Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-01-04 TranscriptionPage 1 Council Present: Alter, Bergus, Harmsen, Taylor, Teague, Thomas, Weiner Staff Present: Fruin, Jones, Kilburg, Goers, Fruehling, Welter 1.a Proclamations -- Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Teague: All right, well, welcome to, uh, the first formal meeting for this 2022 year. Welcome to everyone in the audience and online at any other social media sites. We are going to start with our first item, which is proclamations for Martin Luther King Jr. day. Whereas the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. believed that each individual possesses the power of self-fulfillment regardless of their circumstance, and that is the duty of all humans to strengthen communities, alleviate poverty and harness the potential of all of us; and whereas Dr. King's dream of transforming the world into one free from discrimination and intolerance continues in the minds of millions and has not been forgotten since his devastating death on April 4th, 1968; and whereas Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. dedicated his life to promoting peace, freedom, and opportunity through non-violent means; and whereas the teachers of Dr. King can continue to guide and inspire us in addressing challenges in our communities; and whereas there are numerous ways to show service and respect to others, such as volunteering at your local hospital, donating books and games to families in need, organizing a food drive in your school, volunteering at a senior center and many others; and whereas the City of Iowa City joins with other towns and cities across the country in tribute to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Now, therefore I, Bruce Teague, Mayor of Iowa City, hereby proclaim Monday, January 17th, 2022 to be Martin Luther King Jr. Day in Iowa City, and urge all to join me and the celebration thereof and to take this opportunity to reflect upon Dr. King's message of the principles of justice and equality for all. And to accept this proclamation is Commissioner Roger Lusala from the Human Rights Commission. Welcome. Yes. Lusala: Hello. My name is Roger Lusala. I, uh, one of the Commissioner of the HRC, I am humbly accepting this on behalf of the incredible, uh, incredible and amazing commissioners who serve on the Human Rights Commission. Dr. King gave the most famous speech that we all know, many of us know it. I've heard it time and time. But besides the speech, there were Dr. King's teaching, the teaching of Dr. King are what pushes us to embrace each other's differences and tackle challenges together, and to better our community. In this community, there are a multitude of men and women whose name will never be on a history book, but they are living Dr. Kings teaching. Those who work hard and never stands in front of the Council to complain or to seek praise. Those who you don't see their name on local papers or election This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 2 ballots. Those men and women who through countless act of quiet work do bring about changes in our community. These people are both black, white, young, old, male, female, gay, straight, and trans. They all have one thing in common. They share their love of this community. So as we celebrate Dr. King this year, each of us need to ask one question: how am I living his teaching? What am I doing to better this community? Not just to remember his speech. Thank you, Council. Teague: Thank you. And I'm going to come and present this to you. Lusala: Thank you very much. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 3 6. Community Comment (items not on the agenda) [UNTIL 7 PM] Teague: We are on to item number 6, which is community comment. This is an opportunity for people to come and address any item that is not on the Council agenda, and I invite you to sign up. And also we ask that your comments are three minutes or less. Welcome. Please state your name and the city you're from. Hiatt: Good evening, Temple Hiatt, and I'm from Iowa City. Uh, I hope everyone had wonderful holidays. Um, the families in Oxford, Michigan, um, their family, their holidays were, were probably, um, not as, as happy as, as most. Uh, I'm here today to talk about gun violence in schools and the impact of school shootings and incidents of gun violence covered in the media never cease to alarm us with all too familiar scenes of families and schools in the aftermath of a tragic event like that, that happened in Oxford, Michigan. As gun sales surged in 2020, the issue of gun violence in schools continued to concern many parents, educators, students, and leaders in our community leaving many with feelings of helplessness, but we can take action together to keep our schools safer. Here are some facts about gun violence in schools. While mass shootings in schools represent -- I'm sorry. While mass shootings in schools account for less than 1% of school gunfire incidents, they represent one quarter of overall gun deaths at schools. Up to 80% of shooters on school grounds under the age of 18 obtain the guns they used from their home or the homes of their relatives or friends. 58% of school shooters were associated with the school where the gunfire occurred, the majority of whom were current or former students. In 100% of incidents of targeted school violence, there were warning signs that caused others to be concerned. And in 77% of incidents, other people were aware of the shooter's plans in advance. We also know that gun violence disproportionately affects students of color and that the threat of gun violence at school negatively affects students' learning. These are some facts, some of the facts that suggest that we as a community need to do more to prevent the threat of gun violence among our students. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. Welcome. Whittington: Thank you. Good evening. Thank you for this, uh, chance to come after Temple on the current rate, my name is Lorianne Whittington, Iowa City, uh, 1907 Ridgeway Drive, Iowa City. The current reality, as Temple demonstrated, is that gun violence among school age children, whether at home or at school, is a community issue that is not going away unless we as adults do all we can to prevent it. We're encouraged that the Iowa City School District School Board will be considering a resolution to notify parents and adult guardians of a district expectation that firearms at home be kept secure This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 4 from students and minors. This, uh, effort was presented to the Iowa City School Board as part of a nationally recognized gun safety program called Be Smart. Be Smart is neutral on the topic of gun ownership. It does not advocate for changes to gun laws. Rather, it emphasizes the power of each and every adult to exercise agency for the safety of children and teens in our community in five steps. The S in Be Smart or Smart stands for securing guns in our homes and vehicles. The M is for modeling responsible behavior around guns among other safety measures. This includes securing, not hiding, guns, uh, in our homes. A is for asking about the presence of unsecured guns in the homes of places where our children visit. R is recognizing the role of su-, of guns and suicide. This is important because of the increased danger guns, uh, of guns in any suicide attempt. And T is for telling others about the Be Smart message. For nearly seven years, we have given well-received presentations of this Be Smart program to adult audiences in the community. We're here tonight to ask the City Council to consider how we might spread this message of safety within programs, where the Iowa City government interacts with parents and adult guardians of our city's youth. Um, we would certainly welcome further conversation with Council members and be happy to provide more information about, uh, the Be Smart program, uh, with Council members. And with that, I thank you and wish you all a very happy new year. Teague: Thank you and happy new year. Would anyone else to address a topic that is not on the agenda? Welcome. Kauble: Um, good evening Council, uh, um, good evening Council. My name is Dan Kauble and I would just like to reiterate the need to address gun violence in our community. Um, it's very, especially in, with Iowa City with the gun violence that does occur here, it is something that's really important. And I think that, um, this Council and coordination with other local governmental entities could, could, and should, uh, have an impact on this issue. Um, and I think that would be more, more, you would achieve more doing that than with a Bearcat or an MRAP. Um, I have several things that I would like to talk about tonight. Um, firstly, I would just like to address some things that were mentioned during the work session. Um, Councilor Bergus mentioned how coming up to this podium and addressing Council isn't as effective as writing Council and establishing written correspondence with you all. I would like to point out that before I came here to annoy you all before I started coming to Council meetings, I, I, I would write and very rarely would I get a response. And it's one thing to get a response from staff, it's another thing to get response of response from Council who are at basically the head of the bowl. Um, and so I would encourage Council to start having those dialogues. Um, and so from your comments at the work session, the mayor and this Council complained about the last meeting and how we disrupted it by repeatedly This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 5 coming up to the podium to make comments about meeting accessibility. This is completely mind-boggling to me, especially because rules were followed to the T, comments about accessibility were germane and relevant to each agenda item because they directly related to how the public engaged with them. Yeah. And our conduct may have been annoying to you, but it wasn't out of order. Um, and it's extremely absurd to me that this Council is salty about, about the hour and a half that was added to the meeting in, through our comments because multiple times Council was given the opportunity to, to raise their hand and commit to having hybrid meetings or, Mr. Mayor, taking a quick recess and, um, everybody doing it off the record. Um, so it's it, the last meeting, wasn't our result. It was the res -- it was your, uh, the inaction of the mayor and of this Council is the reason why the last meeting went on as long as it did. Um, it it's just astounding to me that this Council talks com --, has been complaining and spent the work session complaining about disrespect from the public, when the conduct of the mayor, the conduct of councilors has been extremely disrespectful. I mean, y'all reap what you sow and I would just like to encourage self -reflection and, um, yeah, just do what you can do and be better. Thank you. Teague: Thank you and happy new year. Welcome. Petersen: Hello. My name is Noah, uh, happy new year to y'all. Um, so yeah, last meeting, uh, I was asking for shelter for my friends because I have many friends who are houseless, because I work on, I -- like I deliver meals to them. I cook meals for them, I know these people, I work with these people because they are my friends in this city, this city is failing them for so many ways and sorry, I'm really distracted, um. [drumming] Oh gosh, sorry. Uh, wow. Uh... [drumming] I'm sorry, my brain is not working right now at all. I can't, um....Gosh. Uh...What was I saying. I'm not trying to stall. I, I, my brain is not working right now. Obviously I've said multiple times I am disabled in the brain and right now that is really affecting me so I can not speak. I'm sorry. Teague: Okay. Thank you. And have a new happy new year. Any -- anyone else who would like to speak during this time. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 6 8. Landfill gas collection system expansion - resolution approving project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the landfill gas collection system expansion project, establishing amount of bid security to accompany each bid, directing City Clerk to post notice to bidders and fixing time and place for receipt of bids. 1. Public Hearing Teague: Number 8, item number 8, landfill gas collection system expansion, resolution approving project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the landfill gas collection system expansion project, establishing amount of bid security to accompany each bid, directing City Clerk to post notice to bidders and fixing time and place for receipt of bids. I'm going to open up the public hearing and I'm going to welcome our staff. Welcome. Welter: Joe Welter from Engineering. And, uh, I'm the project engineer on this, this project. So I'm going to walk you through what we're doing with this project. So, oops, sorry. So located at the landfill, I think everybody knows where that is, west of the Interstate 218, south of IWV off of Heble Ave. SW. So this project as shown on that picture is in the black with the extents in the lighter blue, it's located on the west, south and central portions of the landfill site, the proposals install 5,100 linear feet of new gas extraction piping. This will give us a full loop around the active and closed cells at the site. It'll accommodate better leachate and condensate removal in the existing system. In this proposed system we're adding additional clean outs so that we have better access to the system and able to, uh, respond to any clogs or any kinds of system disruptions that, that we have. Overall, this project is an effort to have better system reliability on-site, uh, with a goal of improving our compliance at the landfill with our environmental regulatory requirements that we're required to meet both by our air permit and our solid waste disposal permits. So this project will enable more landfill gas to be collected from the newest cells, the FY09 and the FY18 cell, as well as the new cell that we'll be starting to design this year. Future horizontal collection lines, which we'll go through the upper portions of the fill as well as vertical extraction wells, which get drilled down through the existing cells will tie into this expansion. We're opening bids later this month, uh, with the anticipated, uh, starting in March, the completion stan -- substantial completion in May, final completion in June. The estimated cost was $648,000. I'd like to thank HDR Engineering who designed this project for us. And there's my contact information as well. Teague: Great. Any questions for Joe? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 7 Alter: Joe? What kind of gas are we talking about and what happens to it once? It's extremely, Welter: I'm sorry, who's speaking. Alter: That's me. Thank you. Welter: Thank you. Sorry. The masks, um, landfill gas is primarily 50% methane, 50% carbon dioxide. There is some oxygen and other impurities in it, but generally speaking, it's about half methane, half carbon dioxide. The -- currently the gas is collected and we flare it at the site. We burn it. Alter: Thank you. Great. Weiner: And -- and maybe I missed it, but then what happens to this gas once it's collected by the system? Welter: It's collected and the piping is all, uh, all directed towards with, with system pressures, directed towards our flare. It's, it's burned. The, the methane is burned and carbon dioxide's burned. Weiner: Thanks. Fruin: Yeah. If Council were to look at, um, our carbon study, when we produce that from our Climate Action Office, the burning of the methane, um, is the biggest contributor is part in terms of the city's, um, uh, uh, footprint, you know, carbon footprint. And, and, uh, you may have recall earlier this year, the Climate Action Commission reviewed a study that we initiated to see what kind of alternatives there would be to burning the gas. And unfortunately, nothing, uh, turned out to be economically feasible. So we're continuing to kind of explore ways to find alternatives, but in the meantime, uh, the flaring of the gases is the best we've got right now. Weiner: Thank you. Welter: I would add in that HDR, the, the, the firm that we hired to do this project was also the same firm that did that methane feasibility study. So, so they're very familiar with, with, with the site and, uh, did a lot of good work on the landfill site and the wastewater treatment plant, uh, to find viable, feasible options. Harmsen: Uh, question for you. Um, you mentioned that the carbon dioxide was burned, but I don't think that's a flammable gas, is it? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 8 Welter: The methane burns, the carbon dioxide, um, would, uh, is, is part of the, is part of the overall landfill gas. Harmsen: So it's vented. Welter: It goes through the flare. It could, the, the, all of the landfill gas goes through the flare. So, um, it's, it's burned. Yeah. Fruin: We love giving tours of the landfill, uh, may not be the best time of year to do it, but, uh, we're happy to take anybody around it if uh, you're interested Harmsen: Probably better in August. Teague: Right. Any other questions for Joe? Thank you. Okay, great. And would anyone from the public like to address this topic? If so, please step to the mic. Welcome. Kauble: Hi, um, two things, I would just like to encourage Council and City staff, just to be very cognizant of the environmental impacts of this, and just being sure that everything with this as being done in the most effective and environmentally conscious way. Um, secondly, I would like to encourage, um, the mayor to invite Noah on agenda item number 14, to come up and comment if he would like to. Um, and that would require reopening public comment at that time. Thank you. Teague: Would anyone else like to address this topic. Seeing no one I'm going to close the public hearing. 2. Motion to approve Could I get a motion to approve please? Alter: So moved. Weiner: Second. Teague: Moved by Alter, seconded by Weiner. Council discussion. [roll call vote] Motion passes 7 - 0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 9 9. Proposed South District Self Supported Municipal Improvement District - Ordinance amending Title 3, "Finance, Taxation and Fees" of the City Code to add a new Chapter, to establish the South District Self -Supported Municipal Improvement District (SSMID) pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 386, Code of Iowa; and providing for the establishment of an operation fund and the levy of an annual tax in connection therewith. (Second Consideration) Teague: Item number 9, proposed South District Self -Supported Municipal Improvement District. This is an ordinance amending Title 3, Finance, Taxation of Fees of the City Code to add a new chapter to establish the South District Self -Supporting Municipal Improvement District pursuant to the provision of Chapter 386, Code of Iowa and providing for the establishment of an operation fund and the levy, levy of an annual tax in connection therewith, um, Councilor Bergus did just recuse herself. And so this is, um, a motion. Could I get a motion to give second consideration, please? Taylor: So moved, Taylor. Weiner: Second, Weiner. Teague: And would anyone present from the public like to address this topic? Welcome. Petersen: Hello. Um, so yeah, my only, I guess my real concern with this is issue is, is that it's going to bring cops more into the South District to harass more and more people in there. Like I already know people who have been, who were houseless on the South District and the cops have been moving them along into make, to make them invisible because this city would rather hide its problems than actually address them by helping people. So I just would say about this item is if you're going to do this habit, so you stop your cops from going around harassing people in this new district, this that's probably just going to be more gentrification and that always brings more cops. So that's just, I guess my only real concern with this and hopefully, I mean, hopefully it helps the community. I'm sure there will be something that's fair for community, but on the flip side that is, is this Council should control their cops. So they don't go and start harassing more and more people in the South seriously with this, which they're probably going to be doing anyways. But so, yeah, that's all. Teague: Thank you. Would anyone else like to address this topic? Kauble: Hi, um, my name is Dan Kauble and I think that the, um, SSMID is a very good thing. I think it would have a lot of benefits to the South Side District. Um, that said, I think that going forward with it, there are some concerns that This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 10 it would be good for the City to keep in mind. Um, firstly, I think everybody should just be aware of gentrification, how it works and the impacts of it. I really want to be sure that, um, whether it be residents who would be priced out with increased rent or whatever it is be mindful of that, have supports for them, make sure nobody has to leave their neighborhood, um, and extend that also to business owners, make sure that business owners, um, that there isn't an increased barrier for them to be able to establish shop in the South Side. Um, I think that it would just be very beneficial. I mean that that's very important to the community because I think if you look at what's happened downtown, I think that some people think that downtown it's a very, it can be a very exclusive place to start a business. And I think that we just need to be mindful that, um, with the South Side, as we've worked to improve it and make it even more beautiful than it already is that, um, we're making sure that opportunity is extended to all residents and business owners. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. And anyone else like to address this topic, seeing no one, Council discussion? Alter: Well, I will leap into this since, uh, this is something that I have been aware of, uh, since its infancy. I know the folks who have worked to make this happen. And, um, I think one of the things that's very cool about SSMIDs is that there's no one size fits all and that this has worked very much within what exists and even down to its mission statement, um, within the neighborhood as, as it is and how the property owners and in, in conjunction with the residents, see how, um, essentially in the most simplistic of ways, know, putting into a pool to help sustain its own, um, health is, um, going to strengthen the South District. And so, um, certainly, um, a generic sense of what a SSMID is, can, and I was very much part of this, a little suspicious at first, but I'm, I have seen the work that's been done and where the vision is and how the different kinds of businesses and properties and property owners that are there are working together to strengthen what's there and to retain the flavor of the neighborhood while strengthening it as, as a vibrant area. So I'm pretty excited about this. Um, you know, uh, I'll leave it at that. Harmsen: I, uh, wasn't here for the first reading because I wasn't on Council yet. So I'm kind of glad that this has a second reading, uh, so I can go and record just congratulating and thanking all the people, uh, Angie Jordan and all the people from the South District and all the people that helped them put this together, uh, and to give them like a public kudos for that work. And I'm excited to see where they take this. Teague: Great. All right. Well, you'll have more readings. So with that being said, roll call please. [roll call vote] Motion passes 6 - 0 with one recusal by Bergus. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 11 10. CPRB - Expand Membership - ordinance amending Title 8, entitled Police Regulations, Chapter 8, entitled Community Police Review Board, to increase the composition of the board from five members to seven. (First Consideration) Teague: We are on to item number 11, which is Council appointments. Applicants must reside in Iowa City and be 18 years of age unless -- Weiner: Mr. Mayor, you skipped the CPRB, 10. Teague: Oh! You know, (laughter) I thought that was too quick. I saw it. Sorry about that. Item number 10, CPRB, expand membership ordinance amending Title 8, entitled Police Regulations, Chapter 8, entitled Community Police Review Board, to increase the composition of the board from five members to seven. And this is first consideration. Can I get a motion please? Thomas: So moved, Thomas. Alter: Second. Sorry. Teague: Moved by Thomas, seconded by Alter, and... Fruin: Would you like a quick overview? Teague: Yes. Fruin: A quick refresher. Um, so this, uh, dates back all the way to December 22nd, 2020, that's when you received, or the Council at the time received, a list of recommendations from the CPRB. One of those recommendations was to expand membership from five, and at the time they said either seven or nine. Uh, Council has been working through those recommendations, uh, throughout 2021. And, uh, this was kind of the last, uh, a major one for Council to, to finalize. Uh, the City Council at an October 19th work session gave direction to staff to prepare an ordinance, uh, that would increase membership from five to seven. Uh, the Council, uh, continued to stress, uh, the need for diverse membership and also stressed, uh, the importance of having someone with law enforcement experience, uh, uh, on the board. So, um, you can see in the, uh, packet the memo, uh, after that meeting that I drafted and sent to CPRB, um, that had the proposed ordinance change in front of it, uh, or attached to it, excuse me. Um, the CPRB reviewed my memo in the proposal at their December meeting, and, uh, you can see the letter they sent back to me on December 14th that says they, uh, approved the language, um, that, uh, that I prepared based on your direction. So that is what is before you today, again, it expands membership, uh, to, uh, seven members. And it also, uh, in, in order to, um, uh, uh, help broaden the pool This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 12 for, uh, folks with law enforcement experience, it removes a provision that, um, previously restricted, anybody that was employed by the Iowa City Police Department within the last five years to serve. So the way it sits right now, um, is that if you've been an -- on the Iowa City Police Department for the last five years, you're not eligible to serve. Um, this removes that requirement. And just says, if you're a current police officer, you are not eligible to serve. And that was, um, the way that we attempted to, to broaden the pool. I'm happy to answer any questions. Again, this comes, uh, uh, with a recommendation from staff and CPRB. Teague: Great. Any questions for Geoff? Would anyone from the public like to address this topic? If so, please come forth. Welcome. Kauble: Hi. Um, I would, there are several things about this that are -- Teague: And please state your name again. Kauble: Oh, uh, Dan Kauble. Um, there are several things about this that are pretty concerning to me. Um, first of all, the removing the five-year waiting period for a former member of the Police Department to be appointed, that should be a no -no. I'm sorry, but that, I understand that they're trying to expand it so that they can have more people be involved who have law enforcement experience. I'm sorry, but even that is a problem in and of itself because I mean, I've had conversations with former Mayor Pro Tem Salih about how, when she was on the CPRB, people who had law enforcement experience, who were, uh, who, who knew the workings of policing, they often hold up the process of justice for it. And I mean, you've seen that with Steve Dolezal and Coralville CPRB, they're very resistant, reluctant to, um, hold police officers accountable. They are, it's a fact. I mean, if you see, if you observe meetings, that's a definite trend that you will pick up. And having someone who like less, even like less than a week ago could have been a cop. And now they're in a position to judge one of their former, uh, dictate whether one of their, uh, former colleagues has done something wrong. That problem is going to be amplified tenfold. You can not have it be like that. Um, I would even go further and say that, I think that, yeah, I mean, there, the rationale for having law enforcement officers, former law enforcement officers on these boards is that they give the police mindset about these issues. But I mean, in reality, they often hold up the process of justice and I would encourage members of Council to talk to other people, talk to former Mayor Pro Tem Salih about this, it's a real issue. It's very concerning. And I think that ultimately at the end of the day, this would harm the efficacy of your CPRB. Um, and I mean that, that five-year waiting period really needs to go because I mean, it's going to hamper, I mean, the ability of the CPRB to do its work, it's a bad, I mean, there's just a lot about this that's really bad. Um, I mean, yeah, I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 13 think it would be cool to, I mean, ultimately like add, adding more members to the CPRB isn't a bad thing, but if you're adding more members who are cops, who worked with the cops that they're going to be having oversight over, that's messed up and that will again harm the efficacy of the CPRB. So I encourage Council to push back on this and push back and make it so that these cops aren't going to be in a position to dictate whether or not they're going to get their friends in trouble. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. Would anyone else like to address this topic? Welcome. Petersen: Hello, my name is Noah, um, and, uh, yeah, I'm, uh, prove, uh, expander, in favor of expanding it and, uh, changing the five-year wait period to, uh, no cops former, no cops ever on the board ever. So there's no cops on the board. Like, no, five-year, make that um just no cops on the board, cops invested in any cops. We all already know what the result was going to be always. And every single time, not every single time, 99.999% of the time when cops investigate, investigate other cops, of course the cops aren't going to find their fellow cops guilty of stuff in wrongdoing. I mean the, uh, blue wall of silence, uh, you know, you know, the stuff all the cops, they always stick together, mean props to them for being able to have unity like that, I guess. Um, so yeah, I'm just gonna talk briefly like different object because I have written up, I was sorta going to say earlier and when I couldn't speak, so this is, I'm not trying to be disruptive or whatever. I'm -- Teague: Please do keep it to this topic. Petersen: Can I, you, will you give me the, at the end that -- Teague: Please keep it to this topic at hand. Petersen: Yep, but can I speak at the end of the meeting then, please? I wasn't able to talk earlier. Teague: Please keep it to this topic. Petersen: That's just what I'm asking for, an accommodation. Teague: Please keep it to this topic. That's the topic at hand. Petersen: Okay. Well then I'm just going to be brief on it. Um, this City needs to provide shelter instead of relying on third parties that are incredibly inconsistent. It is January 4th and today is the first day there's shelter. That's not okay. Like that's, we were already full in winter. We've already had several negative degree, days out, deadly. That's all. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 14 Teague: Thank you. Petersen: There needs to be shelter that's not through some third party, through the City because obviously Shelter House has dropped the ball year, year over year. This is not the first year that they have delayed the winter shelter. It's a year over year problem now. And the City needs to stop washing their hands up and saying, oh, this whole Shelter House is guideline, it's everyone else's problem but the own City's, when you can have a million, multi-million dollar Police Department for public safety, but it can't provide the most basic shelter to people who that separate, sorry, need it that who desperately need it? That is necessary. You know, here's what I'm seeking off topic is because of earlier, as I say, so not being disruptive, not trying to be disruptive or whatever, just because I wasn't able to speak earlier. Teague: Would anyone like to address the topic at hand? Seeing no one, Council discussion. Bergus: If I'm reading the memo correctly, Geoff, did the CPRB recommend that they wanted to allow current members? Fruin: No, no. They, they agreed with essentially my proposal, which was, we still don't allow current employees. Bergus: Right. Fruin: Current police officers could not be eligible, but somebody that has retired or resigned from the Department, uh, pursue other work or whatever could be eligible without that five-year waiting period. Do the, um, the members who reviewed this draft of the ordinance, do we have any law enforcement, um, former current members, currently? Fruin: Uh, I may have that if you give me a minute, Weiner: I don't, I don't, I mean, I could be wrong, but I don't think we currently do. Fruin: We don't currently. I think I, I might -- Weiner: The prior chair had some, um, some law enforcement background, but I don't believe there's anybody current. Fruehling: The last one is Don King and, um, Melissa Jensen that had some background. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 15 Bergus: Okay. So I just want to be clear, the members who were recommending this change didn't include any law enforcement or former law enforcement members, those who reviewed this ordinance, is that correct? Fruehling: Correct. Bergus: Okay. Thank you. Fruin: Yeah, if I, I do have a little bit of history. So, um, we had a, uh, someone with probation parole officer experience serve from '09 to '17. Um, we did have an Iowa, uh, a former Iowa City officer that served from '03 to '09, um, Johnson County Reserve from, uh, two stints, 2007- 2014, 2015 to 2019. Uh, and there's a couple others as we go back further into the, the existence of the, uh, the CPRB. So, uh, definitely some with related experience. Um, it looks to me at quick glance that we had over the, uh, the CPRB started in '96. It looks like we've had three IC, former ICPD officers serve at one time or another. Taylor: So obviously, Geoff, I remember reading something about that we, as a Council could, could waive that as far as having a member of ... Fruin: Yes, you're still, you're not obligated to have a police officer, um, on there. So if you've, if you've got applications and for whatever reason you decide not to, you still, you still maintain that discretion and Eric correct me if I'm wrong on that. Goers: Yeah, I think that's right. Fruin: That, that's written into the ordinance itself and that's, uh, existing language. So it's intended to broaden the pool, not force your hand. Weiner: It has, it has struck me in, in sitting in on a number of the meetings that, that the current board sometimes is struggling, um, to in essence sort of understand what's happening or what's happened, or, or what the appropriate procedure is or, or what order they sh --, how they should interpret a particular order, or if they should approve a particular order. Um, I'm not sure that I'm, um, in agreement with having no waiting period, but they, but for the, for the current members in any, in any event, when other meetings I've sat in on have indicated that they really want some law enforcement expertise on there, they think they would benefit from some law enforcement expertise, but I'm not sure that I'm completely comfortable with no waiting period. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 16 Fruin: Yeah. Just to expand on that, I think, um, you know, that's the key thing, and I think as you move to seven, you have to remember if you do put on somebody with law enforcement experience in the future, it's, it's one perspective out of seven, um, uh, uh, but it is helpful when they can say, well, this is typically how maybe we trained on it, or this is how this policy would be interpreted. This would be, um, why we, uh, why an officer may approach this situation like that. Um, I think that perspective is, is really important. It's not necessarily, uh, going to change the mindset of, of a majority of a body of seven, but I think that is lacking, uh, right now. And I think that's been pretty apparent, um, uh, that, that, that police perspective can add value. Um, and, and we're just missing that right now. Um, obviously we've had it in the past, so, um, it's possible, but, um, we don't have a lot of applicants, um, uh, with, with police experience. Teague: At least for me how I said we have the current CPRB that it's making this request to the Council. And, um, I mean, I do know that, um, as been mentioned in some of the meetings is just helpful. One of the, one of the questions that I do have is if we didn't want one to go full, um, no, you know, time lapse, if we might consider even a two-year lapse of time or three-year, but to me it would be two years. The benefit, the other thing that we have to remember is that whoever is on Council at the time reviewing the applications have, uh, the full responsibility of ensuring, uh, that the individual that will be appointed, um, will be appropriate and, uh, for, for their appointment. Um, and so, but that being said, I am supportive of it if we wanted to change. Um, I I'm, I'm supportive of it as, um, with no, um, time lapse, but I can be agreeable if other people wanted a lapse. Weiner: I would be more comfortable with say with, let's say a two-year cooling off period. Right. You know, that there would have to be a gap so that you don't have the direct contact with just having retired. I mean, that's, that's sort of, I mean, if you look at other governments, there's that you have the famous, revolving, revolving door, which becomes problematic. I think under the Obama administration, the federal government, they widened, they extended it to two years, which seemed more reasonable so that you didn't have immediate relationships and contact. Harmsen: I agree with, uh, Councilperson Weiner, I, I, uh, had similar thoughts, uh, that were brought up during the public comments, not just that I necessarily think that it would be there's any wrongdoing. There's also also the issue of perception. Um, and people have trust in our, in our CPRB. Um, so I, I, i like the idea of some sort of, I don't know what you call it, cooling -off period, or a gap or, or, uh, whatever you want to call it. Um, I don't know that it has to be five years. Um, but, uh, I think something in there would probably be good for, uh, at least to keep community trust in, in the CPRB. And I think that's This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 17 important, um, you know, with that maintained going forward. And then, because I'm new, procedural question, is this just a first reading on this kind of a motion? Or is this a one and done? Teague: Oh, that's the first. Harmsen: Okay. Thank you. Teague: If there are no other comments...roll call -- well, I guess the question is before we do, are we going to, uh, I mean, I've heard at least three talking about an amendment to the time. Is there anyone else wanting to amend the time should this be passed? Thomas: Um, um, you know, this was, the language was approved by the CRB, on the one hand; on the other, uh, you know, I, I hear your concerns in terms of, uh, you know, having a period in which there, you know, there is some degree of separation from serving on the force. You know, I would, I would support that, but I think we need to, you know, remember again, why, why the, the timeframe has been reduced. And, um, I think we need to monitor that and see if, in, by putting in that two-year requirement, we may again end up finding difficulty finding individuals who are interested in serving. So, um, you know, it's, it's a trade off and, uh, you know, I- I'm supportive of the idea of the two-year grace period. Um, but I do think we need to watch, watch this and make sure that it doesn't end up defeating the purpose of reducing the timeframe. Taylor: I would be in favor of, of going with two years. I think, uh, I think John's concerned that you don't, perhaps if they've left the force, they've retired or they've moved away, so they're no longer here and that's why we're having difficulty, you know, but it could be that others from other, uh, law enforcement agencies that, uh, have moved into town. Um, so I think two years would be a good timeframe rather than the five-year, that perhaps we could still find some interest out there in former law enforcement, and it doesn't have to be, I believe we've had before, it didn't have to be, like, a police department person, just someone who has, um, knowledge or experience in, in law enforcement of some sort. Teague: So I do hear majority of, um, changing the language to two years. Goers: So if that's the, uh, desire of Council, uh, what we would want to hear is a motion to amend the ordinance to, um, or the proposed ordinance at this point, uh, to two years instead of five, and that would require a majority voice vote. And then we would, uh, default back to the roll call vote, uh, if This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 18 there are no other motions to amend, uh, to the roll call vote for the, uh, underlying ordinance. Weiner: Okay. I would move that we, that we amend it to, to include a two year waiting period. Teague: Can I get a second. Bergus: I'll second. Teague: Bergus second. [voice vote] Motion passes 7-0. All right. So we have the two-year. And are there any more comments about the membership expansion? Weiner: No, just that I think it will help the work of the CPRB to have to have a somewhat broader cross section of the community there, and hopefully some people with some diverse knowledge. Teague: All right. Roll call please. [roll call vote] Motion passes 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 19 11. Council Appointments Teague: On to item number 11, Council appointments. Applicants must reside in Iowa City and be 18 years of age unless specific qualifications are stated. 11a, Housing and Community Development Commission, Housing and Community Development Commission, one vacancy to fill an unexpired term upon appointment through June 30th, 2023. And then I'm going to go ahead and do the second, um, appointment, uh, read -- I'll read that, which is 11b, is Senior Center Commission. And, well, let's do that one first, the, sorry, it's the beginning of the year, what could I say. We'll do the first one, Housing and Community Development. Weiner: Kellie? I was wondering if there is a reason why, it seemed like when we last saw something for this, there were a lot of applicants. Is there a reason that that shrunk so much, thank you. Fruehling: I think Laura asked me the same thing, and so I did check the previous applications and it appears most of them were past the one year mark. Uh, one was not an Iowa City resident. Uh, I think another one is on another commission. Um, so it, it, it appears that these are the three current. Teague: And we have a female requirement for this one. Weiner: Right. I mean, I guess, I guess I, and this may not be appropriate, I guess I was wondering if we might, given the fact that there's going to be another appointment to it very shortly because, um, um, mayor pro tem had to have to resign, if we might not go out again and, and get, um, and seek a broader pool and then do two appointments at the same time. I don't know. It was hard to get, glean much information from these applicants. Bergus: Yeah. And I don't know if we know for sure, but I think, Kellie, you weren't sure if we'd really promoted this opening on like, on social media, maybe we could make a point to do that. Cause I, I kind of had the same reaction as Councilor Weiner, like we normally have a lot of applicants and, you know, there wasn't, um, these individuals had all kind of indicated not knowledge of this commission. And I think it is kind of a technical one that maybe having a few more to review would be useful. Teague: I would be open to reposting and training advertise for it. Alter: I would agree. Teague: It sounds like we have a majority for that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 20 Taylor: With, um, Megan, not on there and uh, this person resigning though, does that leave the HCDC short on membership? Fruehling: It would by two. Taylor: Pardon me? Fruehling: It would by two. Taylor: Because I would think that if they were short and it would hinder their functioning, that it wouldn't hurt to, uh, appoint one of the three that applied currently, but that, that's just my opinion. Fruin: It's a nine -person commission. [crosstalk] Teague: Yeah. I dunno if you have any thoughts on, on that and that you're resigned. Alter: Um, I mean, it's, the current commission, uh, functions really well. I mean, yes, they're down two, um, but there are robust conversations, but I, I can't think of a time when, you know, it's been when some kind of recommendation that needed a vote was split only by one vote. So, um, the other consideration actually is that there's, um, considerations of CDBG, uh, and HOME applications coming up. That honestly, if that's one of the first things that, that a new Commission member would have to deal with, it's, it's a lot, uh, it's very daunting and it's hundreds of pages of applications and a rubric. So it might be difficult to have. based on the pool that we saw. And part of this might be what's being asked in an application, but there's very little information to indicate even that there was any experience from applicants, um, about reading grant applications, um, let alone other experience to understand sort of the ins and outs of, of agency needs. So my sense, would it be that the Commission can be, will re, self -regulate and be okay. They have a great staff and, um, they're able to work together well. Um, so if it is allowed for them to work a little bit, you know, um, I don't know -- the boat's a little higher in the water because we're not, we don't have as many people on it. Um, if that's allowed, I think that they can, can muster through without any difficulty. Goers: Um, the other thing I'll point out is it appears they meet on the third Thursday of every month. That would be the 20th of this month, two days after your next Council meeting. So obviously it would be short notice to those who were appointed, um, but this group will actually, will not be meeting again until after your next Council meeting. Bergus: Is that timeframe doable for staff to advertise a little more aggressively? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 21 Fruehling: Sure. Yeah. I can push it out to Communications and have them put some stuff out Teague: With the holidays, I think it might be in everybody's best interest, the public, to have a little more notice and we can still consider the three that are there. Um, but I'm seeing some shaking of heads. So we'll delay this one until the next Council meeting. And, um, more communication will be, uh, going out to advertise this. On to item number 11b, Senior Center Commission, one vacancy to fill a three-year term, January lst, 2022 through December 31st, 2024. And we just have a no gender requirement for this one. Weiner: And we have one, one applicant who seems quite conversant with the issues. Alter: I was impressed by the application. Bergus: Yeah, I think we should appoint Victoria Carroll to the Senior Center Commission. Taylor: I had a question for Eric. Um, although she was employed by the VNA, she said she has, uh, worked there and done some of the VNA, uh, things for the Senior Center. I assume it's like the blood pressure checks and cholesterol checks. Uh, would that be a conflict if she serves on the Senior Center Commission if she's actually working at the Center? Goers: And I apologize, I haven't reviewed her application, but you're indicating she works for VNA, not for the Senior Center. Taylor: She said she takes classes at the Senior Center and she has volunteered for the VNA and the VNA, just-- it's separate. I mean, they do it here at the Senior Center, but do blood pressure checks and cholesterol checks and those kinds of things. Goers: Right. I see that now, no, that doesn't represent a conflict. Taylor: Okay. Good. 'Cause she, she seems to have very strong understanding of, of the mission of the Senior Center. Teague: Seems like there's a support for Victoria Carroll. Could I get a motion to appoint, please. Bergus: So moved, Bergus. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 22 Thomas: Second, Thomas. Teague: [voice vote] Motion passes 7-0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 23 15. City Council Information Teague: We're on to number 15, City Council information. So if anyone has anything they want to mention about any, um, various meetings that they'll be attending or upcoming meetings, community events, or any item of interest. Weiner: My only item of interest is covid, which seems to be, the, essentially with us for the long-term. I would really, really, really urge people to wear masks, wear good masks, um, and, and be very, be very aware because, um, omicron appears to be at least twice as, uh, infectious as delta. Um, so please stay safe. Bergus: I just wanted to mention an event on this Thursday. Our Truth and Reconciliation Commission is having a special guest presentation by a Ron Wakabayashi, who is with the Divided Community Project. I think Janice and I have both spoken with Ron before. Um, he has a very extensive history in working with, uh, truth commissions and also was directly involved with the reconciliation process, uh, relating to the internment of Japanese -Americans after World War Two. So he'll be presenting at the, uh, Truth and Reconciliation Commission this Thursday evening at 7:00 PM, which you could view on Zoom. Weiner: He is incredibly impressive. Bergus: Yes, yes. Harmsen: And that's recorded too, correct? Weiner: Yeah. Bergus: Yep. Teague: Great. Any other updates? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022. Page 24 16. Report on Items from City Staff Teague: Item number 16, report on items from the City Staff. City Manager? Fruin: Just a reminder that we're back at it on Saturday for the annual operating budget review. This room 8 am uh, looking forward to a day of numbers with you. Teague: Yes. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council formal meeting of January 4, 2022.