Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-06-04 Transcription Page I Council Present: Alter,Bergus,Dunn,Harmsen, Salih, Teague Council Absent: Moe Staff Present: From,Jones,Lehmann, Goers, Grace,Platz,Liston,Knoche,Havel, VanDyke,Lyon, Seydell Johnson,Nagel-Gamm Others Present: Monsivais,USG Liaison 1. Call to Order Teague: All right. I am going to call the City of Iowa City formal meeting together,um,to order for the June 4, 2024. Roll call,please. [Roll Call] Welcome to everyone that is in person and those that are joining us virtually. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 2 2. Proclamations 2.a Gun Violence Awareness Day Teague: Item number two is proclamations, and 2.a is Gun Volence Awareness Day (reads proclamation). And to receive this is the community violence prevention coordinator, Jess Lang. Lang: Good evening. As Mayor Teague said, I am Jess Lang. I work with Johnson County as the Community violence prevention coordinator. Um, I just wanted to thank Mayor Teague for all of your support in the last year since the Johnson County CVI has started and been building. I also want to thank the support of the entire council. I also want to thank you- your Iowa City Police Department,your officers have been instrumental in helping me get this off the ground and getting guns out of the hands of people in our community and keeping the homicides at zero. That's the hope. So,um,thank you very much for all your support. Teague: Thank you. Harmsen: Thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 3 2.b Pride Month Teague: We're going to move on to 2.b,which is Pride Month. (reads proclamation)And so a- receive this proclamation is the President of Iowa City Pride, and also our nighttime Mayor,Joe Riley. Riley: Thank you,Mayor Teague and Pro Tem Salih and Council. I feel like just about a year ago standing here,telling you we're going to have our biggest festival yet. And I'm here to tell you this year,we're having our biggest festival yet. Measured the Ped Mall. We're going to fit everybody in and still leave room for fire lanes,which is great. Our festival theme this year is forward with strength. And when we think about what that means and strength, it's relying on each other. It's showing up, it's being public and representative and seeing yourself out in public,people like you. And with our events,we like to keep them free, and having that exposure,that sense of community out here at no cost to our community is- is one of our goals. Some of new- some new programming elements that you may be excited about this year,we now have an after hour show that's completely free to attend at the Englert,which if you're up past 10:00 P.M, like I am, it goes from 10:00 to 12:00 A.M. with headliner transgender- transgender artist Miss White. And then also,we have a new temporary art installation that will build and grow throughout the day, and then it'll be gone the next day, Geoff. And done by our partners at Public Space One. So it'll be really exciting. It just keeps growing, and we're so glad to have your support. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. And thanks to all the other supporters that came for both the gun violence, intervention, as well as the pride Committee. So thanks to all of you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 4 3.-7. Consent Calendar Teague: We're going to move on to items number three through seven except. I do want to pull 6.e for a separate consideration. So, could I get a motion to approve. Dunn: Mayor, I'm sorry. I'd like to pull 5.c for separate considerations. Teague: Which one? Dunn: 5.c. Teague: 5.c. Okay. Any other separate considerations? Okay. All right. Could I get a motion to approve the consent agenda for items three through seven except for 6A, 6E and 5C that will get separate consideration. Dunn: So moved. Teague: Moved by Dunn. Bergus: Second. Teague: Second by Bergus, I think. Okay. Bergus: Yes. Teague: All right. Anyone from the public like to discuss this? If you are online,please raise your virtual hand. Seeing no one in person or online. Council discussion. Roll call, please? [Roll Call] [Roll Call] Motion passes 6 - 0. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 5 8. Community Comment Teague: All right. We are-we are on to item number 8,which is community comment,um, and this is an opportunity for people to speak on anything that is not on the council agenda, um, and welcome. You'll have up to three minutes. Ross: Hey, good afternoon. Good evening. Um, fust of all, there is county supervisors election. My name is Brandon Ross. I'm not running for anything. Thank you. There is county supervisors election going on until 8:00. It's good to know. Good candidates like Mandy Remington,Rod Sullivan,Roy Anne. If I don't remember, everybody,thank you. Um, anyway, I'm here today,um,because I want to remind people,please continue to write your Congress,your House members,the White House, and tell the representatives to stop- stop the sending of arms to countries much like Israel,which is basically bombing Hamas to-to Ukraine,which is kind of a fascist regime right now,um, which is just I'll get into that, and also Taiwan. I don't know why we're bothering Chinese people at this point,we should really tell our Congress people to stop the aggression against these people. First of all, I am Ukrainian. My family-half my family is from Kyiv area for hundreds of years. I am second generation Ukrainian American, I'm also Jewish on that side. Um, I would like to say that the most recent news regarding that particular conflict is that Antony Blinken and Biden,President Biden, excuse me,have indicated that it would be great if the Ukrainians could use any of the arms that they can get from any of the NATO countries, and there are 32 of those countries including the US,which basically is the ruler of those NATO countries and that we could-they could send bombs, nuclear tip bombs, and they could send-they could send the top-top rated missiles into Russian cities. Already,there have been bombs that have gone off into commercial areas and civilian areas into Russian areas. Right now,um,Volodymyr Zelensky is no longer constitutionally president,but he canceled elections in Ukraine, so you cannot have an election. He has shut down 14 opposition parties. He has impri- imprisoned his number one opposition leader. Has shut down five out of the six media companies.He has also closed churches, and he doesn't want to go anywhere. He is known to be a very corrupt leader,much like many of the previous Ukrainian leaders. I am Ukrainian, I do not accept this leadership that is in Ukraine. It is a violent fascist group. It is anti Semitic in 2019. Israel came out with a study that showed that Ukraine was the most anti Semitic country in Europe. Eh, so they are also anti LGBTQ. They are anti tartar, they are anti Roma,they are anti Russian, and they are violent. And this is the group that the US got with 10 years ago when they sponsored the coup in Ukraine and overthrew the President. And this was McCain and Newland and Lindsey Graham and Joe Biden,but Obama said, I don't want to get involved in Ukraine and cause World War III, and he was right. Thank you. Teague: Thank you. Anyone else like to address this topic or have a comment during this time? Welcome. Please state your name and City you're from. Grierson: Howdy. My name is Trent Grierson. I am a resident of Iowa City and a bartender here as well and I'm here to discuss a topic not on the agenda this evening. It's about the price increase for parking. I understand that my grievance may come to too little too late,but I This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 6 feel that they must be aired on behalf of the backbone of this community. Adequate and affordable parking is a necessity for a successful service industry, and,you know, forget the impact of price hike on our customers. I had an ankle surgery back in January, and a contemporary of mine had a hip surgery last year,which precludes us from walking to and from work. We would love to take the bus system,which is now free. Thank you very much, guys. But they stop running at 10:00 PM. I do not get off work until 3:00 in the morning. That becomes a little difficult, um,moving along. So the only option here now is parking. The increase would mean a substantial overhead increase for individuals already living on the margin. Yesterday, I made $65 in cash tips. After 9 hours of being parked in the ramp, if you increase the prices,that's going to be $16. That will be a quarter of my cash tips from that- from that shift. Other cities such as Cedar Rapids,uh, which is nearly twice our size, only charges $0.75 an hour and in the ramp and $1.25 an hour for street parking. So other options that we could pursue instead of this immediate price hike would be,uh,we could do a incremental adjustment of a quarter a year in order to get us up to your expected budget. We could also extend transit service hours so that we're not completely relying upon parking. Otherwise,we could offer permits to downtown employees. Thank you very much,members. Teague: Thank you. I'll have you sign in right there. Thank you so much. Anyone else like to address this topic or address a topic that is not on our agenda? Seeing no one in person or online. I'm going to close that part of our agenda. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 7 9. Regular Formal Agenda 9.a 2024 Water Pavement Patching Project—Resolution approving project manual and estimate of cost for the construction of the 2024 Water Pavement Patching 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. Teague: We're going to move on to our regular formal agenda,which is we'll start with item 9.a. This is the 2024 Water Pavement Patching project. Resolution approving project manual, an estimate of costs for the construction of the 2024 water Pavement Patching 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 the public hearing and welcome. 1. Public Hearing Van Dyke: Hi,thank you. I'm Mary Van Dyke. I'm with the engineering division. So this is an annual maintenance project where we repair pavement that was damaged from water main breaks. So the types of pavement that we repair include sidewalk, driveways, concrete street, asphalt Street,kind of any combination of those. These pictures show kind of what the sites look like once the water division is finished with their water main repair. So they'll put back either rock or temporary asphalt. Um, so I guess,with this project,we combine the permanent repair of all the locations into one project. So currently there are 28 locations in need of repair and then as new water main breaks happen throughout the rest of the year,those will be added to this contract as well. So we estimate that about 15-20 locations will be added to the project by the end of the year, so the estimated construction cost is $320,000. That's for just the 28 starting locations. Then for schedule,we'll open bids June 25th, award the contract,July 16th, and then construction would go from July to November this year. Happy to answer any questions. Harmsen: Thank you. Teague: Thank you much. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online. I'm going to close the public hearing. 2. Consider a Resolution Teague: Could I get a motion to approve,please? Bergus: So moved,Bergus. Harmsen: Second,Harmsen. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 8 Teague: Well by Burgus, second by Harmsen. Um,we know that one council left, so we're going to, er,we'll open it up for council discussion at this point,but before roll call,we will wait. Alter: I was going to ask, actually,just as a point of reminder,with the permanent patching or so- called,that's sort of-that basically, it extends the life of the existing road until we get to a point where it's like, it has to be completely reconstructed. So this is, I mean, it's definitely extending the life of the road, correct? Van Dyke: So, in a sense,the main goal of this project is like,really, what's out there is like an emergency. Alter: Right, okay. Yeah. Van Dyke: So we're just kind of fixing that to the existing conditions that were there before,um, the water May break happened. Alter: Got you. Yeah. And I'm sorry. It's like, yes, I saw the pictures of everything. Its like I had a different thought to, like,keep things humming along. Van Dyke: Also, I have a lot of different annual maintenance projects. Yes, so they kind of blend together. Alter: Yeah,but no,the pictures explained it all. Thank you. Teague: But all of these are not temporary fixes. I mean, it could be something about- Van Dyke: So I guess what the city staff has put back immediately after they fixed the water main break is temporary until we go back with this project to permanently repair it. Teague: Got it. Yeah. It's no fun to have a water main break. Thank you. Any other questions? Dunn: I will say it is fun to get calls from people and be able to answer their questions because Geoff sends out good timely emails on Friday. Teague: Yeah. Dunn: I've had that happen multiple times where people have-have called me and said, "Why the hell, don't I have water?"And I'm like,well, thank God, I got this message. Teague: Yes. Yes. Dunn: So thank you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 9 Teague: Great. All right. So, continue with council discussion on item number 9.a. Any other discussion by council?Hearing none. Roll call,please. [Roll Call] Motion passed a six to zero. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 10 9.b Transit Funding Application—Resolution authroizing the filling of an application with the Iowa Department of Transportation for FY2025 State Transit Assistance and Federal Transit Administration Funding. Teague: 9B is transit funding application. Resolution authorizing the filing of an application with Iowa Department of Transportation for fiscal year 2025. State Transit Assistance and Federal Transit Administration Funding. I'm going to open the public hearing. And I'm going to welcome Darien Nagel-Gamm. Welcome. 1. Public Hearing Nagel-Gamm: Good evening,Mayor. Mayor Pro Tem and council,Darien Nagel-Gamm. I'm the Director of Transportation Services with the City. The item before you tonight is our consolidated transit funding application,which is an annual application that we file with the Iowa DOT,the Department of Transportation, listing our capital and operating expenses for which the City seeks funding from the DOT and from the Federal Transit administration. The projects contained in this application have been programmed by Iowa City Transit for Federal Transit Administration Section 5307, 5310, 5339, funds in the year fiscal year FY,the upcoming fiscal year,FY25. The projects will be included in the FY25 Iowa DOT consolidated transit funding application that the MPO of Johnson County or the Metropolitan Planning Organization of Johnson County is completing and also in the FY25 through 28 MPOJC Transportation Improvement Program. So Iowa City Transit may not seek funding for all the projects we have listed in our program and projects tonight. However, each project needs to be listed in order to qualify for-to be eligible for federal funding. The four categories of funding that we are requesting funding for,uh, are, are as follows, number 1 is our state transit assistance program, and we are requesting over $694,000 in funding. And these are operational fundings that are awarded to MPOJC and then distributed to Iowa City Transit, Coralville Transit, and the University of Iowa Cambus. The second category of funding is federal operating assistance for transit. And that's approximately $3.1 million this year,mostly used for salaries- salaries and wages of our transit staff. And they are-these funds are awarded from the FTA to provide, again, operational assistance for our agency. The third category of funding is federal funds for transit serving primarily elderly persons and persons with disability. This is categorized as 5310 funding in federal parlance, and this is approximately $200,000, and this will go to help support our Seats paratransit contract and our Seats paratransit service that we contract through Johnson County. And last but not least is the Statewide Federal Capital assistance for transit. This is 5339 funding. This is over $34 million. As you might imagine,this contains the funding from which we will- we will be constructing a new transit facility. It also includes funding for new expanded fleet of electric buses, electric bus replacements. Future pair transit vehicles that we need to replace when our fleet age is out of production, spare parts and the like. So this is really kind of our wish list of all the things um,that we would like to see funded. Of course,we've already received word uh, federally that we've received grant funding for the new facility. That's the 19-plus million dollar grant. But until those funds are actually drawn down,they like to see these in our formal request. So you will likely see these for This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 11 the next few years as we are designing and constructing the transit facility until that grant is ultimately closed out. And I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have today. Teague: Thanks for bringing this before us. The one question I have, I know that we have 28E agreement as stated here with Johnson County for SEATS. And then, of course,we have the MPO. How- explain a little bit more about this application?Why is the MPO listed in here where we're asking for funding for other communities? Nagel-Gamm: It's a great question. So federally the-the designation there's a designated metropolitan planting excuse me,Metropolitan Planning Organization in every metropolitan area that is a recipient of federal transportation funds. And they're responsible both for receiving those funds and for planning and programming those funds. So they sort of act as the overseer for any federal transportation funds that we receive. So they receive the funds, and then through Metropolitan Planning process,those funds are then distributed to the member entities. So the MPOJC Board ultimately makes the decision about how much of that total funding we receive federally that comes to the metro area, gets allocated to Iowa City to Coralville, and to Cambus. So that's their role. They're kind of they-they oversee the distribution of federal funds on behalf of the federal government. Teague: And we are the ones that kind of apply to the state for this, and the other communities are not. Nagel-Gamm: They will also. Teague: So they'll also have that. Nagel-Gamm: Yes. Teague: In theirs. Okay. Thank you. Nagel-Gamm: Yes. That's a good point of clarification. So Cavill will also be going through the similar process,uh, and the university um,would go through a similar process for, for their federal funds. Teague: Thank you. Hearing no more questions. Thanks. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Saying I want in person or online. I'm going to close the public hearing. 2. Consider a Resolution Teague: Could I get a motion to approve,please? Alter: So moved,Alter. Harmsen: Second,Harmsen. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 12 Teague: Moved by Alter second by Harmsen, Council discussion. Roll call, please. [Roll Call] Motion passes six to zero. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4, 2024 Page 13 9.c Amendment to Title 8, Chapter 7,adding section prohibiting throwing and shooting projectiles—Ordinance Amending Title 8,Entitled, "Police Regulations," Chapter 7,Entitled"Weapons,"to add a new section prohibitin throwing and shooting projectiles into or on public ways and property. Teague: 9.c is Amendment to Title 8, Chapter 7, adding Section,uh, Prohibition, Throwing and Shooting Projectiles, Ordinance amending Title 8 entitled Police Regulations Chapter 7 and Title Weapons,to add a new section prohibiting throwing and shooting projectiles into or on public ways and property. I'm going to open the public hearing. And welcome Chief. 1. Public Hearing Liston: Good evening,uh,Mayor and council. Dustin Liston, Chief of Police. Um,we talked about this last year, if you guys remember,um,we have an ongoing problem in the community with,um,many of our youth and adults using typically what the name brand is an Orbeez gun. There's other brands. But what-what they do is they shoot,um, projectiles that have either water or,um,these water or gel filled beads, and they run around and play games and shoot one another with it. But the thing that's concerning is now they're starting to shoot at unsuspecting people,not willing participants. Um,we had an issue last year that ah the Mayor you-you took charge and led a CVI meeting,um,that was very successful. The challenge we face now is last year was kind of a confined group of people that we knew who they were. It's a much bigger problem this year.Um, so far this year,we've had over 60 calls for service related to these guns, and in the last two months,we've had over 30. Um, If you remember last year,we had an incident where, uh,we had someone who was most of these guns look very toyish,they're wild colors, but occasionally we'll have instances where people, for whatever reason,modify them to look real. And that's what I'm really afraid of, especially,you know,we-we had the proclamation today on gun violence. I would hate to see a tragedy happen when someone mistakes one of these guns for a real gun. Um,that's the thing I'm worried about. And without this ordinance change,we-we really don't have any thing to do, any enforcement action we can take,um,unless they commit other crimes. And recently,we've had cases where we've had to charge people with assault,with disorderly conduct, and we do really like to get ahead of it and work on prevention. If we have this tool,we can talk to the people. We always start with um education fust. Um, and if that doesn't work,then we have this,uh,this ordinance change that would allow us to write a citation, which would be a $50 fine. It would be no different than a seat belt ticket. Just like with seat belt or speeding,we try to get ahead of the bigger problems, and that's what we would try to do here. Um, like I said, some of the problems we've been seeing. If it's it it's a group of kids in a park that are playing with one another,that's a perfect opportunity for education. That's what we talk to them, let them know that if the ordinance change that we can't do that in public places. Um, and if that doesn't work,then we would have the option to seize the guns, and we could have the option of writing a citation. But as you know,we usually-we always lead with ah education fust. So I'm happy to take any questions. Um, last year,the CVI- we're willing to do the CVI again, I think we should,but we need to This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 14 identify a distinct group of people. The groups we've had have ranged from all over different sides of the community. Last year was a very small group, and we were able to make ah a lot of progress with just dealing with those people, and it pretty much solved the problem. And now the problem is back with a larger group of people. Salih: Was the CVI? Liston: Yes. Salih: What's the CVI? Liston: Oh, community violence intervention. Jess Lang was here. She represents part of that group. The mayor had a group of people. I think some other of you may have all participated in it. We knew a lot of the people that I think that was a night. Maybe the genesis of that was an event. I think it happened during the uh- Harmsen: Juneteenth. Liston: Juneteenth, and Redmond got in the crossfire,too. So,um,but that-that was very helpful. And I have a meeting on Thursday with the county attorney and we're going to be discussing options for identifying more people to have those meetings with again. Dunn: I guess the question I have is-is and I'm not a lawyer, of course. How is it not assault to just shoot random people? Liston: It-it can be. Dunn: Okay. Liston: And we have charged people with assault. What we'd like to do is intervene before that happens. So this year,we have charged people with assault. One of the things we've noticed, some of them kind of maliciously freezing the beads to make it hurt a little worse. Um, and that's where,you know,they can produce injuries,welts, and sometimes they can break the skin. And then that obviously is assault. Salih: But the question is,you mean like they intentionally shooting like stranger? Liston: Yes. Salih: Or they just, like was playing, and some of the they shoot somebody else, like, coming across or something like that. Liston: We've seen both. What we've seen is people doing, like, drive bys with cars and just shooting randomly at strangers and videotaping it. There's some nationwide trends where people are using social media to videotape these events. Um, and that's what we kind of This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 15 see at the end of the school year. I-I think that's what the timing seems to be both last year and this year is uh kind of fueled by social media. Salih: But when you say, like,you cannot do this in public, like, for example, if a group of kids, they are playing this game together and they went to, like, a park, and there is no one in that park, like in certain time, and they yes was doing it,there among themselves. Is that also, like we become illegal? Liston: Yes. The ordinance, go ahead. I'm sorry. Salih: Go ahead. Liston: I was just going to say the ordinance does have a carve out if there's some event that with the city manager's written approval,they could do that. Um, again,we have had instances where it's just a group of friends, and we go and tell them, like,hey,right now, it's not a against city ordinance. So we really don't have any teeth to that. We remind them that it can become a problem. It's just dangerous to do. This isn't something that people should be doing in public anyhow because of some of these do look like real guns, and we would hate for a tragedy to happen. Salih: And yeah, if somebody said maybe also, if I saw a gun, I will just have heart attack, even if it's not a real gun. So yeah, some people say just done like that. Liston: Mm. Bergus: So I just want to clarify what's currently on the books and what this would change. So, it's currently unlawful already and is a simple misdemeanor in our code for,um, carrying any toy pistol,toy gun, or other toy arms or slingshot out of or by which any leaden or other dangerous missiles can be discharged. Okay, so I-I think my primary concern with this ordinance,two things. One is it's very broad because it's much beyond just the toy guns and the orbeez and that concern. I saw in the memo introducing it that there was some concern about water balloons as well. Um,but I think this would criminalize like, literally skipping stones at Terry Trueblood. This would criminalize throwing a rock onto a sidewalk, as it's written. And I think if we're going to be implementing- if we're going to criminalize acts in our community, it needs to be very narrowly tailored to address specific behavior. Otherwise,we have a situation where there can be discretion to say, well,these kids playing in the park,they're not hurting anyone,but if a particular officer has an issue with,you know, one of those kids or something like that,they can then be charged with a crime instead of addressing the outcome of the behavior,which I think we already have protections in place um for that. In general, I am not in favor of criminalizing additional,uh, activities in our community. I think it's really important that we get to the root, and I appreciate you saying you want to provide education and prevention. I don't think a citation after the fact for $50 and,you know,misdemeanor on someone's record is going to deter that behavior. I think it really is about social media and peer pressure, and those kinds of things,not about what you know, I don't believe in this This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 16 instance that this is a tool in the toolbox that will actually address the issue. And if we need to,based on things looking like guns,you know,those Orbeez guns are definitely capable of discharging a dangerous missile, if they're frozen, for example,the code just says ah from which may be discharged. So you don't even have to have discharged it. If it's capable of doing that, it's already unlawful. So I just think if the true intent is to capture those particular issues,we have tools already to do it. But in general, I don't think that,you know,having something that-that criminalizes,you know, if I'm changing out the pavers in my front walkway and I throw a brick, and it lands in the right of way. Under this ordinance,that could be a crime unless Geoff Fruin has given me permission in advance. Salih: What? Is that? Harmsen: Where are you seeing that, Councilor? Alter: Where are you reading that from? Bergus: The ordinance itself. Alter: I'm reading the ordinance also. Bergus: It is unlawful for a person to throw stones,bricks, or missiles of any kind or to shoot other dangerous instruments or toys or on or into any street, alley,highway, sidewalk, public way,public ground, or public building without written consent of the city manager. It is the act of throwing onto a public way of stones,bricks, or missiles of any kind. Teague: I-want to make sure that we're-we are giving,uh, questions at this point because we'll be come back-we'll be able to come back and do deliberations. But I thought you were- I thought you were getting to a question. Bergus: My question is,was-was my reading of the code as written correct that it could be enforced that way,understand that maybe wasn't the intent based on the memo. Goers: Yeah, I'll- I'll open with agreement. I- I'm certain that you're right. It was not the intent to, uh,you know,have tossing a brick onto the parkway or something uh,to be a criminal event. Um, in response to your question about the current toy gun and slingshot ordinance. Um,that requires a dangerous missile. And whereas we've concluded that a BB gun would apply, our conclusion when this issue was fust raised some time ago was that that would not apply to Orbeez guns with gel pellets,probably whether they're frozen or not. And that's why it was decided we would need something more,uh, and that's how we got to this ordinance here. We-uh, if memory serves largely mirrored,uh, ordinances that were already in place in neighboring communities such as Coralville and North Liberty and use theirs as a model. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 17 Dunn: So I guess my question is, if- if our only concern was with the language for dangerous missile,why couldn't we say, like, or gel pellet, if we're being very specific about our issue. It seem- if- if- if- this is a- if everyone's on the same page here, it would seem that that would achieve the same goal without some of the downsides. Goers: Yeah, of course, I wouldn't address the water balloon part to that. Dunn: We could add that too. Goers: Well- Well, we-we want to be careful about trying to- Dunn: Hydrated projectile. Goers: An exhaustive list because I wouldn't have thought of water balloons being thrown from cars driving down the highway,um,nor would I thought of Orbeez guns until a year ago or so. Dunn: But aren't we creating a list with the new ordinance? Goers: Well, it's- it's still broad. I mean, I get what you're saying insofar as it lists stone's bricks or missiles,but it ends with,you know, of any kind,missiles being a projectile. Bergus: So a water balloon is a missile,but a frozen Orbeez pellet is not a dangerous missile? Goers: Uh, I would agree that a water balloon probably- I'm sorry,that would just said is not empty. Bergus: Yeah. You- so under this-under the proposed ordinance, a water balloon is a missile. Goers: Yeah. Bergus: But under the current ordinance, a frozen Orbeez pellet is not a dangerous missile. Goers: We think we would have a hard time proving that up,yes. Bergus: I think you might have a hard time with a water balloon being a missile also,but I- I-my overall objection is. Goers: Sorry. I_I take your point about,you know,whether it's written too broadly. You know, that's a reasonable point. Salih: And is this kind of be like why are we saying this ordinance will impose a crime or penalty?Like, can we just give people if they did that,without making it a crime?Like, give them a ticket, a warning,without like calling it a crime, and just do everything as it is,but not call it a crime? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 18 Goers: Well, we couldn't issue a warning for a non crime. Is- is that what you're suggesting? Certainly,they can be counseling. Dunn: All civil penalty. Salih: A fine, a ticket, like, or anything. Goers: Oh, a civil penalty is that what you mean? Salih: Yes. Goers: A civil penalty kind of Oh. Uh,well,we could certainly do that,but that would be a municipal infraction, and that's not something our officers can dole out on the spot. That's more-there's junk in your yard,um,you know,your grass is too high. Something that has a much lengthier process and requires us to file,uh,you know, something and pay a filing fee upfront and so forth. It's- it's not the kind of,um, agile response that officers need,you know, in the moment to resolve a problem. Dunn: So-were going to? Bergus: Oh,just a question for the chief. Is there- from a legal standpoint, do you feel like your officers are empowered to do that educational component whether they're,you know, like, currently?Like,right now, do they go and talk to kids who are harming people or who are acting in ways that they believe are about to harm people? Is there anything preventing them from saying,hey,knock it off, it looks like you're going to hurt someone? Liston: There's nothing preventing them,but there is something preventing um,us from seizing those guns. And that-that's we would also like to do that because if we see someone shooting at someone in public, if they don't hit him, and if they- or even if they do hit him, and it doesn't cause an injury,that's not-there's nothing wrong with that, and we can-there's nothing we can do. Dunn: But they can't carry them according to current ordinance. Liston:No,they can-they can carry them. Goers: Under the current ordinance,they could carry these because again or this [OVERLAPPING] not. Yeah. Dunn: What's this carrying prohibited? It shall be unlawful for any person to possess or carry any-they can't carry it. I don't-. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 19 Bergus: Would the city attorney's office entertain an interpretation of the word may be discharged to understand that you could put something in an Orbeez gun that looks like a real gun that then is a dangerous missile? It seems to me that that's-that's where you would get that. Goers: Right. I understand your point you're making. I'm just and- and I'm not sure whether I would entertain that is what's important. It's whether a magistrate would dismiss it, uh, is what I'm concerned about. I mean,there's been some case law about um,BB guns, and there have been many who have proffered a defense and saying,hey,the BB is not a dangerous missile and so forth. Ultimately,there's been some case law,not a lot,but some case law that says,yeah,that is. Obviously,we've had a- a tragedy in our own community a couple of years ago, I believe,where that,you know,hazard was made evident. But,um,those defenses have been proffered. I'm fearful that if we were to try to prosecute someone even with frozen Orbeez,that there would be a- a pretty good defense on their part saying,hey, it's a gel,you know,thing sold,you know, in toy stores, etc, and that we would- I'm not sure if we would prevail on that. Dunn: I'm confused. Goers: Sure. Tell me more. Dunn: I still don't understand how as the war- current ordinance is written,not the one that we're- we're understanding, I'm confused as to how our law enforcement offi- officers are seeing something that says carrying prohibited and we're allowing it to happen, like, is there a disconnect there or like,what's? Liston: It's the definition of a dangerous missile. Goers: Yeah. Liston: Or projectile. Goers: So they can't carry a BB gun, for example,under or just carrying a BB gun would be illegal,but that's because it is interpreted as being capable of firing a dangerous missile. This covers Orbys guns and other things that you could throw and doesn't require to be a dangerous missile. Dunn: Okay. Goers: Be just something that's harmful. Dunn: So if we amended that to be more specific. Goers: Sorry. Which version, sorry? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 20 Dunn: The-the current- current language,not proposed. Goers: Okay. Dunn: To be more specific to the issue that we're dealing with,would we be able to address the problem?Would be able to seize them if they were in public and or shooting other people?Would we be able to do what the police department is hoping to do? Goers: Well, it- it depends on the amendment. If you're saying, it could we amended the present ordinance in such a way as to incorporate Orbeez guns? Dunn: Correct. Goers: Then yes. You know,uh, I'm not sure how we would phrase that. But if we would largely probably be taking language from the ordinance proposed before you,uh, and amending the current ordinance in such a way to make sure we're inclusive,then that would address the police's concern about their ability to seize the guns,um, if they see folks firing off and- and so forth. That would not address the throwing other objects. But again, if you wanted to amend the current ordinance in such a way as to include the throwing,too,then I would probably right back to this ordinance. Dunn: Is- is something that's thrown a projectile? Goers: Yes. Dunn: Okay. Could - could we not just say, like,toy guns, slingshots, and projectiles. Change that part, and then,you know,we could literally say hydrated projectiles. Like, as I'm serious. Goers: I understand what you're saying. And presumably that would address -well, I mean,we could write it in such a way as to ensure that we're addressing Orbeez guns. I think that's your point without including, let's say,nerve guns. Dunn: Yeah. Goers: Sure. That could probably be done. But again, I don't know what else police officers have encountered being thrown. Again,water balloons is one of the -the things that apparently has been happening. I guess I can't speak for the police as to what other objects they've seen thrown,but our view was that we,you know, looked at what neighboring communities have done. Have it work for them? The answer we got was yes. And so we, kind of, figured we would go with what. Dunn: I guess,my final question before I continue beating a dead horse. Would we achieve similar effect, if not, or equivalent effect by amending what-what already exists in that way that we've been discussing rather than adopting what has already been?Would - This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 21 would our law enforcement officers be able to achieve what they want to achieve and what we want them to achieve?Because I do want them to achieve this. Goers: If we were to amend the present ordinance in such a way as to be essentially inclusive of everything that's being offered. Dunn:Not everything. Goers: Well, okay. Which parts would you want to cut out? Dunn: Specifically,we're talking about the Orbs,the water balloons. That's what I'm talking about. Goers: Okay. Could we amend the present ordinance such as to include orbs in water balloons, but not the stones,bricks, or missiles?We could. We could do that. Dunn: And that would achieve what our law enforcement officers. Goers: I'll let the Chief answer this. Dunn: That's what I'm wondering,Yeah. Liston: Yes. Yep. Dunn: Okay. Teague: Any other questions?We'll certainly have time to deliberate. Alter: My question is just really basic. Have there been problems with the water balloons? Liston: There have. Alter: Okay. Liston:Not- it's not near to the extent of the Orbeez situation. But yes, around the same time last year that we were dealing with,we had some people driving arounds,throwing water balloons into other cars. Yes. Teague: Hearing no other questions at this time,would anyone from the public like to address this topic? If you're online,please raise your virtual hand and - and if you're in person, please step to the mic. Seeing no one in person or online, I'm going to close the public hearing. 2. Consider an Ordinance(First Consideration) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 22 Teague: And can I get a motion to give fust consideration? So moved. Dunn: Moved by Dunn. Alter: Second. Teague: Second,by Alter. Council discussion? Alter: Let me ask a question. Let me jump right in because it actually responds to, sort of, the back and forth thing. And I apologize cause I have a cough drop. So if I sound mushy, I apologize. So my question is this, is that what is, and it's a genuine question. I really do not know. What is the benefit of simply amending an ordinance versus adding another one?And I just- I asked that, I guess I should. I guess, I want to know both from a legal perspective what is. Is there a distinction or a benefit to having a separate new ordinance as opposed to amending it?And then from sort of the Council perspective,the same question. Dunn: May I respond briefly? Alter: I wanted to ask him. Dunn: Okay. I'm sorry - I'm sorry. The only thing that I think is that there's a difference in the breadth. That's -that's the only thing that I see in the - in the difference. Alter: So there's no real distinction? It's just, sort of, the -the, I don't know. Dunn: Well,yeah. So I mean like - Alter: The elegance of having it in one. Dunn: It's addressing - it's whether we're, as I understand, addressing the existing problem as we see it, like precisely,which I think we all- I would hope that we all want to do versus I do think this would make it a finable offense to skip rocks. Like,you know, and I'm very concerned about that. I don't think anyone wants that, even if it is not the antenna it is the letter of the law would be here. And so my concern is what that the breadth of what we are doing with this. I have no problem if we were to create an additional one,but it does seem like we have, as Councilor Bergus mentioned,we already have a tool, and we can make a very small precise change to address the problem that this is trying to address. Harmsen: In that case,kind of, following up a further question,the skipping stones versus causing,you know,having an orbeez fight. Is there, and this maybe as a question for Eric. If the proposed amendment here were to say something indicative of in the - in the act of creating a public danger or public nuisance. You know what I mean?Adding a phrase in this,you know,this proposed a-that somewhere in the it is unlawful for a person dot- dot- dot,without written consent of the city manager to add something about This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 23 public nuisance being. Because I think that's kind of the difference,right? I mean, somebody throwing a paver, somebody -that's as opposed to what we've seen,which is a concern. I am very concerned about that and what that could lead to so. Goers: I guess my hesitancy about that would be the argument that what constitutes a danger or a nuisance. I think it's the word you use might be difficult to prove, and any ambiguities would be interpreted to the benefit of the defendant, and I imagine we might lose a lot of cases like that. The only other difference I see is, again, if the present ordinance,which is 8-7-3,toy guns, and slingshots. As long as - I mean,we've got carrying and so forth here. Now,presently, carrying an orbs gun is not illegal. And so I want to understand what it is. I mean,well, I guess, shouldn't presume because it's Council's decision about what they want to do here. But well,yeah. So I guess in answer to your question,Councilor Harmsen, I would be hesitant to adopt such a standard because I think it might be problematic. Harmsen: Cause a different problem. Goers: Yeah. Harmsen: Got you. Bergus: Oh, I'm sorry. Teague: Yeah. So I- I have one question,maybe it's just to add to this. Because I do understand that this is generalized. So thanks for it. You know, it's too general, and they're going to be inclusive of a lot of stuff. I also just want to put out there that, you know,we see water guns here,but I can tell you that some of that is not water. So it is bleach. You know, it's. So,how do - I think a part of the discussion is,how do we know what the next thing is that's going to come - come out, and how do we capture that?But I do understand,you know,the concern, absolutely,without a doubt. You know,the skipping of the rocks and all that other stuff. I don't think that's what we're really wanted to,you know,penalize here or- or go into, although there is already an avenue for that if someone is assault, right? If that's the - if that's the issue. But I just wanted to add that to the conversation. I won't belabor it. The other thing I will just mention is, you know,the BB gun that our city attorney mentioned. That was an event that happened right over there near,you know, Sycamore Street and the highway where someone was out there innocently,well, while they were shooting in their backyard, I think rabbits or something like that. Goers: Squirrels. Teague: Squirrels. And- and-,you know, it actually,you know,the person sitting in the car,their window was down far enough where they had,you know,terrible instant,you know, effect from that. So, I just want to bring that out there as well. The other thing that I will say in light,you know, of,you know,the work that was done last year,this happened during Juneteenth,where we realized that we had been getting complaints to the council This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 24 level about the Orbeez guns. Prior to June 19,we heard it happened in downtown through some of the parks, as well as through the Old Capitol Center,where,you know,people are using these guns. We also- so we brought individuals here to City Hall,the individuals that we knew. We had a great conversation with them. There was also a video that showed a bunch of kids down in front of,um,the Mall downtown, I still call it the Old Capitol Mall. Downtown, and they were hanging out. And then there was a car coming,um,t was actually northbound on Clinton Street, and they were shooting at this- at this van. And the kids were running into the street, cars coming south. It was,you know, it was very-very dangerous. That vehicle that was headed north got in the opposite lane and made a left going where the-where the buses go. So this is a problem within the community. The good thing is that we have,you know,the conversation,the educational piece. We did some - a presentation that showed these kids. Like,you know,the concerns about these. July 4,we had,you know-because the July 4 was coming. And after we have this opportunity to talk to them,we had zero, I believe instances that we heard of July 4,because we were worried. These kids are ramped up. So education does work, and I think that if we- whatever we create, I think that education can still be there. But if kids have these,you know, devices,they are probably not going to stop unless there are-there is something that,kind of,you know, sends the message home not only to themselves, but also to their peers and their parents. Bergus: I think fundamentally we have to decide what we want to be a crime and what we don't. And what's in front of us tonight would criminalize all kinds of, conduct that we all seem to agree we don't want to criminalize. And our city attorney said very clearly,he doesn't want to add something like it needs to be dangerous because we might have a problem proving that. I have no interest in criminalizing activities that aren't even arguably dangerous. I don't think that is the role of the city,particularly when we're talking about our armed officers enforcing these infractions. Salih: I Teague: Alright. Oh, Go ahead. Salih: I really agree, I did not see criminal penalty at all until you grab that to my attention. And I think the way that you explain it, since you have experience as you a lawyer. So, you know,you can read like in the fine line. So I really wouldn't anticipate it that, like,we're going to make it criminal penalty. I guess so look at the 50 do not bad for like this. But I really would like, as the mayor said education work. I will guess- if the education going to work,then let us do education instead of making it criminal. And also, if the- if we can figure out,use it like any tools in our toolbox and just figure out another way of, like, giving ticket or make it violations without making it criminal. You know, I will do that, but I'm not interesting in voting something that will just add a lot more barriers than what we have in this community. Teague: I think what I was going to -. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 25 Harmsen: Go ahead. Teague: I just want to put this out there because it really does,kind of, add another element to what Mayor Pro Tem just stated. My question is, is there a way where there is a,kind of, a stepping stone,where,you know,the warning is there. Then there is,you know, fust is the warning. Then there is, like,you know, $50 fine. And then,you know,the third time, you know,there is that-you know,that criminal option. So I put it out there. I don't know all the ins and outs,but I just wanted to put it out there. Harmsen: I mean,how does that work with them? I mean,we have a fine. It's technically- I mean,you can't find somebody for doing something that's not against something. Goers: Right. Again, if you're going to make people pay a fine, it's either a civil penalty or a criminal fine. And so obviously, if you're looking to impose a criminal fine, you need a crime. If it's a civil penalty,then we again,would likely be issuing a municipal infraction, as I mentioned before,that's just not a very practical answer for the police. We've been approached in the past about trying to convert some crimes into municipal infractions. And I think the only one we've actually done so is disorderly house for allowed parties. And that was more in a response to what we do when officers go to a location and knock on the door to try to just educate the public and say, "Hey, can you turn it down and so forth". But they don't answer and keep the music back and no one will come to the door. Well, we needed a civil remedy for that. And so we did create a civil version of disorderly house. But again,there's a lot of work involved with going that route, and we impose it on the folks who have signed a lease there. And so you can just imagine there's a lot of things that would distinguish that,kind of, circumstance from what you could do or what an officer could do on the street,you know, if he encounters something like that. Bergus: I think if we had fun patrol, it would be people who could say, "Hey,kids,knock it off'. And provide the education, and would help solve the problem. Alter: Can I - can I? Harmsen: Go ahead. Alter: I'm sorry, I just want to hop in. I've just been, sort of, trying to make sense of this all. And I guess, one of the things is that in fact, I think that given the direction and the tenor of the council in previous discussions about public safety,that the police force knows not to and our legal department is not going to bring something to us without having considered a lot of ramifications. Like, it's not just, sort of, like, let's slap together an ordinance and say, "Hey,here,pass it". Knowing very well that it's something that in fact, this council is and has been talking about and really parsing this finely, and I think for absolutely all the right reasons,But I feel like in slicing and dicing and parcing the language of this, it's - in some ways actually becoming over simplified to say,well, if there is a paver,that's a crime. There's no interest in and I agree,we don't want to criminalize something that's not dangerous. But I think the whole point of why this is before us is because, in fact,there This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 26 have been problems that are potentially dangerous,not simply for individuals who are innocent, so to speak,but those who are involved in it. It could become very dangerous for them as well. They're putting themselves into a situation where either they're playing around and horsing around, and God forbid a traffic accident and they're hurt or that a gun is mistaken and otherwise. So I guess, I just want to, sort of,bring it back to, like, at the same time that I think we are absolutely right to look at this with,you know, a very fine lens on this. I also just want to say realistically speaking,this council and this Iowa City Police Department and our mayor's office, and etc. They're not just bringing something because they know we're going to rubber stamp this, and they think that this is just something that isn't needed. And I appreciate that we're having the conversation to say, is it needed or not, and we may decide it's not. But I think it's too fine a point or too broad of a point to say,that the ordinance is here, essentially to say, let's just put this through because we just don't like orbeez. I think that there are real complexities and that there are the potential of danger,which is why it's before us. So I just wanted to raise that. Harmsen: I'm glad you did,because that's actually so-vLast summer, during one of the events we were talking about during a festival downtown. Literally observe watch this kind of all- all happen and that's actually- so bear with me for just one second. There were a group of kids,teenagers,probably,which, again,they're just teenagers. They're just kids and that's an important part of this. Um,they're screwing around,they're playing with each other,but it's a crowded place. One of their,you know, crossfire hit a little girl she was like 3-years-old playing on the playground in the face, and she started crying. Her dad was understandably upset, and he went, and I believe there was, I can't remember now if it was an officer there or it might have even been one of our county supervisors that sort of intervened and calmed down the situation. Um people that were there and - and deescalated the situation successfully. But that could have gone a very different way. Um, I know that if I was there and being a dad, if all of a sudden,my little girl gets hit in the eye, I don't know. We're lucky it didn't evolve into violence.Now you take that, and you add it into the stark reality of our situation and Councilor Alter has got her orange shirt on for a reason today, and I forgot mine and I'm sorry, I forgot what day it was. Um, because- so what if that dad is also maybe just a little bit aggressive and is pack in heat, because that's the state we live in, that's the country we live in.Now these kids,who started with the Orbeez,who are just kids, for goodness sake,they're facing some really - really dangerous consequences and that's the fear I have. So last summer, I was really happy the way that it was a small enough group that that intervention, I think that was a classic example of what a good program that is, and it worked well. What we're hearing is we've got it back,but we still have all those dangers out there. So I see when this came before us, I was like, so- so sad to see this. I really appreciate the concerns about we want to make something that's not over-broad. But I'm not really ready to throw this out because, it kind of sucks to have to criminalize this and criminalize what should be a fun kit activity. I think it would be, I grew up in rural Iowa where there actually were BB gun fights. I did not participate,but I did play football with a kid who lost his eye doing that. So,um,you know, I'm not really advocating that,but, I grew up in a different time and place.Nerf guns, I've been the survivor of many a Nerf gun battle with my children. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 27 These orbs things, and they're really not meant to be harmful, and so I hate to like be that heavy handed thing. At the same time, I think there might be something about giving a slap on the wrist so they don't find themselves in a much -much worse situation because again, our society is not what it was when I was a kid. We didn't have the threats of gun violence and so though do I think this-this- does this make me happy?No. Am I thinking that it's unnecessary? I'm not sure that I think that. I think it might be necessary or something else like this so that there is something that we can,you know,impose that and stop this before it has a chance to escalate into something that won't involve an officer. In fact, I'm far less worried about officers being involved than somebody who's coming into our town,who has decided they needed to carry a gun places,they get hit in the face, a kid gets hit in the face, and that anger starts to escalate and then we've got blood on the ground,not just a $50 fine. So,that's my fear, and that's where I'm kind of looking at this and approaching this from is I think,yeah,the Orbeez themselves,they're annoying at worst right,but what about the next-the next thing that happens? That's actually,you know, and there is an education component, and we already heard there's going to be an attempt to reach out. But we've also heard too that there are people from other communities coming here into our community and participating in this. What should be a harmless silly prank?But maybe in today's world, it's not. Dunn: Isn't that a slippery slope fallacy,though? To say, like,well,what what does this lead to? "That's not- Harmsen: I mean, I almost saw it come to blows, I don't know how slippery slope that is. Dunn:No-no I understand,but we're talking about like whether we take an action that is extra- extraordinarily broad,right? I think we can all acknowledge that the thing in front of us is extraordinarily broad in the way that it is raised. Harmsen: I don't know about extraordinarily. I can understand the concerns that have been raised. I don't know that-I mean, I want to think about that some more, is that fair? Dunn: Yeah, it's totally fair but I mean, I think- I think that this council wants to do something about this specific issue. This-this should not be happening. I- I think that we should have the ability to,you know,take these toy weapons out of people's hands and try to prevent these types of situations. But I don't know that the way that this is worded is appropriate to do that. Right?We've had just as much said both from our city attorney that we can achieve the similar results with an amendment to the already existing language, similarly from our chief of police. They both said that if we amended it to,um, you know,the minor wording changes to what is the specific word?Dangerous missile, or you know,we can just be more specific. We can address these specific changes and problems in our community,rather than quite literally, as everyone up here, I think, acknowledges,technically criminalize skipping rocks. Like my real concern is with how broad this is. We are not having problems right now with people skipping rocks, or as far as I know,people even throwing rocks at each other. So why are they part of the issue, if that's not something that we're experiencing. Additionally,throwing rocks is a major This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 28 escalation than using a toy gun,that's assault and battery. Clearly,that's already not allowed,you know? So, like,that's my concern like, I want to do this the right way and I just don't believe that this is the right way. Like, I want-I want to be able to achieve what the Chief of Police is talking about,what Eric's intent in this language is. As well as what your intent is,but I just don't like all of the other stuff that the baggage that comes with us, I think- I think it's unwise. Teague: I guess the question for the Council at this point is, um, is there support for what's before us now with some edits, or what Councilor Dunn just mentioned, is there interest at looking at the current ordinance and adding in maybe more specifics of addressing the issue that we have on hand? Alter: I think this actually goes back to, I would very much like to hear, is there a distinction? Is there a between amending an existing ordinance or having a new one that's addressing this? Goers:No, I don't think there's any legal distinction as to where the language is found, if it's found in a new ordinance or it's found in an amended version of 873,the present ordinance. I would just want to make sure I get some guidance from Council about what you specifically want to achieve. Like, for example,with the toy guns and slingshots, again,referencing something capable of,you know, firing a dangerous missile, even carrying it is prohibited. Under the proposed ordinance,that is not prohibited for carrying an Orbeez gun. You could carry an Orbeez gun,but as soon as you start shooting it under those circumstances that are outlined,then and only then, is it illegal under the proposed ordinance? Dunn: You have to carry it to shoot it. Goers: Sorry. Dunn: You have to carry it to shoot it. Goers: Well, right but I guess the distinction is if two people are walking down the street, one's carrying an Orbeez gun and one's carrying a BB gun,uh, if we were to pass a new version, I should say, even if we were to pass a new version,we could stop the person with the BB gun,not the person with the Orbeez gun. Bergus: So that doesn't seem to really help if we're trying to prevent these incidences. Goers: Well, I think there's a distinction between BB guns and Orbeez guns is the short of it. The most significant of which is BB guns look like firearms and often end in tragedy as a result of their looking like firearms. You know,they fire a dangerous missile,what is case law has indicated is a dangerous missile. Again, I'm not sure that we could prove that up with an Orbeez gun. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 29 Bergus: So right now, it's illegal to carry a sling shot in Iowa City, correct? Goers: Correct. Assuming it this slink shot that's capable of discharging a dangerous missile? Bergus: Which would be like any rock, correct? Goers: Fair. Bergus: So I think the issue really needs to be about the danger and not about the act of throwing something onto some public way. The-the chief and the attorney are doing exactly what they are supposed to do by saying,well, let's just be as encompassing as we could possibly need to be,because we don't know what's coming next. We don't know what's in the water gun. Like,that's what they're supposed to do. Our job is to say,what might be the ramifications of this down the road that we might not like and try and tailor it to the situation. I- I don't see why we need a new crime when it's already literally illegal to carry a slingshot in Iowa City. Dunn: I- I also would say, like, in terms of the difference between an amendment to what we have before us versus an amendment to what we-we have um, already on the books. I don't think it would be germane to do at least what I have in my mind, as an amendment to what we have before us in order to affect the change that we have on the books, if that makes sense. Goers: Well, if- if your amendment to the proposed ordinance is not germane to the proposed ordinance then I would agree with you. Dunn: Well, so like- like-basically,what I've been describing,right? Could we theoretically. I'm not saying we have the support for this because I have no idea,but theoretically, could we amend the ordinance in front of us to achieve the similar effect,more,um, you know, surgical and amending the section that's already on the books rather than creating a new section. Can we do that in this meeting? Goers: Well, you can't amend the other-the present code section at this meeting because we-we haven't noticed that up. Um,you can, of course- if it's the will of the council,you can provide guidance as to what you'd like to see, and we can bring it back. That's fine. Salih: You mean we postpone this or we vote on it or we would- Goers: I'm sorry. Salih: We have to, like, defer this or we vote for it tonight? If we want to see, like,new language. Goers: Yeah. I mean,you've got a number of choices. You can approve what you've got before you unaltered. You can amend uh,the proposed ordinance in front of you. For example, if the concern is about skipping rocks and so forth,you could just eliminate the portion of This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 30 the ordinance that makes reference to throw stones,bricks, or missiles of any kind. Or instead just leaving in the language about shoot other dangerous instruments or toys on or into any street, etc- etc. If- if that's the nature of the council's concern. Or you can vote it down and give direction to me to come back with something that's consistent with what you would like to see effectuated, or you can vote it down and be done with the issue. Salih: And there is no way we can take the word criminal penalty. We can just say penalty. Goers: I'm sorry. Could you remove the part about criminal penalty? Salih: Uh uh. Goers: If that's the will of the Council. Sure, I would want to know what you want to do instead. Because we can't just say it's illegal to do something and then have no punishment. I mean,we need to be doing something with it. Salih: Like some kind of penalty. Yes. Goers: Like civil penalty. Salih: Like do something [OVERLAPPING] but it is not called criminal. Goers: Yeah. I'm not here to say you could not do that as a Council. You could do it a municipal infraction,but I'm here to tell you that that would not be practical. Harmsen: It's interesting because I was actually-before-before you had said that um, I was just sitting here looking at this,thinking about,you know,that it really does seem like the crux of this, at least one of the crux. Cruxes, cruxi, is about the-the throwing portion of this. And in fact is an issue that needs to be dealt with separately,but I think,you know, the striking that part and keeping the shoot other dangerous instruments or toys,that gets us at least the Orbeez part of it moving forward. Um, and so I would make a motion to amend to strike through,two throw stones,bricks, or missiles of any kind or- strike those words. So then it would read, it is unlawful for a person to shoot other dangerous instruments or toys on or into any street, alley,highway, sidewalk,public way,public ground, or public building without written consent of the city manager. Goers: Could I offer a friendly amendment to remove the word other as well,because that-that word wouldn't then make any sense. Um, so as to read, it's unlawful for a person to shoot dangerous instruments or toys, etc. Harmsen: Thank you. I- I- I will- Goers: Accept that a friendly amendment. Harmsen: I will accept that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 31 Dunn: Well, I also say remove throwing from the title section. Oh, did you remove that? Alter: Just unlawful for a person to shoot. Dunn: Well,no. So I'm saying the title- in title. The title-the title is throwing and shooting. It would not make sense to be throwing. Harmsen: Oh,thank you. I was- I- I- I'm going back to the top. Thank you for catching that. Let me say that I will make the amendment as suggested with the addition with the city attorney and to include any other- clean up any other language within the ordinance that then would be necessary to change. Would that be an acceptable way to handle that? Goers: Sure. Teague: So there's an amendment proposal. Any comments there Salih: Can we have an amendment to take the criminal penalty or change it to something else. Teague: I guess I would have questions about- Harmsen: Just separately,maybe. Teague: Yeah. I would have questions about, are there ways to,you know,have written those steps where we have,you know,the education? Dunn: Yes. Teague: Um,then we-you know, after the education,maybe we,you know, go to that civil penalty? Dunn: Yes. There-there is a great example of that. I think we could reference our- exactly. Uh, the-the nuisance house ordinance,the party ordinance. There's steps on that. Alter: Party odd- ordinance. Dunn: Yeah. Alter: Police come by one time,warning, second time. Dunn: Would they be able to seize- Chief,would you be able to seize the-the guns? Liston: Well,the city attorney would better be able to address the difference between civil and criminal,but we really don't enforce civil ordinance. Uh, it's a- it's a process that they go through, and we enforce criminal law. So it would be-he'll be able to address that better. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 32 Dunn: So like the law enforcement would only become involved if- once the stage gets to a simple misdemeanor? Goers: Right. And- and there's been some discussion about the disorderly house. I'm not aware that we've got codified,you know,that fust visits a warning, second visits,you know, escalating fines. I'm not- I'm not aware that that's the way. Dunn: Who is escalating fines in there? Goers: I'm sorry. Dunn: Who is escalating fines in there? Goers: Are you talking about the civil part or the criminal part? Dunn: I- I think they're both. Goers: Well, it might be. It's been a while, so I haven't prosecuted in a while. I know that that's true in the civil part. I'd have to check on- on the criminal part. Dunn: Okay. Goers: But I'm pretty- is there-you know there-well, I should just pull it up. But in answer to your general question, could that be done?Yes. There are a number of crimes where there's a required warning up front. Obviously,that makes it incumbent on the officers to, you know, document every time they're warning someone so that if they do it again,the next officer,presumably would be a different officer who encounters that individual would know that they've previously been warned. And so, okay,now,you know,the escalated penalty is present. So, in answer to your question,yes. We could set up a scheme that way. I- I would want to make sure that that's a separate motion to amend. And right now,we've got one motion to amend without a second yet, and to focus on that before we go anywhere else. Sahli: Oh, I- I thought we just want to, like,make all the amendment together. Goers: I mean,they're related in the sense that they're all related to this ordinance, of course,but um,that seems distinct enough that I think that would be best addressed through a separate motion to amend. Which you can do immediately after,you know. This-this motion is resolved. Alter: I'll second for amending,but I don't want to cut off if- if there's still a desire to talk about it as one- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 33 Harmsen: I mean, I think I- I made a motion to amend that was specific. And let's deal with that fust. Teague: So moved by Harms, and second by Alter. Continue your discussion. Salih: I just feel like- for me I strongly, I just want to- I don't want to make this criminal by any means. And I'm thinking, I- I really don't know what the language you guys use for, like, low language. Laura,maybe better on that. So, I mean, like there is something called sometime simple misdemeanor or somebody doing like something on the street that also will be charged by the-by the police. Like the police will take care of that issue and charge that person,but it's not crime. What can we call those kind of things? Bergus: The police only enforce crimes. Harmsen: Yeah. Liston: It's- it's a crime. It's a simple misdemeanor. Just like if you run a stop sign. That's a crime, and it's a simple misdemeanor, and so- and that's what we enforce. But it's- it's a $50 fine, and it's-but it's still is- Salih: I was going to show like a- on the record and something like that. That's what I'm worried about. Teague: Yes. Salih: Criminal record. Teague: Is it on the criminal record? I think that's what-the concern here. Salih: Yes. Liston: Just like if you got a PAULA ticket or something like that. Salih: You said if I got what? Liston: If you got in the bar after hours or person and PAULA. Harmsen: Underage. Liston: : Yeah, there you go. Goers: Possession of Alcohol [OVERLAPPING] Under the legal age. Liston: I never got those. So I don't. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 34 Salih: Okay, and- and when-when that's happened. And is- is this shown in their background as a criminal? Dunn: Yes. Liston: It's- it's shown that you had a simple misdemeanor. Just like if you got any other- it's- it's the lowest level of misdemeanor. Harmsen: That would be just like a speeding ticket or something. Goers: Same. Bergus: Except. Dunn: Well Goers: And there's two-two other things that add to that one is that there are opportunities to expunge your record. But two, if it's a juvenile,then juvenile records are typically. This is not the kind offense that you'd wave up to an adult. It's a simple misdemeanor and so forth. So if it's a juvenile, it would be handled at a juvenile court. Bergus: But the answer is yes, it's on your criminal record. Goers: Yeah-yeah. If it's by an adult, it would be there until expunged, if at all [BACKGROUND] Teague: Any other um discussions on the amendment that is before us,which is um taking out some of that language related to throwing stones,bricks? So if no other discussion on that,we're just going to take a vote on that change in language. We are not approving this entire document. Goers: That's right and just a voice vote here. Teague: All right. So all in favor say uh of making the amendments as stated by Councilor Harmsen, if you're in favor, say Aye. (Voice Vote)Aye. If you're opposed? Salih:Nay. Bergus:Nay. Teague: Okay. Motion passes four-to two. All right. Now we can take up the topic that Mayor Pro Tem just um kind of talked about,which is,what are other considerations that we can have um to relate to. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 35 Salih: Rest of them. Yeah, I really would like to see a level of if-if there is no way we can do this, and I either just not to do it at all, and that's it. But now you are changing the language. Can we just figure out like a level of like warning and start with just education and warning and after that, Goers: Well, what you can do is as I mentioned earlier,you can require a warning to every individual before they're charged. Again, officers would need to make sure they do a good job documenting the warnings that they've given but yes. But I want to be clear,that would be incorporated presumably in a criminal statute. So fust time we would write that up,they get a warning. Second time,now they're,you know, getting the criminal charge, you know,with a $50 fine or whatever the Council chooses to make it. Teague: So the warning,will that appear on their background? Goers: Well, when you see in your background, it would not appear on their criminal record or any kind of background check. It would be documented in the police station. They would know it. Teague: Sure. Salih: Yeah. Teague: Okay. Salih: And also, it will be also not documented only on the police department. It will be-it's not going to show anywhere in their background? Goers:Not in a background check. Typically background checks look well,typically, I should caveat that. Typically,they look for convictions and so forth.Now,there are some who are thorough. Let's say there's a job applicant, and they write down that I used to live in Iowa City. There are some employment agencies who will contact the police department and say,hey,what do you got?You know, open records on John Smith,you know, in your town.Now. Teague: That's an extreme example,but could happen too. Goers: Is an extreme example but I want to be clear. Teague: Absolutely, appreciate it. Salih: Thank you. Goers: Sure. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 36 Harmsen: I-I certainly think that the idea of the warning and stuff uh makes sense, and it sounds like that's kind of already the process much as we talked about with the nuisance uh,the noise nuisance. The one thing I don't know, and maybe-maybe the chief or somebody else could answer this. A concern I have that maybe can be answered. Um so I'm thinking back again,to the circumstances that I saw kind of go down. And in that particular case, it was appropriate for the-if we'd have had something like this,to be able to the bare minimum, confiscate the-the weapons and remove those from the situation um and to respond. If we require a warning,would that make it so that an officer can't take away the toy? I mean, it just it feels like-like,we might-there might be circumstances where we'd want that to happen,where we want the-the ability of somebody to continue with this behavior, or if the thing is just I'm thinking out loud here because this is a new proposal. Teague: What I will add to it is that we have the opportunity to work with the school district to educate on whatever ordinance that we have. So if we state that,you know,the warning is going to,um you know,the warning will confiscate,you know,the Orbeez gun. And then the second one, it is a $50,you know, fine,um it's a simple misdemeanor. It can be on your record. So I do think that if we you know, confiscated,you know,the item, and we kind of work with the school district and social media outlets to warn the public of, you know,you can no longer have this in public. I think I would be more comfortable with that approach because we've done some work to kind of say,hey,you can't have this, and I think they might take care of the situation. I will say that, you know,probably 50/50. Um you know, some kids are playing amongst themselves and others aren't involved in 50% of the time. You know, it's not appropriate, and it is becoming a dangerous situation.Not mainly between the guns so much,but other things that they're doing like they're running in the street and doing all that time. Dunn: Doesn't that violate the constitution? They're not committing a crime. If it's just a warning, like we can't seize property,right?Like. Goers:No we'll still make it a crime. It would just be the penalty would essentially be,well, that's not quite fair, either, because it's not like a court would be imposing uh the warning. But I think we could still probably seize. Bergus: So if.. Salih: I feel we don't have to take it from them because maybe somebody doesn't know anything about what we're doing right now and this law after we implemented. And they're just doing that. And the fust time to learn about it. Why we take it from them if we give them a warning saying that, don't do it on the public,but you can do it whatever you want to do it somewhere else, okay?But not in public. Why we take it from them?We shouldn't take it from them. Teague: And I'm okay -and I'm okay with that. The question would be is,what is the educational tangible material?And I don't know that our officers will be expected to,you know,walk around with stuff,but,you know. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 37 Salih: I thinks we can do education at the schools,you know, like. Bergus: If what we want to do is education and helping kids understand the harm of shooting Orbeez guns and why that we as a community think that this is wrong and want to address it. I do not think enacting a new part of our criminal code is the way to do that. We have spent no resources other than the one um meeting last summer on addressing this particular issue in ways outside of law enforcement. And now we're talking about all these ways outside of law enforcement that we want to address the issue,which I think is right. But what's in front of us is creating a new crime. Salih: Yes. Yeah, I still going back to how can we not make it a crime? Teague: Okay. I guess,you know, I sorry, I'm not taking over the conversation,but go right ahead-go right ahead. Salih:No-no. Teague: Yeah.No, I hear you. How do you not make it a crime?And I guess. Frain: Can I off uh sorry to interrupt. Teague: Sure. Fruin: I just-I want to. You need to trust your officers,right? They understand that this is not the preferred approach. They don't want to be issuing tickets. They don't have to issue the tickets in every circumstance. You think about how we've handled fireworks. Um we've got all kinds of fireworks violations every year and there's concern that there's not the community education out there so the officers use their discretion. We give you that report every year that shows that we go and we try to hunt down and chase all these calls for service that we're getting in most cases,we're issuing warnings. In very rare circumstances are we issuing the citations, only when there's an extreme situation where there's a major public safety compromise. I would urge you to consider,trusting your officers, give them this tool and understand it's not the default. Bergus: I think that's true in all cases,because I do fundamentally trust our officers. One more question for you,Eric. In order to seize an Orbeez gun that looks like a real gun or an Orbeez gun that has been shot at someone, and there's a concern of injury or people running into the street,things like the mayor was saying. The only thing that we would have to do currently is say that that particular toy is capable of shooting something that could be classified as a dangerous missile, correct? Goers: You're drawing under the ordinance already on the books? Bergus: Correct. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 38 Goers: Yes,you would have to be capable of firing a dangerous missile and we would need to prove that out. Bergus: And your concern as stated earlier was you wouldn't want a magistrate to dismiss that. But what we're talking about is a citation that someone would then challenge in court or try to defend in court,by then any deterrence is done. Dunn: A child. Bergus: Hey. What do you mean? Dunn:No,we're talking about children,too. Children? Bergus: Well not necessarily. I mean, any person. Dunn: Theoretical. A person. You're right-you're right. Bergus: But if what we're trying to do is deter this behavior. We're not talking about prevention when we have citations,right? Dunn: Mmmh. Bergus: What we want to do is deter this behavior. If the officers say,this is a dangerous missile. I see what's happening. They're shooting frozen Orbeez pellets. They have the discretion to address that already. Harmsen: How would they prove that it was frozen cause it got thaw? Bergus: Oh,my gosh. This is not. Harmsen: Sorry-sorry. Salih: Can you- can you- can you do- can you- can you just read if you have the-the- like the current ordinance in front of you. Bergus: The part that we keep talking about as far as being capable of shooting something, okay? Reads, carrying prohibited. It shall be unlawful for any person to possess or carry any toy pistol,toy gun, or other toy arms or slingshot out of or by which any leaden or other dangerous missiles may be discharged. Teague: I have a question right there. It- all right. Is- so if someone was,you know, downtown or wherever, can the police get someone with a Orbeez gun with that written language right now? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 39 Goers: Based on the language we've got now? Teague: Yes. Bergus: That's a question of legal interpretation. It's not clear, correct? Goers: I- I think we- I- I would advise our officers not to seize those guns because I don't think we could sustain that in court. And I think we would run the risk of running into trouble, you know, stopping and seizing,uh,toy guns that don't meet the ordinance. Salih: I was asking you to read that because I want to ask you what the punishment right now currently for those? Bergus: So that is currently also criminal and a simple misdemeanor. Goers: It's an unscheduled simple misdemeanor, I believe. Alter: And it should be criminal. And put people in harm's way. Teague: So,yeah. Salih: Okay. Teague: So I guess the council to kind of bring this in 'cause we need to. Salih: Yes-yes. Teague: Um what is the- so,you know,we already went through one amendment. Um,we've been discussing what are other ways to maybe tie straight,um,this to look more like a civil penalty with a warning than a simple misdemeanor. It sounds like Councilor Bergus, correct me if I'm wrong. We could add language specific to the Orbeez guns and maybe add in language relating to,uh,water,um, some type of water balloon or liquid balloons, um,to the current. Understanding that you may not be a,you know, a proponent of this, my question is more,would that based on what you're hearing by the Council,would that address and add that specific to be defendable if the- if um individual was cited. Bergus: I think that's a question for our attorney. Teague: Okay, Sure. Goers: Well, I'm sorry. And I missed your-your question. Teague: So essentially, if we added just Orbeez and liquid balloons or projectile or whatever you want to call it, and to the existing,would that give the officers the um-the-the-the leverage that they need when they really need to go to the next level with someone? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 40 Goers: Sure. Uh whether that authority comes from the proposed ordinance as amended or we were to amend 873,the toy gun,the current ordinance. Um, and I assume you're talking about with discharge as opposed to the carrying component. Uh, sure. We could write it in such a way. I wouldn't want to use the word Orbeez,because, again, as the chief mentioned,there are other brands and so forth, and we don't want to. Teague: Sure. Goers: But if you're talking about making sure that we're inclusive of Orbeez style,um, guns and water balloons or other projectiles,yeah-whether we,you know, outlawed in the proposed ordinance or the new ordinance would make no difference insofar as the police's ability to do something about it. Again,the only other thing I would add, if you were to add it to the present ordinance,that uh is, I believe, is an unscheduled simple misdemeanor,which carries a minimum fine. Boy, it's- I'm rusty here,but I want to say if between 65 and maybe $850,not that it would be at all likely that someone would get a penalty that high,but in any event, even the minimum fine would be higher than the $50 fine that's in the ordinance proposed before you. Alter: So it sounds like if- if I'm understanding this right,that there may be more-more benefit to simply amending the existing ordinance because then there is not to-to use some comments from earlier,um, creating a new criminal- criminalizing something new, correct?Um and it is possible to be inclusive of the specific problem that is trying to be addressed by this new ordinance by putting in language that talks about gel pellets and water balloons. Goers: Right. Alter: Right. In the existing ordinance. Goers: I don't want to speak for Councilor Bergus. Alter:No-no, and I'm not trying to— Goers: Either way we're adding something new. Alter: Correct. Goers: We're adding something new. Alter: But it's not an entire new ordinance. Goers: We'll right. But I guess my point is that that doesn't make a lot of difference.Now, whether Councilor Bergus feels, it makes a difference, I'll obviously defer to her,but either way,you would be,uh, criminalizing behavior that is not currently. Uh, illegal. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 41 Alter: Okay. I see what you're saying. Goers: Yeah. Teague: I guess,with that information, I would be more interested in just amending maybe doing some more amendments to the current ordinance that's before us,um,just to kind of not well, commonly known as Orbeez. So I think that kind of takes,you know, accounts for whatever the other objects are out there. So I think we could be good there.Now,the only question is, at least for me, that's remaining,um, after we've already done the amendment and that pass that Councilor Harmsen suggested is,you know, do we have in here,you know,that required warning?And then,you know, doing the-you know, doing the-you know, going the criminal route, I I guess,um,what I will say is that from this- from last year to this time, they've been operating with the educational part to this. And there has been some deterrent. But I think if they were able to say,you know,this is the ordinance, you know,knock it off. If you continue to do it,this is what we're going to do. So. Alter: I mean, isn't that to Geoffs point that saying that having this ordinance doesn't mean that they just go straight to that. It means that they can,they have, essentially, in their the dreaded word in their tool kit, to be able to say,this is illegal. Knock it off. Don't do it anymore. Goers: Right. Alter: And then they go, oh,you've done it again,right? I mean, so this. Liston: If I can just speak to that and I appreciate what Geoff said about trusting your officers. Um if you remember the-the um traffic study report, one of the things the-that-uh that they mentioned was how many warnings we give. We only actually write citations on about 25% of our traffic stop. So, our officers always take that. Um, if we can seize guns when we have to give a warning,that's uh it doesn't we're not-we're not in it for the 50 bucks. I'll tell you that. Um, so but we just need a mechanism, and I know the criminal thing gives some of you all pause, and I can appreciate that. But everything we enforce is criminal, and we give a lot of warnings, and that just gives us the mechanism in which to encounter these and- encounter these most of the time,youth and- and work with them on like and it also gives a parents. I think one of the benefits of this is we can talk to parents and say,hey,your kid is going to get a ticket for this. Do not let him go run around at the park with things like this. So let- lets them know that they can help with the education, let them know that there is-there could be a ticket involved. So,um again, it's not- it's certainly not about the money, and it's certainly not about putting something on someone's criminal record,but it's just about giving us the authority to do the education, and then in cases where we need to to enforce law. Before it gets to someone shooting someone's eye out. Someone getting an assault charge,which is going to be on their criminal record,we're going to try to-we want to get in- get in front of that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 42 Teague: At least for me, given all that I know that has happened,um you know between,um, those that have these and the officers,um, and the danger that some of these activities have presented. They could have,you know,turned out into a horrible situation. I think I am comfortable with the current amendment,um,that's been proposed,you know, supporting what's before us tonight. So I guess the only question that Council,we wanted to go ahead and vote on was before us as amended? Alter: You mean in terms of the-the amendment that Councilor Harmsen did? Teague: We already voted on that in that pass, Alter: so-Now,what is before us? I apologize. Teague: Yeah, as amended. Alter: As- as amended. And so this is like the vote to pass it? Teague: Yes. Alter: Okay. Harmsen: This is the first reading. This is a three reading. Goers: Right, fust reading. Alter: Okay. Teague: So are we ready to vote unless there's any other comments, or is there any other avenues Council want to talk about?Hearing none?Roll call,please? [Roll Call] Motion fails 3 - 3. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 43 9.d Adjusting Park Hours—Ordinance amending Title 10,entitled"Public Ways and Property," Chapter 9,entitled"Parks and Recreation Regulations,"to adjust park closure hours. (Second Consideration) Teague: We are going to move on to 9.d. Thank you all. Adjusting park hours, ordinance amending Title 10 titled Public Ways and Property, Chapter 9 title Parks and Recreation Regulations to adjust park closure hours. This is the second consideration. Staff is requesting expedited action. Anybody want to read? Alter: Did you want to do it? Dunn: Can I do it? Salih:No-no because Andrew asked to do that, I thought he will do it all the time. [inaudible] Teague: [OVERLAPPING] Okay. Alright. Dunn: Yeah. Which-which consideration are we on?We're on second consideration? Teague: Second consideration. Dunn: All right. I move that the rule requiring ordinances must be considered and voted on for a passage at two council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed. Be suspended that the second consideration and vote be waived, and the ordinance be voted on for the final passage at this time. Teague: By Dunn? Salih: Second. Teague: Seconded by Salih. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? See in online. Welcome,Noah. Petersen: Hello. Can you hear me? Teague: Yes,welcome-yes welcome. Petersen: Hello. It's been a long time. I can't believe I just listened to an hour of somber town City Council meeting. That was pretty wild. The three of you should change your name to Burgemeister Meisterberger,voted for that proposal. Teague: [OVERLAPPING] This is item Number 9.d. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 44 Petersen: I'm- I'm moving on to this agenda item,Bruce. You can- anyways. So my question is, so- so what's the penalty for somebody who is not in authorized hours for the park?Like, what happens to them?Hello, can you hear me? Teague: Yes. And Council can bring up any conversation that someone asked when we do our remarks. [BACKGROUND] But you can continue to speak at this time. Petersen: Okay, so my understanding of it is- is there issued a misdemeanor? Correct?For being past park hours,there is a misdemeanor. Eric,you can answer if the Council won't. Dunn: I think we'll. Petersen: [OVERLAPPING] Hello. Dunn: We'll engage with your questions after you're done with your comment. Teague: : Council may ask yes- Council may ask staff to respond to a concern or question posed by the public or to follow up with the speaker when we deliberate. Petersen: Okay. So my point is that people do get criminalized for being in a park that's a public facility. Be they're in there for the so-called wrong hours.Now, lots of reasons people could do that. A big reason is because this city refuses to house and they're forced to seek shelter somewhere else that happens to be in public land. And instead of giving them housing,we have a landlord city council that rather word housing,be landlords be it's- you know, do more capitalist exploitation of the working class. So this is a- this the city refuses to fund housing and criminalizes you if you sleep in the park overnight. You just not criminalize people for being in the park,because they're in unauthorized hours. It's ridiculous that you're criminalizing it at all. Yeah. I don't know consider that. Use the state for good,not punishing already vulnerable people.Not hard. Also, fuck you, Geoff is always never trust cops. Teague: Thank you. Anyone else like to address this topic? Seeing and hearing from no one else. Council discussion. Salih: I don't think this is-this is criminal or anything,right, Geoff? Goers: Well, I think the intention is that if there's someone found that they're moved along,you know when it's closed, otherwise, I think it would be a trespass charge, is what you would probably see. Salih: And what's the trespass charge? Can you explain that because I have no idea? Goers: What a trespass charge is? Salih: Yeah. What that will lead to, like,Yeah. What's that? Is that a criminal thing also? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 45 Goers: It can be well, it is a criminal offense,but typically a trespass charge requires a warning, if you will, that you are trespassing. You are not allowed to be here. You need to leave now. And if someone says,No, I'm not leaving,well, okay.Now, it can be a crime. Salih: I see. Dunn: Yeah. Well,the other thing that I would mention is, like, I don't know that no- I don't think that we're engaging in maybe potentially the right way. This is ordinance expands hours. Doesn't it? If I'm understanding? Salih: For two is not. Alter: And for two of the parks. Dunn: It does it otherwise affect? I'm sorry. I'm just try I had a difficult time finding this. Salih: It is on the- Dunn: It doesn't reduce it. Salih:No. Fruin: Yes. Currently, College Green Park does not close. Chauncey Park does not close. This officially closes those parks at midnight. Goers: So midnight is later than other parks. Dunn: Okay- okay. I understand. Yeah. Fruin: It still allows you to walk through those parks,right-right? Trails, sidewalks,those things. Salih: Unless you find somebody else? Dunn: I see- I see. Salih: Yeah, I- I guess I- I wasn't know that. I thought this is just like, also a ticket kind of or something like that. Dunn: What-what's prompted this? Fruin: It's- it's the- it enables us to pursue trespassing if needed. So you don't-you don't get the- you don't get a ticket for being in a park after hours. You will have someone approach you and say,you need to-this park is closed,you need to move. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 46 Teague: And this is what we do at other parks- Fruin: And if you don't do it you get-you get tres-there'd be a trespass. Dunn: Well, I guess I understand that that's the effect,but there's like- is there a problem that we're experiencing that's facilitated the-the desire to pull this up? That's- that's really what I'm curious about. Fruin: Yes,um, we've had encampments at College Green Park. Dunn: Okay. Salih: That's like a camping only or can we just say no camping? Teague: So I think all of our- I mean, as I mentioned, all of our parks close from dusk to- are open dusk to dawn, except these four are not. And so they're trying to- Salih: Why those two? Fruin: All the other- all- all parks- currently, all parks except three,um, close,um, and we're suggesting that we close two of them at midnight. So Blackhawk Mini Park would remain 24/7 not-not closing. That's part of it. Salih: You mean people can go and come there, and it's okay,but don't come here on Chauncey Park. That's not okay. Goers: To be clear, it's- it's- uh,the ordinance is not specific to camping, it's just you can't be in these parks- Salih: Because the problem was camping,that's why I'm bringing it up. The problem was some people was camping there. Fruin: Right. Salih: And thus initiate- Fruin: Pedestrian Mall is active nearly 24 hours a day,right?You could argue maybe 20 hours a day,you know,but-but the-the Pedestrian Mall is plenty active with open businesses and commerce taking place at 1:00 in the morning, 2:00 in the morning. Um,that's not the case for Chauncey Park,that's not the case for College Green Park. Salih: I mean, like for- even the other park is closed, if somebody like slept there because they are homeless or anything, is that also they're gonna be charged trespass? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 47 Fruin: We work with that situation the same we do with- I mean,this-this is a regular occurrence, where we're working with the Shelter House outreach position that you all helped us create, and we're trying to move people into permanent housing. Er,we've shared some of those statistics with you. I think our outreach team does a really good job. The Shelter House outreach team does a fantastic job. We've had over 100 successes in getting people,um- Salih: Yeah,but- Fruin: - a housed,that's-that's our fust approach. That's always our fust. Salih: You mean tomorrow, after this environment is, if somebody was, like, a homeless person slept on that Chauncey or College Green Park,you are not gonna charge them with trespass,but you will work with them to figure out a solution for their situation? Fruin: Yes,we would con-we would continue to work with them,but- Salih: But if they're not homeless- Fruin: We would have the tool to say, if- if you don't work with us,we are going to trespass you. Goers: At which point, again,because of the nature of a trespass,they can get up and leave no criminal charge. If they refuse, say,no, I'm not leaving, I don't care if it's illegal or not, then- Salih: Okay. Goers: It's susceptible to a criminal charge of trespass. Salih: That will be for somebody who come for fun to camp,they have a house, and they have everything that they wanna do. I'm just giving you the example of somebody who was just sleeping there,you will-you will find something for them for that night to sleep.No like, go figure it out tonight and come- and come to us tomorrow so we can help you. Fruin: Yeah, I mean,the best I can give you is- is- and I think the council is aware of the approach that we've taken,um,we've had encampments and locations for weeks and months last year. We had encampments that had multiple fires,repeated fires in the same location. We should still exercise the patience and the desire to try to find housing for those that want housing,um. Salih: Sure. I understand that, Geoff,but I just wanted to put this particular situation. You're gonna work with that person to figure it out for them for that night,but they're not gonna be saying,you just we don't care where you go,but get out right now from here, and we figure it out for you tomorrow. But can you find in the same day or night a place for that person to sleep if he's not sleeping on the park? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 48 Fruin: If that person wants that assistance,then yes,we would. But there may be some people that don't want that assistance. Salih:No just. yes, I'm just asking,you know, if they don't want that assistance,that's something else, of course,you are not gonna force them to- Fruin: Correct. Salih: Be assisted. I understand that. Fruin: Correct. Salih: But yeah,just let's take it that way so- Teague: I'm Hearing no other comments. Roll call,please? [Roll Call] Motion passes 5-1. Could I get a motion to pass and adopt? Dunn: So moved. Alter: Second. Teague: Moved by Dunn, second by Alter. Roll call,please. [Roll Call] Motion passes 5-1. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024 Page 49 11. City Council Information Teague: We're at item number 11,which is City Council Information. Yep. Harmsen: Quick congratulations to all of the high school- area high school graduates. Yes, absolutely. Yeah,we have three Councilors that have graduates this year. Bergus: That's true. Teague: So. Wow. Yeah. All right. Hearing nothing else from council. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council regular formal meeting of June 4,2024