Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1973-06-12 Bd Comm minutes
I • AGENDA IOWA CITY HOUSING COMMISSION I May 15, 1973 ' 1. Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting a. May 2, '''1973 2. 'Coordinator's Report 3. Old Business' a. Selection.of Representative'.to J.C. Regional Plan- ning Commission's Housing Committee 4. New Business a. Introduction and Briefing of New Commissioners b. Discussion of Election of Officers c. Discussion of Meeting Times for the Coming Year 5. Public Discussion of Items not on the', Agenda 6. 'i dNext Regular, Meeting a. -June °,6, 1973 7. Adjournment • I I, 4 IOWA CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY MINUTES May 15,'1973 MEMBERS PRESENT: Litton, White, Frimml, Duncan, Hamer, BossermanrMikelson:: MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Seydel,,Schierbrock j Vice-Chairperson Litton called the meeting to order. ,Commis- sion members introduced: themselves to the new Commissioners. 1. Minutes of the previous meeting, May 2, were approved as "written. Frimml'made the motion Wand a second from Hamer. All were in favor. 2 Coordinator's Report;, a'. At the present time, all '209 'units are leased and occupied.' At the end',of May; four units will termin- ate however, ;three replacement units are lined up. It is anticipated that the program will be filled to capacity by June L b. For'Commission Information: JUNE PROJECTIONS-- Tenant -Unit Relationship Authorized Iowa City Unit A.C.C. L.H. Size 12 12 Eff. 83 94, 1 bdrm. i B3 72 2'bdrm. 22 19 3«bdrm. 9 7 4 bdrm. -z- • `! Financial Standing Receipts Expenditures $'8,053 Collect fromlTenant $25,687: ,Paid to Landlord Rent Rent $22,250 HUD Grant $ 2,600' Administration Costs The Leased Housing Program'nets,approximately $2,016 per month.; This is less per :month ',than last year because of the rent to landlord increases.` At the close of F.Y. 1973 _there will be approximately $24,000 which will be returned to HUD. C. Seydel requested the permission of the Housing Com- mission:to lease another unit -in',the 100 block of Iowa Avenue, where the Authorityi;presentlyholds leases #185, 181,: 131(l), 115; 047,',027. The building' consists'. of 8 units and 6 are in the pro- gram; this request will make theseventh,unit in: the program, therefore, requiring a waiver of, the 10% rule' of theiA".C.C. '.Reasons for the request: ideal location,,close"to the°downtown'Iarea, size' of unit is right for one elderly person, other residents in the building are''also'elderly and owner requests 'tenant be ,,elderly, price of unit will come down $30 to make'!it financially feasible for the program.; Litton questioned' the placement of those persons on ,the priority/preference list. What 'is available also; has 'a relationship as to what family classification is placed. Seydel remarked, that an elderlyi person was moving from,the'program so the placement of 'an- other elderlyperson in the requested unit,'ther.efore, ' percentage /elderly would not Ater the pe g Y persons in the program. Mikelson asked the purpose for the 108 rule. Response was to prevent concentration; to preventthe labeling of,or'create an'image.of a "low income" area, .and for areas containing many families with children the - school districts are affected. The 10% rule is also a requirement of°the A.C.C. A motion was made by Frimml to grant permission for :the leasing of;the seventh unit, and waving the 108 rule. The,motion was seconded by Hamer and passed • with all in favor. d. Seydel had drafted a letter to Progressive Housing, Inc., to inform them that Iowa City would not sub- mit their packet for housing for the elderly in its present ;form to HUD. Many changes would have to be • made, these changeswerelisted in the letter. It was the concensus of the Commission to Supplysome input into the letter to:,Progressive Housing. :Action was tabled to'!next meeting. e. An article inthe Apartment construction News, May 1973, !'Landlords Fight ton's First Emergency Secu'r- ity Deposits Law", pg. 8!, is suggested reading for the Commissioners. The magazine 'will be available in the,department library. 3. Old Business a. Duncan was appointed as representative to the Johnson County Regional Planning Commission'sHousingCommit- tee.il Acceptance will be based on the Committee's meeting time. b.j Seydel reported that the meeting ofthe Commission, with the City CoCouncilis pending. the! Council's receipt of its legal staff report on the proposed Tenant - Landlord Ordinance. Arrangements for:the meeting will . �place as soon a word take lace s the Commission receives from.the Council. c. Litton asked the status of the.legal action for the, releas�e of tenant names. Seydel commented that the! City had fi!led'a lawsuit in D'istric'Court against the persons who :brought the suit against him and was seeking an injunction prohibiting the release of this information. d. Litton asked Commissioners if they 1-ianted some input or an evaluation of the program from its tenants. Comments: White -people feel free to contact the Commissioners. From an operational standpoint, the Conunission and the staff are doing a good job. We need satisfied landlords as1well as satisfied tenants to keep�,the program going. No action was taken at this time and after new members become familiar with duties, !,this may be reconsidered. 4. Old Business a. The new Commissioners will review their informational packets and if they have any questions, will contact Seydel. b. The election of officers was moved to the first meet- ing in June. The motion was made by Frimml, White seconded. All were in favor. C. The discussion concerning the meeting time concluded with the majority of the Commissioners prefering 8:30 a.m., on the firstland third Wednesdays of the month. i -'4- • d. Theo n C mmissio ers were reminded that the next meet- ee t- • ing ing will be June 6, 1973 at 8:30 a.m., Room A of the Recreation Center. e.The meeting was adjourned with a motion from White and aisecond from'Mikelson. All were in favor. i I APPROVED— Ja B. White, Chairman I• yo MINUTES • NUT S Iowa City Charter Committee May '23, 1973 MEMBERS PRESENT. Meardon, Cain, Welt, DeCounter, Davidsen, Baldus, Ringgenberg. MEMBERS ABSENT: � g Knight, Corrigan g STAFF PRESENT: Rosenstein GUESTS PRESENT:' Robert Welsh Chairman Meardon called the meeting to order at.4:10 p.m. Mrs. Davidsen stated that paragraph '4 of the minutes of may 9,1973 was incorrect I` in stating that ,the Staff does not make reports to the Boards and Commissions and 'it should only state that Boards and Commissions need Staff reports to function. ..This correction was '.accepted. I. Rev. Welsh presented the Charter Committee with a letter from the Citizens for',a Better Iowa City. (copy attached) in addition Rev'. Welsh stated that he, opposed the offering; of alternatives on the Charter: because someone may favor the Charter but be against one alternative and 'thus vote against the wholeCharter: in order to assure that one alternative does not win. He further stated that he wanted to know exactly,what he was voting for and with alternatives he might get a,Charter .containin provisions that he opposed. g P PP Rev. Welsh, acting as Chairman of the CATV Committee stated that it was important that:all options' were kept open in the Charter in relation- ship to, Cable TVjownership and operation.', Mr. Meardon stated that all Powers are vested in the Council. except as otherwise provided in,'State Law of the or the Charter .and that this broad statement allowed Council whatever,flexibilityit wanted. Mrs. Davidsen stated that State''Law also allowed Council'to establish an authority if it wanted to. Mr.'Meardon read'a letter from Mr. Jay Honohan, City Attorney. (copy attached) Discussion was held on the provision on Campaign', Expenditures. Mr. Baldus stated that now he'felt -that a short provision would be better because of the lack of time left to work on the Charter, and because concern which is arising now nationally,would pressure a Councilinto setting a limit on campaign expenditures that was enforceable'. Mr'.' Baldus presented the Committee with Draft 4A, which puts a duty on Council to (1) impose limitations on the amount of campaign ;expendi- • tures that can be made', by the candidate and all other persons in.their behalf. (2) Prescribe procedure requiring a candidate to disclose his campaign contribution before and after every election. (3), Bar a candidate'framservingfif he violates the 'limitation `on campaign pagee 2 • May 23 Minutes Charter Committee expenditures and to; prescribe other remedies:for violations. Mr. Baldus'stated that it could be, up, to-Council'to'set the exact limitation. Discussion centered on the philosophy of limiting campaign expenditures, and )n disclosure,of campaign contributions. Mr. Baldus moved that the Charter Committee adopt -a"requirement in the Charter that Council set limitations on campaign expenditures in a.:form similar to 'draft 4A'. Mrs. Davidsen seconded. Mrs. Davidsen stated that it was possible that a Council that was well known might set the limit on the primary election so, low that someone who was unknown might 'not have 'the reason :to become known by the public. Mr Ringgenberg stated that the work- ability of this proposal is',the "key," and that he is;willing to,givIe P y -stated that 'this. proposal could be:, o ' r with it a try. He further: the public. Mr. Baldus stated that the inclusion of a P P provision requiring the council to establish a limitation on campaign expendi- tures would force discussion of the issue and that initiative and referendum would assure that a fair limitation, was, set. Mr.. Welt stated that this provision would give people with less financial support more of a chance to get elected. `Mr. Baldus stated that this would result in confidence in theindependenceof members of he tha Council and that,it the amount"of money spent on campaigns.. The question was called and the motion to have a provision in: the Charter was passed unanimously. Mr..Baldus stated that Section 20A'would 'provide that there be a dollar limit onrthe amount,spent by-the.candidate and people in his behalf for each election. Mr. Meardon stated?that the fact that'the Council would have to act in public would prevent a'Council from misusing the limitation.Mr.'Ringgenberg moved that Section 20,(a) read, "The Council shall prescribe by ordinance limitations on the amount of campaign expenditures_ made by and on,behalf of candidates for,,election to Council.,! 'Mr. DeCounte'r'seconded and the motion passed six to one with Mr.' Meardon voting against.' Mr., Ringgenbergrmoved.that Section 20 (b) read, "The Council shall also prscribe by ordinance procedures requiring immediately before all elections'(primary, municipal, special, and run-off), the disclosure of the amount, source, and form of all contributions received by, and all expenditures made by (1) the cadidate, and (2) any person, for ';the Purpose of aiding or'securing,the candidate's nomination ,or election." Mrs. Cain seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Discussion was held on whether there should be a limitation placed on the size ,of contributions one individual could make. Mr. Baldus • moved that Section 20 (c) read, "The Council shall prescribe by ordinance, limitations on the amount of campaign contributions made�by any person on behalf of a candidate." Mrs. Davidsen seconded and:the motion was defeated ,two for and five against with Mr.'Baldus and Mr. Meardon voting.for the motion. . . . . . . . . . . page 3 1 May 23 Minutes Charter Committee Discussion was-he-ld on the prescription of penalties for the Violation of the limitation on campaign expenditures and the disclosure of campaign contributions and expenditures. Discussion specifically centered anwhether the Charter should prescribe,theiconditions for the revocation of a candidate's right to serve on the Council. Mr. Baldus statedthat this should be;done in two cases; (1) 1 when a candidate falls to:file a disclosure report, (2) when a candidate e-xpendsmor,e than the limitation allows. Mr. Welt stated that a pro- vision '.that'required revocation of a right to serve could be used by a candidates opponents, if they expended money in that person's behalf so that the amount of money e'xpended by oron behalf 'of the individual was more, , than the limitation. Mr. Baldus stated that if such an action: was challenged in court he doubted whether a judge would revoke a person's right to serve if themoney was expended without his knowledge.' Mr. Baldus.alsolst'ated that the ordinance could be drafted to prohibit this problem., Mr. Rosenstein -stated that -if the revocation :of office, I wasto,beprescr i6ed by ordinance, it 'might be in conflict with State P Law be:cause!Sect . ion 12'.2 of,the City,Code�of.Iowa stated that a City may not,�pr6videa:p'enalty in'! excess,ofone hundred dollar fine or! thirty days mpresonment for , the violation of an ordinance. 1Mr..Mea rdon stated that thiscwas not a�penalty but a condition for election. Mr. DeCounter!stated :that since there 'could be various types of viola- tions of these provisions, there should be variability of the severity of thepenalties'given for the.violati:ons. Mr. Meard6n stated that,, the,CIharter.should have the.conditions of revocation of the right to'� serve to the Council:sipce there is a mandate in the Charter for some conditions and the interest'of the people will force the Council to act... Mr. Welt.stated that since it is hard to get!candidates for Council ,now, there should no!t�be something in the Charter.that could cause additional trouble to a candidate. Mr. Meardon stated that there would stillbe candidates running and that the overri iding public good of this provision was so important that it should be done. Mr. Baldus moved that the conditions for revocation of a candidate right to serve be (1) Expenditure of funds greater than the limit set by, Council, (2) Failure to make timely disclosures. Mrs. Cain seconded i i and the motion was defeated three for And four'against vith Cain, Meardon, and Baldus voting for and DeCounterr Ringgenberg, Welt and Davidsen voting against. I I The Committee agreed unanimously I to have Section 20 (c) read as follows, "The Council shall further prescribe by ordinance, (1) penalties for the violation of the expenditure limitations and disclosure requirements:: it!establishes pursuant to this section, and (2) conditions for the, revocation of a candidate's right to serve on Council if he or she is I elected." • The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m. r i I 1 Citizens For A Better Iowa City Iowa City Charter Committee :Iowa city,Iowa 52240 Members of the Charter Committee: We would remind the CharterCommittee of its basic function: to recommend to;the City ;Council (and in turn the citizens of Iowa City) what it deems to be the best possible forme of government for our coimnunity at this point in history. It is not to be assumed that.the committee will be unanimous in its vote on ee.ch and every issue; nor is it to be assumed that compromise is theonly or best alternative. 'We suggest that the Charter Committee present to the council what it believes, by majorityl;vote to be the best charter for our city. We strongly urge that all substantive recommendations be contained in a single charter proposal and that specific issues not be listed sep- arately on' -the ballot. In'light ,'of your recommendation, it will then be incumbent upon the, citizens of the community to make such judgements and; take such action as they deem wise. 1 There is one further word that we would express and that is our deep I appreciation for'theAime and commitment that each and every one of yo PP u has given and is `giving to your committee assignment. We are ,aware of the long hours you are spending and the citizens of this community, whether they agree or disagree with your recommendations, are truly ,4, indebted to you. Sincerely, Robert L. Welsh Chairman, CBIC • I page 2 • Charter Minutes May ,! 26 , 1973 Mr. ''Corrigan stated that initiativesuggests a cooperative venture between the people and the Councilwherereferendum questions the quality and goodwill of the Council and assumes that the Council and the people are split in viewpoint.- 6e further stated that he w as.not sure a community of Iowa City's size needed a`procedure to keep a Council inline. Mr.tMeardon stated that he wanted initiative in the Charter but if there was going to be referendum,' there should be some financial, protections for the City. He 'stated that 'there is an' automatic "referendum each election and if there is going„to be a referendum process, the people using it should have to file,a bond which would assure that this:process was not used, as a':weapon against the'Council.: Mr. Meardon stated that if'a person hada strong :reason to file a referendum petition, he should; post bond and-if the; position'°did not.get a.40% or greater vote, the 'person 'should forfeit -!the bond. Mr.',Meardonfurther stated .hat he was concerned'about the r: cost of the referendum process, both the cost ofsan election, and the hidden costs. Mr. Baldus stated that there, was no evidence that the referendum process has been used to harrass cities: He further stated that thei` re- quirement of posting a bond would mean that only people who 'could afford to post',the^bond or to lose"the money could use the referendum procefure. Mr. Baldus further stated'that there were other ways of assuming, that, referendum would not'be used to harrass the city. Mr. Ringgenberg moved to leave initiative and negative initiative only, thus not having referendum. Mr. Corrigan''` seconded and the motion failed one for, and seven against with Mr. Corrigan voting for. Discussion next turned to Section'8.01 of Draft #3, and consideration of what areas should be subject to initiative and referendum'. Mr. Baldus stated that the legal' interpretation of initiative in other states was that it couldonly be'a positive' matter and the only way to adopt a law by initiative thatrepealed another law was to adopt a substitute law and have both be on the books. Mr. Baldus stated', that this is an artifical enterprise and is subject to ;challenge. Mr. '!Baldus,further stated that if there were to be initiative that would repeal an ordinance, it :should be; specified so in the Charter. The 'question was raised as to the possibility of a negative initiative procedure after a referendum has failed, at the polls. Mr. Baldus stated that this could be-resolved'by placing a time limit on when an initiative proceeding could 'start after the referendum' process. Mr. Corrigan stated that allowing negative initiative would give the voters two,options.(1) of going through the referendum process and ',thus having to finish the process, in 30 days. or (2) of using negative, initiative which would be less expensive.` Mr. Baldus stated that ,• negative initiative was needed for ordinances that were passed several years 'ago, and has ;since become unpopular, and the Council will not .repeal the ordinance. ,Mr. Ringgenberg'stated that this would not be:a problem because the representative process would take care of these issues. Mrs. Cain moved that,'theiprovision in Section 8.01 that page 3 Charter Minutes May 26 1973 allowed initiative to repeal an ordinance be deleted. ,'Mr. Ringgenberg seconded, and the motion was defeated two for and six ',against with Cain and. Ringgenberg voting for.,' Mr. Baldus stated that the Charter should protect contract rights and private propertyrights that arise out of reliance on an ordinance which is later,- repealed by negative initiative. Mr. Corrigan' stated that this provision: should` be carefully worded to assure that it is not unfairly,, used -by people. Mr. Meardon stated that the provision should be written so'that 'it would not make or destroy any property or contract' rights. Mr. Baldus moved that there be a section in the Charter which provided that no repealing.initiative would affect existing contract or property rights. Mr. Corrigan seconded, and the motion passed seven to one with Mrs. Cain voting against. Discussion was' next held on placing,a limit on how soon after the approval of the 'voters of a referred ordinance there ,could be negative initiative. The Committee felt that since two years .was used else where in this Article, it should,be',kept consistent. _Mr. Baldus moved that the Charter not allow a repealing initiative for:two years after the,', approval of'a.ordinance which had been' approved by the voters in a referendum process.. Mr. Corrigan'seconded and the motion passed unanimously. Discussion was next held on 'what actions should be subject to referen- dum Mr. Baldus stated that this area has, been the subject of"a lot I of,liti litigation and the courts have,g y legislative g enerall ruled that matters are subject but administrative and executive matters are not. Mr:',Baldus stated that the best' definition of what should be subject toreferendum isl "any 'action ,of''Council'that is of a permanent nature." Mr.,Meardon'stated that he -favored a narrower range of items subject to referendum because if there, was a broad` interpretation in issues' like urban renewal numerous`, referendum could be held. Mr. Meardon asked if there:: was away of dealing with referendum using,t_he resolu- tion ofdnecessity concept, with the'orginal decision dealing with the desirability or necessity of a project being subject to referendum, but the steps taken to implement 'that project not being subject. Mr. Baldus stated that he has had an individual go through the statutes of ten ,states 'on referendum and the subject matter has been defined as legislative, but there has been: little, meaning given to legislative, other than permanency. Mr. '.Baldus 'stat ed`that Section 16 page 55 of McQuillan'' gives the.following test,of what is legislative and this could be put into the.commentary. "Whether the proposition is one to make new'law or execute law,already,in,,existence. The power to be exercised is legislative in'its'nature 'if it prescribes a new policy or plan 'iwheras itis administrative 'in'its nature if it merely •pursues a plan already adopted by the legislative body itself or some superior 'power. Similarly an act or resolution constituting a declara- tion of public purpose and making provision for ways and means of its 'j: I� I page 4 • Charter Minutes May 26, 1973 accomplishment is generally legislative as distinguished by an act or resolution thatmerelycarries out the policy or purpose declared,'by the legislative body." The Committee agreed that this should be.`the:distinction made between acts that are subjectl,to referen- dum and'acts.that are not. Mr. Baldus, moved that the definition of ordinance in the Article on referendum be defined as it is in State law with%the statement, that it 'should be broadly construed and that the commentary should provide the McQuillan guide for interpretation. Mrs. Davidsen'seconded. Mr. Meardon stated that the McQuillan guide should be in the 'Charter itself'and:the motion; was withdrawn with Mr:Baldus agreeing to draft such a"provision. The meeting was adjourned for lunch at 12:40 p.m. Chairman'Meardon called the.meeting back'.in order at 1:30 p.m. Mr.Meardon read the Preamble subcommittee's draft of a statement:of, -,principles. `Mr'.' Rnggenberg made o'ne addition 'and Mr. Meardon stated that he would; prepare a draft for Committee review. Mr: Corrigan stated that the commentary should say that initiative! and referendum are procedures designed to see that the will of the people is carried out and that they should not'be used for harrassment. I Mr. Baldus moved that ordinances dealing with the letting of ',contracts be'added!to'the list of actions excluded from initiative andreferen- dum. The Committee agreed to this change. Mr. Baldus presented the Committee with a definition of what is subject to initiative 'and ,referendum.. After several revisions, Mrs.'Davidsen moved that the': definition of what was subject to xeferendum'should read. "Within this Article 'ordinance' means all legislative actions,, however designated, which .(1) are of a, permanent' rather than a temporary charter, and (2)I, include a;pro- position'making"'A new law, policy, or plan, as opposed to one provid- ing for the execution of a'law policy or plan ,already enacted by Council.,The term 'ordinance' should be=construed and interpreted` to'favor',a broad initiative and referendum power for.the voter." Mr'. Corrigan seconded. Specifically,left.out'of the definition was thereferenceto laws of a general`, nature, because this could create litigation as to whether an:action or given action has a general effect on the City. The 'motion passed unanimously. Mr. Ringgenberg asked if'I'this definition could be construed in such a way that there would bel,three'referendums,Jone for the adoption of '.the policy, one for the plan, and one for the law', Mr. Baldus stated that thie would • not be so because it could be argued that all secondary action would be administrative action. page 5 • Charter Minutes: May 26 1973 Section 8.02 dealing with the Commencement of:Proceedings, and the affidavit was accepted as written. Sect I ion 8.03, Petition; Revocation of Signatures was changed to clarify, that the circulation of referendum petitions could not begin before the final action by Council on that ordinance, and must be completed in 30 days. Discussion turned to Section 8.05 and the question of whether the effect of an ordinance should be supended in a referendum procedure, n moved that there be no 'suspension of and if so when. Mr'. Corriga I the effect of an,ordinanceibefore�,the,r6ferendurnwas'held and the ordinance was:repealed. Mrs. Cain seconded. The. rational of this ''. action was to attempt to insure that the�referendum procedure would 1, 1 the procedure'would�not not be. overly,i,costly to the, City. and that, M II ass th tated ,that if there %,,,ould: .,be used to harr , , e City. r.1 Baldus,s not be any suspension of the effect:of an ordinance the Charter, should have a:provison making that clear . The motion to not have a - :suspension of the effect of.an ordinance passed unanimously. Mr. ..Corrigan moved that there,be a provision in the Charter (like the one used in the State of oklahoma)...which specified that there would be ,no suspension.:,of effect until the ordinance was repealed. Mrs. Cain seconded and the motion carried unanimously:. Mr. I Meardon s I tated that he favored :requiri:ng individuals�filing a referendum petition to file a bond to cover the cost ofa special election if their proposal fails to get at least 408 ofthe votes cast. He stated that there is already a referendum every two years when you elect.Ithe Council and 'the referendum can be''a great harrass- nent to the City. Mr..Meardon continued that he did not,want to prevent genuine issues::to coming up,:but he did want o prevent referendum from being,misused. Mr. Meardon stated that'the number ofsignatures required would"knot protect the City against harra,ssment. Mr. Meardon offered the alternative that the petitioners file a ' bo if they bond -only wanted "a special election.:: Mr. Baldus::statedthat there were already Protections against having too many specialelections because a egularlly scheduled fall - referendum election will take place in'a Y election unless the Council choses 'to hold a special election. Mr. Baldus further stated that there has to be away to prevent a Council from arbitrarily pushing,people around, that there would be some n question of the constitutionality of requiring a bond to be posted, and that the requiring of a bond would be discrimination by : economic background. Mr., Ringgenberg moved that a requ'irement for a bond not be put in the�Charter:but that the commentary read that if ndum procedure,is being abused in Iowa historylproves that,the refere • City, then an amendment should be spade to the Charter to include J a 'provision requiring a bond. Mrs. Davidsen seconded and the motion carried six for and1two agaigst'with Meardon and DeCounter voting against. i page 6 Charter Committee • May 26, 1973 requiring that a proposed ex - Discussion on a provision q 4 ..Discussion was h penditure of money by',initiative',not go into effect, until -a new budget went into effect.. Comments were made that this provision would be too confusing„,could be construed to delay any initiative, methin ,,than could not be' and was attempting to write into''law':so g written into law. Mr'. Baldus moved that this provision be deleted, Mrs.,Cain seconded and the .motion carried unanimously. Mr. Baldus moved that a provision be included in the Charter giving Council'the 'power to submitt' , any subject to binding, vote of the people provided this does'not interfe-e,with initiative and,referen- dum. Mr. Corrigan seconded and the Committee decided to defer this matter until'' the`specific'language of the ,proposal was brought in Mr. Ringgenberg moved that Section 8.08 which prohibited the Council from establishing any stricter conditions or requirements for and, initiative ,and referendum be approved.Mr: Corrigan seconded the motion passed unanimously. Discussion was held on the 'Preamble as ,submitted by ,the sub- committee on, the Preamble.After making certain additions, the Committee accepted thePreamble. `Mr. Baldus moved that the title; be Preamble'rather.than the Statement of Principles.' Mr. DeCounter seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Meardon announced that he was arranging a meeting with the County 'Auditor, either Tuesday or Wednesday afternoon. He stated, that Mr. Rosenstein would contact the Committee members to inform 'them of the specific place. Mr. Meardon statedlthat if the Committee wanted the Charter to holdover the three Councilmembers whose terms do not expire, it shouldirequest from the City Attorney ,an opinion on whether, this could legally be done. Mrs. Cain moved that ,the three Council members 'not 'be held over ;but rather 'the'seven,member Council be elected at the first City a lection under the Home Rule Charter. Mi.. Davidsen seconded. Mr. Meardon asked if there were any members who had anything to say about the desirability of holding over the members. ',Mrs.'Davidsen_stated that the Charter. would be accused of holding over vestiges from the past. :Mr. Corrigan stated that the Charter would not be discounting continuity ,because"these,Council- members could seek election under the', Charter. Mr.,Meardon stated that anyone can run under the Charter and since the Charteris a. separate form of, government, the Charter should be drawn as a separate; form. The question was called and the motion carried un- • animously. `The Committee agreed that it was not necessary to seek a legal opinion on whether a full Council could be elected. page 7 Charter Minutes • May 26, 1973 Mr. Ringgenbergmoved that the definition of Person be accepted. Mr. Corrigan seconded and the motion carried unanimously. The Committee agreed to include in, the Charter the definition of ordinance usedinState law except, for the Article on initiative and.referendum. Mr: Baldus moved that the City Code of Iowa's savings clause be used in the Charter. Mrs'. Davidsen'seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Mr`. Corrigan moved that Section 2.01 should provide for a City Council of seven members, elected at -large. The motion died for a. lack of'a second. Mr'. Corrigan stated that he wasnot interested'in offering; his :proposition >as'an alternative on the ballot.' With Mr. Corrigan dissenting, the Committee agreed to use Section '2.01 I(a);(alternative A);of the MOdel:Charter as.a<model for Section 2.01. Mr'. Ringgenberg moved that Section 2.02 which provides for the division ofthe,City into three districts by Council be accepted. Mr. Baldus seconded. Mr.' Baldus 'moved to amend ,this section to require that the districts be of substantially equal population,', rather than simply, be=based on' population. Mr.;Baldus stated:that, with the change P P of attitude on the Supreme Courts, ,this may not be a requirement in the futureunless`it;is written into the Charter. The motion to amend died for lack of a second.' The motion to' accept "the provision carried seven to one with Mr.' Corrigan voting against the motion. Mr. Ringgenberg moved that Section 2.03, Eligibility, read "to be eligible to be elected to and retain a Council position a person must be a qualified voter of the City and if running or serving ,in a Council:District, a resident of ,that Council District. Mr. Knight seconded and the motion carriedlsix to two with Baldus and Corrigan voting against. Mr. Baldus stated that the Charter should not require a -person holding a district seat to live in'that district. Mrs. Cain moved that Section 2:01 (c) (alternative A) of the Model City Charter, -which provides the terms of the Councilmembers, be modified and used. _Mrs.'Davidsen seconded and the motion passed seven to one with Mr. Corrigan voting against the motion. Mrs. Davidsen moved that the division into districts as provided in Section 2.02 be required to be substantially equal. Mr. Baldus seconded and the motion carried five for, two against, and abstentionif • with DeCounter, Baldus, Davidsen, Knight, an, Meardon'voting for, Cain and Ringgenberg voting against, and Corrigan abstaining. MINUTES • IOWA CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE MAY 29, F1973 MEMBERSIPRESENT: Meardon, Cain, Corrigan, Baldus, Welt, Knight, Davidsen, DeCounter MEMBERS ABSENT: Ringg6nberg STAFF PRESENT:: Rosenstein Chairman Mea,rdon'called the meeting to order at 8:00. Mr. Corrigan moved that the minutes of May 22, 1973 be approved as corrected. Mr. Baldus,seconded and themotionpassed unanimously. Mr. :, Meardon:distributed copies of >a letter from Councilman Hickerson concerning the sections of the:Charter which the .,Committee submitted to the Council and the City.Manage r. The Committee next went over the working ,draft of the Charter'. The.COmmittee agreed to accept the definition!section with the addition Of t.he definition ",City" meaning the City of Iowa City, Iowa.: The Committeei agreed to, have the definition section follow:t�' I he Preamble', and not be designated as an separate Article. mr.,Ba'ldus moved that Section 1.04, Savings Clause, read as follows. "If any provision of this Charter, or the application of this Charter to' any person or, circumstance is held invalid,' the invalidity:shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Charter which can be given effect." Mr. Knight seconded , and the"motion carried unanimously.: Mr. Baldus moved that Section 2.01 Composition, read as follows, "Ther' eshall be a City -Council of seven members, four,:to,be known as Councilmembers at -large, shall be nominated and elected by the qualified voters of the City at=large. The other three shall be'known as District Councilmembe , rs; they shall be nominated by the qualified voters of their respective districts'as provided by Article III and one shall be elected from each Council District by the qualified voters of the City at -large." Mr. Corrigan seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Discussion was held on whether the divisio'n into Council Districts by Council should be subject to referendum. Mrs. Davidsen,state'd that it should not since it was a technical decision,jand it was! unlikely that any division would satisfy manypeople. Mr. Baldus stated that it should be subject to the referendum procedure because it was very political and'a bad division could split a group in half. This question was deferred., MINUTES • • 'IOWA CIT? CHARTER COMMITTEE' MAY 29,''1973 PAGE 2 e Discussion was held on whether the date, of the election of the Mayor and the length 9 of term should be specified. Mrs. Cain wanted to clarify that the 'Mayor should be elected at the 'first Councilmeeting of a newly ,elected' Council. This, question was deferred. Mr. Corrigan moved that the proviF.ion that the 'Mayor give a'State of, the City message be deleted and it be recommended in the commentary. Mr. Corrigan stated that the Charter Section on the Mayor was very' broad except for this provision, and that being this specific did not fit in the Section. The motion died for lack of a'second. Discussion was held on whether it,was necessary to state that the Mayor was the chief executive officer. Mr. Rosenstein was directed to research the question,of whether the Charter must provide that there be a chief executive officer who would sign the official papers of'the"City. Mr. Rosenstein questioned whether the Charter Committee wanted to prohibit a Council -member from being a County employee. Mr. Corrigan stated that it would be enough',to exclude County Officials. Mr. Baldus moved that Section 2.12: (a) read, "A'Councilmember may not hold, any other'City Odic or be a City employee or County Official..." 'Mr. Corrigan' seconded andlthe motion carried unanimously. Mr. Baldus moved that Section 3.01, Nomination, be changed to read "a qualified voter...: City;C er a petition requesting that his or her name be placed..." Mr. Corrigan 'seconded and the motion passed` unanimously. The Committee agreed that Section 4.01 should provide that the City' 'Manager was the "chie as—inorative officer of the City" rather than the "administrative head of the City." This :was simply a' grammatical change. Discussion was held on the correct method of writing Section 4.04; Duties ofiCity Manager. The Committee agreed to delete the hrase �� p the duties of the City Manager shall include" and simply ',list the duties. The correct drafting!of.this provision was referred to the sub -committee on the City' Manager.0 MINUTES IOWA CITY CHARTER, ER C OMM IT T EE MAY:-29, 1973 PAGE 3 Discussion was held on Section 4.05''which prohibits the City Managerfromparticipating he election of the City Council, except for voting. Mr. Corrigan moved,'that this Section be ,deleted. kr: Welt seconded. Mr. _Corrigan stated, that this was unnecessary because no professional City Manager would ethically participate in the, election of, the City,, Council'. Mr. Meardon stated that a prohibition such as this was;sound !policy , both to insure that a City Manager did not participate] and to protect the ,City `Manager : from being forced by the Council to participate. Mr. Meardon stated that "participate" has a very broad meaning. After discussion Mr. Welt removed his second, and the motion was withdrawn, - for lack of a second." Mr'. Corrigan moved to delete the provision that a City Manager's violation of Section 4.05 be a'cause for 'removal from office by the courts.! It was felt that since "participate" was so broad, it might be,unwise to have, this provision. Mr.' a motion and ,the motion passed Ba seconded th unanimously. Mr. Rosenstein was directed to research whether it was advisable to have}'a provision defining special elections. �'' prescribe shall,also a is o Section 6.02 was changed to read the,.Coun Council by ordinance, procedures requiring immediately before and after each regular,;.speial, primary,"or run-'off 'election; the disclosure of the amount, source, and form of:all contributions received by, and all expenditures made by (1) each candidate for election to Council, ,and (2) any and all other; persons for the purpose of aiding-or securing the candidate's nomination or election." Section 6.03,,Violations, was changed to read ".—and (2), when 'appropriate, conditions for ',the ,revocation of,a candidate'sright to serve on Council if he or she is elected.", This 'change was made to insure that this power could not be abused, and'that removal could only .pertain to violations of the ordinances established in''accordance "with 'Article VI, in such cases where it would be appropriate to,revocate the right to serve. Discussion was held on Section 8.01 Charter amendments and whether to rewrite these provision�or�evision was"made at this time. The Charter Committee agreed that Section 8.02, Charter Review Commission read "the Council, using the ,procedures prescribed in Article V, shall establish -a Charter Review Commission at least once every ten (10) years following the effective date of this Charter. The Commission, consisting of at least nine'(9) members, shall review the''existing Charter, and may, within twelve months, recommend any Charter amendments that it deems fit. ,The Council,' • shall submit such amendments to the voters and an amendment becomes effective when approved by a majority of those voting. The meeting was adjourned at 10:130. i MINUTES i; •IOWA CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE MAY 30, 1973 MEMBERS PRESENT: Meardon, Cain, Welt, Davidsen, Baldus, Corrigan, Ringgenberg MEMBERS ABSENT: DeCounter, Knight STAFF PRESENT: Rosenstein Chairman Meardon called the meeting to order at 4: 10 p.m. Mr. Meardon stated that five members of the Charter Committee 'had met with Delores Rogers, County Auditor, to discuss what problems woul& be encountered in the reprecincting'of the 'City and the districting of the City for the Council_ election this fall under this the4 p a warm welcome and answered all 'Charter,if adopted. Mr'. Meardon stated that Mrs. Rogers had ,given _ rou he Committee'questions. uestions She 'discussed the difficulties' of reprecincting,"explaining that it would'Icost'the City about $8;000 and would take her at''least_2-1/2 weeksjto complete her work after the ,City iCouncil submitted the precinct lines!. She stated that she would work hard to accomplish thefdesires of the City Council and,'while the time schedule would be tight, she did' not sa ' it could ld note be done.^Furth rm e ore, she stated that after the s,ecial':elec i p ton on the Charter, the Council would have to, agree to unlock the voting machines for the'school,board election. Mrs. Rogers stated that'the cost of an election, was $8,000 plus approximately $500 for any additional'' proposition submitted at, the sameitime. Mr. Baldus stated that one way of giving the auditor two weeks extra time was.to omit a; rimar p y election this year and to rely on a run -'off'' election.': Mrs. Cain stated that this would not be workable, given the primary,` election, held in the District only.) Mr. Meardon'raised the question of moving the election on the Charter forward to sometime in August. Mrs. Davidsen stated that this wouldnIt be desirable because it would'. disinfranchise most students and faculty members.,- The Committee agreed thattheonly way 'of utilizingthe three districts in next falls " election was to reprecinct the 'City.1The Committee also agreed that the key to''being,able to'do this was''full cooperation by` the''City,Council because the Council would have to authorize the process of redrawing precinct'lines';,and getting approval from the Secretary of State before the, special election on the Charter. This would include adopting these by ordinance, to be effective if the Charter wins approval. After the election the councilwould have to submit the new precincts and districts to the County Auditor so that.she would have a -maximum amount of time to do her work., page 2 Charter Minutes May 30, 1973 Mr. Rosenstein made a presentation on the precinct map that he had drawn under the Committee's direction. Mr: Rosenstein stated that this map was based upon population and the division 'of the City into a 'pie. The map utilizes 14 of the City's present precincts and makes changes in 11 of them, reducing this number into ten. 'Thus, the map is composed of 24 precincts divided into three districts of 8"precincts each. Mr. Meardon stated that since the submission of the Charter, the re precincting, and: the districting was up to the Council, theCommittee should quickly complete;its'work and then:'- urge the Council to take the necessary steps. Mr. Baldus moved that the Committee, recommend' that prior to the special election on the Charter, the Council inact an ordinance which adopts therprecincts and would, go into effect if the Charter is -adopted. Mrs. Davidsen seconded and the motion carried unanimously. The Committee agreed,that since one district representa- tive would set altwo year term at the first election under the Charter, the decision should be made,by a drawing of lots. Three pieces of paper were prepared, each stating the color of one of the districts on the map. 'It was 'agreed '_that the district 'that was drawn,would be Council District B, thus would receive a two year term the first election. Mrs. 'Cain drew the lot with the-greenl,district,l which en compasses the northeast side of Iowa 'City. Mr. Corrigan assigned the title Council District`A to the brown district whichencompasses thee' southeast side of Iowa City and Council District "C to the blue district which encompasseslthe west. side of Iowa:City'. These last ' assignments were arbitrary. It was agreed by the Committee that the',` public should be made fully aware oflrthe ;district.boundaries but that these should not be voted on by the voters Mr.'Baldus announced that Mr. Martineau would meet with the Charter Committee at 9;00 a.m. June 21 1973, in the Conference Room of the Civic Center. Mr. Baldus,presented the Charter Committee ,with several comments from Mr. Martineau. InlSection 7.03 (c) the Committee ;agreedl.to`prohibit suspension of effect of an ordinancelwith negative initiative, the; inclusion of the nrnvicinn 4:-- .. L. �•�•=y=u 6u rcau so.tnar the provision did not conferelj only established the right to,`court 'review. In Section suggestion 'was 'made to'confere-upon the City Clerk the ting a proposed or referred ordinance to the voters rat the duty on, the City Council. Mr. Rosenstein asked whe Clerk legally had the power to submit items to a vote o This subject was deferred. I • ': • ISI page :3 •Charter Minutes May. 30, 1973 Several minor clarifications to the wording of various sections were recommended 'and radopted. ' Discussion turned to Section 7.06:(e) and'it was changed to read "An initiative votewhichl,'repeals an existing ordinance in'whole 'or in part does not effect any obligation entered into by'the City; or its agency with a privatejperson which was undertaken in reliance on the ordinance and during the time it was in:effect.11 The only purpose of this provision is to assure contractors that they can enter into a s contract with the City and will not lose on account of negative: initiative. Legally this provision is unnecessary because it already covered by law. Mr. Meardon proposed that the Charter exclude from initiative and referendum anything that pertains to'the-police power,, including zoning, building'codes, median strips,` traffic control, but not including resolutionsj.of necessity.;on'certain items. Mr..Meardon stated that anyone with''money and a desire can get enough signatures` to have an initiative or referendum on a subject,, and that there are ccertain subjects that rely on: expertise and should not be voted on y people. He stated that he 'was particularly worried about zon- ing,because the time, involved' in waiting for the processes to 'end and would be very costly, both monetarily and psychologically, on the parties involved.' Mi.`Baldus stated that if anything pertaining to'Ithe police power was prohibited! -then almost everythingthe City did would not be subject to initiative r, 7 v o referendum.r 'r M Baldus stated that there was already a tight definition, of what was :subject to referendum. Mr. Baldus',continued that major zoning decisions, like a comprehensive plan, greatly affect people's lives and should be subject to,referendum, but that requests; for, rezoning, should not be and are not under the present definition of referendum. Mr. Corrigan stated that it'was too easy; to construe,:a police power to be any City action. Mr. Welt sug- gested listing exclusions to initiative and referendum processes. Mr.`Riggenberg suggested the Committee list 'what ',is subject to'initia- tive`and referendum and leave room for additions by Charter amendment. This 'subject was 'deferred for further thought. Mrs. Davidsen and Mr. Welt both announced that they were leaving town temporarily and would miss several Charter Committee meetings. Mrs'. Davidsen stated she opposed having ,the division into Council Districts subject to'referendum:and excluding measures using the police' pow!: from initiative and referendum, but she favored excluding zoning from initiative and referendum. The meeting was adjourned. L. I 1 MINUTES S • IO IT WA -: CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE ,JUNE 2, 1973 MEMBERS PRESENT: Meardon,'Cain, Ringgenberg, Baldus, Corrigan MEMBERS ABSENT: Knight; Welt, Davidsen, De Counter. STAFF 'PRESENT: Rosenstein GUEST PRESENT Robert Martineau Chairman Meardon called the meeting to order at 9:00-A.M. Mr. Martineau stated that the Charteris an excellent piece of work and everything the Committee lis doing with the Charter is proper under the City Code of 'Iowa. He stated that everything included in the Charter would, in his opinion, be held to be legal. Mr. Martineau stated that'theCommittee is doing things that are a little bit different, but that was the idea behind 'a Home Rule Charter in the'City_Code of'Iowa. was anything that the Mr. Corrigan asked if there Charter doesn't do that needs to be done. Mr. Martineau replied that he didn't think so but he.had`not studied this question that thoroughly since he; has been receiving the Charter in sections. Discussion was held oninitiative and referendum, Mr. Mart I questioned'why'the Charter; limited the filing of a referendumeau petition, tothirtydays after fina that negativel passage. Mrs. Cain stated i ' initiative would allow more flexibility since the nitiative could repeal an ordinance.-Mr.:Martineau stated that it should be made 'clear', that initiative could repeal an ordinance since traditionally it could not. I"'The Committee agreed that Section 7.01 (a) clearly allowed initiative which repealed an ordinance, but that the comments should state that the subject matter of initiative and referendum are not mutually exclusive', Mr. Martineau stated that the only universal protection from initiative and referend and the other exclusionum was the ,exclusion of appropriations s variediaccording,to the community:' Discussion was held on whether the division into Council ,Districts should be subject to referendum.'„ Mr. Martineau stated that .as the Charter now reads it`would be subject. Mr, Rosenstein stated that Mrs. Davidsen had expressed opposition to the division into districts being subject to referendum because l) it was to a large degree a technical decision and 2)fit was the type of decision no one., likes. Mr,ICorrigan stated that there might come a time when the Council would realign the districts and there has to be a protection for the voters.`,Mr. Baldus stated that this is i MINUTES I WA ' "ITY H 0 1. CHARTER COMMITTEE TUNE 2 � 19 3 • PAGE 2 a political question, one which the voters are competent to respond to. Mr. Meardon raised the question of requiring the posting of a bond if the petitionerswanted an election other than at the regular fall election. Mr. Baldus stated that the Charter protects.against the cost of having special elections by providing that the election' will be held at the regular 'City election, unless Council' decides to"have a special election.': Mr. Corrigan 'stated that the basic problem is one of allowing for proper motives that are designed to protect the Citizens and "prohibiting the use of the procedures to harass or togainprofit. Mr. Meardon stated that he did not like - the 'idea of'letting Council' determine when a'referendum was ;to be held because some issuses need to be resolved immediately. 'Mr. Baldus stated that if Council choses to 'delay the referendum, it can, rather than give the citizens a right to_impose, 'an $8000 burden on the City. Mr. Meardon stated that :if someone wants to pay for the election,' the 'Charter'should allow:them to pay ,for it; and have,a special election. The Committee agreed to state in'the comments that if someone wants.to pay for 'a'special election on a referendum issue,',the Council should accept the money and 'call a special election. Mr. Baldus stated that ,'the;Committee has attempted to anticipate everything, that this is not possible,``and furthermore thatthishas hurt the ,proposal. Mr. Baldus stated that no 'other city or state has put as many protections in as has the Charter ;,Committee.' Mr. Baldus stated that the commentary should give some guidelines on what is administrative and what; is legislative. He stated that the making of a new law, plan, or policy should' include' the idea of making substantial amendments which 'should ,be judged by the importance of an issue. Mr. Martineau:stated that this was trying to write .in something which 'there is no objective way of describing. Mr. Ringgenberg stated that a democracy cannot: protect itself from mistakes and that'it'has to permit mistakes.': He stated this would be :trying to protect oneself from oneself. Mr. Corrigan stated he favored leaving initiative wide open,lnot having, negative' initiative, and spelling out what should',be subject to referendum,_ allowing for amendments which add subjects. Mr. Meardon stated that if the Charter' was going to accept the principle oL initiative and referendum, the Charter must make'provisions for it. He stated that initiative and referendum was the ultimate citizen participation. Mrs. Cain': stated that you `have to have faith in the electorate and if!initiative ,and referendum is abused, it can be taken ,out 'of the Charter. She stated it may `go through a period of abuse once adopted, but this should level out. 'Mr. Rosenstein stated that traditionally once something is put in a Charter it is very ;difficult to get it out, MINUTES • IOWA CITY CHARTER COMMITTEE JUNE 2, 1973 PAGE 3 Mr. Martineau stated that he was bothered by specifying an exact number ofdsignatures'that 'are required for the initiative or referendum petition because it doesn't work well with 'a living document. He stated that you never know when there will be a population change and relying on amendments' to the Charter is not a'good idea. Mr. Baldus stated that a specific number simplified the processes. Mr. Martineau stated that Section 2.08 (c) needed to be more clear as to who appointed the `City -Attorney. Mr.<Meardon stated that the real issue was whether the Council or the Manager should appoint the City Attoreny. Mr. Ringgenberg questioned whether this needed to be in the Charter. Mr. Martineau, statedit did ':because of thelinfluence the City Attorney, has on City government. Discussion was held on Section 2.08 (e) and whether .the Council should provide the em ployees. , daand nd the compensation of 'City officials:,and wanted Council to set broad figures but not to set ""each individual employee's salary. The Committee agreed to have this Section provide for Council to fix the salaries of the people it appoints, and provide for the method of compensation' of other City.employees. The Committeelagreed'to delete the pharas "without 'notice" in Section 4.04 (h) which would allow' the City Manager to cause the affairs of any department, etc. to be investigated with or without notice. The Committee.agreed to move the statement that the Manager is the` Chief administrative officer from the Appointment Section to the Duties Section. The Committee agreed to remove the requirement that a Council candidate be a qualified voter and instead to require a candidate to be a voter. i Discussion was held on the presentation of the Charter to Council. Mr. Meardon stated he would talk with the Council and determine how they wanted the Charter presented: He stated that it, would be best to have an 'special meeting with Council in an informal' session. He"further stated that the formal, presentation would come later. -Mrs. Cain 'stated 'that she would want the Charter Committee to have a chance to make any necessary wording changes after informal presentation to Council. The Committee agreed that it would like„ the chance, but that _the 'draft would be submitted as the final draft. The Committee further agreed to submit the map', and Ordinance with thefinal draft and directed'Mr. Rosenstein to finish' preparation of the Ordinance'. The meeting was',adjourned'. rl • • I Minutes Planning and,:Zoning Commission •' Special Meeting June 4,'1973 --'14:30 PI.M. Departmental Conference Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Madsen, Larew, Horner, Henry, Ogesen, Galiher MEMBERS ABSENT: Davidsen STAFF PRESENT: Lambert, Child Chairman Madsen called .the meeting to order and stated that at the: next regular P & Z meeting, June 14, 1973, thei'Commission would vote on approval of'the ,minutes of the May 24th meeting. 5-7310.Final Plan. Amendment for a LargeScaleNon-Residential Development for Westinghouse Learning'Corpor,ation (vic. north west of Highway 1 and Interstate B0 interchange). lFiled: May 31, 1973. 45-day limitation: July',15,!1973. Mr. M. Terrance Lambert stated that�the scale of the requested addition is such that an amendment to the original proposed plan is ordinance I lcablenzonetdistrictthe requested 9 Y that amen PP regulations It was ,pointed out that the requested addition will be. of consistent appearance with that of thc,rest >of the structure. I, Chairman Madsen indicated that the Commission had always sought' to hold special meetings:when requested if ''circumstances warranted it. This special meeting was called consistent with that ,policy.' After a brief discussion, :it was moved by Mr. Galiher and (seconded by Dr. Ogesen to recommend approval of item 5-7310,,Final Plan,;' 'Amendment for a Largel Scale Non-Residential Development for Westinghouse ,Learning Corporation. The motion carriedunanimously. Chairman Madsen appointed Mr. Horner to.the Parking Subcommittee. The subcommittee '(Mr.'Henry, Mr. Galiher and, Mr. Horner)'will meet for the purpose of electing:a chairman of that'subcommittee and determining the work schedule in examining parking and side yards: It was moved by Dr. Ogesen, seconded by Mr. Henry, to request the Staff to examine and report upon. the R3A'zone shown directly across from Procter'& Gamble on Hollywood Boulevard and south of .Fair • Meadows' Boulevard. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned. Me. Lyell D.-Trenry, J Secetary i. -L- I to lay out tracks providing a place to ride without bothering other persons. In discussing motor -cross trails, he said that this could also 'be'used'for snowmobiles. He,further stated that he sees no reason why most bike trails in a corridor could not be available to hikers, possible even horse trails., on 'a staggered type schedule. Jim Roegiers asked if the Federal Government has'any ideas about bike 'trails in`the:Reservoir area? Tom Wegman responded that the group was assigned`'a designated area last winter. Due to'many objections of the people in that area, the group was kicked out. Jim Lindberg asked about the possible conflict with the trailer a, and also what steps are feasible'to park in the landfill are ssen the; likelihood of com Taints: ii le p Gene Chubb stated that the City will have to level the area off and the car crusher area will have to be confined to a'smaller area. At'that point in,development, l'useswill have to be separated'.'- For example", the public access point and parking ,area should be defined and posted with'!a large sign. Rules will have to'be'layed out. Chubb stated that the biggest problem which he feels has to be resolved,;!'is the'policy,determining 'whether unlicensed bike riders will be permitted on City tracks. r Sarah Fox asked if it would be legal to permit unlicensed, drivers to use the track. Gene Chubb responded that it couldi,be, and further that the concern is extending ,the exposure to youth!',„who have not received their training and possibly have not reached the age of good judgement. (Risk exposure to -the City::of Iowa'City.) Mr. Chubb also added that one alternative might be to require that such users be accompanied by a parent or guardian and that to make such use trespassing unless a'parent or,lguardian!had signed a':release to the'City;that they 'p (the 'parent orlguardian) 'would be responsible for all action of the youth. A clear rule is needed that all operators would be using the track at ,their own 'risk. The City ,would 'also want to enforce a strict muffler rule which would be at least equal, to, or more"strict than the proposed City noiselordinance. Any trail would have;to be one way. Also speed limits have to be • established. The rules of the track would be passed by the City Council so that they would be covered by: the park ordinance in such a way that 'fines 'could be'levied for violations. • -3- Chubb recommended not spending a lot'of money in the area immediately. Jim Roegiers asked why Willow Creek was not beingconsidered. Gene Chubb pointed out that rots are being platted across the street from Willow Creek, and that construction would start on the east'side of the, park before the end of the year. *' Following' discussion;' Jim Lindberg moved, seconded by Dr. Robin Powell to',recommend :to the'City,Council the establishment of motorized recreational vehicle tracks located in!Mesquakie Park, available.only'to licensed vehicle users and other authorized persons ,and that the rules of operation and location be,worked out by the Director of Parks and Recreation in accordance to his memo Commission.973 (attached) and subject to the a of May 8, 1 � pprovalf the o Motion carried :by unanimous vote. Mr. Lindberg stated that in the Program Evaluation meeting, attended by Jim,Roegiers, Virginia Hebert,; and Jim Lindberg, it was generally agreed,that some kind of_program evaluation was desirable.,,.The Recreation Department budget is several thousand dollars,,'and if that fmoney 'can be spent more 'wisely and more effectively for 'the communitys benefit, that is the goal of program evaluation. Mr. Lindberg stated that no one was enthusiastic about the full scale community survey, primarily, because' of the cost of such;a thing, and that they did recommend proceeding rather slowly on a trial,and error basis this year, as the,Department already does some kinds of,program evaluation, i.e., suggestion boxes, feedback, reports, ,etc. The decision was basically,,to expand on that sort of things Some possibilities area 1. To use -the radio.(air your opinion)' and inviting listeners to make comments' and 'state their reactions. 2. A newspaper ad that asks people to write in suggestions about new programs,: and co ments about existing programs. Helfurther'stated that the Committee would try to put into operation this summer some kind of radio newspaper program - to get peoples reactions to the kind of recreation concerns that they have for the summer, and possibly again in the winter. Dr. Powell at this time suggested that the Commission, ask the School, Administration their thoughts, and also to request input through the University. I ps'AENTAL GORRSSDiNCt DATA May 8. 1973 a tion Apuaratus Area • Suuter Park Recreation Commission DIP• To Director of Parks 8 Recreation FAQ Il. Eu¢ene Chubb OW'T or area on areafforathis type I. the request from Mr. Tom Wegmaons track 1' other reasons fornconsideringbalpublicerty joins several " J of activity. A. Councilmen are receiving many complaints about motor bikes operating in residential neighborhoods. B. Many landowners are deeply concerned about tespassing upon their property by owners of these kinds of apparatus. C. depart- It is my personal belief that ridi.)bike can be recreawhich thenequal activities value as sports, crafts, or other ment supports. D. Manydepartments provide areas for these activities. E. The major resistence has come from concerns ab out ',liabilities. a facility quite similar to that in Grand Island, Nebraska. II. Iowa City could provide A. On City property, the City & local motorcycle club could lay out a motor-cross;`and a,go-kart/mini-bike track.'- B. Motorcross is a, trail riding activity (occasionally race) over a changes, and many switch- long trail which would include elevation Because of its meandering trail, an adequate backs and corners. built on 20 acres.' Variations in topography and views track might be essential. A track for 'motorcross add interest but are not necessarily could be'used as a snowmobile track in winter: It appears in Sumner that cross-country skiers likewise could use the same trail. C. A mini-bike/go-kart track 'is a relatively tight closed track of,approx- free form imaiely 1/8 or 1/4 mile. A kidney' shaped' design or other hand corners. This track should layout would provide for right and:left 20 feet wide to provide for passing during - be relatively flat, and 15 to and 'short straight -a -ways are desirable. The races. Tight corners can be outlined with automobile tires'sunk half into the ground track area providing, soft cushioned markers. r May 8,;1973 • Page 2 D. Other ,types of trails not to be confused with the above would be bike trails, horse trails,and hiking trails. These quiet trails could run parallel to the motorcross/snowmobile trail,, and could also be used for cross country skiing in winter. It i possible that they!couId`be.used on alternate days with the motorized' equipment. The surface material would be different for'bicycl'es, but the 'other uses could use the bike trail. E. Alternate days or alternate hours could be worked out to provide for the several activities which would use compatibel_trail corrdiors. III. Trails on Landfills A. Any of Iowa City's old landfill areas could provideadequate space for the desired trail systems. Each is well within the acceptable travel - time -location range.' 1. Sturgis Ferry Park has already been designated as an open space highway -river vista area much like the, development found in Terrill Mill Park. For this reason it is recommended that motorized equipment be kept out-oflSturgis Ferry -Park. 2. Mesquakie Park appears to offer all of the space, location, and tera r in' re mr ements for',a.:trail-system area. lThe greatest q negative,concern'for this area would be the proximity to the trailer. court which is now expanding to the property line on the North.' The,park is in the overflight, area of the Iowa City. airport and otherwise; adjacent to commercial enterprises which would not be 'affected by such uses. Mesquakie Park will be subject to continued bulldozing throughout 1973 after which it should be relatively smooth and planted to t within a res- . wil 1 be brought crusher operation tion g grass. The Iowa p tricted area during 1973 and should prove to be no major conflict. Settling in Mesquakie Park can be expected to continue for approx- imately 5 years'at a high rate. A trail system would not be'. materially affe by such settling 'since the trails could be cted relocated should a water pocket develop. B. The new West landfill may eventually provide the best location for a permanent trail system sinceit has extreme topograohical,variations, however at the present time it offers only a limited available space. There will'.be areal problem of separating park use areas from landfill operationsffor approximately three to five years. It is recommended that the new landfill not be used for the trail, system until such '.time that the entire :front 40 acresredeveloped into has park areas,and only aftsr a buffer zone between landfill operations and the park area has been developed. HEEPC &IIA" ',Irmo wAV' 14 f. Y i Tentative Agenda Planning,, and Zoning,Commissiom June 14,-1973 -- 4:00 P.M. Council' Chambers - A. Call :to Order by, Chairman B. Roll Call. C. Approval of Minutes of ''Preceding Meetings 1. Minutes of May 24, 1973 2. Minutes of Special:Meeting of June 4, 1973 D. Subdivision Items 1. S-7222. Preliminary and ,Final Plan for Oakcrest Apartments, Large Scale Residential Development, a Hi -Rise Apartment Development (vic. northwest of intersection of 'Oakcrest Street and Blane - Roc.Road). ',Owners: Mr. ,and Mrs.,Roland,Wehner. Date '.filed: ,May 31, 1973., 45 -day' limitation: July 15, 1973 2. S-7309. Preliminary Plat for Bryn Mawr Heights, Part V'(vic.''east and west of a southward extension of Sunset Street). Date filed: May 14, 1973. 45 -day -limitation: June'28; 1973. E. Zoning Items 1. Z-7307. Rezoning request of Mr. and Mrs. F. E. q Tisinger'for Lot.7, Block 5 East -Iowa 'City located Second Avenue, from R1B to R2.', Date originally t' 2 Seco 4 a 81 , filed: April 4,'1973. Date resubmitted: June 4,1973. 45 -day limitation: July 19, 1973. 2. Z-7311. Rezoning request of the owners of Lots 5, 6 and 8, ,Block V, East Iowa City, located respectively at 212 F Street, 822 Second Avenue', and 800 Second Avenue, from RlB to R2. Date filed:` May 31, 1973. 45 -day limitation:' July 15, 1973. F. Other Business G. Adjournment 1� • I • l STAFF REPORT:I Planning 9 & Zonin Commission _ June 14, 1973 SUBJECT: S-7222. Preliminary and Final Plan for Oakcrest Apartments Large Scale Residential Develop- ment, a evelopment,:a hi -rise apartment development (vic. northwest of intersection of Oakcrest Street and Blane'Roc Road). Owners: Mr. and Mrs.IRoland'rWehner. Date filed': May 31 1973 45 -day' limitation: July 15, 1973." I � I! STAFF This proposed hi -rise development ANALYSIS: is a revision of the plan submitted for Commission review on September .8,.19721and considered at the Planning .& Zoning Commission meeting of September 28, 1972. At that time the proposed development ;. plan was deferred so that the Board.lof Adjustment ;could ''resolvei'I h the question of lot coverage. At its April, 25, 1973 meeting the;Board of Adjustmentldecided that roof tops are open space when ,they are essentially at grade and are;usable'iopen space. As,a result, 1200 feet of garage roof is to be decked and/or landscaped and would not be considered as part of `'the 30% maximum lot coverage requirement. This revised plan proposes a 5lstory hi -rise apartment with basement (whereas the September 1972 plan proposed a-6 story ,I building with basement),containing 31 2-bedro6m and 1:1 -bedroom' dwelling units. The attached garage will accommodate 31 automobiles and the parking lot on the east side of the garage will contain an additional,7 parking spaces. The property is currently zoned R3A. The proposed, plan meets all R3A district requirements except as indicated below. A summary of lot coverage is given in the following table: Sq.Ft. Proposed Lot Coverage - Apt. Building 7;073 Propose& Lot. Coverage - Garage 10,;772 Less decked garage roof (1,200) Proposed Lot Coverage - Total;_rg _,6_4 77 Site size 55,552 Code maximum 1308 coverage 16;665 Three minor discrepancies remain to be resolved before approval " can be recommended: 1. No sidewalks to the building are shown., 2. The legal description currently includes, part of Blane-Roc Road, and should not. 3. Parking space size as shown on the exterior parking lot .;600'z 7 ©dH5'A '..ic',bl! Ii r -` /�,I 1• �lj_ / Il �7 < _ ♦ � r - r� V _ '1 q -�I r tai i 1 . ij.. \V \ �' °I � y',� ;fir ; ,.,:i CC all<. r_-..._,. -_ � ♦ / •\ /�C}L. �'' ^1 y \ 1 -a' r 'r `\ �,; r /L / I, ♦<I�rl\..I i Iyi V1 n i \`i `�'_-_ n ` Ilr <.♦ \ \ \ it i �� .rr j !I -C SJ''� �o�♦ Il t\ / 6 c '.r/ ,y - t):j _ N '''' Y�,w•' ♦`` e�_�-'-_, ..' r - cy Y r ',f �I�� 091— o ! <�� < oj --'' / V r•! I'/� �j1 , .. I `` ----------- -- ♦�- 'L♦..1 - �r ��� ---- � �:� ar�I --z 1' ''' �' � ��'' � tom' iN' 'I - . �� 90 --- - -� P p�. ��.__ �J �� � �-•• - _ \ . o, -- - Y1^1 ,. ' J /moi ., ` ,I ` 1r1+ �._ ``♦• - �- � _--ItL� , v- ,, Q gin-' Ya �� � : �- ;. - � - ''� -♦ 4. �' �. 1j C.N 0 h ., %\ __Q'� O'thY. rr,��f� Ij{� ♦♦ _ N♦'` J ? � P' rf- T , p 'L � uj� I-tl j �ii/r-.-'. - t !•- — cooil �h �•�- / N'--- Q+1 o _ •� LL Bva mot.• _ / �� e\ -- N �" Inr /6ti o ®d9A ..e ao ,ea 7a OLI , a''J" 'A •1-.0614 I� _,y • r, r,', p ti _ � 1 n N ,. \\ LO NGS �\ 11 +'� V � e 6% - _ / j ...- �-' '- - - '�" sem`• _ -_ a / � -- ---�•_ _----------- in --- ' rosy Ii dCI. - - .>SO% _ ^i ♦ - -67 I CIrl- I~ l . ize�� r rt ♦ .\ IIIN ` :� �- i ,G 'OW ' ' r `�� 1I 1 . •lb au e 'r. � /.moo ¢r.,,,,, �' `' r"� ' r .�' V �`` \ ♦♦ V. 'O. d J •: ���, I O w /IJl���.,s orb i 3 �� �.' �v/ N \ \ 1 \ \)V I .1! .. \` \♦ 4�m { aL yy^° f^r)j P a, d ♦.��` \ Y/1,'�'ll�11 - j �4 % , N,S q`r m Iry qL m Nn I '../ IBJ Cq:l- - ' tyM nl� `•s �_ • \;.. All tj— \ 40 Ato.071 to I r - vvY '.1`.i� rnI ` MN to� .1y .GD (O ♦\ \\; JI r- Yj �c NI CL 0 % � % � kl III . 1/'. �)L�1 � N ":.i C ^ _ri N W � � � I^_�_ �� V /� /, i, Mr a�.j'`_ J V \� \♦\`. \\\ i � J , If If • %/\ ,/ - lye / 1, I `\`\t,/ // // )\ •1 `?♦ `\♦�, If If it ,I ' (,IN -) 6 ,.. V ; ^•',/ Oj h Ir ,� /(yam- I•'i! ��N I// I``♦ �yt�`,,1 \♦ I• If If vz' If`If ` If Al ITZ IN If Q - y - _ " i I f i STAFF REPORT Planning 6 Zoning Commission June 14,:'1973 SUBJECT: Z-7307.1 Rezoning request of Mr. and Mrs. F. E. Tisinger for Lot 7,I Block 5, East Iowa City located, at 812 Second Avenue, from R1B to; R2. Date --originally filed: 4/4/73 Date resubmitted: 6/4/73 45 -day limitation 7/19/73 and Z-7311. Rezoning request of the owners of Lots 5, 6and 8, Block, 5, East Iowa city, located respectively at 2212'F Street, 822 Second Avenue, and 800 Second Avenue, from RlB to R2. Date filed: 5/31/73! 45 -day limitations 7/15/73 11 BACKGROUND OF The original submission of Z-7307; THIS REQUEST occurred in early Aril but Y P � ut due" to a desireof neighboring property' owners to join in ,the request, and a change in ,the zone requested, action was deferred at the applicant's'- request until such time as a joint request could be filed. This has been'done and is the subject of'this report. SITE The subject DESCRIPTION: J„ parcels constitute the western half of Block 5 o the East Iowa City. Addition. map indicates, these lots back As the attached zone districtupon a', CH zone district, are north of a C2 district and are otherwise surrounded by R1B zoned property, the'subject parcels' current 'zone classification. These parcels comprise a total area of 58,000 square feet, or 1.1 acres, ail of which is relatively, la t The northern boundary of the request area, indicated upon the zone district map as E Street, is, in fact, occupied, by the, south fork of Ralston Creek, which does carry water over ''the northern portion of the request area during, flooding. AREA In view of the size of the request DESCRIPTIONS tract relative to the surrounding land uses', a brief review of'the conditions and characteristics of the immediate area of the zone request is in order. The grid street pattern of this area was established in 1899 by the East Iowa City Addition. Second Avenue, upon which front -2 - the subject lots, has a paved width of 31 feet, only two feet narrower'than that', of. First; Avenue. As of this writing, the dwellings situated in the subject area are relatively modest, all in apparent good repair and showing no signs of blight, with the'sole exception of the dwelling occupying ;the site of the,original:request. As with many, other -areas of the City, various'corner'lots have; been halved to create two lots where one was originally platted.As the accompanying map; "Land Use Near ,Request Area" indicates,!a strip of land approximately 75 feet wide, has remained 'in its undeveloped state to accommodate the south fork of Ralston Creek in what would be the E''Street right-of-way. This map also -shows' ''the extent of commercial' development present in the eastern half of the block of the zone _change ,request . ZONING The applicants request the REQUEST: subject parcels be rezoned from R1B to R2 Copies of the requests are attached. STAFF The analysis of a request such AN ALYSIS: as this one is necessarily diffi- , cult, as the- determination of whether anincrease in the possible density of development must rest ,upon the'evaluat" of the positive benefits possible relative to the lack or presence of possible negative effects. First, to analyze the request as a "buffer zone" is to raise numerous difficult', questions. The increased density may well be appropriate in relation to -the CH and C2, districts east and south of the request area, but is it appropriate relative to the residences across Second 'Avenue and immediately north? A Partial answer is that the presence of the natural barrier, Ralston Creek on the north of the request area, makes a logical boundary'ifor the proposed district. ',:The use of Second Avenue: as a boundary is 'less appropriate, but merits consider- ation -in view of the rather 'large street width (31 feet) and right-of-way width (75 feet). The value of'duplexesl,in "buffering" a CH area is dubious, but certainly greater than the buffering providedi,by existing development. A final consideration is the effect of locating more people near the CH andiC2''districts. it is the opinion of the Staff that such duplexes as would be permitted would almost certainly face away or at right angles to the',commercial uses', and that the impact in terms 'of noise, vibration or similar negative environmental factors from these commercial' uses is relatively slight, and ,mitigates in favor of duplex development, even' with -the resultant' higher densities possible under the present' zoning ordinance. r i COUNCIL DISCUSSION WITH' CHARTER COMMITTEE JUNE 13, 1973 The;Iowa City Council met in joint session with the Charter Committeetodiscuss the draft of the Charter on June 13, 1973 at 4:00 P.M. in, the Conference Room." Councilmen present: White, Hickerson, Czarnecki, Connell, Brandt ,(4'-40 PM), , Others present: Wells, Honohan, Stolfus, Rosenstein CharterCommittee: Meardon; Riggenberg,`Corrgan, Knight, Cain,', DeCounter,' Baldus,Weit�a Councilman Connell presided as Mayor Pro -tem. Charter Committee Chmn. Meardon presented statements for ser- vices of Mr. Martineau and Mr. Kaufman. As the; preamble and -each article were discussed, Mr. Meardon noted the changes made in the June 8th draft'. There was general discussion on`, several ,points including;Definition ,#11; 20B.B, Council appointment of Deputy City,Clerk; use of,word 'quali- fications', in paragraph'E, page 7; use of word 'ordinance'', page,7,Paragraph'B, could be measuredor matter;:2.11A; 2.02; 2.03, definition for resident; 2.06, how vacancy;is filled 12.08C; 2.12, could' say 'elected' County official; 2.12C;'and 'need to make clear concerning May Pro. -tem, 2.06. In Article IV, the City Managerrequestedthat he be,'allowed to execute `Federal '.and'State Giants after they are approved by Council and wanted a: definition of 'participate' in 4.05. Council discussed Item 13, page 13; 4.03, change to read 'Mana- ger'doe's not make such a designation ',,;In;Article V,:: "discussion included 5.02,' is it valid?; and :5.03;"use of word 'uniform', could use 'common'. The City Atty.,°noted use of various pro- `fessions on Boards, so 'subject to State Law' could be added. In'discussion'of Article VI Chairman"Meardon explained limi- tation and disclosure. The City Atty, was concerned over the penalty. Concerning Article VII, there was concern over the definition ,. of' the word 'substance', and there was considerable discussion on how 'these provisions would work. The City Attorney ques- tioned if Initiative and Referendum could be included in a Charter. Chairman Meardon advised the Council that the Committee would go over items discussed and notedl,that this was their 50th meeting. TO: MEMBERS OF THEC ITY COUNCIL' The following is a brief narrative description of each of the expenditures` herein proposed. Allocations have been made, for each of the first three entitlement' periods on a priority basis. The balance of available funds are proposed to be allocated to financing ,of projects to be considered in the Capital Improvements Program of 1973. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 1. Transportation --- Provide for -Provide -for the purchase of two new transit coaches and additional' bus accessories as previously dis- cussed. 2. Public Safety--- To'purchase additional equipment land.providelfor the improvement of the, police records information system. Funds would also be.used in 1973 ($36,000) to hire six (6) additional police personnel, the 'cost of which will be :assumed by, the operating bud - :get in future years:, 3i Financial Administration --- To support the initial costs'inv'olved in establish- ing a`c'entral,procurement capability with the ,'Depart ment of Finance including salaries for the balance of 1973. ';These costs would' be absorbed into the operating':budget in future years''. 4. Code Enforcement -- In 1973 additional equipment would be purchased for the purpose of dispatching inspectors in the field. Additional costs represent,funds'to intensHy'local building code enforcement activities by ';hiring addi- tional;personnel. This burden will be:fully lsupported by goncral'reyenue sharing funds for a periodof five) (5)s years. 5. Social Services— This allocation represents an estimate of the City's contribution to area -wide social services: It Is intended that thisbean annual contribution to:one agency that will exercise administrative control and supervision on :a County -wide basis with reporting responsibility to the City. Council for funds advanced. 6. Library -- To provide for the purchase of additional equipment as requested by: the Library Board and also to make structural' improvements in the Library building as, a,result 'of a -recent safety inspection. The ,'improve- ments would include aisecondary means of 'egress from I PROPOSED REVENUE SHARING EXPENDITURES JUNE 12, 1973 1 2 3 4 _5 6 7 TOTAL ENTITLEMENT PERIOD: 1/72-6/72 7/72-12/72 1/73-6/73 7/73-6/74 7/74-6/75 7/75-6/76 7/76-12/76 Amount Estimated $ 214;000 $ '205,000' S 254,000 $ 490,000 $ 502,000 $ 514,000 $ 270,000 $2,449,000 ' EXPENDITURES PROPOSED: (Operation and Maintenance) $ Transportation 96,500 7070'0 00 Public Safety 70,000 ,000 15,000 Financial Administration 15,000 7,500 15,000 15,000 15;000 7,500 60,000 Code Enforcement SocialServices 35,000 75,000 75,000, 75',000 35,000 295,000 Library SUBTOTAL $ 189,000 35,000 35,000 571,500 42,500 90,000 90,000 - 90,000 - 70,000 (Capital Outlay) 200,000 Civic Center Remodeling' 200,000 , 90,000 Ralston Creek Study 25,000 5,000 60,000 50,000 Central EquipmentFacility 50,000 7,500 Animal'Shelter '', 7,500 60,000 Public Safety Headquarters 60,000 $ SUBTOTAL J 1S,000 205,000 117,500 60,000 - 407,500 AVAILABLE FOR OTHER CIP PROJECTS - - $ 66,500 $ 340,000 $. 412,000 $ 424;000 $ 227,500 $1;470, TOTAL $ 214,000 i I I $ 205,000 $ 254,000 $ 490,000 $ 502,000 $ 514,000 $ 270,000 $2,449,0 i