i Under the terns of the statute the payment of attorney
Li
I
fees is included as one factor of "remedial action." Sec.
691A.15(8)(a). Remedial action is dependent upon a finding
of discrimination.
"If upon taking into consideration all of the
evidence at a hearing, the commission determines
that the Respondent has engaged in a discriminatory
or unfair practice, the commission shall state its
findings of fact and conclusions of law and shall
issue an order requiring the Respondent to cease
and desist from the discriminatory or unfair
practice and to take the necessary remedial action
as in the judgment of the Commission will carry out
the purposes of this Chapter..."
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1965, 72 U.S.C.
92000e et. seq. is the federal counterpart of Chapter 601A.
Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Parr 227 N.W. 2nd
486,494.(Iowa, 1975). Under Title VII a "prevailing party"
may be allowed "reasonable attorney fees." Sec. 706 (k), 42
U.S.C. § 2000e 3-5(k).
In Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, 390 U.S.400 (1968)
a unanimous Supreme Court authorized the payment of reasonable
attorney's fees to the prevailing plaintiff in an action under
Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §2000 a-3
(a) and reasoned as follows:
"When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed,
it was evident that enforcement would prove
difficult and that the Nation would have to
rely in part upon private litigation as a
means of securing broad compliance with the
law...If successful plaintiffs were routinely
forced to bear' their own attorneys' fees,
few aggrieved parties would be in a position
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
I
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOI;IES
_4__
Loadvance the public interest by .invoking the
injunctive powers of. Lhe federal courts. Congress
therefore enacted the provision for counsel fees --
not simply to penalize litigants who deliberately
advance arguments they know to be untenable but,
more broadly, to encourage individuals injured by
racial discrimination to seek judicial relief under
Title II." at 402.
The Court proceeded to articulate a standard for the award of
attorney fees which has been accepted by all of the federal
appellate courts.
It follows that one who succeeds in obtaining an
injunction under that Title should ordinarily
recover an attorney's fee unless special circum-
stances would render such an award unjust."
Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises 390 U.S. 400, 402 (1968).
In 1.975 the Supreme Court reaffirmed its support of the
Piggie Park test by holding it applicable to Title VII
litigation.
There is, of course, an equally strong public
interest in having injunctive actions brought
under Title VII, to eradicate discriminatory
employment practices. But this interest can
be vindicated by applying the Piggie Park
standard to the attorneys' fees provisions of
Title VII."
Ablemarle Paper Co. v Moody 422 U.S. 405,414 (1975)
The Eighth Circuit has held that even when the plaintiff
in a Title VII employment discrimination case fails to establish
a right to damages or an injunction, if the lawsuit "acted as
a catalyst" for the employer to comply with Title VII, an
attorney fee award is appropriate. Parham v. Southwestern
Bell Telephone Co. 433 F.2d 421 (8th Cir. 1970).
The State of. Iowa shares the goal of federal civil rights
legislation of promoting a non-discriminatory work place. This
goal will be furthered by adopting the federal standard under
Title VII: successful complainants should ordinarily recover
an attorney's fee unless special circumstances would render such
an award unjust.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIIIES
Wl
I .-
-5-
There is no evidence in the record that an award of
atLorney rcos in this uo:io i:o precluded by special circumstances.
Thu Lacl. Lhai. ::umu Luce; in Lhin cane have been paid by a
non-profit organization, the National Organization for Women,
is insufficient reason to modify any attorney fee award to the
complainant. The payment of fees by a non-profit organization
has been found "to be an impermissible rationale" to use in
determining an award of attorneys' fees and expenses.
"This Court has indicated on several occasions
that allowable fees and expenses may not be
reduced because appellants' attorney was
employed or funded by a civil rights organization
and/or tax exempt foundation or because the
attorney does not exact a fee."
Fairlev v. Patterson 493 F.2d 598,606 (5th,Cir. 1974); Dawson,
"Lawyers and Involuntary Clients in Public Interest Litigation,"
88 Harvard Law Review 849, 853 (1975); Gunther v. Iowa State
Men's Reformatory 466 F.S. 367 (Ia. 1979).
1 Nor is it a "special circumstance" to deny attorney fees
i even in "test" cases. Therefore, where plaintiff in an
employment discrimination case was not seeking specific
iemployment but was bringing a "test case" where he prevailed
on the merits, an award of attorney fees was upheld. Lea v.
I
Cone Mills Corp. 438 F.2d 86 (4th Cir. 1971).
i
The essential indicium for an attorney Eec award is the
existence of an attorney-client relationship. Miller v.
Amusement Enterprises, Inc. 426 F.2d 534,538 (5th Cir."1970).
In the instant case Exhibit52 demonstrates the existence of an
attorney-client relationship and no special circumstances'
were alleged or proved at the hearing to withhold an award
of attorney fees to the complainant. Torres v. Sachs 538
F.2d 19 (2nd,Cir. 1976). (Title VII does not mandate that
publicly funded law firms must be paid rates lower than fee
charging counsel).
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RARIDS•OES iIOIMES
-6 -
the fact that thn Respondent herein is a municipality
ircumstance" which would preclude an attorney fee
Cur 601A has no exclusion in its remedial action
)r state or local governments. The rationale
that the possibility of having to pay attorney
Ane the City to act in such a manner that further
Ligation will not be necessary. Further, the U.S.
has held that in a sex discrimination case under
Eleventh Amendment does not invalidate an award
ges and attorney fees against the state treasury..
Bitzer 427 U.S. 445 (1976); Hutto v. Finney 437
8).
:)f the Pio4ie Park stande.rd,'that attorney fees
oily be awarded absent special circumstances, is
-ted by the mandatorylanguag& of Chapter 601A:
,damages shall include but are not limited
actual damages, court costs and reasonable
:orney fees." (emphasis added)
fla)(8). Chapter 4, Sec. 4:1(36), 1979
tates that:
word shall imposes a duty."
A.18 indicates that, "This Chapter shall be
dly to effectuate its purposes."
since there are no special circumstances
case a reasonable attorney fee award should
Complainant.
ISSUE II
30NABLE ATTORNEY'S FEES BE COMPUTED UNDER
AUTHORITIES
Iowa Code of Professional Resp dibility UR 2-106
In Re Jenneiohn's Marriage 203 N.W. 2d 237 (Iowa, 1972)
Am. Jur. Attorneys at Law, 99232 Measure of Compenation
PIICROEILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES raDlnEs
-7-
SGfY40C,__L.'laswyr.t_h 63 N.W. 683 (iowa .1895)
Lunn chscl_y...l'uwa_State_ Ill yhwuy_'9mnl_{:_.Lon_2L9 N.W. 2d 658 (Iowa,
1974)
Wilson v. F'_eming 32 N.W.2d 798 (Iowa 1948)
Riter v_Davenport., R_I_and N.W. Ry. Co. 243 Iowa 1114 (Iowa, 1952)
_,Johnson v. Gcoraia_llighw_ ay Express Co. 488 F.2d 714 (5th Cir. 1974)
Berger,S. "Court- Awarded Attorneys' Fe:s: What is "Reasonable?"
126 U. of Pa. L. Rev. 281 (1977)
Council for Public Interest Law, Balancing the Scales of Justice:
Fin- aancing b is Interest Law in America (1976)
�taFP of Towa v. Un1oAsphalt & Roado;ls Inc. 281 F.S. 391 (S.D.
Iowa 1968)
i
-L],IIC1}L$ros. Ruddersv- Amariranitary Com, 487 F.2d 161
(3rd. Cir. 1974), 540 F.2d 102 (3rd Cir. 1976)
i
Glexnrlv�y,��lestrrn F1e�trir Co. 594 F.2d '638 (8th Cir. ]979)
i
-Gr-un;n v. rnFernitignal Hour,ncakez513 F.2d 114 (8th Cir.
1975), cert. den. 423 U.S. 864 (1975)
_C.Lty_taf let D2.t y_—GrinnPll Corp. 495 F.2d 448 (2nd Cir. 1974)
i -DreJd v- W har-ty_MutuaLlnsurancr-_C-a.A80 F.2d 69 (5th Cir. 1973) ,
cert. den. 417 U.S. 935.
Note, Developments in the Law -Employment Discr_mination in Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 84 Harvard 1. Re,`
1109, 1257 (1971)
)
( Xulkarn'i v_ Alexanrlpr 18 EPD 8644 (1978)
4-09eys__ New_York Gas Lioht 47 U.S.L.W. 2747 (1979)
J1es7th-y Mason City and For. Dodge R. Co. 94 N.W. 467 (1903)
_Fisher v. R ams 572 F.2d 406 (1st Cir. 1978)
.".bn 4 -u --Y> United StaLes 554 F.2nd 632 (4th Cir. 1977) .
_Parker v.—QD.1,UgDO_.182 U.S. App. D.C. 322, 561 F.2nd 320 (1977)
�ostr'r v �3aor_Stsn 561 F.2d 340 (D.C. Cir. 1977)
-Batesc_Pasifi�-C4s�xaxime Assn, 19 EPD 9132 (D.C. Calif. 1979)
i
I Prandin; v. Nada anssl Tea Co. 18 EPD 5194 (3rd Cir. 1978)
-In_Re-J�ehner's Fate _298 N.W. 656 (Iowa, 1941)
i
�anhman SSS sc alc_ 19 EPD 9044 (D.C.D.C. 1979)
ArCnson v,--Doar Trade_of City of Chicago 372 F.S. 1349 (N.D.
Illinois 1974)
-ArmstLong v. Board of Education of Birmingham C.A. No. 9678
(N.D. Alabama September 14, 1976)
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAG
CEDAR RARIDs•DEs o-touas
IM.
Disc•usS um
In :;ctLLng "reasonable" attorney f.uu:; Iowa has relied
uprm a multi - f+iclar. Lc::;Lcr' from IIIc 2-100 of Iho Iowa Codu
Lgn_.11 Iccspon:_i_bi1i1._y,. Ln Ilu_.,lcmnu_jo!uI':;_ht�rriagc
203 N.W.2d 237 (Iowa, 1972); pm. Jur_ Attorneys at- Law, s
232 Measure of Compensation.
It is noted at the outset that the wealth of the clinet
and any contractual arrangement between the party to be
awarded the fees and the attorney are not factors considered
i
in fixing a reasonable foe. Stevens v. Ellswroth 63 N.W.2d 683
I
' (Iowa 1895); Carmichael v. Iowa State Fl.iahwa Commission 219
i
N.W.2d 658 (Iowa 1974). Also, Iowa authorities agree that
attorney fees are noL taxable an part of the; costs in an
action unless specifically authorized by sLatutc. Wilson v.
Fleming 32 N.W.2nd 798 (Iowa, 1948); R.iter V. Davonport, R.I.
and N.W. Ry. Co._ 243 Ia. 1114 (Iowa 1952). The'attorney award,
if any, is owned by the client. Carmichael, suhrzl.
Dr2-106 Fees for Legal Services, Iowa Code of Professional
Responsibilitv states:
"Factors to be considered as guides in determining
L!Ie reasonableness of a fee .include Lhc following:
(1) The time and labor required, the novelty and
difficulty of Lhe questions involved, and the skill
requisite Lo perform Lhe legal service properly.
(2) The likelihood, if apparent Lo the client, t.hal
the acceptance of the particular employment will
preclude other employment by the lawyer
(3) The fee customarily charged in the locality for
similar legal services.
(4) The amount involved and the results obtained
(5) The time limitations imposed by the client or by
the circumsEances.
(6) The nature and .length of the professional
relationship with the client
(7) The experience, reputation, and ability of the
lawyer or lawyers performing the services.
(8) Whether the fee if fixed or contingent.
In tnc frequenl:ly cited ensu of Johnson v_.- Ccor1la._Ifighwa.y,
I
Express: Co. 488 F.2d 714 (5th Cir. 1974) the Fifth Circuit
applied each of these factors in an umployment. dLscriminat.ion
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ilo RIES
-9-
case, and other courts have followed their Lead. However,
the application of this multi -factor approach in the civil
rights field has be -un fraught with probloms. Samuel Berger
notes that the:
"courts have provided Car mor, atbractive
financial inducements for .lawyers to
represent private anti-trust complainants
and that oftentimes fee awards in environ-
mental and civil rights litigation have
been unreasonably low."
Berger, "Court Awarded Attorneys' I•'ces: What is "Reasonable?"
126 University of pa. [,._ Rev. 281,2.92 (1977). See also,
Council for Public Interest Law, Balancinrnthc scales of
Justice: FInancino Public Interest Law in America (1976); Stat.
of Iowa V. Union Asphalt & Roadoils. Inc. 281 P.S. 391 (S.D.
Iowa, 1968). In short, the multi -factor test has often
been applied inconsistently and unpredictably in the federal
courts.
The 'Third Circuit in Lindy Bros. Bu.ildcrs_v__American
Sanitary Corp. 487 F.2d 161 (3rd Cir. 1974), 540 F.2d .102 i
(3rd Cir. 1976) has devised a briefer list:
1. The number of hours spent in various legal '
activities by the individual attorneys
2. The reasonable hourly rate for the individual
attorneys
3. The quality of the attorneys' work.
I
Under either approach the process of setting the fee award
i
^s with a multiplication of the number of hours found to
have been reasonably expended by a typical hourly rate -for
that type of litigation in the particular area. This is the j
"lodestar figure" used by the Third Circuit, Limy eros.,
supra.
� I
In a case cited by the Eighth Circuit as a "model of
clarity which should serve as an example for the proper com-
putation of attorneys' fees awards," Clevorly__v._Wcs,Ccrn
Electric Co. 594 F.2d 638,642 (8th Cir. 1979) this approach j
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES
V -..•'�
-10-
was explained as follows:
"These factors will be considureii in the
following manner: first, a deLormination
will be made of the number of hours spent
by plaintiff's counsel, and in what manner;
second, a value will be placed on those
services by consideration of the customary
fee charged by plaintiff's counsel; finally,
this initial figure will be adjusted by
consideration of the remining factors."
See also, Grunin V. International. House ofCnncakcs 513 P.ld
114 (8th Cir. 1975), cent. den.. 423 U.S. 864 (1976).
Thus, the first: step in computing the attorney fee
award should be to ascertain the number of hours reasonably
expended and multiply that number by the typical hourly fee.
For while no final just and adequate fee can be determined
by this procedure,
"it is the only legitimate starling point
for analysis. It is only after such a
calculation that other, less objective
factors, can be introduced into the
calculus."
CiIY oE_Udlro.il v._.Cri,nncl Coi:p. 495 I•'.2d 448 (2nd (:ir.
3
1974).
a. TIME EXPENDED BY ATTORNEYS
As indicated in Exhibit 51 Complainant's attorney
submitted detailed time records from contemporaneous office
records. Time of volunteers was not included. rime spent
on non -legal aspects of the case, e.g., media problems, was
not included.
b. TIME EXPENDEN) IN D1. TRICT COURT AND ON GRIEVANCE'
'Pima was included for representation of Comp.lainanL in
the Iowa District Court of Johnson County in an action to
obtain a Temporary Injunction to allow Complainant to breast-
feed at work during the pendency of the action under Chapter GOLD.
3. A distinct minority view of one court for :;ening attorney
fees recently advocated a "cost plus reasonable profit :margin"
approach. Copeland _v_. Marshall 48 U.S.L.W. 2017 (1979)
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES HOMES
9
4lhile thin action Wil:: noCf.iLed under C1-1111 r 1 601A, L. hr. luw,i
Civil lights Commia:;ion had intervened under TOWO 1411e of
Civil Procedure 75 without objection by Complainant Eaton and
a 'remporary Injunction granted which is still in effect. 'rhus,
the District Court ar, a mattcr.�uf comity deferred t•o the
jurisdiction of the administrative agency to allow the
statutory scheme of Chapter 601A to proceed. In this case, the
Complainant was thrcat:ened by the Respondent with termination
of employment and the District Court prevented that by issuing
a Temporary Injunction restraining the employer from firing
the Complainant for breastfeeding on the job. Therefore, the
Complainant went directly to the State District Court on the
same facts and occurrences which became the basis for the
complaint under Chhater. 601A. Since under 601A the Complainant.
could not herself seek temporary injunctive relief. (Sec. 691A.5
reserves the power to seek a temporary injunction to the Civil.
Rights Commission) she had to rely on the traditional equity
power of the: Iowa Court, asking it• to act expeditiously and
then, with the protection of the 'Temporary Injunction, pursue
the course of Chapter 601A.
The facts and circumstdnces of the grievance matter for
which attorney hours are claimed (1-.xhib.it 51 1.6 hours)
are part of the instant casa. Complainant filed a grievance to
eliminate negatA ve .inferences being on record about. the
Complainant's breant.feoding and job performance. Whereas,
Respondent• sees the facts of the grievance as part: of their
usual and customary evaluation process, Complainant contends
in this matter that it was an example of retaliation, a
violation of Chapter 601A..11, and therefore necessary for
her attorneys' action. Since the subject matter of the
temporary injunctive suit and the grievable issue were the
same as the complaint before the_ Iowa Civil Rights Commission
BEST'
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DE.S 1101flES
■
W
-.12-
and pursued concurrently it .is fair and cit.,il.able Lhat Lhc
time expended on same should be included Ln the computation of
any attorney fee award.
Drew v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. 480 F'.2d 69 (5th Cir.
1973) cert. den. 417 6.5.935 held that in cascs in which
irreparable injury is shown and likelihood of ultimate success
has been established, the individual emp.loyce may bring her
own suit Lo InainLain the staLus quo pending admLnistrative
action and an award for attrneys' fees is appropriate. The
Court quoted with approval from Notre, Dcvclof,ments in the laity --
i
i
Employment Discrimination in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
� of 1964, 84 Harvard L. Rev. 1109,1257 (1971).
"...it would seem that if a court has the power
to grant a preliminary injunction when the final
decision authority is an administrative body, a ,
fortiori it should have the power to award such
j relief when it must only defer to the agency for a
period of attempted conciliation and the final
decision authority rests with the Court. Indeed,
such an injunction might be ccnLral to preserve
the Court's ability to later order meaningful
relief."
The United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia
faced a. similar situation where they held that a federal
employee who prevailed in a job bias complaint was entitled
to reasonable attorney's fees including fees for the work
done on a suit at the administrative level*and for work
done on a prior suit brought under the Administrative
Procedure Act pertaining to the same discriminatory event.
The Court found that the attorney's fees clause of 'Title VII
includes the awarding of fees for a vital and closely
related non -Title VII action. Kulkarn.i v. Alexander 18 LPD
8644 (.1978). The Complainant's first suit was held not
actionable under 'Title VII but only under the Administrativo
Procedure Act. The analogy here is that Complainant Eaton's
i
suit was not initiated under the.Chapter 601A but was
actionable under Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 320. In
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES .'IOINES
i
KU lkilrn i, UIC Court Said:
"The remaining issue is whethar Lhc• fee ativrd if] this
action can also Lake into considrroLA(1n the led;tl
work, donor at. Lhe admini:ilrativa lcvul and in the fir:;t.
suiL, C.A.No.76--347. The answer mu:;t b(' aEfirmatiVc!_
the award can and should cover all INA. work, up to
now, which was reasonably appropriate to the end-
result. It is settled in this circuit: that, iE tha
employee prevails, the attorney's compensation award
Properly includes legal services rendered at the
administrative level before (or alter) filing of the
court complaint under Title VII. (citing P_UrlSCL.
Foster, supra) The court has also indicated coverage for
legal services performed in prior court litigation
pertaining to the same discrimination claim (such
as the first suit here). See Grubbs v. Butz, supra,
U.S. App, D.C. upra,
at 22, 548 F.2d at 977. t•!c think
it irtunaterial in this instance that the first suit
was held notsustainable under Title VII but only
under the Administrative Procedure Act. The holdinq
Of the first suit--in which appellant clearly prcvriilerl in
a significant-. way--is a necessary pre
di.cate for ,i l,trq,r
part- of his claim in the present action and, as
this opinion shows, furnishes a vey iugiorLttnL raa:;on
why he prevails now. •Though the fee provision of.
Title VII ... authorizes, an award of fees in a court
suit only .if that litigation in brought under Title
VII (as is the present action) the literal terms of
I that clause do not
I preclude consideration
the award of: services renderedinsonclosely itol
setting
i integrally connected a prior non-Title VII casedas the
first suit here. The purpose of 'Title VII to
t encourage and abet vindication by covered employees
(including federal employees) of their rights against
discrimination calls for such a broad, liberal,
and sensible reading of the fee provision.
w Parkrc, suCiting
pra."
fIn analogous Si Luationsattorney Lime spent on collatara]
proceed.incir; ha:; been included in an ILI.ornoy Cee award, When
I
it TiLle VIL complaint was r.esOl.ved at the state: Civil Rights
i
I
Commission hearing level the Federal Court hats entertained
suit for aLtorney's fees and awarded them. C,'� V, A0
YOrhSss1z-1, 9J1.t C11t}z 47 U.S.L.W. 2747 (1979)'. Or, .in a Title
VII action, time spent by an attorney enforcing a consent
decree is includable in an attorney fee award. Rates v.
PacifJc Mar.it_iin� �;it_n•., 19 BPD 9132 W.C. Calif. 1779) .
In Iotaa, an award of atLorney'., CcOS to part-Acs who
benefited Erom the settlement of it car;c wa hold propuc
where the statute provided that "reanonabla ,iLtorney's fort;
shall be paid." IlcLJth v. Mason Cit and
_y _ Furl- Dodge R. Co.
94 NW 467 (1903). Further, federal employees who prevail on
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES
-14-
their employment discr.iminaLion complainl.:; I]cEorc the Civil
Service Commission may be granted aLt.ornuyS' fees under
Title VII. Fisher. v. Adams 572 F.2d 406 Cir. 1978). Und r
Title VII the District Court can granL fees to prevailing
parties for work done on the administrative as well as Court
Level. Johnson_, supra; Parker-Y. Califano 182 U.S. App. D.C. 37.2,
I
561 F.2d 320 (1977); Foster v. Uoorsten 561 F.2d 340 (D.C. Cir.
1977) .
In the: instnat: matter the Respondent's counsel acknowledged
the District- Court action covered the same facL situaLion as Lhe
i
Complaint before the Iowa Civil Rights Conmrission (T. 11) and
i
j that people named as defendants in the District Court suit
"have a direct interest" in this administrative agency complaint.
i
(T. 10) .
C. TIME SPENT ON THE ATTORNEY FEE ISSUE
Included in Exhibit5lis time spent on the compilation of
ithe bill, the research time on the issue of the Payment of
attorney fees and hearing time addressing than issue. Time
reasonabiy necessary to obtain a reasonable fee should be
i
included in tho fee award. 11onndin.i v. National 111ca Co.
18 EPU 5194 (3rd cir. 1978) ;;Cates that: '
Ij I
"StatuLurarily authorized fees are not paid
out of Lhe plaiu,.if:f's recovery and the attorney
in socking his fee is not acting in any sense
adversely to the plaintiff's intcrc:;t. Hence,.
the time expended by attorneys in obtaining a j
reasonable fee is justifiably included in the
attorneys' fee application and in the court's
fee award."
id. TIMI•; EXPENDED ON FACT INVESTIGA'CION AND AT THE ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENCY LEVL•'1
Chapter 601A, a:; does 'Title VII and other stale civil
rights statutes, Outlines a schume for setLlcmcnt of
discrimination allegations through the adminisLcative agency
I
structure before a Complainant goes to Court. Restricting
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
I
AI1CROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES M01HES
M
i
9E7M
an award of attorney Lecs to time: spent only in Court:
would hamper the legislative intent for informal resolution
of these cases outside of the judicial system. It would
have the anamolous result of having complainants pay their
attorneys' fees if the case were settled at the state
administrative agency hearing level but not pay attorney foes
if the Complainant had to go to Court.
...parties and attorneys would be Less
likely to try and diligently to resolve
claims at the administrative level
knowing that they can only recover
fees once they get to federal court."
Carey v. New York Gaslight Club, Inc. 47 U.S.L.W. 2747 (2nd Cir.
1979).
Further, the Iowa statute clearly gives the authority
to award attorneys' fees to the administrative agency for
Complainants and to the District Court for Respondents.
e. CUSTOMARY FE1-:S CHARGRD IN THE COMMUNTTY
ExhibiL50 aLtc:;L:: to Lhe f.ilclthat: in Iowa City, Iowa
forty dollar:: ($40) .is a usual and customary hourly fce for
an attorney. Further., affidavits of complainant's counsel
attest that this rate is a common one in their. practice.
In Re Dohner's Estate 398 N.W. 656 (Iowa, 1941)(aLtorneys
may testify themselves as to the value of their services
or may use qualified witnesses). To avoid penalizing
attorneys who are willing to work on civil rights cases, any
diminuat:ion of this hoursly feet: should be explained with
particularity. Sen .9. 1=.9EJC, suura. Further, the attorneys
herein for Complainant have demonstrated their past and
continued interest in civil rights litigation by their
community involvement in legal education talks for the general
public on civil rights, the expenditure of time and monies for
continuing legal education in civil rights and their
representation of civil rights claims within the possibilities
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIES
a3�5
i
r
•-hs-
1�.
Of a general practice in Iowa City.
f. RESULTS OBTAINED
The consideration of results obtained as a factor in
the case is an attempt to reach a general conclusion cuncerning
risk. As a practical matter, one looks at lhn care from
the perspective of a reasonable attorney's evaluation of
the case at its inception and its likelihood for success.
Burger, supra, reconunends:
"If, viewed from the perspective of a
reasonable attorney looking at the case from
its outset, success was virtually assured,
there has been no significant risk and there
should be no adjustment. If the Conrt con-
cludes that success was more likely than
not at the outset, an .increase in the fee
award in the range of 5001, would be
appropriate. Where the court concludes
that the chances for success was about even
at the outset an increase in the hourly
rate in the range of 100% appears
l appropriate. Finally, if the case appeared
unlikely Lo succeed when initiated, an
increase in the basic hourly rate of up to 200%
may be justified to compensate the attorney for
the substantial risk undertaken'.' at 326
I
The question herein is whether a reasonable attorney
presented with the case on or about January 22, 1979
would feel that he/she: could be successful in allowing
an unmarried female firefighter to breastfeed her infant
sone at the firehour.e. It seems alsmost certain that
I
any reasonable aLtornoy would con:;ider this: a high
i
risk case. If. the above calculus of Berger is accepted
a 200% increase in the hourly fee herein wou19 result
in an hourly raLc of: $120.00. Bachman v. PortSChUk 19
EPD 9044 (D.C.D.C, 1979) (Reviews hourly rates for attorneys
in Title VII cases in the District of Columbia circuit).
While on the face it may appear a .large hourly rate it is
nothing more than a recognition of the many unique and
unusual facts: which crr_atcd ,1 high risk liliclation ca::o in
civil rights law.
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLt
r, -
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIORIES
i
-17-
If the percentage increases above are deemed to overstate
the value of an attorney fee hourly rate for this kind of case
in Iowa, it is still appropriate to allow some percentage
increase as a recognition of the risk of the litigation.
g. THE NOVELTY AND DIFFICULTY OF THE QUESTIONS INVOLVED
To the best knowledge of counsel of Complainant this
is the first case attempting to adjudicate the .interests of
a breastfeed -in-, mother who is a f.iref-.ighter4 however,
more
unique may be the procedure utilized by Complainant's attorney
of relying upon the traditional equitable power of --the
District Court concurrent with using the statutory remedies
of Chapter 601A. To the knowledge of Complainant's counsel
this is the first case which used the combination of the
State District Court equitable power and the jurisdiction of
a State Civil Rights Agency to obtain, expeditiously, temporary
injunctive relief for the Complainant while the case in chief
moved forward through the administrative agency. Also, as
indicated in L•'xhibiC It
Complainant's counsel had to
spend significant time educating themselves on the issue of
lactation and its compatibility with the unique occupational
demands of being a firefighter. Finally, the amendments to
Chapter 601A effective January 1, 1979, including an entirely
new remedial action section presented issues of first
impression for adjudication.
h. THE SKILL REQUISITE TO PERFORM THE LEGAL SERVICES
Complainant's counsel in this action were called upon
to demonstrate legal knowledge of the State's Civil Rights
4. Pcnderarass v. Toombs, 546 P. 2d 1103 (Ct. App. Ore., 1976)
(Incarcerated felon, filed habeas corpus action asking
for release to breastfeed her child denied, but Court
stated: "...breastfeeding is a constitutional right
and ...in the unlikely event that a
governmental unit would attempt to
interfere with breast feeding by a
free citizen, the action would un-
doubtedly be held to be unconstitutional"
i BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•D[S t10111ES
■
i
PcdoraI Civil Iti(IhL:; .taw ;Ind St.nLe and I•odor<iI procedur.:a curd
con:;Litutional. provisions to devise an apprupr.ial.(: 1ery,11
mechanism t:o al Low Complainant- to breastfeed her child aL
work while pursuing her discrimination claim. During the
course of their representation, counsel for Complainant
were involved in many hours of mediation and negotiation,
court room representation and administrative hearing repre-
are
sentation. While some of these/skills traditionally used by
any attorney in general practice, their application to the
unique facts of this case and in the civil rights area in
general rf:q.uLrcd a degree of thnughL' and croat.iviCy .lacking
in many ocher kinds of actions.
I. THE ACCEPTANCE OE' TIIE PARTICULAR EI4p1.,OYMKNT AND PRI?CL,USJON
OF OTHER EMPLOYMENT BY THE LAWYER.
As indicated in their affidavits Complainant's counsel
are a two member law firm in practice for under three years
when this case was accepted. Counsels' affidavits attest to
i
the fact of their diminished ability to accept other employment
because of the press of time of this matter. Nor has their
I
i
representation attracted any significant now employment.
I i
J. TIIE AMOUNT INVOLVED AND THE RESUI,TS 0STA1NED
As noted by Herger, ;n)pra, because (.here is little
money involved in a civil rights claim the award for attorneys'
fees should not be diminished. What- is the value of being
able to do one's job in an atmosphere free of discrimination?
What is the value of being able to operate in the employment j
context free from retaliation by an employer? Because of the i
nature of issues confronted in civil rights litigation the use
of the dollar amount of any damage award as a measure of the I
attorney fee damage .is peculiarly inappropriate. Herein, the
client has indicated a deep commitment to breast.r.eeding w}iiln
maintaining her unique employment status as a firefighter.
i
TIEgT
DC)GU:YI IsN'r
kyML.A_BLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES ItO RIES
I..
• -19-
Counsel for Complainant were successful in meeting this
client goal.
K. THE TIME LIMITATION IMPOSED BY THE CLIENT AND/OR BY THE
CIRCUMSTANCES.
As indicated by Exhlbit 52 attorneys for the Complainant
accepted this case on January 21, 1979 and within five days
i
had received District Court InjuncL.ive relief for the client
to maintain her breastfeeding and work schedule For a client
who was undor the threat of imminent termination and had
already been suspended from her job the promptness of the
i result can only be labeled stunning. The Lime limitations
i
1 imposed by the client and the circumstances of the case
i I
necessitated Complainant's counsel effectively being on
duty on this case around the clock for ten consecutive days
when the case was first acquired and for intense significant
i
periods during the pendency of the litigation.
i
L. THE NATURE AND LENGTH OF THE PROFESSIONAL, RL'LATIONSHIP
i
wI'i'LI THE CLIENT �
As indicated in ExhibitC52 Complainant's counsel first -
had an attorney client relationship with the Complainant on
January 22, 1979 and met with Complainant p periodically I
throughout the litigation to "debrief" the Complainant as to
her job conditions. The necessity for this and the increased
time resulting was necessary due to the harrassment, retaliation
and difficulty of the working conditions imposed by the
Respondent. It should be remembered that every day, week and
month of this litigation the Complainant- was performing an
activity which the Respondent deemed unusual if not bizarre:
breastfeeding her son at work. As indicated from Exhibit R22
the Respondent kept the ComplainanL under virtual daily
scrutiny. In an attempt to understand, evaluate and cop(,
with this situation it was necessary for Complainant's counsel
�•JBE
ST'
DOCUMENT
'��EABIJ;
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I10111ES
-20-
Lo meet with her frequently. These s0ssi01':: were done by
only one attorney.
NI. THE EXPERIENCE, REPUTATION AND ABILITY OF '1'IIE LAWYER OR
LAWYERS PERFORMING THE SERVICES.
Counsel 'Affidavit explains in detail these factors as perreived
by Complainant's counsel. Since each counsel has only been
practicing for three years, information was provided about
their actions prior to their membership in the Bar and their
continuing involvement with civil rights as well as information
about their general law practice.
N. WHETHER THE FEE IS FIXED OR CONTINGENT
There is general recognition that competent counsel
cannot be attracted to difficult contingent cases for hourly
rates. Virtually no court has suggested that anti-trust
fees, for example, should be limited to prevailing counsel
ordinary rates. Arenson v.Floard of Trade of._ Cilv of Chicago
372 F.S. 1349,1359 (N.D. Illinois 1974) (lead counsel awarded
$400 per hour). Most courts which have compensated for a
contingency factor have done so by multiplying the standard
hourly rate or giving: a fixed bonus. AERiLr0D v, hoard of_
EdUQAtio�pfyl.CMi1l9haIn, C.A. No. 9678, N.D. Alabama, Sop t.
14, 1976) ($60.00 per hour average for period of 1973-76,
with 15% qugmentat.ion).
Finally, if Complainant receives some but not all
remedial actions sought she should still be awarded attorney
fees. Brown v. Boorstcin supra; NAACP V. Bell 448 F.S. 1164
(D.D.C. 1978); Firebird society v. Members•of Board of Fire
Comm. 433 F.S. 752 (D.C. Conn. 1976) affd. 556 F.2d 642 (2nd
Cir. 1977); Grubbs v. Butz, 548 F.2d 973 (1976); Schaeffer v.
San Diego Yellow Cabs Inc 462 P.2d 1002,1008 (9th Cir.
1972).
BEST
DOCUMENT
AVAILAnl,E
II1CROFIEMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES
_21
CONCLUSION"
For the reasons advanced gprn an award of attorney
fees should be made to Complainant under a standard that
absent special circumstances a Complainant should
ordinarily be awarded reasonable aLtornay fees under
Chapter 601A.15(8)(a)(8).
Further, that ho:ppecial circumstances have been
demonstrated and an award of reasonable attorney fees
is appropriate remedial action pursuant to Chapter 601A.
15 (8) (a) .
BEST
rjOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOVIES
M
r...
CCRTIFICriTE OF S. �,VICk
ihounder►Ipne4 arhlin that the luepoing insuu.nenr
W Mem qUk W Ovum to Ma above cause by
Mew on Nraal M tlta Umad slates Man.
N=maddFMmd (a each of
[heal.
Wmpalt�
1011 rasa addresses
aloM 111a 46 19
BUST
DOCUMENT
AVAILABLE
Respectfully submitted,
IOWA CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION
'I'IIOMA,S�d�"NfILI.,I•;12 �._
At rney Gonaral of I w�r
BY: _
Victor Herrin
Assistant Attorney ene
Civil Rights Division
507 10th Street
Des Moines, Iowa 50309
(515) 281-4482
elan zz 'v\_1
Clara Oleson
Attorney for Complainant Eaton
Oleson & Eikleberry
Suite 6, Paul -Helen Building
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
(319) 354-4056
eberry
/Attorney for Complainant Ea�t�
Oleson &-Eikleberry
Suite 6, Paul -Helen Building
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
(319) 354-4056
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tl01flES
"I CkOF ILklfL .9 -
JORM MICROLAB
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 14, 1979
i0: City Council
FROM; City Manager
RE: Informal Agendas and Meeting Schedule
December 17, 1979 Monday
1:00 - 5:15 P.M. NOTE CHANGE IN STARTING TIME
1:00 P.M. - Council agenda, Council time, Council committee reports
1:30 P.M. - Streetscape Phase II -B
2:15 P.M. - Review Senior Center Plans and Specifications - Senior Center
Staff
2:45 P.M. - Preliminary CIP Presentation - Staff
4:15 P.M. - Budget Projections - Finance Director
4:45 P.M. - Executive Session - Collective Bargaining
5:00 P.M. - Consider appointments to Human Rights Commission
December 18, 1979 Tuesday
7:30 P.M. - Regular Council Meeting - Council Chambers
? December 20, 1979 Thursda
7:30 P.M. - Special Informal Council Meeting - Conference Room
(518 and executive session - collective bargaining)
December 22, 1979 Saturday
8:00 A.M. - Council Legislative Committee meeting with Area Legislators -
Highlander Inn
December 24, 1979 Mondav
No informal Council Meeting
December 25, 1979 Tuesda
No formal Council Meeting - HERRY CHRISTMAS!
? December 26, 1979 Wednesday
7:30 P.M. - Special Informal Council fleeting - Conference Room
December 31, 1979 Monday
No informal Council Meeting
January 1, 1980 Tuesda
No formal Council Meeting - HAPPY NEW YEARI
January 2, 1980 Wednesday
11:50 A.M. - Organizational Meeting - Council Chambers
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES II0E7IES
City Council
December 14, 1979
Page 2
PENDING ITEMS
Northside Study
Area Transportation Study
Airport Commission Funding Request
Undergrounding of Services in CBD
Spruce Street Drainage Problem
Appointment to Resources Conservation Commission - January 8
Appointment to Committee on Community Needs - January 15
Meeting with Board of Adjustment/Staff
Human Services Requests - January 3
IIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOIm ES
E r
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 14, 1979
TO: City Council
pRW; City Manager
RE: Informal Agendas and Meeting Schedule
December
17, 1979
Monday
1:00 - 5:15
P.M.
NOTE CHANGE IN STARTING TIME
1:00
P.M. -
Council agenda, Council time,
Council committee reports
1:30
P.M. -
Streetscaoe Phase II -B
2:15
P.M. -
Review Senior Center Plans and
Specifications - Senior Center
Staff
2:45
P.M. -
Preliminary CIP Presentation -
Staff
4:15
P.M. -
Budget Projections - Finance Director
4:45
P.M. -
Executive Session - Collective
Bargaining
5:00
P.M. -
Consider appointments to Human
Rights Commission
December 18, 1979 Tuesday
7:30 P.M. - Regular Council Meeting - Council Chambers
? December 20, 1979 Thursday
7:30 P.M. - Special Informal Council Meeting - Conference Room
(518 and executive session - collective bargaining)
December 22, 1979 Saturday
8:00 A.M. - Council Legislative Committee meeting with Area Legislators -
Highlander Inn
December 24, 1979 Monday
No informal Council Meeting
December 25, 1979 Tuesday
No formal Council Meeting -MERRY CHRISTMAS!
? December 26, 1979 Wednesday
7:30 P.M. - Special Informal Council lieeting - Conference Room
December 31, 1979 Monday
No informal Council Meeting
January 1, 1980 Tuesday
No formal Council Meeting - HAPPY NEW YEAR!
January 2, 1980 Wednesday
11:50 A.M. - Organizational Meeting - Council Chambers
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS.DES Ho1nES
k,
City Council
December 14, 1979
Page 2
PENDING ITEMS
Northside Study
Area Transportation Study
Airport Commission Funding Request
Undergrounding of Services in CBD
Spruce Street Drainage Problem
Appointment to Resources Conservation Commission - January 8
Appointment to Committee on Community Needs - January 15
Meeting with Board of Adjustment/Staff
Human Services Requests - January 8
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110111[5
11
1 �Z9
INFORMAL COUNCIL DISCUSSION
DECEMBER 17, 1979
INFORMAL COUNCIL DISCUSSION: December 17, 1979, 1;10 P.M. in the Conference
Room at the Civic Center. Mayor Robert Vevera presiding.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Balmer, Roberts, Perret, Vevera, Councilmember-elect
Lynch. Absent: Erdahl, Neuhauser.
STAFFMEMBERS PRESENT: Berlin, Stolfus, Helling. Others present for certain
discussions, as noted.
TAPE-RECORDED: Reel A79-29, Side 2, 933 -End, and Reel H79-31, Side 1, 1-1150.
AGENDA AND COUNCIL BUSINESS 993-1823
1. Balmer questioned intent of memo from Traffic Engr. Brachtel re
street light attlover/Friendship. City Mgr. Berlin explained the
present policy. There would be the same number of lights but at
different locations. He agreed that the residents should be
notified, and advised that Northside residents had presented a
petition requesting changes in their area at the Revenue Sharing
hearing. A memo regarding this hearing will be received by
Council next week. Lynch asked for a memo from the Police Chief
re lighting or alternatives to solve assault problems. Discussion
will be scheduled for an informal meeting.
2. Item #15, contract with Kelly Security in the Block 84 Parking Ramp
was questioned. How many people will be hired, hours? Berlin
stated that the staff did not want to advertise hours, and a trained
policeman was not necessary. The car is necessary and is the small
vehicle assigned to parking systems during the day. Contract will
be amended to provide for one guard only. There were no Council
objections.
3. Regarding memo from Plastino/Vitosh concerning the hiring of an
Asst. Transit Mgr., Berlin advised that no decision on the routes
was necessary Tues. nite, but if there was no objection, staff
would like to proceed with installing the signs and advertising
the position immediately.
4. Perret called attention to memo from Mose on FY81 Transit Assistance
Mose advised that DOT is receiving negative responses from all over
Iowa, and asked that the area legislators get input from Council -
members. This will be added to the agenda for Saturday's meeting.
5. Item N16, Ordinance and memo from Showalter regarding division of
cemetery/park property. The property was purchased with cemetery
bonds, only 5 of the 80 acres is suitable for cemetery use. If land
is given to the park, it can be given back for cemetery use if needed.
Legal description of park needs to be resolved for grant regarding
shelter at park. Lynch obsorved that the need had not been shown
for a change from cemetery tG park. Berlin will check to see if the
State will accept the present boundaries.
6. City Clerk Stolfus requested addition of Resolution approving Sunday
Sales Liquor Permit for Yen Ching, 1515 Mall Drive to the Consent
Calendar.
7. Berlin reported on the problems concerning the cemetery wall, and
the request from citizens for a sidewalk for safety of school
children. It was noted that consultant Noel Willis had studied
the problem & reported previously.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES
_..'
Page 2 Informal Council
December 17, 1979
Kucharzak explained use of CDBG 5th year funding for housing rehab
in renter -occupied properties, under '312' program. Present and
proposed projects were noted. There is a one-person staff, and the
program will end June 30, 1980, if possible.
STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, PHASE II -B Hencin, Chiat, consultant Leaman,
Poupe ka; Gibson & Mossman for Univ.; Dietz
Berlin advised that the consultant would make a presenk'.ation, and staff is
seeking permission to go out to bid. Leaman called attert;o;i to the memo
regarding the construction schedule and budget summary. Poupelka explained the
concept, & gave an overview of why things are the way they are, outlined the
coordination with the University, and answered questions. Bus shelters will
be placed in the median strip. During Mall opening hours, riders can wait
there. Gibson stated that the University opposes bus shelters along the
Pentacrest, as they are not architecturally compatible with the historic
register designation of the Pentacrest. City Mgr. & staff are negotiating
with University representatives regarding sharing costs of amenities,
benches, new cable as a result of River Corridor Sewer project. Concern
was expressed by Councilmembers over the higher cost of the benches the
University wants to install. A majority of Councilmembers were agreeable
to preparation of the bid proposal as discussed.
SENIOR CENTER PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS Miller, Showalter, Benz, Hencin, &
Consult—an—tBITI Nowysz.
2764-ENd
City Manager Berlin stated that staff needed a
decision to proceed to the bidding stage. Roberts
suggested that hiring
of a consultant for cost estimate was unusual. Nowysz reimbursed the
City for
Tape 79-31
Side 1,
the fee. (This process was used in Library project, also.)
Alternatives were discussed, and will be left in
1-500
the bid proposal.
Balmer expressed concern in tearing out sidewalk just installed on the
Washington St. side, for on -grade access. Other entrances were pointed
out. An alternative for q4,
painting, is cloth -back vinyl sheet. An
historical grant has been applied for, and will be
used for replacement
of windows. In funding, it is possible for the $35,000 from Ecumenical
Housing to go into the General Fund and then $248,400 will be needed to
balance with CDBG funds.
Space for offices was discussed. Berlin advised
that the Space Colmnittee will be coming up with alternatives. The
Center
will have a 50 yr. life expectancy, and is designed as a low maintenance
building. Nowysz
advised that there is no grant available for solar energy.
After discussion of
roof repair, the consultant will look into the new type
of roofing. There was Council consensus to
move ahead on the bidding
schedule.
DEFERRAL OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM PRESENTATION
City Mgr. er in advise that the CIP presentat o would be moved to 7:30 PM
Thursday, December 20th, along with the discussion on Freeway 518. And
discussion of collective bargaining would be rescheduled for Dec. 26th.
BUDGET PROJECTIONS Vitosh, Jones present 5004150
Memo in 12/14 pac et noted. Funding of housing inspection discussed. State
law mandates inspection every year, legislators could change it. Program is
almost self-supporting, not counting minimum housing inspection. Concern was
expressed over costs of maintenance of Senior Center. Some costs will be one-
time expense. Staff will meet with County to discuss participation in operating
costs. If health & life ins. costs are moved out of the general fund, it
would raise taxes. $800,000 shortage of funding discussed. Berlin noted that
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
EEnAR RAPIDS -DCS 'IOImES
,
Informal Council
Page 3 December 17, 1979
there will be several options, and mechanisms within the budget to cut
and paste, or face the music and make decisions. Mayor Vevera stated
that he sensed a consensus to not put off till next year what is bound
to happen. Berlin noted that Councilmembers are going to tell their
problems to the legislators.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
i
Moved by Perret, seconded by Vevera to adjourn to executive session for
discussion of collective bargaining under Sec. 9.3, 4:45 P.M. Affirmative
roll call vote unanimous, 4/0, Neuhauser, Erdahl absent. Councilman -
elect Lynch present. Staffinembers present: Berlin, Stolfus, Helling,
Vitosh, Jones. Council discussed the AFSCME collective bargaining.
Tape-recorded on Reel N16, Side 2, 1236-2224. Moved by Perret, seconded
by Balmer to adjourn, 5:15 Ph1.
MICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS.DES 1101NES
fo
NOTES:
BENCH SUPpL/EO BY B£NCH MX(, CORP., MOOEL 8,0.'
2, OENCH FRAME d SUPPORTS C457 IRON, PAINTED 7t7 MATCH
OBnUAM/N M27640 (RONCLAO RUST RBTAROO, BRONtFTONL
S /(5ro 0.
3 ALL SLATS 2"r3' EXCAL/EUA 5AAOG PURFLQHEART� M/LLEO
3MOOTH W/TN EASS0 EDGES -
4. ACL BOLTS STA/NL5S5 STEEL,
'i ALL OLNCHES TO HAVE 5/)VGL.E ARMREST DETW"Al
EACH 4=0' 3EG77/0N.
G, SET ALL 9CNC14ES PLUMB � LEVEL (WHEN ON 5LOPE,
MOUNT AT /7" AV&, NEldIM7,.
�/ i :'iG�/rtA N .gC/1Giv
FIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DESS FIOINES
`- 07 IRON SVPPORT3 (7-y
MI:.k,VILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES tIDIDES
STEEL ANµOQ
"I"S (NOT /NCL,)
' �•:'i �••►.: V:.:••••►'�• _ ;'y"!„'
�:..:.. ..9•
SH/^I£i FOR LEV /NG,
EL
,►• v..,. —.r:.' ' '
(NOT /N -
SLAa
' `t,i �•'e7 i. +poi.{+��:•i.v...i�•i;: i.,
•n
ANCHORAGE DETAIL
MI:.k,VILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES tIDIDES
NIcKINLEY ENCLOSED WALKWAYS
CENTRAL LIBRARY ADDITION. TAMPA, FL
Architect: McElvey, Jenneivein, Stelany 8
Howard, Inc.
Contractor: Peter Brown Co., Inc., Clearwater, FL
EUCLID PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, ST. LOUIS, MO
Architect: Eugene J. Mackey, III, Inc.
Contractor: Albers Construction Co.
FIRST NATIONAL BANK, CLINTON, IA
Architect: Expression, Inc.
Contractor: O. Jorgensen 8 Sons
Construction Co., Inc.
MEMORIAL HOSPITAL. CLARKSVILLE. TN
Architect: Hibbs and Johnson
Contractor: James W. Harris Building Contractor
Phone collect or write for full information.
o. o. MCKINLEY co., Inc. P.O. Box 55265 • Indianapolis, IN 46205
Telephone (917) 546.1578
q
"ICROFILMED 0'r
JORM MICROLAB
_ 1
Vim %• X\ �k 1
ag
�'�ti�
Market Square. Indianapolis, Indiana. Lincoln County High School. Lincoln County, Kentur
The McKinley Company has specialized for over 30 years in the design and fabrication of
unique products from all metals. While the practical and attractive walkways shown in this folder
are typical of McKinley quality, products, they are but one of many kinds of architectural
products from McKinley ... raneine from custom metal products to fascia, sun and weather
control products and quality finishing. The McKinley Company is ready to serve your particular
needs with experienced engineering consultation and help... call on McKinley.
SPECIFICATIONS
SCOPE:
Furnish material. labor. and equipment to fabricate
t.: aluminum and plastic elements of new enclosed
passageway connecting the carious buildings of the
complex.
MANUFACTURER:
THE ORMAN 0. AIcKINLEY CO.. INC.
4530 N. Kesslone Arc.
Indianapolis, Indiana 46205
SHOP DRAR7NGS:
Complete shop and erection drawings shall be pre-
pared and submitted before fabricatiun.
it EASUREJIENTS:
Measurements of the concrete walkway .hall be
taken in the field before finalizing erection drawines.
General Contractor shall cooperate in holding the
number of direction chances and grade changes to a
minimum.
WORKMANSHIP:
Fabrication. finishing, and installation shall be
first-class in every particular.
AIATERIALSt
All metal members are extruded aluminum, alloy
6163 -Ti, in shapes as detailed.
Glazing panels shall be 1, " thick bronze tinted
acrylic sheet (or as specified).
GL•Izing gasket is to be closed -cell sponge neoprene.
Fasteners shall be stainless steel: or plated steel.
Painted,
in. o. McKINLEY co. Inc
FABRICATION:
Main extruded "tee" shape shall be si:up fabricated
into "bents- as detailed using cold -bending !echnigate
so as not to destroy the finish.
All other extruded aluminum members shall b^"
fabricated (drilling. cutting, milling. etc.) prior to
finishinu.
Acp•lic sheets are to be cul -to -size in the shop.
FINISHING:
All aluminum shall be elven a chemical treatment
consisting of an eight -step cleaning process and
flonderite conversion.
Following this, material shall be color -coated with
•t flurocarbon polymer over a compatible primer.
Color -coating shall be applied under controlled con-
ditions by airless spray method. then fusion -cured in
a comeyorized electric convection oven under precise
temperature regulation.
ERECTION:
All installation shall be performed in first-class
manner.
Bents shall be spaced precisely according to the
erection layout and shall be set plum and square
with the walkway.
Horizontal members shall be neatly and securely
fastened in place.
Acrylic sheet glazing panels shall be carefully
glazed •into openings. the vault panels being cold -
formed to conform to the curvature of the bents.
Gasket must be continuoushapplied about perim-
eler of acrylic sheet.
4530 N. Keystone Avenue Indianapolis, Indiana 46205
11.1-6 SAl PRIMED IN USA.
FI ICROFIUIEO BY
JORM MICROLAB
Crone RAPI05.OEs t101R[s
I
77edi-fieml. [,,,
FIICROFILMED BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES
NOTE: ALL EXPOSED METAL
SURFACES TO ON PA/NTGO
TO MATCH aE-"JAMIN
MOORE /RONCLAO RUST
RETAROO, bRONZETONG
a /43/QO-
•OCTAGON LANTERN hVW-33
W/TM SINGLE 2_50 W
MERCt/RY VAPOR LAMP
LAMPS BY 07'MZR5)
'CAST ALUM/NUM HOUSING
WITH P -S PLEXIGLAS PANELS
•GA57' IRON "EDGBWATER"
ROLE
GALL.AST /N POLO
FOR ANCHOR OOL,T3
•ACCES•s DOOR /N POLE
4`CdVCRETE S/q�WgLK�
P2 EXP,,sr RECESSFO
WITH JOINT F/LL•Cq
4- 2"
AM=NOR BOLTS
CONOUI7'6V I2• MIN, OGPTH
SIZE VA,R/BS '
:ONC R ETE FOOT/NG
:OMPACTEO SUOSO/L
Z-��
JOINT COUNCIL -BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING
DECEMBER 13, 1979
JOINT MEETING WITH CHAIRPERSONS OF IOWA CITY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: December
13, 1979 at 3:30 P.M. at the Highlander. Mayor Robert Vevera presiding.
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Balmer, Roberts, Perret, Vevera and Councilmember-elect
Lynch. Absent, deProsse, Erdakl, Neuhauser.
STAFFMEMBERS PRESENT: Berlin, Stolfus, Helling.
Meeting not tape-recorded.
F
City Manager Berlin stated that each representative would discuss the accomplish-
ments of the previous year, plans for the next year, and would advise if any
assistance from Staff or Council was needed.
Representatives of various Boards and Commissions present were as follows:
Board of Appeals -Warren Buchan
Broadband Telecommunications Comm. -Robert Pepper
n Airport Commission -Dick Phipps
A
Senior Center Commission -Lawrence Carlton
C
Resources Conservation Comm. -Phil Hotka
G Parks & Recreation Comm. -Bob Crum
h
Civil Service Commission - Jane Anderson
Housing Commission -Diane Klaus
5
Human Rights Commission -Agnes Kuhn
r'
t1 Riverfront Commission -Bernadine Knight
i
Board of Zoning Adjustment -Jim Harris
Committee on Community Needs -George Swisher
t
Board of Electrical Examiners -Ferrell Turner
Design Review Committee -Annette Lilly
Library Board of Trustees- Randall Bezanson
{
Planning & Zoning Commission -Richard Blum
Meeting adjourned 6:30 PM.
MICROFILM BY
JORM MICROLAB
CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101NES