HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-01-07 Bd Comm minutesItem Number: 4.a.
a
CITY OF IOWA CITY
"QF T-4 COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission: November 21 [See Recommendation]
Attachments: Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission: November 21 [See
Recommendation]
r
��_..® CITY OF IOWA CITY
R&
MEMORANDUM
Date: December 6, 2024
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Stefanie Bowers, Human Rights Coordinator
Re: Recommendation from the Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission
At their November 21, 2024, meeting the Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)
made the following recommendation to the City Council:
The TRC request for the City Council to allow them to continue to work on its final report
with a delivery date of June 30, 2025. Motion passed 6-0.
Additional action (check one)
No further action needed
Board or Commission is requesting Council direction
X Agenda item will be prepared by staff for Council action
S:RECform.doc
November 21, 2024
Approved Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) Minutes
Emma Harvat Hall
Commissioners present: Lou Tassinary, Wangui Gathua, Amos Kiche, Lauren Merritt.
Commissioners on Zoom: Chastity Dillard, Lubna Mohamed.
Commissioners not present: Clif Johnson, Kayla Rossi, Chad Simmons.
Staff present: Stefanie Bowers.
Recommendation to City Council: Yes, the TRC request for the City Council to allow them to
continue to work on its final report with a delivery date of June 30, 2025. Motion passed 6-0.
Meeting called to order: 7:02 PM.
Reading of Land Acknowledgement: Tassinary read the Land Acknowledgement.
Public Comment of Items not on the Agenda: None.
Approval of the Minutes from November 7, 2024: Kiche moved, and Merritt seconded. Motion
passed 5-0. (Mohamed not present).
Actions for Phases Three and Four: The person who has been selected to write the commission's
final report to be presented to the City Council will require two months to write the report from the
date the agreement is signed, which would push the commission outside of its December 31, 2024,
end date.
Merritt asked staff what the earliest date to be approved for an extension from City Council would
be. Staff answered the soonest the commission would know about approval for an extension would
be December 10t'.
Dillard suggested requesting June 1st for the extension of the final due date. Dillard noted this
would allow ample time for both the individual writing the report and the commission to contribute
to the report.
Tassinary brought up the possibility of being denied an extension from City Council and the need
for a backup plan. Dillard said if they do not get an extension then they will let City Council know
they did not have enough time and they can give City Council whatever information they do have
at that time.
Tassinary encouraged commissioners to take time writing down points they would like to see in the
report and using that as information to hand over in the case that the commission is denied an
extension.
Kiche expressed his thoughts on the need for an extension and mentioned it would be up to the
City Council to help the commission understand why they would not be granted an extension
considering the time and work the commissioners have put in. Gathua added that if commissioners
are present then they may be a part of the discussion with City Council.
Tassinary asked staff if there were any special requirements for the commissioners to be involved
in the December 10t' Council meeting as attendees contributing to the conversations. Staff noted
there are no special requirements. Merritt asked staff if the decision would be part of the work
session or formal meeting. Staff answered that any decision would be made in the formal meeting.
Kiche shared his thoughts on the importance of including the difficulties the commission has faced
in the report to be useful for future groups and commissions to learn from. Kiche mentioned if
there is a lack of time to write the report these important aspects may be left out.
Dillard mentioned that the June 1st date would be the bare minimum amount of time for the report
to be completed. Merritt mentioned that they would not want to request an extension beyond June
30th because that would enter another fiscal year. Dillard mentioned the possibility of the report
writer needing additional time (beyond the two months) to complete the report. Merritt agreed
extra time may be needed and the June Is' date allows more than two months for the report to be
written. Tassinary spoke about the wording of the agreement between the commission and the
report writer. Tassinary would like the agreement to state the deliverables along with dates to avoid
the report not being finished on time. Dillard suggested an extension date of June 30th to allow for
the most amount of time possible with anticipation of finishing sooner. Gathua asked if the June
extension date is for the TRC or for the report writer. It was clarified that the June date would be
for the TRC, and the final report date would be discussed and decided before then to give the
report to City Council by the final extension date. Gathua asked staff when the commission should
have the report by to turn it into City Council on time. Staff answered that the decision may be
appropriate for a later meeting once the commission has an answer from City Council and more
communication with the report writer. Merritt suggested making the decision on dates and
expectations during the commissions next meeting. Motion by Tassinary to request an extension
through June 30, 2025, to allow them to continue to work on the final report. Motion seconded by
Gathua. Motion passed 6-0.
Gathua asked the commission if they would like the Catholic Workers to come do a presentation
relevant to issues being faced after the 2025 presidential elections -mass deportations. Tassinary
asked how long the presentation is likely to be. Gathua said the last presentation she attended
lasted about an hour, but there is a possibility of it taking less time. Tassinary agreed it would be a
good idea but would like to ensure the commission has enough time to focus on the contract and
the report. Dillard agreed the commission may need to prioritize more pertinent tasks, including the
report, before they take on any additional tasks. Gathua shared she intended to include the work
from the presentation in the final report as it pertains to the commission's mission. Kiche argues
the presentation is relevant to the commission's work and is important to provide the presentation
as a resource to community members.
Staff reminded commissioners that the report needs to include their recommendations. Dillard
agreed with staff and suggested postponing the Catholic Workers presentation to their December
19t' meeting to prioritize the recommendations. The commission agreed to focus on the
recommendations at their December 5th meeting.
Oil
Announcements of Commissioners: None.
Announcements of Staff: None.
The meeting adjourned at 7:44 PM.
The frill meeting video can be viewed at this link.
AD HOC TRUTH & RECONCILIATION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2024
(Meetinm Date)
NAME
TERM
EXP.
4/4
5/2
5/16
6/20
7/18
8/1
8/15
9/5
9/19
1013
10/17
11/7
11/21
Dillard
12/31/24
P
P
P
P
P
P
A
P
P
Z
P
P
Z
Gathua
12/31/24
P
A
A
Z
Z
Z
A
Z
P
P
P
A
P
Kiche
12/31/24
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Johnson
12/31/24
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
A
A
A
A
A
Merritt
12/31/24
P
P
A
P
P
P
P
Z
A
Z
A
A
P
Muhamed
12/31/24
-
-
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
A
Z
Z
Simmons
12/31/24
Z
P
P
A
P
A
A
A
Z
Z
A
Z
A
Tassinary
12/31/24
A
P
P
P
A
P
P
A
P
A
P
P
P
Rossi
12/31/24
-
-
-
A
Z
A
A
A
A
A
Z
A
A
P =
Present in person
A
= Absent
Z
= Zoom
Item Number: 4.b.
I, CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission: December 5
Attachments: Ad Hoc Truth & Reconciliation Commission: December 5
December 5, 2024
Approved Ad Hoc Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) Minutes
Emma Harvat Hall
Commissioners present: Chastity Dillard, Lou Tassinary, Amos Kiche.
Commissioners on Zoom: Wangui Gathua, Lauren Merritt, Lubna Mohamed.
Commissioners not present: Clif Johnson, Kayla Rossi, Chad Simmons.
Staff present: Stefanie Bowers.
Recommendation to City Council: No.
Meeting called to order: 7:06 PM.
Reading of Land Acknowledgement: Tassinary read the Land Acknowledgement.
Public Comment of Items not on the agenda: None.
Approval of the Minutes from November 21, 2024: Dillard moved, and Tassinary seconded.
Motion passed 6-0.
Phase Four: Staff informed the commission that their request for an extension will be on the City
Council's agenda on Dec. loth.
Gathua shared that due to scheduling issues the Iowa City Catholic Workers House will not be able
to present at the next meeting (Dec. 19). Merritt asked if there are plans to reschedule the
presentation if the commission gets approved for an extension. Dillard suggested commissioners
educate themselves on the topic regardless of the presentation due to the personal and professional
value of the information provided by the Catholic Workers House.
Merritt asked what the commission's meeting schedule would look like if they were to be granted
an extension. Dillard suggested meeting once a month to touch base on the final report. Mohamed
agreed. Tassinary agreed once a month should work, but suggested going back to twice a month if
it seems little to no progress is being made with commissioners working on their own contributions
to the final report. Merritt suggested leaving both monthly meeting times open for the option to
meet twice or pick one of the two dates to meet and cancel the other meeting time if it is not
needed. It was agreed that any final decision on the topic will be made once the commission hears
back from City Council regarding their extension.
Kiche suggested relating the commission's schedule to the chapters of the report. Gathua added to
this statement and mentioned it will be necessary to work closely with the report writer which may
call for additional meetings.
Dillard asked commissioners their thoughts and ideas on recommendations to the City Council.
Tassinary suggested presenting the idea to establish a commission that routinizes what the
commission has been asked to do --collect data on structural racism. Kiche offered a suggestion to
use the commission to hear, question, and resolve issues people of the community are facing.
Kiche mentioned that this opportunity to hear people out would also allow City Council and the
commission to know what is going on in the community beyond what is reported directly to City
Council.
Gathua recommended a racial injustice commission that would address Kiche's suggestion
directly. Merritt suggested dedicating a staff member to receiving community complaints. Gathua
added this may be a big body of work to take on and it may need someone with investigative
power in the sense they have access to resources that would allow them to take on these cases.
Dillard shared her own suggestions including requiring City Council to acknowledge how difficult
it is to do the commission's work while adhering to rules of open meetings and public records.
Dillard shared she would like to see a real effort to dedicate resources to a paid team that could
dive further into areas the commission has identified, including education and housing. Dillard also
recommended that the city looks at the commission's efforts of restorative justice and to use it as a
form of reconciliation moving forward. Gathua added she would like to recommend continuing
work on fact finding on policies and laws that contribute to racial injustice. Kiche suggested the
potential for a commission that checks in with other commissions to track their work, findings, and
plan of action for projects and community efforts.
Gathua added to Kiche's recommendation and suggested putting BIPOC community members in
charge of this effort. Dillard mentioned that the resolution for the commission was very big and
vague which gave little direction for where the commission was to start with their efforts on
addressing racial injustice. Dillard prompted the city to narrow the focus for the commission.
Kiche brought up his confusions with the City's expectations of the commission regarding
interacting with community members and reporting on their findings. Kiche also expressed
frustration with the lack of information the commission received from the facilitators regarding
their final report and what it was expected to contain. Tassinary noted the commission has worked
through struggles and with multiple turnovers. The TRC work was consistently interrupted and
redirected.
Kiche expressed frustrations with expectations on budget as well. While the commission was
informed on the need for a budget, they were not told how that should look or what should be
included. Kiche also reports that there was no time for them to meet with City Council for them to
understand Council's expectations. Dillard read through the resolution in effort to provide
framework and inspire more recommendations for the commission. Merritt suggested revisiting the
information the commission previously provided to City Council to be included in the final report.
Dillard noted another barrier to public report and connecting with community members was the
fact that all things are associated with the government and therefore public record. Tassinary
shared he would like to understand what is meant by "Public Record" and if there is a way to work
around that to protect the community members willing to come forward.
Announcements of Commissioners: None.
2
Announcements of Staff: Staff reminded commissioners the Human Rights Office will be
temporarily moving from the third floor of City Hall to the Robert A. Lee Rec Center.
The meeting adjourned at 8:09 PM.
The full meeting video can be viewed at this link.
3
AD HOC TRUTH & RECONCILIATION COMMISSION
ATTENDANCE RECORD
YEAR 2024
(Meeting Date)
NAME
TERM
EXP.
5/2
5/16
6/20
7/18
8/1
8/15
9/5
9/19
1013
10/17
11/7
11/21
12/5
Dillard
12/31/24
P
P
P
P
P
A
P
P
Z
P
P
Z
P
Gathua
12/31/24
A
A
Z
Z
Z
A
Z
P
P
P
A
P
Z
Kiche
12/31/24
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Johnson
12/31/24
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
A
A
A
A
A
A
Merritt
12/31/24
P
A
P
P
P
P
Z
A
Z
A
A
P
Z
Muhamed
12/31/24
-
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
A
Z
Z
Z
Simmons
12/31/24
P
P
A
P
A
A
A
Z
Z
A
Z
A
A
Tassinary
12/31/24
P
P
P
A
P
P
A
P
A
P
P
P
P
Rossi
12/31/24
-
-
A
Z
A
A
A
A
A
Z
A
A
A
P =
Present in person
A
= Absent
Z
= Zoom
Item Number: 4.c.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Airport Commission: October 16
Attachments: Airport Commission: October 16
MINUTES
IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION
October 16, 2024 — 5:00 P.M.
AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING
Members Present: Warren Bishop, Judy Pfohl, Ryan Story,
Members Absent: Chris Lawrence, Hellecktra Orozco,
Staff Present: Michael Tharp, Jennifer Schwickerath
Others Present: Carl Byers, Travis Strait, Adam Thompson
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
None
DETERMINE QUORUM
A quorum was determined at 5:20 pm and Lawrence called the meeting to order.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
FINAL
Lawrence noted that Pfohl had submitted some grammatical corrections to the draft minutes.
Story stated that the attendance sheet appeared to be wrong. Lawrence moved to approve the
minutes from August 19, 2024, as amended, seconded by Pfohl, Motion carried 3-0
(Orozco, Lawrence Absent).
PUBLIC COMMENT - None
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION 1 ACTION
a. Airport Construction Projects:
i. FAA grant projects
1- Runway 12/30 Displaced Threshold/Relocation — Tharp stated
they were having some equipment issues with some of the REILs
that were installed last year. Byers described the faults with the
lights with the Commission saying parts were being overnighted.
Byers stated that this was holding up the flight check as they wanted
to make sure they had working equipment.
2. Solar Power Project — Tharp stated that the project was going at
pace and that the contractor thought the project would be winding
up by the end of next week. Tharp stated that following that they
would begin the testing and acceptance part of the of the project.
Pfohl asked about the signage and Tharp responded. Tharp also
stated that they were looking at November 14th for a ribbon cutting
ceremony. Tharp noted that he had asked Communications staff
and Climate Action staff to assist him in the planning of that.
Airport Commission
October 16, 2024
Page 2 of 4
3. Terminal Building — Tharp stated they were just waiting for the FAA
to announce the awards. Tharp stated there was some anticipating
with the industry that the FAA would make these announcements
near the beginning of the fiscal year.
4. 5 Year Engineering/Consultant Request for Qualifications —
Tharp stated that the publication is out and they he was expecting
some good responses. Tharp stated that if they received more than
3 or 4 submittals it would likely require a committee to perform a first
round review and forward on firms as finalists. Tharp noted that they
would typically forward 3 or 4 firms as finalists.
ii. Iowa DOT grant projects — Tharp stated they still didn't have any open
grants and that the next application process would be in the spring.
b. Airport "Operations"
i. Budget — Tharp stated that the big item for the evening was the budget
submittal for FY26.
1. FY26 Budget —Tharp stated that he did have in the packet a budget
submittal and that he, Lawrence, Story had met previously to
discuss the budget. Tharp noted that'because they were nearing
the deadline for submittals, some other finance numbers have been
clarified. Tharp noted that the budget was projected to have a
$20,500 surplus. Tharp stated that they did have some more
maintenance dollars in the budget to capture more hangar issues.
Tharp stated that if everyone was ok, he was asking for a motion to
submit and that he would submit the budget by the end of Friday
a. Consider a motion approving FY26 budget submittal —
Story moved to submit the budget, seconded by Pfohll.
Motion carried 3-0 (Orozco, Lawrence Absent).
ii. Management —
1. T-Hangar Lease Language — Tharp stated he was researching a
couple of items to make sure they weren't violating any other grant
assurances. Tharp noted that he was trying to time this
conversation around the RFQ meetings.
iii. Events -- Tharp stated that events for the year had wrapped up, but they did
host the Greater Iowa City business lunch. Tharp noted this was a merger
between the Iowa City Area Development Group and the Business
Partnership groups. Bishop asked if there was a way to engage those
entities for further support of efforts for the terminal or other projects.
c. FBO 1 Flight Training Reports
i. Jet Air — Wolford stated that some equipment had been in the shop getting
repaired and that they were able to get mowing caught up. Wolford also
stated a Jet Air employee had received their CDL and that would help with
operations in getting fuel for the snow plow. Wolford noted that the National
Business Aviation Association conference was next week.
d. Commission Members' Reports — Story asked about the grass landings. Tharp
stated the flight standards office acknowledged they received the request letter.
e. Staff Report - Tharp noted that he would have some zoom meeting for the Iowa Public
Airports Association as they were preparing their legislative priorities as a group.
SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING — Next meeting November 14, 2024, 6:00pm
ADJOURN
Story moved to adjourn, seconded by Bishop. Motion carried
Meeting ad'o d at 5,38 pm.
CrIAIRPERSON
Airport Commission
October 16, 2024
Page 3 of 4
3-0 (Orozco, Lawrence Absent).
2a2u " 12 -1Z,
DATE
Airport Commission
October 16, 2024
Page 4of 4
Airport Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2023-2024
TERM
s
s
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
A.
Q�
co
A.
*
Ua
N
coo—L
to
N
M
NAME
EXP.
ia
N
1
N
N
iz
N
N
N
1
N
N
N
iZ
N
N
N
N
Warren
06/30126
Bishop
X
X
OIE
X
X
O/E
OIE
X
X
X
X
X
X
Christopher
06/30/25
X
X
X
01E
X
X
X
O/E
OIE
OIE
X
X
O/E
Lawrence
Hellecktra
06/30/28
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
OIE
X
OIE
Orozco
Judy Pfohl
06130126
X
X
X
X
X
X
OIE
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ryan Story
06/30/27
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
OIE
X
X
X
Key.
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a Member at this time
XIS = Present for subcommittee meeting
O/S = Absent, not a member of the subcommittee
Item Number: 4.d.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Airport Commission: November 14
Attachments: Airport Commission: November 14
MINUTES
IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION
November 14, 2024 — 6:00 P.M.
AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING
FINAL
Members Present: Warren Bishop, Judy Pfohl, Ryan Story, Chris Lawrence, Hellecktra
Orozco (via Zoom),
Members Absent:
Staff Present: Michael Tharp, Jennifer Schwickerath
Others Present: Carl Byers, Travis Strait, Adam Thompson, Matt Wolford
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
None
DETERMINE QUORUM
A quorum was determined at 6:00 pm and Lawrence called the meeting to order.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Pfohl stated she had forwarded an edit to Tharp and moved to approve the minutes with the edit.
Seconded by Bishop. Motion carried 5-0.
PUBLIC COMMENT - None
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION / ACTION
a. Airport Construction Projects:
i. FAA grant projects
1. Runway 12/30 Displaced Threshold/Relocation — Tharp stated
that they had notified FAA to schedule the flight check on the REILs
but they hadn't heard back from them to confirm a date. Tharp
stated the contractor had been out to the work on the intersection
markers for the runway. Tharp stated there was a little bit of cleanup
and punch list items the contractor would need to take care of.
2. Solar Power Project — Tharp stated that they had a great turnout
for the ribbon cutting. Tharp noted they had the Mayor, members of
the City management team, City Manager's office, and other
department heads. Tharp stated that they also had staff members
from the 3 federal legislator offices and one state representative.
Tharp also stated that there had been an early preview story run by
KCRG, Tharp stated he was thankful of the help provided by
Shannon McMahon City Communications Coordinator and Sarah
Gardner, Climate Action Coordinator to put the event together.
Tharp stated that they still had a couple of steps with MidAmerican
Airport Commission
November 14, 2024
Page 2of 5
that would take some time to complete. Tharp stated MidArn&can
had 2 weeks to perform a witness test, which was a test where a 31
party comes out and examines the system and clears it as operating
as expected. Then following the test, MidAmerican has another 2
weeks to replace the current meter with a bidirectional meter which
is what is needed to get credit for the energy the array produces.
Lawrence asked questions about the timeline to which Tharp
responded.
3. Terminal Building — Tharp stated that since the last meeting the
FAA announced the awards and Iowa City wasn't on the list. Tharp
stated that this was year 4 out 5 for the program and based on how
FAA was awarding funds from the program, he didn't feel it was
worth the effort to submit a future application for an "all or nothing"
type ask. Tharp stated that now they can discuss other options like
doing fundraising or other capital campaigns but also to look at the
existing building with the expectation of having it for another 10 to
20 years and performing what things can be done to upgrade and
maintain the building. Wolford asked about plans that Tharp had
previously mentioned and Tharp responded. Tharp stated that he
currently had a placeholder in the CIP program for HVAC upgrades
but if there would be a longer list of things to do like furniture and
carpets and other interior projects.
4. 5 Year Engineering/Consultant Request for Qualifications —
Tharp stated they had 4 firms submit responses. Tharp stated that
after a review they all were firms that submitted responsive
statements and that he was planning to forward them all to the
Commission for final interviews. Tharp stated that in the past the
Commission interview process was 30 minutes per group that was
broken up to be 20 minutes for presentation and 10 minutes for
question and answer from the Commission. Tharp stated the plan
was that would be the front end of the December meeting.
Lawrence stated that he agreed with Tharp in that it was important
to have all members of the Commission available for the meeting so
he asked everyone to confirm they could attend the December 12th
meeting. Tharp stated that he would deliver the formal letters to the
firms tomorrow.
5. FAA FY26AIP Pre -Application —Tharp stated that he had the pre -
application packet for the Commission. Tharp noted that the project
list consisted of the remaining runway maintenance work and then
move on the 2'd phase of solar, and finish with the apron expansion.
Tharp noted that the list also included a state project for the
replacement of the fuel cabinets because they were 30+ years old.
Bishop asked about a runway extension project. Tharp noted that if
members refreshed their memory on the Airport Master plan, there
was a project to add around 200 feet to the runway 7 so that both
ends of the runway would have the above 5000 feet of landing
distance. Tharp noted that similar to what theyjust did with Runway
30, this was one-way pavement so it would be a displaced threshold
for Runway 7. Tharp asked if everyone was ok with the CIP program
Airport Commission
November 14, 2024
Page 3of5
he would submit the program to FAA for comment. Members
agreed by consensus to submit the draft. Tharp also stated that the
project list was lower priority so it was likely theywould need to build
up funds from the entitlement program to fund these.
ii. Iowa DOT grant projects — Tharp stated they didn't have any open state
projects and they would anticipate the next grant application period in April.
b. Airport "Operations"
i. Budget —
1. FY26 Budget — Tharp stated that he and Lawrence had met with
the City Manager for their budget meeting and it went well. Tharp
stated that there was really no comments as far as the budget went.
Tharp stated he was expecting some questions about the fund
balance but guessed with a $20,000 surplus as shown in the budget
that helped ease those concerns, Tharp stated that other than the
need for that surplus to be a reality at the end of the year he didn't
have any other comments, Pfohl asked if the increased helicopter
traffic was helping. Tharp and Wolford responded. Tharp stated
that they were seeing the increased traffic due to the university
helipad being inaccessible due to elevator repairs. Orozco asked
about the surplus, and Tharp stated that it was the product of the
recent rate increases.
ii. Management —
1. T-Hangar Lease Language -- Tharp stated that he and Lawrence
had talked about this outside of the Commission meeting and that
Tharp believed they had a lease agreement draft nearly ready.
Tharp stated that with the upcoming RFQ interviews he thought it
would be good to hold this to January and Lawrence agreed. He
stated then 'the Commission could review the draft, and send it to
tenants for comments/awareness before it was formally adopted.
2. Grass Landing Ops — Tharp stated that he did meet with a
representative from the Flight Standards District Office and he drove
them around to give them a visual of what the airport was asking for.
Tharp stated it was back in the hands of the FAA and that he didn't
know when they would be giving him an answer or what
requirements they might add to any permissions.
3. Events — Tharp stated that he had been in contact with the Summer
of the Arts for the calendar of drive-in movies. Tharp said he had
also been given a list of autocross dates but hadn't reviewed them
to know if there was any conflicts yet but didn't expect there to be
any.
c. FBO / Flight Training Reports
i. Jet Air -- Wolford stated that flight training was still active and that he had
just returned from a conference in Miami. Wolford stated that as far as the
industry went it seemed people were being optimistic, Wolford said the shop
had been busy and that Wolford was weighing the decision of how many
new mechanics could he hire given the new maintenance classes that were
being operated by Kirkwood. Wolford noted that they were adjusting to the
increase of helicopters using the airport due to the universitywork. Wolford
noted that they really didn't have a good place where the helicopters and
Airport Commission
November 14, 2024
Page 4of 5
ambulances could go and be close to the terminal. Pfohl asked about getting
the Ambulance building power washed or cleaned up. Members discussed
getting the building repainted.
d. Commission Members' Reports — Lawrence mentioned that the automated
weather service was out of service. Lawrence asked Tharp if he had any other info
on it. Tharp responded that he didn't know why it wasn't operating correctly, but that
the live broadcast over radio, and the phone number were working as expected.
Tharp stated they had experienced a partial power outage that impacted a lot of
computer technology at the airport. Tharp noted that the FAA was expected to send
someone to the airport on Monday to help restore it.
e. Staff Report — Tharp stated that he was expected to take winter vacation between
December 23 and January 31d
SET NEXT REGULAR MEETING — Next meeting December 12, 2024, 6:OOpm
ADJOURN
Bishop moved to adjourn, seconded by Lawrence. Motion carried 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 6:40
pm.
CHAIRPERSON DATE
A!rportCommission
November 14, 2024
Page 5of5
Airport Commission
ATTENDANCE RECORD
2023-2024
TERM
A
W
0000
A
d
! j
h`S
W
`
100
N
Ct1
P
NAME
EXP.
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Warren
06/30/26
Bishop
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Christopher
06/30/25
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
Lawrence
Hellecktra
06/30/28
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
Orozco
X
X
Judy Pfohl
06/30/26
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ryan Story
06/30/27
X
X
X
X
X
X
I X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
Key.
X = Present
X/E = Present for Part of Meeting
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = Not a member at this time
XIS = Present for subcommittee meeting
O/S = Absent, not a member of the subcommittee
Item Number: 4.e.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Charter Review Commission: November 7
Attachments: Charter Review Commission: November 7
FINAUAPPROVED
Minutes
Charter Review Commission
November 7, 2024 — 5:30 p.m.
Emma J. Harvat Hall, City Hall
Members Present: John Balmer, Susan Craig, John Deeth, Gerene Denning, Mackenzie
DeRoo, Matt Hayek, Molly Kucera, Bijou Maliabo (5:45 p.m.), Jennifer Patel
Staff Present: City Attorney Goers, City Clerk Grace
(Videos of the meetings are available at citychannel4.com typically within 48 hours)
Recommendations to Council: (to become effective only after separate Council action):
None
1. Call to order and roll call
2. Motion to adopt draft minutes as presented or amended
Moved by Hayek, seconded by Patel to approve the October 24 draft minutes as
presented. Motion carried 8-0, Maliabo absent.
3. Motion to Accept Correspondence
Moved by Hayek, seconded by Deeth to accept correspondence from Vicki Lensing,
Terry Dickens, and Paul Burns. Motion carried 8-0, Maliabo absent.
4. Review of City Charter: Section 2.02 Division into Council Districts
Chair Balmer stated he would like to have all Commissioners express their particular point of
view and noted he thought the alternatives were (1) maintain what is currently in place (2)
district voters vote on district candidates (3) consider more districts. Commissioner Hayek
requested discussion to be moved to later on in the agenda to allow Commissioner Maliabo
to be present. Commissioners agreed to move to item 5, Voter Engagement.
5. Voter Engagement
Chair Balmer mentioned there had been many things proposed to encourage voter
engagement and he felt the League of Women Voters had always been a good vehicle for
that but that they didn't seem to be as engaged as they used to be. Commissioner Patel
noted that the League had been involved in voter registrations but have had issues with
candidate forums and parties not participating. Commissioner DeRoo stated Greater Iowa
City creates a voter's guide every year where they send questions to candidates and share
those responses. The guide also includes other information on how to register, deadlines,
locations, and how to find your polling place. DeRoo also noted the Downtown District will
go through an interview process with candidates for the Iowa City Council seats and
compare the candidates to the legislative priorities for the downtown that they've laid out
and shared with them in advance. Patel also stated the League of Women Voters sends out
a questionnaire where the responses to the questionnaire are published on the National
League website called Vote411. Commissioner Deeth stated Farm Bureau has had forums
in the past. Vice Chair Kucera stated she liked the information from Greater Iowa City
because it was nonpartisan, fact -checked, and a great tool to give to the youth to educate
Charter Review Commission
November 7, 2024
Page 2
them and try and get them engaged. Kucera stated that the recommendation to Council
should include an education process that is multi -generational. Deeth mentioned that the
participation in the last few City elections has slipped and believes one of the factors is there
have been fewer candidates. Kucera suggested a multi -generational task force to help with
voter engagement or a professor at the University with a background in politics that could
help with education. Commission Craig suggested the focus should be county -wide and
DeRoo suggested a multimodal dialogue which includes videos. Individual Commission
members expressed their views.
4. Review of City Charter: Section 2.02 Division into Council Districts [continued]
Chair Balmer noted that in 1975 when the City Council changed from a five -person at -large
to a seven -person hybrid, four at -large and three districts, he ran for Council and had to
explain to a lot of people who were initially confused about the voting process. Once he
explained he thought they understood and feels the process has worked well. Balmer
stated he wanted to hear from each Commissioner and what their thoughts were.
Commissioner Patel stated the problem with the current system is that people don't see how
important City government is so there is a lack of participation. Patel said that an example of
this are the areas of the City where less than 10% of the people vote and there is no control
over the causes, such as the downfall of local reporting and lack of education on how
government works. Patel stated the only thing we have control over is how district Council
members are elected and the measure is the voting rates and the number of people running.
Patel recommends the election of district Council members by the district and stated this will
help with participation because when you have a small area it costs less in time and money
so more people will be able to participate as a candidate. Currently when a candidate runs
city-wide it is at a greater cost and within a district it's possible for the candidate to knock on
every door. Since the candidate can meet most of the people in the district, a closer
relationship can develop with the citizens which allows them to have better insight to how
City government works and how important it is and how to contact them. They can also
contact their Council member if they have ideas on how to improve the City. Patel stated
there are problems with representation and noted it is a natural reaction to return the calls of
people you know, and active citizens get their calls returned without regard to where they
live. Those citizens tend to have more resources than citizens who are less active and with
the division of the City by social classes, areas with a higher social class tend to get more
attention. With fewer primaries, district citizens don't have any more say in who represents
them than anyone else in the City. Patel stated that the current system has Council
members being elected at -large and district members with a residential requirement,
therefore we do not have district members in the traditional meaning. Patel recommended a
hybrid with four at -large representatives and three district representatives who are elected
by the district.
Chair Balmer thanked Commissioner Denning for her memo which was included in the
November 7 meeting packet and asked if she had anything additional to add. Commissioner
Denning recommended a task force with content experts to research and make
recommendations for the number of districts the City should have. Denning stated she was
in favor of remaining at three districts. Denning also noted that the City is not homogeneous
and districts have distinct characteristics and the people living in a district need an advocate
who will focus on them and act as their representative. Denning said she believes in electing
district Council members by district but wanted to note one issue that had not been
discussed which was the issue of Fundamental Voting Rights. Denning stated in a
representative democracy a critical element is the people have the right to elect their
Charter Review Commission
November 7, 2024
Page 3
representative and in a district system the 'people in the district have that fundamental right,
not the people around them. Denning referenced a memo where she stated one of the
values of districts is you can prevent diluting minority voting power. Denning stated the
current system dilutes the voting power of every single voter in every single district. Denning
also stated that it didn't matter what her opinion or preference was but that it is simply true
that election of district Council members by district voters is the right way to do it and noted
the benefits. Individual Commission members discussed whether the current system dilutes
the fundamental voting rights of district members or if the election of district Council
members by district voters dilutes the voting rights of those outside the districts.
Commissioner Deeth stated he had a vision of what the City Council should be coming onto
the Commission such as a larger body with much smaller districts, only the districts electing
their representative, and a specific agenda wanting a student on the Council. Deeth noted
that within the three districts every district has some students, seniors, homeowners, and
renters which creates good diversity within each district. Deeth stated he liked the argument
of simplicity but changing to electing by 1/3 of Iowa City from all of Iowa City is a minor
repair, unless you have 11 to 15 members being elected by the districts you are not going to
change the diversity that much. Deeth noted he was unsure where he stood on the issue
and his big picture goal of getting a student on the Council has been set back again.
Individual Commission members expressed their views.
Commissioner Craig stated that she originally felt they needed to fix the confusion on how
Iowa City voted for Council members but after reviewing the Charter and discussions with
the Commission she had a simple explanation, there are three districts to ensure geographic
representation. Craig said you can find neighborhoods where voting is well below the
average of other precincts but it's not the whole district. Craig stated that you couldn't look
at a neighborhood and say they are not represented because they are represented by seven
people (Councilors) and disagrees that it diminishes their voting power if they don't get to
have a single representative.
Commissioner DeRoo stated she agreed there could be the claim that the current system is
confusing, but the simplest system is not always the best and it is a compromise that
ensures district representation. DeRoo stated that she doesn't agree with the argument that
a direct election would solve the issue of voter participation and is not a quick fix, it's
complicated, needs education, and practical systems like people being able to get off work
or have transportation to get to the polls. DeRoo noted she felt those strategies would be
more effective than a systemic change. DeRoo stated she thought that changing the system
does have a risk of parochialism, the idea is that they are an advocate for that district and in
a larger city that could be a need and the benefits could outweigh the risks but does not see
that in a city of our size. DeRoo said based on the discussion at the last meeting regarding
the current Mayoral selection process having districts direct elected by only 1/3 of the City
causes an issue because of a difference in mandate. A district representative mandate is to
represent the district, and for the Mayor the mandate is to represent the entire City which
could potentially cause tension.
Vice Chair Kucera stated she feels like there is geographic representation and noted some
of the information given regarding why people choose not to vote needs to be looked at
because we don't know the reason why and changing the system won't change voter
participation. Kucera said she feels like the current system is working well right now and
Iowa City is still small enough that those voting within a district for elections are still voting
on City-wide issues too and not just within their district. Kucera noted the current system is
Charter Review Commission
November 7, 2024
Page 4
working well for the City and people are represented and if a change is needed they should
dig deep into why people don't want to vote to help them with those answers.
Commissioner Maliabo stated she thinks the system works right now and she personally
knows all of the Council members and has seen them represent the City and districts that
are not theirs. Maliabo said she likes the ability to vote for all seven and not just for a district.
While having three districts and a representative you can go and talk to is also good but the
system we currently have works and she is in favor of keeping it. Vice Chair Kucera added
that the idea people want to talk to their district representative is really not how it works, and
she is going to go to whatever Council member she feels most comfortable talking to and
who has the same values as her.
Commissioner Hayek stated what we have works well and doesn't see a compelling reason
to change. Hayek noted there are three fairly even districts that get reworked every decade
with the Census so it's not a static geographic system that is used. Hayek said within the
three districts he sees great variation within each one and the vast majority of what Council
votes on affects the entire community and the more they can involve the entire public in
voting for the seven people who are making the decision that are affecting the entire
community the better. Hayek noted he also feels it's fair to allow each citizen to have a say
in the seven seats that get filled and he would not want to create a system that creates less
of an incentive for an elected official to respond to a constituent if they do not live in the
district of that official. Hayek remarked there are no districts for the School Board or the
County and as far as the issue of confusion, more voter education is needed. Hayek stated
he likes the current system because whether he likes or dislikes what is being said by a
Councilor he is assured that he will have a chance at the next election to vote either for or
against them. Hayek noted that if district Councilors were elected solely by district residents,
it would be possible for a district Councilor to be elected Mayor without 2/3 of the City ever
having any say in the selection of that Councilor
Commissioner Patel said instead of saying "Council member District A" it should be "Council
member from District A". Patel noted everyone represents the whole City and we don't have
district Council members, we have a Council member from a district. Commissioner DeRoo
asked Patel if she thought the current language misrepresented the system and if that was a
problem. Individual Commission members expressed their views.
Chair Balmer thanked the commissioners for sharing their views and stated he was
comfortable with what we have and stated his concern was the number of candidates
running for Council, noting there are district seats going uncontested with regularity and
rarely have primaries for at -large seats. Balmer said while the current system may initially be
confusing, he as a voter wants the opportunity to vote on each one of the individuals as they
will be making decisions that affect the entire City. Balmer noted Iowa City is still small
enough that it's not parochial and the current Council is very diverse. Balmer stated that
after discussion it appeared that the majority were in favor of no change to the present
system.
Commissioner Craig proposed language to clarify the confusion of districts in Section 2.01
Composition, suggesting "The purpose of district divisions is to ensure City-wide geographic
representation on the Council." before the last sentence. Individual Commission members
expressed their views. Commissioner Deeth wanted to add to his prior comments and stated
that a good public official serves the good of the whole community whether or not the
constituent is in their district. City Attorney Goers confirmed there was a majority that wanted
to adopt the proposed language from Commissioner Craig. Commissioners agreed and
Charter Review Commission
November 7, 2024
Page 5
asked City Attorney Goers to review the proposed language and make any necessary
changes.
Commissioner Craig noted an article in the Press Citizen regarding the previous discussion
of Mayoral elections, stating the information was accurate but she felt it misrepresented the
facts of the process and made it sound like it was a done deal. She requested someone
write a letter to the Press Citizen to clarify. Individual Commission members expressed their
views.
6. Tentative Meeting Schedule
Chair Balmer stated he hopes to wrap up deliberations in December and send the report to
the City Council. Balmer stated he would like himself, Vice Chair Kucera and Commissioner
Hayek to draft the report for the Commission to review.
Balmer reminded the Commission that the next meeting was on Monday, November 25 and
asked if everyone was available. Commissioner Craig asked if there would be a final
working draft of the Charter to review on the 25th and a vote on the proposed changes, then
the following meetings could be focused on the report. Commissioners agreed to the
timeline.
Commissioner Patel asked if there had been a consensus to recommend a task force to
look at voter engagement. Commissioner Hayek stated he wasn't sure if a task force was
needed but they should encourage the Council to take actions deemed appropriate and
solicit other local governments county -wide to look at voter engagement. Commissioner
DeRoo suggested it should be discussed at a Joint Entities meeting.
7. Community Comment
No one appeared.
8. Adjournment:
Moved by Kucera, seconded by Maliabo to adjourn the meeting at 7:02 p.m. Motion
carried 9-0.
Charter Review Commission
November 7, 2024
Page 6
Charter Review Commission - 2024
ATTENDANCE RECORD
TERM
o
o
0
0
0
0 0
0
o
s
s
A
�
U1
C1
C) M
co
OD
0
O
j
NAME
EXP.
\
O
\
0
co
\
N
CA
\
j
�
\
N
w
\ \
-AN
-4 -4
\
j
w
\
N
o0
\
O
0
\
N
-N
\
O
-4
\
IN
A
\
N
06
\
N
-a
\
N
4pk
\
N
4pk
\ \
N N
-N p.
\
N
\
N
O
\
N
O
\
N
O
\
N
O
N
0.
N
�
N
06
N
4N
John Balmer
4/1/25
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
Susan Craig
4/1/25
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
John Dee
4/1/25
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Gerene Denning
4/1/25
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Mackenzie DeRoo T 4/1/25
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Matt Hayek
4/1/25
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Molly Kucera
4l1/25
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Bijou Maliabo
4/1/25
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Jennifer Patel
4/1/25
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a member
Item Number: 4.f.
a
CITY OF IOWA CITY
"QF T-4 COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Charter Review Commission: November 25
Attachments: Charter Review Commission: November 25
FINAL/APPROVED
Minutes
Charter Review Commission
November 25, 2024 — 5:30 p.m.
Emma J. Harvat Hall, City Hall
Members Present: John Balmer, Susan Craig, Mackenzie DeRoo, Matt Hayek, Molly Kucera,
Bijou Maliabo, Jennifer Patel
Members Absent: John Deeth, Gerene Denning
Staff Present: City Attorney Goers (via Zoom), City Clerk Grace
(Videos of the meetings are available at citychannel4.com typically within 48 hours)
Recommendations to Council: (to become effective only after separate Council action):
None
1. Call to order and roll call
Chair Balmer statements regarding the recount for the 1 st Congressional District in Johnson
County and the All -State Music Festival in Ames, Iowa. Individual Commission members
expressed their views.
2. Motion to adopt draft minutes as presented or amended
Commissioner Hayek noted one typo at the bottom of page two, Blamer to Balmer.
Moved by Patel, seconded by Maliabo to approve the November 7 draft minutes as
amended. Motion carried 7-0, Deeth and Denning absent.
3. Motion to Accept Correspondence
No correspondence received.
4. Staff response to Commission questions previously posed
City Attorney Goers noted he was requested to review the proposed language in Section
2.01. Composition by Commissioner Craig from the November 7th meeting which added the
sentence "The purpose of district divisions is to ensure City-wide geographic representation
on the Council." Goers stated he reviewed the language and had no changes.
S. Staff proposal regarding Special Elections following Petitions
City Attorney Goers summarized the memo included in the November 25 meeting packet in
which during his final review of the Charter he came across an inconsistency related to the
opportunity for Council to adopt a Charter amendment proposed by residents via petition.
Goers gave a scenario where petitioners proposed a Charter Amendment, Council
considered and adopted via the powers under 8.01(B) ("The Council, by ordinance, may
amend the Charter.") but the special election must move forward anyway due to the
mandating "must" language of 8.01(C). Goers proposed the following language to mirror the
language of 7.05 to grant the Council the same common-sense opportunity to adopt the
proposed change for Charter amendment:
Charter Review Commission
November 25, 2024
Page 2
Section 8.01. Charter Amendments.
C. Petitions.
(1) Action by Council. If a petition valid under the provisions of section 362.4 of the Code of
Iowa is filed with the Council proposing an amendment to the Charter, the Council shall
Promptly consider the proposed amendment. If the Council fails to adopt a proposed
amendment which is similar in substance within sixty days. it shall submit the proposed
amendment to the qualified electors of the City as hereinafter prescribed. If at any time more
than thirty days before the scheduled election the Council adopts a proposed amendment
which is similar in substance. the amendment proceedings shall terminate and the proposed
amendment shall not be submitted to the voters.
(2) Amendment. If required by this section, the vote of the City on the proposed amendment
shall be held the Cethe prGpese d SMeR �^,on# }ha voters at the first
legally permissible election date consistent with Section 6 8.01(C)(1) of this Charter a
. 11 Gity e!eGt'^^, and the amendment becomes effective if approved by a majority of
those voting. (Ord. 05-4152, 3-1-2005)
(3) Ballot. Copies of the proposed amendment shall be made available to the qualified electors
at the polls and shall be advertised at the Cit 's expense in the manner required for
"questions" in section 376.5 of the Iowa Code. The subject matter and purpose of the
proposed amendment shall be indicated on the ballot.
Goers also suggested clarifying the language in 7.05(B)(1) and (2) to make clear the need
for an election will exist only if the Council fails to adopt the proposed initiative or
referendum with the following:
(1) Initiative. If required by the Section, tThe vote of the City on a proposed measure shall be
held at the first legally permissible election date...
(2) Referendum. If required by the Section, tThe vote of the City on a referred measure shall be
held at the first legally permissible election date...
Moved by Patel, seconded by Craig to accept the proposed language by City Attorney
Goers. Motion carried 7-0, Deeth and Denning absent.
6. Review of Iowa City Charter Working Draft
Chair Balmer noted the agenda items for Mayoral election and district representative
elections stating there would be a separate vote but wanted to a discuss the remaining
sections of the Charter.
Commission Hayek stated he thought that the language in the Preamble was too wordy and
suggested taking out "fair and effective" in the sentence starting with "By this action". Craig
noted there was a lot of conversation on what was meant by environment. Hayek confirmed
he was only looking to remove "fair and effective". The Commission agreed to remove the
language from the Preamble.
Commissioner Hayek asked City Attorney Goers if there were any changes in the Preamble
that would put the City at risk such as 1.a "Each individual shall have an opportunity..."
noting the work "shall". City Attorney Goers stated he was okay with the language.
Commissioner Maliabo confirmed the meaning of the word shall.
Charter Review Commission
November 25, 2024
Page 3
Commissioner Hayek suggested a revision to Section 2.12 Prohibitions (B), to move the
period in the last sentence to after the parenthetical: However, the Council may express its
views tG the appGintiRg ai itherity pe4ai" tG the appointment or removal of such employee
pertaining to the appointment or removal of such employee to the Council appointee under
whom the employee works.. (City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk). Commission members
agreed to this change.
Commission Craig asked for clarification regarding "a Council member" versus "the Council'
and if that meant a Council member may not express their views. City Attorney Goers stated
the purpose of the language is to leave open the opportunity for a majority of Council to
speak on an issue and to avoid a single Council member reaching out to a department
director, other than the City Manager, City Attorney, or City Clerk, and attempting to direct
them. Individual Commission members expressed their views. Goers provided additional
information. After discussion no changes were made.
Commissioner Hayek noted inconsistencies where the use of gender -neutral terms were
changed to a title and other areas the gender -neutral term was not changed. Commissioner
DeRoo stated the Commission had asked the City Attorney to review the gender -neutral
terms for the plural pronoun where it would change the meaning of the word. Individual
Commission members expressed their views.
Commissioner Patel stated she thought Article VII Initiative and Referendum, Section 7.01
General Provisions, B. Limitations, (i) Amendments to this Charter, conflicts with Section
8.01 Charter Amendments, noting that 7.01(B)(1) states that the right of initiative of
referendum shall not extend to any of the following, (i) Amendments to this Charter and 8.01
is regarding Charter Amendments. City Attorney Goers explained that the process for
initiative and referendums are slightly different than petitions noting the reasons one might
use an initiative or referendum. After discussion no changes were made.
7. Motion approving language regarding Mayoral election
Commissioners agreed to table the item until the next meeting so all members could be in
attendance.
8. Motion approving language regarding district representative elections
Commissioners agreed to table the item until the next meeting so all members could be in
attendance.
9. Motion approving Iowa City Charter Working Draft
Commissioners agreed to table the item until the next meeting so all members could be in
attendance.
10. Discussion reg ardin 9 the Report of the 2 024-2 02 5 Iowa C ity Charter Review
Commission to City Council
Charter Review Commission
November 25, 2024
Page 4
Chair Balmer stated that he, Vice Chair Kucera, and Commissioner Hayek had met with the
City Attorney and City Clerk to go over the draft report which will be discussed at the next
meeting to get the Commission's approval. Balmer noted that after the Commission has
approved the draft report and the final working draft that he and Vice Chair Kucera would
present the information to City Council at a work session in January. Commissioner Hayek
added that there were previous examples of the draft report to City Council that were being
used to create the draft report for the commission to review. Vice Chair Kucera provided
additional information on what will be included in the draft report.
11. Tent_ative Meeting 5cheduIe
Commissioners agreed to cancel the December 3rd meeting and meet on Tuesday,
December 17th noting that it may take longer than the typical meeting in order to get through
all the agenda items and review/amend the draft report. Individual Commission members
expressed their views.
12. Community Comment
No one appeared.
13. Adjournment:
Moved by DeRoo, seconded by Craig to adjourn the meeting at 6:17 p.m. Motion
carried 7-0, Deeth and Denning absent.
Charter Review Commission
November 25, 2024
Page 5
Charter Review Commission - 2024
ATTENDANCE RECORD
TERM
o
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
s
j
Oh
.1h.
�
cn
M o)
0
oo
w
o
o_
NAME
EXP.
0
j
O
cc
IV
o
j
-N
N
w -4
N
-4
j
w
IV
o0
O_
W
i;i
�
O_
-4
N
0
N
chk
N
p.
N
�
N
-N
N N
4�6 46
N
Ob
N
4h-
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
John Balmer
4/1/25
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Susan Craig
4/1/25
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
John Deeth
4/1/25
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Gerene Denning
4/1/25
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Mackenzie DeRoo
4/1/25
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Matt Hayek
4/1/25
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Molly Kucera
4/1/25
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Bijou Maliabo
4/1/25
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Jennifer Patel
4/1/25
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No meeting
--- = Not a member
Item Number: 4.g.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Community Police Review Board: October 16
Attachments: Community Police Review Board: October 16
Final/Approved
Call to Order:
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Staff Present:
Others Present:
Community Police Review Board
Community Forum Minutes
October 16, 2024 5:30 p.m.
Chair Mekies called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m.
Jessica Hobart, Jerri MacConnell, Saul Mekies, Colette Atkins
Melissa Jensen, Ricky Downing, David Schwindt
Staff Connie McCurdy, Legal Counsel Patrick Ford
Police Chief Dustin Liston
Welcome & Introduction of Board:
Mekies spoke briefly about what the board does. Each member introduced themselves. Legal
Counsel Ford introduced himself as well. All welcomed the public to the meeting.
Consider Motion to Accept Correspondence and/or Documents:
No correspondence received.
Public Discussion with Community Police Review Board on Police Policies,
Practices, and Procedures:
MacConnell gave an overview of the complaint process.
Public Discussion with Community Police Review Board:
The Board welcomed public comment at this time.
The following individuals appeared before the CPRB:
Angel Taylor
Dean Abel
Amos Kiche
Mary McCann
Allison McGough
Brenda Taylor
Barbara Jay
Adjournment:
Motioned by Atkins, seconded by Hobart to adjourn.
Motion carried 4/0. Downing, Jensen, Schwindt were absent.
Meeting adjourned: 6:41 p.m.
Community Police Review Board's Community Forum Summary Letter
Iowa City Public Library, October 16, 2024
Present: Colette Atkins, Jessica Hobart, Jerri MacConnell, Saul Mekies.
Staff present: Connie McCurdy, staff; Patrick Ford, Legal Counsel.
Others present: Dustin Liston, ICPD Police Chief.
Public: members of the public
Absent: Ricky Downing, Melissa Jensen, David Schwindt.
Rollcall was taken. The Chair CPRB Chair gave a brief explanation of the purpose and
procedures of the Board, pointing out that those procedures were also explained in a pamphlet
available at the forum and distributed to the public. With that information in mind, the Chair
noted that the intent of the forum is to listen to the public in attendance and receive feedback.
Members of the Board and Legal Counsel were introduced. The Chair invited anyone on the
Board to add any remark. One of the Board members further described the steps taken once a
complaint is received.
Public's questions and comments
Do we have an "audit"? What is the role of the staff attorney?
Report is sent to the counsel. Counsel attends all the meetings and gives advice to the Board.
What is the Board's authority?
Police Chief explained that the complaint goes to the Board then to the Chief who does the initial
investigation. He then sends the results of the investigation (summary and evidence) to the
Board. The Board reviews that investigation and makes a determination.
Has the Board ever subpoenaed anyone?
Our collective memory did not recall any instance of subpoena use by the Board. The Board was
reminded that we may make use of it. The Chair explained that at times the Board may disagree
with the Chiefs conclusion; and even when agreeing, at times the Board may point to some
misgiving on the handling of the matter.
The significant amount of time the police force spends on various matters some of which
not usually known as associated with police work:
A person in attendance cited data from September to October was: incidents' reports, public
assistance, welfare checks, investigation follow-ups, foot patrol, 222 mental distress or
impairment calls, 130 calls related to pets, 29 missing adults and juveniles, 200 motor vehicle
accidents, 14 thefts of motor vehicles, shoplifting incidents, 160 instances of fraud and identity
theft, amounting to some1848 times of police contact and communication with the public in
those few weeks. These findings will be sent to the Board.
Procedures and follow up:
After a person is found "in the right" by the Board, what happens then? What recourse does that
person have?
The Board has no authority to discipline an officer; the Chief of Police does. The Board can
recommend disciplinary action. That, in effect, is the Board's limited power. However, the
persons in question are free to use the Board's findings to support their case in a court of law or
other setting.
Concerns about bicycles and scooters meandering on sidewalks are endangering
pedestrians in the downtown/Ped Mall area:
The Chief of Police assured the public that the behavior described is illegal and signs are posted
to that effect. The police department is aware of the infractions: the law is enforced, and citations
are given. A downtown liaison officer is also assigned to the area.
Concerns with cameras not available to attest to an accident:
The Chief noted that while cameras are useful, the challenge is the limited data storage available
which is a source of frustration for the police department in addition to the public expecting to
have that evidence. The Chief remarked that the amount of data storage is significant and so is
the cost, limiting the storage availability to about 7 days.
The Counsel pointed out that the Board is limited to complaints made about officers, not
complaints between private citizens. However, the Chief added that complaints can be addressed
to him directly.
The importance of the Board to the community:
It was expressed that the Board's mission is important in many ways, dispelling distrust, and
instilling confidence in the public. As such a report to that effect is necessary to disseminate and
inform the public.
The Counsel remarked that a report is issued annually, summarizing the complaints and the
process that was followed. That report is public and posted on the Board's website.
The possibility of mediation between the complainants and the officer:
The Chief pointed to the limitation of the code: while criminally some mediation may take place,
administratively the code prevents the police department from releasing personnel records (i.e.
officer's identity). Moreover, this Board is empowered and limited by City ordinance which does
not provide for engaging in mediation. It was also pointed out that the police department has a
coordinator who can make referrals to appropriate agencies.
The Board's responsibilities beyond complaints and into advocacy at the City or State
level:
The Board's is limited by ordinance to two areas: 1) Review complaints; 2) review existing
policies that the police department has put in place. The Board may make recommendations for
changes. For example, the Chair noted that the Board had inquired to the Chief of Police about
the status of the chokehold policy. That practice, however, was outlawed by the state as well as
the City which had outlaw it a decade before. The Chief noted that all the policies are online and
available to the public. He also noted that the Board has a direct conduit to him and can review
policies and procedures and follow up with recommendations.
Members of the public were reminded that the Board meets every second Tuesday of the month
at City Hall, 5:30 p.m. The public is invited to participate during the public session.
Forum meeting adjourned at 59:54 p.m.
Respectfully submitted: Saul Mekies
Community Police Review Board
Community Forum
October 16, 2024
Members Present:
Jessica Hobart, Jerri MacConnell, Saul Mekies, Colette Atkins
Members Absent:
Ricky Downing, Melissa Jensen, David Schwindt
Staff Present:
Staff Connie McCurdy, Legal Counsel Patrick Ford
Others Present:
Police Chief Dustin Liston
Mekies: I call the meeting to order. And where's Connie?
[INAUDIBLE]
Mekies: You take attendance, uh. Okay.
Atkins: Roll call.
Mekies: Thank you.
McCurdy: Speak into the microphone a little more.
Mekies: Is this on? Okay. Can you all hear me?
McCurdy: Downing.
Mekies: So there are seven members of the of the board appointed by the city. Uh, we -
we're here mostly to listen to you as opposed to, uh, you listening to us.
Atkins: Saul we need to do roll call first before we get started.
Mekies: Yeah. I thought she had taken the roll call. Okay.
McCurdy: Downing.
Mekies: All right.
Mekies: Downing.
Atkins: She's calling the roll call.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Atkins: She's doing that.
MacConnell: She's doing it.
Mekies: Okay. That's.
McCurdy: Hobart.
Hobart: Here.
McCurdy: Jensen.
McCurdy: MacConnell.
MacConnell: Here.
McCurdy: Mekies.
Mekies: Here.
McCurdy: Atkins.
Atkins: Here.
McCurdy: Schwindt.
Mekies: So we barely have a quorum. Uh, we're also, ah, here with the- the attorney
appointed by the city to help us out. So we have, ah, legal, ah, backup, uh.
MacConnell: And the chief.
Mekies: I'm sorry.
MacConnell: And the chief is here.
Mekies: And the chief of police is here. I'm not sure he wants that to be known. Okay. So
you may direct, uh, question at, uh, any- any of us. Uh, so as I mentioned, there
are seven, uh, members of whom are here. Uh, we are really an advisory board.
We don't have any legal obligations or responsibilities, uh, but we do advise, uh,
the- the city council, and also we have some feedback for the chief of police. Uh,
we listen to and read, uh, complaints. We act upon them and, uh, decide whether
they are, uh, sustained or not sustained. We give reasons for that and we review,
uh, evidence, including, uh, body cameras and other cameras that may be on the -
on the vehicle, on the police vehicle. So that's about the- the introduction of it.
Um, the next item, uh, on the- on the agenda is to consider motion to accept
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
correspondence or other documents, which we do not have. We don't have- we
haven't received anything, right, correct. Okay, um.
Atkins: Saul, I'd like to introduce us if we can introduce ourselves.
Mekies: Absolutely. And, uh, as we are about to open it to the public, I'd like to, uh- to
have each member of the board introduce themselves. We'll go from left to right.
Hobart: So I'm Jessica Hobart -Collis.
MacConnell: I'm Jerri MacConnell.
Mekies: And I'm Saul Mekies.
Atkins: Hi there. I'm Colette Atkins. Nice to have you all here.
Ford: And my name is Pat Ford. I'm not a board member. I'm the legal counsel for the
board.
Mekies: Okay. So we'll-
MacConnell: Maybe we should just give a description of how the process works.
Mekies: To what?
MacConnell: To how the process works. The [INAUDIBLE] complaint.
Mekies: Go ahead. Any one of us can have some input.
MacConnell: Okay. Um, we want to explain the process of how you make a complaint and
what happens after you make a complaint. First of all, anybody who feels that
they have a complaint against a police officer may make a report to the board or
to the police department. The board as soon as it gets it, makes the report
available to the police, and then Chief Liston does his own investigation of what
has happened. He sends us a written response telling us whether he feels that the
complaint is really violated norms of the police office or has not. We then watch
the body cameras of the police who are involved in the complaint. After that, after
reading the report from the chief and after we see what actually happened. Then
we can make a decision as to whether that complaint actually is something against
policy, or is something that happened under policy that's- that's there already.
Anyone who makes a complaint has to either have felt that they have a complaint
or that someone has been there and seen it. They can't see something on television
and go, I want to report that. That's wrong. Or hear on social media, you have to
be present. The, um- when the report is- is being made, the police department
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
meets with the- the person who has the complaint before we get the letter from the
chief.
Atkins: All of that information is documented in the information that you picked up on the
way in. So I think you can refer to that for additional context.
Mekies: Anymore. Okay. So would really like to hear from you.
MacConnell: I make a motion to accept any correspondence or documents that might be here.
Mekies: We don't have any. So we'll move that question.
MacConnell: Okay.
Atkins: Can you [INAUDIBLE]
Public: Do you guys do [OVERLAPPING]
Public: State your name please.
Public: I'm Angel. I just have a question. So when you submit, um- when anyone submits
a complaint to Officer Liston- Chief Liston. Do you guys do any audits or
anything like that? Because my concern would be, let's just say something gets
lost or anything like that. Do you guys do audits? And then are we able to see
what the outcome of those complaints are in the demographics and just how does
that- like, how do you guys hold him accountable?
MacConnell: After every- after we have completed our job, the report that we make in the
chiefs report go to City Council. And then they will be the ones who make it
public. It will not be public until that time.
Public: Until City Council. So where does the attorney come in? Just out of curiosity, and
know that you're here rep- I mean, where do you come in? When do they consult
with you?
Ford: I attend all the meetings. Sometimes a legal issue might arise. And so they ask,
uh, advice of me.
Public: During the meetings?
Ford: During the meetings, yes.
Public: Okay. All right. Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Atkins: Angel. Can you give us your last name, too? We have to have your first name and
last name.
Public: It's Angel Taylor.
Atkins: Thank you.
Public: My name is Dean Abel. I'm an Iowa City resident. I understand the process of
filing a complaint. But the Citizens Review Board reviews the complaints, but
you're not empowered to actually make a decision about censoring an officer or
changing a policy. The information you collect is presented to the chief who
makes any decision about an action to take, is that correct?
MacConnell: That's correct.
Mekies: Yes.
Public: Okay.
Liston: The order is backwards.
Public: What was that?
Liston: The order is backwards. So the complaint gets submitted- Dustin Liston Chief of
Police, the complaint gets submitted to the board, which gets sent to me. And the
chief the police department does the initial investigation. I send the summary of
the investigation and any evidence to the board, and then they review it, and they
make their determination as well. So yeah, just the order was- was backwards, but
that's how it works.
Public: Thank you very much.
Public: I also asked this question at a previous, um, forum. The board does have, um, the
phrase escapes me. But you can subpoena a witness to testify to the board. I know
that that is true. But the last time I asked if that power had ever been used to
subpoena, a year has gone past. I asked that question again. Has the board ever
used its power to subpoena someone?
Mekies: Uh, in- in my tenure on the board. No.
MacConnell: Not on the time I've been on.
Mekies: Pat would you remember?
Ford: Yeah. As long as I've been counsel for the board, they've never issued a subpoena.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Public: Thank you. I know that when that power was given to the board, there was a lot of
concern. Um, I think the board should have that power, but the board should also
keep that in mind that they can do that if they wish. That's my comment. And
thank you for being here.
MacConnell: Thank you.
Mekies: Yeah, um, I might add that we review you've attended a number of our meetings -
and that you've attended the number of our meetings. So you know how we- how
we proceed. Uh, but I might add that we review all of the, uh, evidence, cameras,
including the- the complaint, of course, Uh, but cameras- cameras often that come
from different direction, all of the officers, as well as the- the vehicle, and based
on that, we would- we would know whether we would have to appeal to- to some
kind of other witness documentation.
Public: I understand that, Saul. But that all takes place in executive session. And so the
public really does not know how you actually interact. And that's as it should be.
But because of that lack of understanding, uh, that's one reason why questions
arise.
Mekies: The executive session is really in order to protect the identity of the person or the -
the detail and the fact of the- of the person who is putting in the- the complaints.
But there are times when we've- we've disagreed, uh, with the chief of police, not
very often, but there are times. And there are times also where we've agreed with -
with the Chief of Police conclusion. But still had some misgiving about how it
was handled. Um, so and we do write that in. We do bring it in.
MacConnell: The first thing that we do once we get the case is decide on the level of
investigation we're going to do. We have four or five choices, and one of them is
to, you know, subpoena the person- a person, or, you know, go further into it. We
usually have only asked for further investigation one or two times in the years I've
been on the board. But the first thing we do is decide on the level of- of
investigation we do.
Public: If you know me, which most of you don't.
Public: State your name please.
Public: Mary McCann. I don't like speaking in public. But I was really struck by last
meeting that I had that was a large group of people. I had just immediately before
learned from my brother that another one of our children was going to be
deployed to a war zone. And I thought, you can do this, Mary. You're tough. You
can just let that go. I walked into that room and saw somebody who reminded me
of that child. And I was a mess. I couldn't remember my own name or anything
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
else. But tonight I'm remembering the Joint Emergency Communication Center
Data is something that I'm pretty much addicted to. I've been tracking for over a
year. And it's to understand. I'm a person who understands towns, police forces,
school districts, according to the numbers that they reveal. I also understand
businesses that way. And what I would just like to say tonight about reviewing the
numbers from the middle of September through now into October.
Public: One of the things that really stood out to me was the amount of contact that is
spent taking incident reports, understanding from the public, all of the information
that's needed to decide what has taken place, the public assistance, welfare
checks, out for investigation, follow up, out with subjects, foot patrol, 1,848
times, many- many hours of time from the Iowa City Police Force is spent with
the public and talking to them. And certainly hopefully time when they can voice
their concerns freely. I was also taken by there being 222 mental distress or
impairment calls that came in to the JECC and Iowa City went out and did what
they could in whatever their capacity was. Um, I was also kind of blown away
that there were 130 calls that were related to Iowa City pets, which is special and I
love the cat that I live with, but that was kind of a thing. There were 29 missing
adults and juveniles in the past four weeks. Motor vehicle accidents, 200 that they
responded to. I would have all of this printed off for you but I ran out of printer
ink. I- um theft, motor vehicle, 14 motor vehicles were stolen. They responded -
the police force responded, shoplifting, fraud and identity theft, 160 times. These
things were reported to the JECC and Iowa City responded. I just am taken by
these numbers and I will- as I promised, I will get those numbers to you so that
you can review those at your monthly meetings. But the amount of time that's
spent here talking to people and being part of the community is unique. It's not
that way everywhere. And so I think that when a complaint comes in it will be
taken very seriously. That's all.
Mekies: Thank you.
MacConnell: Thank you.
Public: My name is Amos and I live in Iowa City. I just have a short question. And you
talked about the procedures and you taking the information for the-.
MacConnell: I'm not sure that's working.
Public: It's not working. Okay. I'll just be loud.
MacConnell: Speak loud.
MacConnell: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Public: So my name is Amos. I live in Iowa City here. So after you do a review and you
find that there was some wrong done or the allegation probably was not right and
somebody was wrong somewhere, what options do the citizens have? This- this is
a matter of information and education for the public. Yeah. What do you
recommend to the city, to the police commission, everywhere, another entity.
Mekies: I don't know if I understand the question. Do you understand the question?
MacConnell: He's asking about welfare coming in.
Atkins: So is your question if there was a wrong- a finding that we perceived to be wrong -
a wrongdoing, is the question then what is the next step in the process?
Public: Yes. If the commission is wrong. I mean, if the event- the activity that was given
to you to make a review. If you find that the complaint is not really just an
allegation, that is not right. Yeah.
Atkins: So if the allegation that was submitted is not- is not true?
Public: Yes.
Atkins: Okay.
Public: Yeah. Somebody came with a complaint and you- you do not reject the complaint.
You say, we- we tend to agree with you. So that's the question. What's the remedy
for that person? Which options does the person have so that the person can make
those choices, educated choices? Yeah, because sometimes they might not know.
So this is just a question of education here.
Public: I think I understand you clearly. So I understand that if he makes a decision and
then they agree with his decision, what are their options after that? Like the
hierarchy take it to the person [INAUDIBLE]?
Public: Yes, that's the question. And I'm not saying that's always going to be a case where
the police- I said that there were- sometimes they could find a situation where
actually they say and I don't know if that's possible. They say that the person was
not wronged. And there could be a situation where they say through the internal
investigation that the person was actually supposed to be the way the police acted.
MacConnell: You're asking that do we find that the person's complaint is valid?
Public: Yes.
MacConnell: Then we say that.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Public: Then you say that, okay?
MacConnell: We say that if that's the case.
Public: Yeah. And in that- so- so if there was a wrongful around something done to the
person that was wrong, that requires a remedy and- and the lawyer- the city
lawyer is here.
Public: He has to understand that he makes his recommendation that let's say not
founded. And then you guys agree with his decision that it's unfounded. Where
the person feels like we were wrong [INAUDIBLE]. I would assume the
Department of Justice or right. Is that correct?
Atkins: I think we'll have to take that question back and get back with you. Right today is
a opportunity for you all to share sort of what your concerns and thoughts are and
we can certainly take that question and- and get back to you, put it on an agenda
in our future meeting to respond to.
Mekies: But I do think that it's a legal question. So I'll ask.
Ford: Yeah. So I'm not sure, uh, I entirely understand the question, but let me say this,
that the board has no authority to discipline an officer. If that was your question,
the board does not have the authority. It's only the chief of police that has that
authority. The board- the board can recommend discipline, but the board cannot
discipline itself.
Public: I think he was and both of these if the Commission and officer both agree that it's
unfounded, where can he go. So after that what's the next step.
Ford: Yeah. As far as the complaint process with this board, there's no appeal to it. So
our involvement just ends then.
Public: So- so the decision remains with the person, you will communicate with the
person that truly you were wrong and the review and the interim investigation as
far that you were wrong. So do you- so is that one the individual [INAUDIBLE]
what you're telling you?
Mekies: Yeah. But let's say we've done our job. I'm going to maybe step over my
boundary here. If we agree that- uh, that the allegation was- was not sustainable.
In other words, the person was right or was- was wrongly accused. If that's what -
that's what you're saying. So we would- we would be saying that, okay? We can't
go beyond that. But the person does have the paperwork that says, look, the
review board looked at it and assessed the evidence and they found that I- I was- I
was right. So whoever that person is accused, you know, would have to be to
appear in court or will have to go somewhere where that person is accused and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
would have our essentially support saying that person was correct. Thanks for the
help.
Public: My name is Allison McGough. I've lived in Iowa City for about 35 years. I love
the downtown area, but what I've noticed lately is lots of scooters, bicyclists,
cruising down through the Ped Mall. And there was a time where there was signs
posted, no bikes allowed, no bike riding allowed.
Public: Guilty, sorry. [INAUDIBLE] I did that.
Public: Well, I'm talking about people who use me as like a slalom post, you know? Late
to class. And- and really they look like they're having fun doing it too. So I just
wonder what happened. I don't see that being enforced anymore. And if, you
know, a couple of adults going down the Ped Mall on a bike, ah, that's permission
for us all to do it.
Mekies: There have been cases like that coming up, including skateboard which are even
more- more dangerous. And I think the chief of police can address that.
Liston: So it's still- it's still- the signs are marked. It's still illegal and we enforce it when
we can, but- but absolutely, we've noticed that too. And when we get complaints,
we have a downtown liaison officer where that is his job to be down there. He -
he's probably the one you most likely see enforcing it but we also have that- we
have officers assigned to areas. That's area one, there's always someone assigned
there. So we do enforce it, we do write citations. And it is- and then now,
especially with- with scooters, you know, we didn't see many scooters until a few
years ago. So it's still against city ordinance and you can get a citation.
Public: Two questions. So can you [INAUDIBLE]
Liston: Right. Anywhere in the downtown- the Ped Mall specifically. You'll see the signs
marked, they're marked on the ground and they're marked, right when you get into
the Ped Mall, so it's College and Dubuque- the long intersection of College and
Dubuque.
Public: Okay and- okay any other [INAUDIBLE]
Liston: That's the one that comes to mind. I don't have- I don't- that's the one that we're
most concerned with. It extends a little further downtown. I don't have the map
memorized but it's well marked. And just like any other, whether it be traffic
offense or anything like that, it has to be marked in order for us to be able to
enforce it.
Public: It's really scary on the street.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Liston: I- I understand that. Right.
Public: But I'm talking really- really slow [INAUDIBLE] bike. And I say excuse me, I'm
sorry. I won't do anymore. I promise- I promise.
Public: I'm thinking like Washington Street sidewalks, crowd of people. Restaurants. That
would be an sidewalk about [INAUDIBLE] I'm scared of the street.
Mekies: And there were a couple of cases that- that were brought up in front of it and we
have expressed that- that concern, especially in the area of senior citizens, uh,
who are on walkers or wheelchairs, who may not have the mobility that you have
to avoid them. We did express that concern.
Public: I just think that's a hard thing to enforce. It seems [INAUDIBLE] downtown or it
seems. I do remember calling on two occasions when there was a big riding
around, speeding around the block on the Ped Mall. Just go as fast as he could
round around. And, you know, posing danger to people. And I remember calling
that in and the police did find him a few blocks away. But there's been so many
other incidents. I just think for it to be left on the shoulder of one person to
enforce it, it just doesn't seem [INAUDIBLE]. I don't have the answer to it.
Public: Generally speaking, Corridor, I ride [INAUDIBLE]
Mekies: Someone, would you come forward?
Public: If you're going to have a private conversation do it in the hallway. Let's address
the concerns that we have. So thank you.
Public: You don't need to say thank you because you don't mean it. Okay next.
Public: Well, I am new to this, okay? So I don't know if my question is appropriate. If it's
not just let me know.
Atkins: Can we have your first and last name.
Public: It's Brenda Taylor.
Atkins: Thank you.
Public: I've lived here about three years now. So lots- lots of neat stuff going on here.
Okay, I had a unexpected event the- uh, the first Sunday morning in July, about
9:30. So quiet out. I just thought I was the luckiest person to get through HyVee
real quick down on Dodge Street or the Highway 6. 1 was leaving in bet- at the
light that's in between, say, the Caseys and the HyVee, probably around the Stuff
store. And I was trying to cross over Highway 6 and turn left. So I had the green. I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
saw two cars coming down to my right from the Caseys. They were parallel,
going slow, slowing down, slowing down. I had the green, so I figured okay while
they're stopping, I better go, right? So I started getting out, and then the one in the
lane closest to me, totally floored and tried to t-bone my car. And I ended up with
a lot of whiplash and concussion issues that I'm still dealing with. And it's cost me
considerable out of pocket with some of the other ramifications of it all, but, uh,
what I finally went and asked if that, uh, recording was active, and they said, yes,
at that intersection, but they only keep them for seven days. Well, you know, I
couldn't even hardly get out of my room for seven days because I was like, living
in my closet in the dark, uh, trying to deal with this concussion. So I don't know. I
have friends that tell me they know people that you know, had gotten some
restitution. Maybe not in Iowa City, but just like one week, is that really all they
can keep record of when somebody's breaking the law, running a red light and
trying to t-bone your car? I- I just find that, kind of, hard to believe. But, ah, I
don't really want to go get a lawyer and, you know, make a big deal, but I- I you
know, it might be- the next person maybe won't have as quick a reflexes as I did
because I had to totally gun it and totally turn really fast left. And you know,
maybe the next person will get hit and have a worse outcome. So I don't know.
That's just, kind of, my concern on a safety event, you know. Thank you.
[INAUDIBLE]
Liston: Um, first off, sorry that you were involved in that. Um, the- the camera systems
are not the police departments. They're- they're- they're run by city engineering,
and they have, uh, storage issues. We can't store things for- in fact, many of my
officers have the same complaint when, uh, crime gets, uh, reported, and we go to
look for the- the camera footage, and sometimes it's gone. So I can appreciate
your complaint. Um, unfortunately, we're- we can only work with the- we've
shared our complaints with the ah, appropriate city departments, and they try to
help when they can. But the- the amount of cost, er, the financial cost of storing
data, ah, the police department itself spends hundreds of thousands of dollars a
year to store our body worn camera, and that's not talking about all these cameras
that are around town. So that's the limiting factor is the storage. So they have to
have the- the seven days sounds about, right, to me, is what they have. I'm sorry
you dealt with that. Um, again, we share the same concern because we go look for
evidence of a crime like you're talking about, and we can't find the evidence either
because it's gone. It'd be great if we lived in a perfect world, we had unlimited
resources, we can store the data forever. I know there are some people in the
community would prefer we not store it at all. Um, so we, uh, have to deal with
those concerns as well. But I- I can certainly appreciate your concern.
[INAUDIBLE] cell phone, I mean [INAUDIBLE] you know what am saying?
Liston: Yeah.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Public: I'm just going to see- maybe there should be some other work around. You know,
with all the high tech stuff, and I don't even know whether to bring this up. But
you know, I keep hearing that there's sensors everywhere on the Internet and
everything, bodies and all that stuff. I don't know if it's all true or not, but it just
seems like if it's not the cameras that there is satellite and other stuff. I had two
brothers that have been at Rockwell their whole career working on GPS and all
that stuff. And it seems like there's all kinds of stuff that tracks and they don't
necessarily [INAUDIBLE] know. I mean couldn't they even do like a satellite
check? [INAUDIBLE]. I don't know.
Liston: Yeah, the Iowa City Police Department does not have access to satellite video, so
I don't think we can be helpful there.
Public: You know- you know something else have. I have to- sure.
Mekies: I have to stress that what we hear are and what we act on is- is based on complaint
that come to us. So if- if there is no complaint, we haven't heard it. We do on
occasion, see what is happening on- on videos or on complaint and- and go
beyond that and say we are also concerned as with the skaters or the bicycles on,
and we- we do express that concern. But unless the complaint comes to us, we
really can't act on.
Public: So would that consider a complaint or what I made you official complaint or does
it have to be incident?
Mekies: They would have to be- there would have to be an incident. And once the incident
is there, if- if, uh, if the chief of police only acts on the incidents, then we do -
well, let me give you an example where someone, uh, was- was stopped for
skating. At least 50 times and- and there was a complaint by that very person for
being stopped. We did express concern about why is it after three times- 10 times
that this is occurring? Where are the social workers? Where are the- where are the
counselors? Where are all of these people that were -that the city is paying for
that- that should be addressing that problem? So we- we do bring that up.
Ford: I want to clarify too, that the board only reviews complaints made, uh, against
officers. So an- an allegation of misconduct by an officer. So this board would not
review any, sort of, complaint between private citizens.
Liston: But one of the most common complaints I get, though, is on traffic complaints,
very similar to what you just. So you- you've shared that complaint with me, and I
will make sure my staff addresses it. So that- that's probably the most common
complaint, not necessarily the bicyclists in the Ped Mall, but people racing up and
down someone's street or something like that. The complaints, as Pat just pointed
out, the complaints they deal with are allegations of misconduct by members of
Iowa City Police Department, so.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Public: Can I go on?
Mekies: Yeah please.
Public: Okay. Short people got no reason to live.
Public: Oh, I'm sorry.
Mekies: Oh, you can hold it.
Public: Oh. I'm sorry. Now I'm the one that. I'm sorry. I'm- I- I yell when I talk. You don't
fair enough to do so. Thank you.
Public: My name is Barbara Jay. It's J-A-Y. Chief Liston knows me, and he probably
doesn't want to hear this again, but when 1- I was here in the late '70s early '80s,
and it was a really nice community, and I know other communities have gone
downhill, but I've seen- uh, this has really gone downhill here. And, um, my big
thing is sorry again, that there's a lot of vehicles in every community I've lived in.
I'm from Iowa, but I lived in Arkansas for a while, and I've never seen so many
vehicles without license plates. So the bicycle. I have four bikes. I have 13
helmets. Just bought a new one. And I'm afraid to drive my car. And I know that
Chief Liston when I was at a South District neighborhood -Association meeting,
even though I don't live over there anymore, I still like to be involved, and with
all my volunteer work. And it- it just bothers me that I'm afraid to drive my car
and having somebody with no liability hitting me. There are so many vehicles
with no license plates and the times I ride my bike slow just to be have fun, look
around, enjoy. I'll look down at the vehicle registration stickers for vehicles that
have a plate, which is 99%, I'm sure. Um, and they're expired. It really upsets me
a lot. Um, it just does. I've had liability since the '70s. I have $1 million liability
policy with condo and the home. But it's been a lot of the same vehicles on the far
southeast side mostly that have gone. The whole four years I lived there. They
never had a plate. So it's upsetting. It really is. Sorry. One more thing. Okay. So I
know Chief Liston heard me say this before too. And an officer told me this
directly. I- I don't say names. I don't do that. Um, and, um, this particular officer
said years ago, and I think it was before Chief Liston that people they were told
by city council and the mayor. This is years ago, supposedly, that they don't- they
shouldn't stop people without license plates and expired vehicle registrations.
Then the State of Iowa got a hold of that information is like, hey, that's illegal.
But the practice continues. But Chief Liston explained to me it really doesn't
continue. I just think it does because I saw the same plates and it's till they have a
warrant for their arrest that maybe- maybe they're in trouble. But it just upsets me.
That's all.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Public: And the stolen bicycles. The police know me very well from calling them in,
stopping in. I see them everywhere. They're all over the place, North Liberty,
Coralville, Iowa City. Sorry.
Mekies: Somebody else has a question.
Public: I'm sorry.
Public: Amos Kiche Iowa City. This is a question on the legislatures of Iowa- State of
Iowa has embarked on a legislation to ban the review board like the one we have
here in our community. That is not allowed. Um, so I'm just asking in the event
that your commission is found not needed by the state, what do you think the
community can be doing- will be doing when it comes to issues of compliance? I
believe what the work you've been doing has been very important to the
community. Personally, I- I sit in a commission where I had to look at a report -
some of the reports on the things that you do. And in one area, the report you gave
out I- I think maybe 10 years ago, that the commission gave was very important,
and it triggered a study that the department did to get some information on some
issues that were affecting community members. So in the event that your
commission is banned. As people who have sat in the commission and I have
known the usefulness of the commission, it gives the community some level of
trust on where to go. Some people are really usually afraid. They won't just step in
the police station to make a complaint. These are, generally, people of color
immigrants and other people. So what- what do you think we are going to do
based on your experience on the complaints? So that's one question. The other
question on the issues of annual reports. I see you collect some information there
voluntary from the complaints and today, I don't see anything like that, but I know
usually there's a calendar in which you issue your annual reports. So I was
wondering because the community want to see how good we're doing so that we
have confidence in our different departments. So you want to see also, well, there
are not very many complaints. There are some years when there used to be a lot of
complaints and those things are not happening anymore. So people are doing
really good. But if that information is missing in the community, then there's
always a lot of uncertainties, mistrust here here and there. And- so I just
wondering what- what you're working on in the area of releasing us reports on the
types of complaints. And I mean, they just the details. The data that is going to
help somebody make decisions? Okay. What are the complaints about? Who is
being complained about here? Things like that. Thank you.
Ford: I can respond briefly if you want. So Amos, the Board releases a report every year
that summarizes every complaint, uh, the process that was followed for every
complaint that was, uh, submitted during that year, and those are all public record.
They're on the- the board's website.
Public: Okay.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Public: Question, just to piggy back off, what I had asked the first time. So during the
complaint process, when the person files a complaint, and you guys are- are like,
you know, investigating the officer and- and the complaint? Is there a time where
they're able to, like, mediate? So like the chief or the board or whatever with the
person that's filing the complaint and the officer? Because I think that sometimes
communication is good, obviously, can be- you know, I'm not a person that's just
straight about punitive consequences. I think that sometimes it could be
miscommunication, maybe between the officer, you know, whoever. So do people
have an opportunity to you know, do you guys mediate with the complainant and
the officer? And from that point, you know what I mean? And then if it can't be
resolved through communicating, then I mean, obviously, I'm sure that you guys
would continue on, but who would want to answer that? So are they given a
chance to mediate, or is it just a complaint, an investigation and we know or and if
not, are you guys able to maybe consider having the complainant and the officer,
you know, sit down prior to you know what I mean just mediate. Thank you.
MacConnell: They do- the police department does meet with the person who's filing the
complaint before they do their investigation, even.
Public: Right. That person, the officer that's in complaint on that person, and sometimes
maybe miscommunication. You know glaring and maybe can be resolved just like
a simple conversation. I know because I can imagine [INAUDIBLE].
Liston: Well, criminally, we do stuff like that. Administratively, the problem is the code
prohibits us from releasing personnel records and discipline is personnel records,
and that's a challenge for this body, too. One of the things that you've alluded to
before, Mr. Abel is they don't get to know the identity of the officer. And that so
and that makes their job very challenging, but that's- that's the way the code is
written. And I can't release disciplinary records. The only thing that I can release
is if a person was terminated.
Public: Prior to getting it to disciplinary, just the officer and that person that's filed
against the officer can they sit down and have a discussion.
Liston: They do not- they do not meet with the officer. They meet with the investigating
officer. So no- no. That's something I'd have to consider, but that's not.
Public: For me, I like everything [INAUDIBLE]. Maybe the officer for me before
jumping into some. Maybe I do believe in second chances. So that why
[INAUDIBLE].
Liston: No.
Ford: Yeah. So, Angel, I can step in here real quick. And I just want to explain that
every power of this board is limited by what the ordinance gives. So the board
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
was created by a city ordinance. Every power that the board has is listed in that
ordinance. So right now as it's written, there's no ability for this board to act as
any sort of mediator. It's just we have to follow what the ordinance says. So we
can't say to the complainant and to the officer, why don't you sit down and work it
out. That's just not something that the board has the power to do.
Public: Thank you.
Mekies: There's something close to that when we review the- the body camera or the- or
the vehicle camera, we see the interaction between the person- the complainant,
and the police officer, and we hear them going back and forth. So in that sense,
we do have that kind of testimony and then based on that some input. And there
are times where we do see, although everything was done legally that we have
some misgiving about how- about the language or how the person and we do how
the person was treated and we do make a statement as such.
Public: I just think that sometimes obviously when an officer sometimes with a person
they are not at their best sometimes. And then obviously the officer, you know,
their worry I'm sure is to get things right? So that's why for the most part.
[INAUDIBLE] Anger in that moment but then regret it.
MacConnell: The police department does have a coordinator that can evaluate situations and
then make referrals for counseling or child welfare or whatever it is they need to
make a referral for. So people are getting more attention than just the police
saying you can't do that anymore, or I understand, but and we have no power to
do that. So hopefully it'll make you feel better to know there is someone within
the police organization that does-; can and does meet with- with people and not
only those who make complaints to us. [LAUGHTER] It's- it's a good program.
Mekies: Please.
Public: So you do handle complaints. Do you also in the review board review what is
happening else like issues of procedures, recommendations by the city council,
changes in ordinances and other things. This is the question of compliance. Is it
also the duty of the review board to make sure that some issues of legislation,
directions from the city council, or from the state and other things like that are
being followed, and to what extent? And can the community know that that is
being done? How does the community know that that's being done? Yeah?
Ford: Yeah, Amos, that's not the role of this board. This board generally has two duties.
One is to review those complaints that we've been talking about. But the second
main duty is to review existing policies that the police have put in place. So
policies and practices, this board reviews it and can make recommendations for
changes, but I don't think that's exactly what you were asking about.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Public: I'm asking- that is part of what I'm asking. So you review policies put in by the
department and these are the procedures and things like that. So what's the
purpose of reviewing that? [OVERLAPPING] What's your purpose for reviewing
post procedures put up or suggested or proposed the board.
Ford: If the board thinks that procedure or a policy needs to be revised. I mean, the
board will discuss that and make that recommendation to the Police Department.
Public: Okay. Yeah. So that was the main question.
Atkins: And today's forum is for you all to give us feedback on those policies and
procedures for the police department that help impact what recommendations we
might provide to the police department regarding the policies and procedures.
Public: Okay.
Ford: And I want to clarify too, sorry. This only applies to policies of the Police
Department. So we don't look at any other policies of the city or the state or
anything else, just the Iowa City Police Department policies.
Public: Okay.
Mekies: Let me give you an example where we expressed some concern. We expressed
some concern at one time about the chokehold policy, a dangerous maneuver. Uh,
at that point, we asked the Chief of Police, what is- what is our policy on that? We
have some misgiving about this or some question about it and we asked the Chief
of Police to clarify that. And he did, telling us what the state legislature has done,
what the city has done, and what the policy of the police department in Iowa City
is. So we have that kind of, maybe it's psychological power, not- not really
legislative power, but, you know, the kind of power that we express concern that
is in writing and is publicly known. And maybe maybe the Chief of Police could
give us, you know, clarify that example that came up and using that example as
what we can do.
Liston: Sure. As Pat mentioned, there are two functions or the complaints and reviewing
policy. And every time we update a policy, they see it, but our policies are all
online, our existing policy manual is online. So anyone can look at it. And it's
their job to do that. Many times throughout the four years I've been here, they've
looked at it. Sometimes it's minor changes, a little bit of a word change, but
sometimes they have major concerns like Saul was saying, the state legislature
completely outlawed across the state chokeholds. We had already outlawed that
probably a decade before, but they wanted to make sure we were in line, so they
asked, and then they had some questions about the wording. But I- I think that's
probably the biggest task that they have is reviewing our policy. We've got
hundreds and hundreds of pages of policy. And that's one of the things we were
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
talking about at the last meeting, how they get a schedule down to make sure they
review all of our policy. But that's an important thing because sometime- that's
what this board exists for- for to receive input from you, and then they have a
direct line to me. I meet with them once a month unless I happen to be out of
town, but it seems like I'm usually there. So they have- they have a direct conduit
to me to give me their recommendations.
Public: Okay. But I also heard from the legal person that they do not do anything else
other than those complaints and the procedures from that. So the community may
be having some complaints. How do they get that and how- is that to be done
through the counsel- proposals through the counsel can somebody just come in
here? It's not a complaint of like a police officer did this to me. It's a complaint
about procedure, just like the questions of data collection and other things. So that
if somebody is looking at that. How- is that also part of what you do?
Atkins: You could provide the recommendation of what you would like to see with a
change in policy or procedure to us because that's one of our responsibilities then
is to take that forward to the police chief. So if it's on the as stated before, one of
our responsibilities is to review policies and procedures for the police. If you have
a recommendation, then you could share that with us either here. You could come
to one of our meetings, and I think during the open session time, you could share
that information or you could reach out to one of us directly and share that with
us. So our two primary responsibilities are to respond to complaints. And
secondly, is to give recommendations on any changes to Iowa City Police policies
and procedures. So do you have something today that you'd want to share that
you're concerned about from a policy or procedure perspective regarding the Iowa
City Police?
Public: I do not have one at this time. That could not be a very good moment to launch
that.
Atkins: That's great. So if you do, we recommend that you come to one of our meetings or
to reach out to one of us and share it with us, and we can bring it forward in our
next meeting as well.
Public: Okay. Thank you.
Hobart: And I think I would just add that that's really where the trust with our board
comes from with the community is trusting us with your concerns and allowing us
to take that back and address those concerns. And it's important to remember that,
you're an advocate if we don't know about something that's going on, then we
don't know. So definitely bring that stuff forward to us in those concerns.
MacConnell: Our meetings are the second Tuesday of every month. And you are welcome to
come. We have several people here who I've seen at our meetings. The public is
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
given a short- very short time to state what they want to state. We put it under our
agenda for the next meeting to further discuss it. So like I said, you're all
welcome. We meet at City Hall. I forget the name of the room. [LAUGHTER] It's
right by the police department. And you're welcome to come and attend those
meetings.
McCurdy: Helling.
MacConnell: Pardon?
McCurdy: Helling.
MacConnell: Oh okay. What's the- I couldn't hear what she said.
Atkins: I think the Helling room.
Atkins: Helling room. Yep.
MacConnell: Okay.
Atkins: Yeah.
MacConnell: Got too many things in my head. [LAUGHTER] Okay.
Mekies: Any other question or comment? Doesn't have to be a question.
MacConnell: We should wind up pretty soon.
MacConnell: No.
Mekies: Okay. Then we'll end the meeting, and I'll ask for a motion to adjourn.
Atkins: I make the motion to adjourn the meeting.
MacConnell: Second.
Hobart: Second.
Mekies: Okay. Any discussion? All in favor.
Board: Aye.
Mekies: Opposed? Okay. Meeting is adjourned. We'll still be around if you have some
questions.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Community Police Review
Board Community Forum meeting of October 16, 2024.
Item Number: 4.h.
a
CITY OF IOWA CITY
"QF T-4 COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Community Police Review Board: November 12 [See Recommendation]
Attachments: Community Police Review Board: November 12 [See Recommendation]
r. .,-4 CITY OF IOWA CITY
1p-
24 MEMORANDUM
Date: December 10, 2024
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Connie McCurdy, Community Police Review Board Staff
Re: Recommendation from Community Police Review Board
At their November 12, 2024 meeting the Community Police Review Board made the following
recommendation(s) to the City Council:
(1) Accept CPRB Complaint #24-05 Public Report.
Additional action (check one)
® No further action needed
❑ Board or Commission is requesting direction from City Council
❑ Agenda item will be prepared by staff for City Council action
Final/Approved
Call to Order:
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Staff Present:
Others Present:
Community Police Review Board
Minutes — November 12, 2024
Chair Mekies called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
Colette Atkins, David Schwindt, Jerri MacConnell, Melissa Jensen,
Saul Mekies
Ricky Downing, Jessica Hobart -Collis
Staff Connie McCurdy, Legal Counsel Patrick Ford
Police Chief Dustin Liston
Recommendations to City Council:
• Accept CPRB Complaint #24-05 Public Report.
Consent Calendar:
• Draft minutes from the October 8, 2024 meeting.
• Correspondence from Mary McCann.
Motion by Jensen, seconded by Atkins to adopt the consent calendar as presented.
Motion carried 5/0. Downing and Hobart -Collis were absent.
New Business:
Police policy review process: Board member Atkins mentioned preparing a schedule to
review police policies. Staff McCurdy noted she had received three months worth of police use
of force reports and twelve to fourteen police policies, which will be in the December meeting
packet. Chief Liston noted that they are working through re -writing the policies using Lexipol.
Liston suggested a review process to the Board and said that when an updated policy is sent
out to the police department, it's also sent to Communications for publishing to the website.
Board member Jensen asked Liston what the rotation was for policy review. Liston said that
Lexipol will do the rotation of policy review on their own and has attorneys on staff that check
the policies for code changes who make sure that ICPD's policies align with theirs. Vice -Chair
MacConnell asked if the current policies remain effective until the new policies take effect.
Liston stated that the current policies are followed until the new ones take effect and said that
the police department archives their current policies because if a complaint was filed before the
new policy took effect, the police would have to use the current policy. Chair Mekies asked
where the policies were located, and staff McCurdy showed the members how to navigate to the
polices on the website. Liston noted that the way the policies currently are set up on the website
differs from how it's set up in Lexipol and plans to have the website changed once all the
policies have been reviewed in Lexipol. Board member Schwindt mentioned that the Board may
want to start out looking at the policies that are reviewed every year. Liston mentioned that
anytime a policy is updated, it will be in the Board's meeting packet. The Board members
agreed to accepting the policies when they receive them in their packets, and then add the
policies to a future agenda for discussion. Liston suggested reviewing the policies at the Board's
leisure because not all the policies require an in-depth discussion.
CPRB
November 12, 2024 Final/Approved
Page 2
Old Business:
Community Forum discussion: Vice -Chair MacConnell mentioned that there were more
people at this forum than previous forums. Chair Mekies noted that he was late to the forum due
to an emergency phone call, and he thanked the members that were in attendance for their
support. Mekies stated that there were a lot of redundant questions from the public, and
suggested next year the board do a PowerPoint presentation explaining what the Board's
responsibilities are. Mekies noted the police are sometimes contacted for situations that have
little to do with police action, which the public is not aware of. Mekies mentioned that it would be
enlightening for the public to learn more about the responsibilities that are put on the police and
the Board. Mekies volunteered to draft the forum summary report. Board member Atkins noted
she was pleased at the number of people who came to the forum and mentioned to make the
expectations of the Board clearer for the public next time. Atkins felt there was a lot of
conversation going back and forth between the Board and the public. Atkins also noted that the
Board receives the comments and questions from the public and should let them know that the
Board will discuss at a future meeting. MacConnell suggested handing out a bulletin to the
public as they walk in, which tells them how the forum works. Board member Schwindt
suggested setting a standard at the beginning of the forum letting the public know that questions
will be received by the Board, and if the question needs to be discussed by the Board, it will be
put on a future agenda. Schwindt also noted a person could attend the monthly meeting to hear
the answer.
Public Comment of Items not on the Aaenda:
■ Mary McCann noted that the Iowa City police blotter does not have the same information as the
JECC. McCann will be updating the information so the police blotter and JECC are the same.
Board Information:
Vice -Chair MacConnell stated that she was not sure of the meaning of "intensity" and
"intentionality" that was mentioned by members in a previous meeting. MacConnell would like to
discuss these terms, so the Board members understand the definitions of them.
MacConnell wants to discuss the last line of the Executive Session verbiage:
"Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a government body or
to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent that the
government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government
could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that
government body if they were available for general public examination."
MacConnell wants to discuss the meaning of commissioner and board member and what the
difference is between the two.
Staff Information:
■ None.
CPRB
November 12, 2024
Page 3
Final/Approved
Tentative Meeting Schedule and Future Agendas submect to change):
• December 10, 2024, 5:30 p.m. — Helling Conference Room
• January 14, 2025, 5:30 p.m. — Helling Conference Room
• February 11, 2025, 5:30 p.m. —Helling Conference Room
• March 11, 2025, 5:30 p.m. — Helling Conference Room
Executive Session:
Motion by Jensen, seconded by Atkins, to adjourn to Executive Session based on Section 21.5(1)(a) of
the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records which are required or authorized by state or federal law
to be kept confidential or to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession
or continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11) personal information in confidential personnel
records of public bodies including but not limited to cities, boards of supervisors and school districts,
and 22-7(5) police officer investigative reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the
Code; and 22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to a
government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of government, to the extent
that the government body receiving those communications from such persons outside of government
could reasonably believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that
government body if they were available for general public examination.
Motion carried 5/0. Downing and Hobart -Collis were absent.
Open session adjourned: 6:23 p.m.
Return to Open Session:
Returned to open session: 7:12 p.m.
Motion by Jensen, seconded by Atkins to accept CPRB public report for Complaint 24-05 as amended
and forward to City Council.
Motion carried 5/0. Downing and Hobart -Collis were absent.
Adjournment:
Motion by Atkins, seconded by Jensen to adjourn.
Motion carried 5/0. Downing and Hobart -Collis were absent.
Meeting adjourned: 7:14 p.m.
Community Police Review Board
Attendance Record
Year 2023-2024
Name
Term
Expires
01/11/24
02/13/24
03/12/24
04/09/24
05/14/24
-----------------------------
OWII12
007/09/24
08/20/24
09/10/24
10/08/24
10/16/24
11/12/24
Forum
Jerri
06/30/27
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
MacConnell
Ricky
06/30/26
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
O/E
Downing
Jessica
Hobart-
06/30/26
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
Collis
Melissa
06/30/25
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
Jensen
Saul Mekies
06/30/25
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
Amanda
06/30/24
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
---
---
---
---
---
Remington
Orville
06/30/24
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
---
---
---
---
--
---
Townsend
David
06/30/28
---
---
---
---
---
---
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
Schwindt
Colette
06/30/28
---
---
--
---
---
---
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
Atkins
Key:
X = Present
O = Absent
O/E = Absent/Excused
NM = No Meeting
--- = Not a Member
COMMUNITY POLICE REVIEW BOARD
A Board of the City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240-1826
(319) 356-5041
November 12, 2024
FILED
To: City Council
Complainant
NOV 12 2024
City Manager
Chief of Police
City Clerk
Officer(s) involved in complaint
Iowa City, Iowa
From: Community Police Review Board
Re: Investigation of CPRB Complaint #24-05
This is the Report of the Community Police Review Board's (the "Board") review of the
investigation of Complaint CPRB #24-05 (the "Complaint").
BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY:
Under the City Code of the City of Iowa City, the Board's responsibilities are as follows:
1. The Board forwards all complaints to the Police Chief, who completes an investigation
(Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(A).)
2. When the Board receives the Police Chiefs report, the Board must select one or more of
the following levels of review, in accordance with Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(1):
a. On the record with no additional investigation.
b. Interview /meet with complainant.
c. Interview /meet with named officer(s) and other officers.
d. Request additional investigation by the police chief, or request police assistance
in the board's own investigation.
e. Perform its own investigation with the authority to subpoena witnesses_
f. Hire independent investigators.
3. In reviewing the Police Chiefs report, the Board must apply a "reasonable basis"
standard of review. This means that the Board must give deference to the Police Chiefs
report, because of the Police Chiefs professional expertise. (Iowa City Code Section 8-
8-7(13)(2))•)
4. According to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(B)(2), the Board can recommend that the
Police Chief reverse or modify the Chiefs findings only if:
a. The findings are not supported by substantial evidence; or
b. The findings are unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious; or
FILE®
NOV 12 2024
City Clerk
c. The findings are contrary to a police department policy or practii%r bPAYY0_Waral,
state, or local law.
5. When the Board has completed its review of the Police Chiefs report, the Board issues a
public report to the city council. The public report must include: (1) detailed findings of
fact; and (2) a clearly articulated conclusion explaining why and the extent to which the
complaint is either "sustained" or "not sustained ". (Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7(13)(3)).)
6. Even if the Board finds that the complaint is sustained, the Board has no authority to
discipline the officer involved.
BOARD'S PROCEDURE:
The Complaint was initiated by the Complainant on May 28th, 2024. As required by Section
8-8-5(B) of the City Code, the Complaint was referred to the Chief of Police for investigation.
The Chiefs Report was filed with the City Clerk on August 21st, 2024. As per Section 8-8-6(D)
of the City Code, the Complainant was given the opportunity to respond to the Chiefs report.
The Complainant did not further submit a response to the Chiefs report.
The Board met to consider the Report on September 10, October 8, and November 12, 2024.
The Board voted on September 10th, 2024 to apply the following Level of Review to the Chiefs
Report: On the record with no additional investigation, pursuant to Iowa City Code Section 8-8-7
(B)(1)(a).
Prior to the September 10th, 2024 meeting, the Board had the opportunity to review the
complaint, the Police Chiefs report, and to watch and listen to body -worn camera footage
showing the interaction between the officers and the complainant.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
On May 23rd, 2024 investigators executed a search warrant pursuant to a fraud investigation,
the search warrant occurred at Complainant's home; within the same investigation, another
search warrant took place at an additional address on the same date. During the search warrant
at the Complainant's home, multiple documents and financial paperwork were seized by
officers. While the search and seizure was actively pursued, the Complainant and the
complainant's daughter remained in the living room area of the home with officers, as viewed on
the body -cam footage, the two individuals remained in conversation with the police officers on -
site. At the end of the search and seizure, it is observed on the body -cam footage the police
officers placed items not seized back in the home and took all seized items with them while
exiting the property. The Complainant and their daughter remained at the home.
COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION #1— Violation of 320.5.9,_Conduct.
Within the complainant's report, they indicated that their car title has been missing since the
search and seizure on their property. This is an alleged violation of Iowa City Police
Department policy 320.5.9 (generally regulating officer conduct), which reads, in part, as
follows:
FILE®
NOV 12 2024
City Clerk
Iowa City, Iowa
(a) Failure of any member to promptly and fully report activities on his/her part or the part
of any other member where such activities resulted in contact with any other law
enforcement agency or that may result in criminal prosecution or discipline under this
policy.
(b) Unreasonable force to a person encountered or a person under arrest.
(c) Exceeding lawful peace officer powers by unreasonable, unlawful or excessive
conduct.
(d) Unauthorized or unlawful fighting, threatening or attempting to inflict unlawful bodily
harm on another.
(e) Engaging in horseplay that reasonably could result in injury or property damage.
(f) Discourteous, disrespectful or discriminatory treatment of any member of the public or
any member of this department or the City.
(g) Use of obscene, indecent, or derogatory language while on -duty or in uniform.
(h) Criminal, dishonest or disgraceful conduct, whether on- or off -duty, that adversely
affects the member's relationship with this department.
(i) Unauthorized possession of, loss of, or damage to department property or the
property of others, or endangering it through carelessness or maliciousness.
0) Attempted or actual theft of department property; misappropriation or misuse of public
funds, property, personnel or the services or property of others; unauthorized removal or
possession of department property or the property of another person.
(k) Activity that is incompatible with a member's conditions of employment or
appointment as established by law or that violates a provision of any collective
bargaining agreement or contract, including fraud in securing the appointment or hire.
(1) Initiating any civil action for recovery of any damages or injuries incurred in the course
and scope of employment or appointment without first notifying the Chief of Police of
such action.
(m) Any other on- or off -duty conduct which any member knows or reasonably should
know is unbecoming a member of this department, is contrary to good order, efficiency
or morale, or tends to reflect unfavorably upon this department or its members.
Chief's conclusion: Not sustained
Board's conclusion: Not sustained
Basis for the Board's conclusion. Upon the Board's review of the body -cam footage, it is
observed that all documents removed were placed in a central location for review by officers
FILED
NOV 12 2024
City Clerk
and listed on the appropriate Property Control Form. After viewing all body -cam footdgwa City. Iowa
available to the Board, the title was observed, via the video, to have been left in the home.
Complainant's allegation is not sustained.
COMPLAINANT'S ALLEGATION 92 — Violation of General Order 00-01, Search & Seizure.
The complaint also alleges that the officers violated Iowa City Police Department General Order
00-01 (regarding search and seizure of property), which reads as follows:
It is the policy of this department to conduct searches and seizures that are both legal
and thorough. Such searches are to be conducted in strict observance of the
Constitutional and statutory rights of persons being searched and with due regard for the
safety of the officers involved. All seizures shall comply with all relevant state and federal
Constitutional provisions and statutes governing the seizure of persons or property. Full
policy can be found at https://www.iowa-
city.orgANebLink/E IectronicFile.asox?dbid=0&docid=1489984&
Chief's conclusion: Not sustained
Board's conclusion: Not sustained
Basis for the Board's conclusion: The officers had probable cause to secure the warrant
(which was issued by a judge), and the officers complied with all state and federal constitutional
and statutory requirement for lawful search and seizure of property. Upon review of the Chiefs
report and the indicated measures taken to obtain the warrant for the complainant's property,
the complainant's allegation is not sustained.
COMMENTS:
An additional allegation was included in the Chiefs report: General Order 99-08, Body Worn
Cameras & In -Car Recorders. The Board discussed during their September 10, 2024 meeting
that the Complainant did not directly include this in their complaint report, thus the Board does
not support that this was an allegation from the complainant and should not be documented as
such. The Board understands, however, that General Order 99-08 will be amended in response
to the circumstances involved in this complaint.
Item Number: 4.i.
a
CITY OF IOWA CITY
"QR T-4 COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Historic Preservation Commission: November 14
Attachments: Historic Preservation Commission: November 14
MINUTES APPROVED
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 14, 2 024 — 5:30 PM — FORMAL MEETING
E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Margaret Beck, Carl Brown, Kevin Burford, Andrew Lewis, Ryan Russell,
Jordan Sellergren, Deanna Thomann, Nicole Villanueva, Frank Wagner,
Christina Welu-Reynolds
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Jessica Bristow
OTHERS PRESENT: Andy Martin, Steven Bullard
CALL TO ORDER:
Sellergren called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANYTHING NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS
HPC24-0090: 10 Bella Vista Place- Brown Street Historic District (garage additions):
Bristow stated this house is located in the Brown Street Historic District. It is a Craftsman Bungalow
built around 1908. It has some interesting patterning of the siding and trim.There's a wider lap with
mitered corners and then a band board at the lower windowsill which is not a common place for a band
board on a house here in town. Then above that, it has corner boards and a narrower siding and then
there's another band board just below the level of the second -floor area.
Bristow said that two years ago the Commission approved a demolition of the garage that is behind the
house and adjacent to the rear alley. The owner was going to put another building above it but he
ended up pricing it out and deciding he wasn't going to do that so now he's come back with a proposal
to do an addition to the garage with a building above. Bristow shared images of the garage noting it's a
concrete structure poured with boards holding the concrete so we can see their impression in the
ceiling. There is some deterioration all around it and that's why it was approved to be demolished
before but now he is going to repair it.
Bristow also shared the site plan and noted it shows the garage aligning with the house and the
building above will align with the house but the existing garage does not align with the house so the
new garage will be in a slightly wedge shape. No one will see that because it's underground but then it
will align better with the house and then the other building will just be placed on top of the basement
garages. The new garage will have a door that matches the existing doors on the existing garage and it
will have stairs that go up along the north side. She noted the property owner will just have to verify
that he has enough room with the setback requirements but that will be figured that out through the
building permit process.
Bristow has talked with the owner about the fact that to have an outbuilding in a historic district,
especially of this age, it would be most appropriate for it to really resemble an outbuilding and it could
potentially resemble an agricultural building as well especially since the north side might have had
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 14, 2024
Page 2 of 12
agriculture still going on hundred years ago. They also discussed using board and batten siding so it
looks like a barn and could be one of the ways to differentiate this extra building from an additional
house in the yard. However, given the siding pattern on the house the owner wanted to come up with
something that worked more with the house instead and be something similar to some of the catalog
houses. The owner found similar houses in the 1908 Sears catalog to the house at 10 Bella Vista.
Poultry houses were something that they were selling around the time of the construction of the house
and could be bought through Sears and assembled and that became the inspiration for this out building
in the proposal.
Bristow said the structure will have a low slope shed roof on the south half and a higher slope shed roof
on the north half, creating a band of clerestory windows between the two roof ridges. The building will
have three windows on the south wall that will be aligned with the evenly spaced clerestory windows
above. There will be three windows in the east wall facing the alley and two evenly spaced windows in
the north wall. The west wall facing the house will have one window. It is recommended that the west
facing window is centered on the wall to match the window patterning on the opposite, east wall. The
building will have two passage doors, one in the west wall facing the house, and one in the south wall
leading to the patio over the roof of the garage stall below.
The guidelines suggest that a new outbuilding incorporate smaller rectangular windows to differentiate
between a house and an outbuilding but the owner has had windows for a long time that came from the
house which was remodeled more than 20 years ago. He is proposing to reuse the casement windows
in this new building. Since that doesn't follow the guidelines for an outbuilding the Commission
recommendation will need to include an exception to the guidelines if they want to approve the use of
those windows.
Another thing Bristow wanted to note for the Commission is the balustrades and handrails, there is a
platform roof over the adjacent garage and since he has a door going out to it they assume it will be
used as a patio. Code will require that a guard rail is there and there would also need to be a handrail
along the stairs. Staff would recommend not a typical wood handrail but a metal one made of black
steel in a simple design. Staff also recommended a fiberglass door since the owner didn't want a wood
door and instead of metal doors because they dent and rust and don't resemble wood doors. The
recommended fiberglass door is a half-light two- panel door as is typically recommended on an
outbuilding. Other guidelines are met, it will still have single car doors, palette of materials similar to the
historic structure, and the outbuildings are at the rear of the house and subordinate in size to the house.
The staff recommended motion is to approve as presented in the application with the following
conditions:
• The south windows are revised so that they align with the clerestory windows above and the
west window is centered in the wall and the lower the north lower window matches the
clerestory windows.
• Trim is included as described in the staff report.
• The windows are revised as relatively small and rectangular.
• The balustrade is constructed of black steel and complies with the guidelines.
• The passage door is a fiberglass half-light two- panel door.
If the Commission wishes to approve the proposed windows and forgo the requirement that the
windows are relatively small and rectangular, the motion could be changed to:
The proposed windows are approved through an exception to the guidelines to in order to
bring additional light into the space and reuse historic materials.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 14, 2024
Page 3 of 12
In his written statements the owner included he really wanted to include additional light as he'll use this
as a workspace, and he also really wants to reuse the windows.
Sellergren asked for more information about how the size of the proposed windows compared to what
the size in the guidelines. Bristow replied they don't have a size dimension but the drawings probably
are accurate with the size of the window in relationship to the wall so a relatively small window is
probably half of one of those.
Reynolds thinks it's a great idea he is reusing materials and totally agrees about the extra light, it will
also make the building look a better match to the house and if the owner uses storm windows that's
historically correct for old houses.
Burford stated he is very much a proponent of the reuse of salvaged architectural materials and the fact
that they're local is even better. He finds the windows to appear unique and interesting and is excited
by that proposal so would be in favor of the exception and the use of the proposed salvaged windows.
Sellergren asked if the windows match the age of this type of out building. Bristow stated they might
but she didn't look up the age of the house that was remodeled, she is assuming that house could have
been built anywhere from 1905 to 1925 so similar enough to be an argument for it if it matches.
MOTION: Reynolds moves to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 10 Bella
Vista Place as presented in the application with the following conditions:
• The south windows are revised so that they align with the clerestory windows above
and the west window is centered in the wall and the lower the north lower window
matches the clerestory windows.
• Trim is included as described in the staff report.
• The proposed windows are approved through an exception to guidelines in order to
bring additional light into the space and reuse historic materials.
• The balustrade is constructed of black steel and complies with the guidelines.
• The passage door is a fiberglass half-light two- panel door.
Wagner seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 10-0.
HPC24-0093: 705 Oakland Avenue - Longfellow Historic District (rear porch conversion/ addition):
Bristow stated this house is located near the Longfellow Elementary School and is a small bungalow
with aluminum or steel siding. It is a gable front house with a brick porch and piers, battered columns
and the back has a little bump out that was historically an open porch, it now has piers and the skirting
area has been filled in with panel walls to bring it in as part of the house. This project is a kitchen
remodel and for this project they using the small porch and are keeping the roof and the porch piers
and replacing the walls. Basically they're removing the enclosed porch portion and putting an addition
on the house that reuses the piers and the roof structure so it'll be insulated. Bristow shared the
footprint of that area noting where the refrigerator will go, where they've proposed a window that faces
west and a window that faces south, the windows will match the nearby kitchen windows.
Bristow stated one of the things that did come up with this project was because of the fact that it has
metal siding and they can't approve a synthetic siding on an addition in a historic district and comply
with the guidelines, they'll need to match the historic siding. They'll uncover a little bit of that as they get
into the demo of the porch walls so they'll match the historic siding for this addition and then hopefully
someday in the future some owner will choose to remove all the synthetic siding.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 14, 2024
Page 4 of 12
The guidelines recommend new windows that match the general type and size of the historic windows
and in a location consistent with the window patterning. Bristow noted she doesn't know if they plan to
use a wood or a cement board siding but generally, they can approve a cement board if it's smooth and
matches the lap. Because this is technically an addition it'll have to match the horizontal lines, the
foundation will match because they're using the existing piers, whether or not they replace the wood
infill between is up to them, the siding must match the historic sighting, and it is disallowed to leave
large expanses of wall surface uninterrupted by windows or doors. Again they're putting windows on
the west and south sides. The guidelines also state is disallowed to add space by enclosing a historic
front or side porch, this is a rear porch and technically they are demolishing most of it and making a
new addition.
Andy Martin, Martin Construction, stated that the enclosed porch is already being used as part of the
kitchen.
MOTION: Wagner moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 705
Oakland Avenue as presented in the application with the following conditions:
Historic siding and trim configuration is documented and reviewed by staff and will be
matched in the addition.
Burford seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 10-0.
HPC24-0097: 927 South 7t" Avenue - Dearborn Street Conservation District (window sash
replacement):
Bristow stated this house is located in a group of small brick bungalows. There are six of them all built
by the same person. In fact when this neighborhood was surveyed it was determined that they were
eligible to be a historic district on their own, but when the City was forming the Dearborn Conservation
District It was included in that instead of forming a small historic district.
The subject property has a very expressive front porch with battered columns and brick piers. There is
shingle siding in the gables and on the dormers, but the rest of the house is brick. In the past, this
house has been approved for the replacement of the deteriorated shingle siding in the dormers with a
cement board product. This particular house is the only one of the six that doesn't have a garage;
instead, there's an adjacent lot that has a garage on it. The project is the replacement of the window
sashes.
Both David Powers (one of the housing inspectors) and Bristow reviewed the windows and they were in
a good to excellent condition. During conversation with the owner they found out that when they
originally bought the house in the 1990s he rehabbed all the windows. He's a carpenter so he did that
work himself and now over the years he has had condensation building up on the windows and
sometimes turning to frost so they're exhibiting some damage. The owner has done some work in the
house such as insulating the roof so his goal is to replace the window sashes so that he has insulated
glass units in an effort to reduce the possibility of frost accumulating on the windows.
When he rehabbed the windows in 1990 he did the weather stripping and all of the stuff needed to
increase the energy efficiency, he replaced the storm windows as well. Again, both David Powers and
Bristow did not consider these windows in any way deteriorated beyond repair when they viewed them.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 14, 2024
Page 5 of 12
They could see there has been some moisture that has gotten in. It may also be expected that after 30
years a finish would need to be maintained or potentially redone. None of windows are in any shape
that would cause them to typically say they are deteriorated and should be replaced. Clearly there's
some finish damage and some of the joints are showing.
The staff recommendation here is not to approve the replacement of all of these sashes however if
there were any individual sashes that were deteriorated beyond repair the owner could document and
determine which ones and then those could be approved individually. Bristow noted when they review
windows they recommend to people things that they can do such as replace ropes that are fraying,
drying out any damp wood and removing excess moisture when it occurs, touching up finishes to help
prevent moisture infiltration into the wood, revising window covering options to allow better air
circulation around window openings, and then if necessary using internal storm windows.
Bristow noted currently the recommended motion is a recommendation to approve the project. She
stated even though staff does not recommend approving this all motions are made in the affirmative
and so if the Commission did not want to approve this they would vote no instead of yes. An alternative
Bristow suggested would be to approve selective window sash replacements. The applicant did submit
a window sash product and it is a product that the Commission could approve if the windows were
deteriorated beyond repair.
Steven Bullard (927 S. 7t" Avenue) stated he loves their old house, it's part of the Palmer brick houses
that were built by an old professor Palmer that used them to house visiting professors for many years.
Of all of houses theirs is probably the truest to character, one of them has been resided totally with
metal siding and others have changed other characters inside. Bullard explained his background is he
was a framing and remodel contract carpenter for about 7 years before he went back to college and he
put himself through college as a trim carpenter that subcontracted from his old framing carpenter
person. He got his degree in biochemistry and biophysics and has done research here at the
University for about 40 years. He has a shop in his garage and could remake all of these windows, and
when they first bought the house he did remake all of these windows as the person before had let them
go to the point where almost all of them had to be taken out, stripped down, and repaired. A lot of them
had rot in them which was repaired with the liquid wood stuff that solidifies rot and they were glued
back together. When the windows were put in he replaced all the glazing, all the lead paint was
removed, he put on new paint, every window in the house was done and it took him over 2 years to do
that.
He does take very good care of his windows, it's not been 30 years since they've been attended to, he
attended them every couple years, the glazing and things have been repaired as needed throughout
the whole 30 years. All of them were glued together and repaired when he did it 30 years ago, a lot of
them were already repaired for rot so taking those frames apart to repair them now would require him to
steam them apart, break that joint and try and glue them back together. He would bet that 50% of them
would break the frame before they broke the joint just because of the age of the wood.
Bullard states they did everything the National Historic Register had suggested, he cut down all the
sashes, he put in foam above and below, he put in V stripping between the windows, the condensation
and stuff is an issue that comes from the window being cold, he has nice top quality storm windows that
they put on, he took off the old aluminum ones which they had glued to the exterior of the house so
when he tore those off he had to redo a lot of repair on the structure itself and the front trim because it
would pull tons of wood with it.
Bullard noted his house is about 950 square feet, maybe 1,000 square feet, and he has 29 windows
and the cavities between the windows that aren't insulated equal about a 10x10 wall that's not
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 14, 2024
Page 6 of 12
insulated, the windows themselves represent about 400 square feet of exposure if not a little bit more.
He stated they've done everything they can do, he repaired the all the cracks in the basement and
professionally filled and sealed everything down there, he insulated up as far as he could and installed
drywall down there to eliminate any leaks of air. Upstairs they've blown in insulation in the areas where
they could but due to the structure of the house they've had to use closed cell foam on the ceilings of
the dormers. All of those things have helped so he feels as though he has been a good steward to this
old house and had he not been the one that moved into it they'd be dealing with quite a much bigger
mess. Not very many people have the skills he has to restore a house like this. He's done all the trim
in the upstairs, he's done the floors, they've kept the original trim on everything, he loves their old
house but the cold from the windows and the condensation that comes is an issue. They have to keep
their blinds down at night to keep the cold out otherwise he's heating the outside. He wants to live in
the house forever. When he retires he has his shop out there, he would just like it to be a little more
comfortable as far as air infiltration and the insulation between the windows, things like that are going to
help, with a sealed double pane glass he's not going to get the heat transfer out or the cold transfer in.
Bullard says he feels he is not able to redo what's there, he can do the finish stuff every few years and
because of that it's going to help the energy efficiency of the house and it's going to help the comfort
inside, it's also going to help the noise from the train nearby and it would add a lot of value to the house
because it would be exactly the same type of sash and it would allow him to insulate everything that he
can. The windows with the double pane and the storm staying in place, which pretty much hides the
window itself, and the trim inside would make it look exactly like it is now, he is saving the whole
outside frame and the inside trim, he feels this would be a good fix that will help them be more
comfortable as they get a little bit older and also improve the efficiency of the house and reduce their
energy cost, reduce their green carbon footprint, and if they are worried about the sashes themselves,
they won't go to the landfill, there is a CSA guy down the street that does urban farming who will take
them for cold frames, which is about what they're worth now. Bullard just wanted to let the Commission
know he really does care about his house and that he's thought this through pretty seriously and has
tried all the steps and feel as though he needs to move to the next step which is going to help him
alleviate the problem and be a little bit more comfortable in his house.
Brown asked what the storm windows on the outside are. Bullard stated they are they Larson storm
windows.
Reynolds asked who's making the new windows. Bristow stated the new windows are a Sierra Pacific
double hung sash kit so it's a metal clad wood sash and the owner said it would be a dark green color
to match the house. Reynolds asked if he wants to do all the windows or just wants to do the ones that
are rotted. Bullard replied he was going to do all of them otherwise he has a mismatched house that's
not going to sell real well.
Sellergren asked if he is looking to sell. Bullard confirmed not, he is looking to stay so selling is not
really an issue at hand, he loves this house and has done so much work on this house. He has his
shop outside that he is going to build furniture out of.
Sellergren wanted to talk about her experience with her own windows. She lives in a 1924 Foursquare
and they are in bad condition so she is very envious of the condition of Bullard's windows. No she
hasn't seen them in person but really does have a lot of faith in the city staff and their expertise. She
acknowledged Bullard is an expert in hjs own home but Sellergren does think that what Bullard
currently possesses is about as good as it gets and there aren't modern alternatives that match the
quality of what they currently have. The current windows look beautiful and he is in an old an old home
that's going to have leaks no matter what, even if he was to replace all the windows it might not solve
the problem of air leakage.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 14, 2024
Page 7 of 12
Bullard stated if Sellergren lives in an old house then she knows how the window weights and
everything work right and so there is that cavity in the middle between each of those windows which
there is about 8 or 9 inch wide and that's where the air infiltration comes from, if that gets filled with
close cell foam there is no longer an air issue, the issue is the windows themselves will fit much tighter.
Old windows rattle and there's no real way to get rid of that, he's tried to put in a piece that has a rubber
seal that would tighten that up. Sellergren asked if that was due to wind and Bullard replied no it's due
to the structure of the window itself. He noted there has to be enough play there this way and that way
due to the way the weights work for that sash to lift so newer types of windows use a different lift
system which has more strength to lift that sash so that side and part that touches the window can be
much tighter and seal, it holds the window in there better whereas due to the way the windows are built
there's no way to get that here with window weights.
Sellergren asked how recently he put the new storms on. Bullard replied the new storms were put on
when he redid each window so they're 20 some years old. Sellergren reiterated her windows are in
terrible condition and it's to the point where she can't even do anything because she's so overwhelmed
by the task. She stated she put on new storm windows two years ago after they painted the house and
hasn't heard a rattle since no matter how windy so she wonders if perhaps rather than removing one of
the key historic qualities of the home maybe they just need some new exterior storms which would be a
less expensive option.
Wagner stated he has installed hundreds of the newer storm windows and it does make a huge
difference. Bullard fully understands but one of their issues is the single pane window is still going to
have the same issue with a good storm window, the outside is still going to be cold to touch which is
going to radiate into the house and condensate on the window.
Sellergren noted approving this is breaking the guidelines which are quite important to maintaining the
integrity throughout town and setting a precedent for the rest of the homeowners and building owners in
town. Mr. Bullard is an example of a very responsible steward of a historic home who's been extremely
thorough and loves his home, there are a lot of folks who don't so once they set a precedent there are a
lot of property owners who will take advantage of it and use that to accomplish fixes that are using
cheaper materials and less effective materials and the Commission won't necessarily be able to
prevent that which will result in the degradation of the historic properties in this town. Therefore, that is
one reason the Commission is interested in encouraging Mr. Bullard to consider other options a while
longer before moving to this step.
Bristow wanted to add a couple things, historically in order to prevent windows from rattling in the winter
they would adjust the stops on the windows and would make the stop tighter in the winter so they don't
rattle and then adjust them looser so that they operate in warmer months. Most of the window
rehabbers actually install a stop adjuster so that they can do that easily without having to remove
everything, it's done with a screw instead. The other thing is that an insulated glass unit has a shelf life
and the seal will break on them and then those sashes will have to be replaced, there's not a fix for
that, someone may be able to have the seals redone but they will get condensation in between them so
an insulated glass unit on its own is something that must be replaced periodically where as a single
pane wood window only needs to be replaced when it's deteriorated beyond repair. She noted they
also have documentation and have provided in the packet where testing has shown that they cannot
recoup the cost of replacement windows through energy efficiency because the difference between a
new insulated glass unit and a single pane with a storm is a negligible difference. Bullard would tend to
argue that's a statistic that doesn't take into account the insulation that would be added to the empty air
spaces.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 14, 2024
Page 8 of 12
Lewis said he has not heard an argument tonight that would allow the exception for using materials
other than historical materials.
Bullard appreciates everything everyone has said, he feels rehabbing these frames that are in there
now as they deteriorate further is impossible, they've been repaired once and they've been filled with a
wood hardener and will not be easily separated. Bullard noted in years to come he's going to face that
issue when he no longer has the ability nor the financial means to take care of it. There's also the fact
that he is going to be able to insulate and have increased comfort inside due to the less radiating cold
coming in which will also be better on cooling because the heat won't be coming in during the summer.
This is a way for him to stay in the house and be comfortable. He has redone the fireplace, he has
redone everything and kept everything the same, he just doesn't want to deal with rotted windows when
he's 72 because he won't be able to pull them out and repair them like he can now. Bullard pointed out
on the windows there are the separation joints and all of those windows were tight when they were
redone, he is a perfectionist when it comes to such things, they're starting to separate now and that's
just going to continue and when that continues he is not going to be able to break those joints apart to
repair them. Again, he would argue that the ability to insulate and upgrade outweighs the disadvantage
of setting a precedent for the entire town.
Thomann noted one of the things they look at too is being able to maintain and reuse rather than throw
away. Bullard stated most don't throw away the whole sash they replace the sealed glass insert.
Sellergren stated though in this case they're talking about removing the entire sash and replacing it with
a modern version.
Burford asked if Mr. Bullard had entertained the thought of the interior storms. Bullard stated once
again he is trying to insulate against air infiltration due to the single pane, if he were to have a double
pane sash that has a sealed argon or gas between panes that allows the r value so that they don't
transfer that cold or let the heat in the summer.
Sellergren thinks Mr. Bullard might be quite impressed with new storms. She stated it's not what the
applicant wants to hear but one of the main tenants here is to protect historic windows and it's very
difficult to make exceptions to that.
Wagner stated he trusts staff's recommendation that if they could determine that there are some
specific windows that they would approve replacing then they could do that, or if that would be
something would consider. Both Bristow and David Powers reviewed this and to him that strengthens
the argument the windows don't need to be replaced.
Lewis stated this motion is basically saying an alternative would be a separate project for selective
windows.
MOTION: Brown moved to approve a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 927 South
7th Avenue as presented in the application. Lewis seconded the motion.
Brown still thinks that the recommendation of newer storm windows with a flush mount system is a
good alternative and can make a huge difference in thermal and acoustics and would be substantially
cheaper than replacing them which also aside from setting a precedent saves money. He stated there
are plenty of historic homes in Iowa City which have those windows.
Lewis stated to reiterate what Wagner said the Commission has the staff recommendation that says the
windows are not beyond repair.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 14, 2024
Page 9 of 12
Bristow stated David Powers is the housing inspector who is the main lead person on the UniverCity
partnership houses and he works with the housing department and the people applying for funding
through the housing rehab program. He is one of the people who goes in and assesses the building
and determines what work needs to be done. He started coming along for the window reviews because
it does tend to be contentious just having one person do the reviews, two is preferred.
A vote was taken and the motion failed 0-10.
REPORT ON CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY CHAIR AND STAFF:
Certificate of No Material Effect -Chair and Staff review:
HPC24-0100: 316 Church Street- Northside Historic District (laundry vent addition):
Bristow stated this home had been previously approved for some repair and redo of the front porch and
now they're just putting in a laundry vent in one of the rear roofs.
HPC24-0101: 826 E Davenport Street - Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (porch soffit
replacement):
This house was in the UniverCity program and is needing to replace the sofit.
HPC24-0109: 813 Ronalds Street - Brown Street Historic District (brick porch pier reconstruction):
This project is replacing the porch piers as they've started to settle.
HPC24-0108: 416 Reno Street- Local Historic Landmark (front porch railing and step replacement):
Bristow noted this is an interesting house that Carl Klaus lived in and then he donated it to the National
Trust when he passed. The house is both listed in the National Register and locally designated to
protect it. The Trust sold it in order to fund some of their programming but one of the interesting
requirements is that the new owner is required to make it open to the public periodically. It's currently
for sale, and staff is trying to work through the process to review a garage built without historic review
but are struggling getting drawings. This project started just as a porch step and railing replacement,
but when they got further into it they found a lot of rot in the base of the columns. Bristow stated this is
one of those situations where she did help them assess this and it was noted that the bases of the
columns would need to be replaced and it was discovered again during the project. Therefore, they
have new flooring and some new railing, they also have a contractor who is turning new bases for the
columns. Historic columns were made to drain and had a hollow center so that any water that got into
the porch roof structure could drain through the column. The column usually was set up off the porch
floor either with actual feet or with little lead squares. These column bases were replaced and blocked
all of that drainage so any moisture that got in the column just pooled on top of the new base and rotted
it out. There was also no air flow around the base of the column.
Minor Review -Staff review:
HPC24-0095: 725 East Davenport Street - Goosetown/Horace Mann Conservation District (new front
step and balustrade):
This project is replacing the steps and handrail, the handrail needed to change since it looked like a
deck railing.
HPC24-0094: 115 East College Street -Local Landmark (commercial signage):
This property got new signage but is a local Landmark downtown that used to be Graze, they will mount
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 14, 2024
Page 10 of 12
the signage to the non -historic transom window and they'll also have a projecting sign from the brick.
HPC24-0106: 28 South Linn Street - Local Landmark (awning fabric/sign replacement):
Bristow noted this should have been a certificate of no material effect as it's just replacing the awning
fabric. Because a sign permit is required, they review it. This building is the local Landmark Iowa City
Post Office.
HPC24-0103: 416 Reno Street- Reno Street Neighborhood (step and stoop replacement):
This is the house again with a front porch step and stoop replacement, but also the southside porch
with the proximity of the shrubs was really rotting out and so the owner replaced it all and used a
contractor who copied all the spindles so they are exact matches which is nice.
HPC24-0110: 1129 E College Street - East College Historic District (overhead garage door
replacement):
This is considered a non-contributing house with a garage. The garage had a historic door but it was
deteriorated and replaced with a flush door with no windows. This is the simplest overhead door that
they can approve.
Intermediate Review -Chair and Staff review
HPC24-0099: 829 Kirkwood Avenue - Local Landmark (window replacement):
The rear addition of this house is a kitchen and it had windows with raised sills put in long ago and the
owner decided to replace those with full height windows so they'll fit the opening again.
HPC24-0074: 629 Melrose Avenue - Local Landmark (roof replacement and internal gutter pan
replacement):
This is a landmark house on Melrose with shingles and they are replacing it with a metal roof made to
look like shingles, not a standing seam metal roof. The house does have all its original copper gutters
but they're damaged and are going to be removed and replaced. Because they don't regulate external
gutters, they are not required to replace them with copper ones. The carriage house has internal gutters
and those will remain.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 10. 2024
MOTION: Thomann moves to approve the minutes of the Historic Preservation Commission's
October 10, 2024 meeting. Wagner seconded the motion The motion carried on a vote of 10-0.
COMMISSION INFORMATION:
Bristow noted they have been working on the awards and had planned to send the letters out next
week but may not be quite ready for that but are moving along.
Bristow went to the Past Forward conference in New Orleans which was spectacular. The National
Trust is the nation's nonprofit historic preservation organization, and they do a really great conference,
there was a lot of focus on sustainability and historic preservation. She personally did one full day
session that was formal training on historic building assessments, and it was really exciting because
they got to crawl all over a historic house in New Orleans and assessed six different areas including
interior and exterior. It was a great learning experience and after hours there were tours.
Sellergren noted she is going to need to step down as chair and Lewis as vice chair will run next
month's meeting because she will be unavailable and conduct a vote for a new chair. Sellergren will
stay on the Commission, she is just unable to continue in the chair role due to time commitments.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 14, 2024
Page 11 of 12
ADJOURNMENT
Wagner moved to adjourn the meeting. seconded The motion carried on a vote of 10-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:58 pm.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE RECORD
2023-2024
TERM
12/14
1/11
2/8
3/21
4/24
5/22
6/13
7/11
8/8
9/12
10/10
11/14
NAME
EXP.
BECK,
6/30/24
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
MARGARET
BROWN,
6/30/26
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
O/E
X
X
X
CARL
BURFORD,
6/30/27
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
X
X
X
X
X
KEVI N
LEWIS,
6/30/26
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ANDREW
RUSSELL,
6/30/27
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
X
X
O/E
X
RYAN
SELLERGREN,
6/30/25
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
JORDAN
STORK, NOAH
6/30/24
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
X
---
---
---
---
---
THOMANN,
6/30/26
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
DEANNA
VI LLAN U EVA,
6/30/25
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
NICOLE
WAGNER,
6/30/26
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
FRANK
WELU-
6/30/25
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
REYNOLDS,
CHRISTINA
KEY: X = Present
O = Absent
O/E= Absent/Excused
--- = Not a member
Item Number: 4.j.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Library Board of Trustees: November 21
Attachments: Library Board of Trustees: November 21
Iowa City Public Library Board of Trustees
Meeting Minutes
November 21, 2024
2nd Floor — Boardroom
Regular Meeting - 5:00 PM
FINAL
Tom Rocklin - President Bonnie Boothroy Robin Paetzold
DJ Johnk — Vice President Joseph Massa John Raeburn
Hannah Shultz -Secretary Claire Matthews Dan Stevenson
Members Present: Bonnie Boothroy, DJ Johnk, Claire Matthews, Robin Paetzold, John Raeburn,
Tom Rocklin, Hannah Shultz, Dan Stevenson.
Members Absent: Joseph Massa.
Staff Present: Elsworth Carman, Brent Palmer, Jason Paulios, Jen Royer.
Guests Present: Luna Johnk.
Call Meeting to Order. Rocklin called the meeting to order at 5:01 pm. A quorum was present.
Matthews entered 5:02 pm.
Approval of November 21, 2024 Board Meeting Agenda. Johnk made a motion to
approve the November 21, 2024 Board Meeting Agenda. Boothroy seconded. Motion passed 8/0.
Public Discussion. None.
Items to be Discussed.
Appoint Committee to Evaluate Library Director. Rocklin thanked Johnk, Matthews, and Shultz for
agreeing to serve on the committee to evaluate the Library Director. Rocklin sent Johnk notes from the
previous evaluation. Shultz shared Johnk served on the committee previously. Rocklin said the Board will
address the evaluation at the February meeting.
Policy Review: 501 Authority for Administration of Personnel Policies for Library Employees.
Raeburn made a list of suggestions to propose to the policy. There was discussion about how to review
the proposed changes. Rocklin deferred the policy review to the December meeting.
Policy Review: 502 General Library Personnel Policies. Rocklin shared the library personnel policy is
meant to mirror the City of Iowa City's personnel policy. Matthews asked if there are differences from
If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Jen Royer, Iowa City
Public Library, at 379-887-6003 or Jennifer-ro ey r@icpl.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to
meet your access needs.
the City's policy. Royer shared the word City Manager was changed to Library Director, and the word
city was changed to library. Royer said the portion of the policy that was proposed for editing is not in
the city policy as they don't require librarian certification. Carman said when the city makes further
changes to their personnel policy, library staff will bring it back to Trustees for review. Boothroy asked if
the section on certification was reviewed by the City Attorney. Royer agreed it was. Royer said the
attorney did a light review of the policy because it matches the current personnel policy and legal is
anticipating a more thorough review soon. Shultz made a motion to approve 502 General Library
Personnel Policies. Johnk seconded. Motion passed 8/0.
Policy Review: 813 Unattended Children. Carman said the biggest change suggested to the policy is
moving the age for unattended youth from "under six" to "seven or under". Carman said this change
would align with Transit's unattended child age to ride the bus. Carman said they also benchmarked
with Parks and Recreation, who has an older unattended child age limit, but library staff felt "seven or
under" worked best for library procedures. Carman said this is a policy the Children's Department leans
on regularly and is nice to have it spelled out. The committee tried to make changes as clear as possible.
Paetzold noted 813.5 and asked if the language is in the right voice. Carman clarified Paetzold was
referring to the reasonable accommodations section. Paetzold said it sounds like a directive and not a
policy note. There was discussion about the wording of the sentence, Trustees landed on "All requests
for reasonable accommodations should be directed to the Library Director".
Rocklin asked how often staff get to closing and have a child without a caregiver. Carman said not very
often but it certainly happens. Carman said if it is a regular patron there could be some differences in
how staff would enforce this. Carman said it can also be a little tricky because the building closes earlier
some nights than others; it can be a hard pattern.
Carman said the committee did speak with legal at length considering adding a section for vulnerable
adults to the policy. Carman said they didn't settle on language that was both reflective of the law and
effective for the library's intentions; Carman thinks this conversation will continue. Carman said like the
personnel policy he wanted to review the policy on schedule and bring it back again if needed. Carman
may also consider a supplemental policy for adults. Raeburn asked Carman to define vulnerable adults.
Carman said that is one of the challenges, but it is adults who are unable to make choices about health,
safety, and safe use of library facilities. Carman said there was discussion with legal on whether library
staff were equipped to identify what adults fit that description. With age, staff can say definitively a
patron is or is not in this category, with other considerations staff are less equipped.
Matthews asked if the policy is primarily directed to closing time and noted it could sound like it falls
under disruptive patrons. Matthews said there is a fine line and asked if it was for someone who should
be supervised vs being uncomfortable with someone on their own at closing. Matthews said they're two
separate things, a disruptive patron policy like the Library Use policy might cover adults if there is a
scene in the library, which is different than not being comfortable. Carman said it is more for someone
who needs medical care and is refusing staff intervention. Carman said it would not be a case of staff
trying to find someone in need of supervision and then taking action. Carman said staff have had a few
problems with young adult patrons, well beyond the age of eight. It can be difficult for staff to navigate
who to contact for this age group and gave the examples of determining whether to call 911, contacting
If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contactlen Royer, Iowa City
Public Library, at 379-887-6003 or iennifer-royer@icpl.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to
meet your access needs.
a caregiver, or contacting public safety. Carman said they are not everyday occurrences.
Carman said visiting this policy was a great exercise and staff may revisit it again in the future. Carman
said it was helpful to walk through it with legal to review what staff should do in the instance that
somebody needs help but isn't interested in receiving help. Matthews asked if there are other libraries in
same situation with a precedent we could borrow from. Carman said staff benchmarked with several
libraries who use adult inclusive policies. Carman shared he was comfortable with applying the general
Library Use policy for behavior issues. Carman said staff are typically able to navigate that, though it
would be a benefit to have an additional policy that spoke to teens and adults. Carman said the Library
Use policy is robust and could be applied. Rocklin acknowledged the challenge in this type of situation.
Johnk made a motion to approve policy 813 Unattended Children. Stevenson and Shultz seconded.
Motion passed 8/0.
Staff Reports.
Director's Report. Carman said the library's budget meeting with Finance happened earlier this week.
Carman, Mangano, and Royer attended and had a line -by-line conversation about the budget request.
Carman said it was a healthy conversation. Carman said he, Mangano, and Royer have been working
hard to add notes in the budget reports submitted every year to the city. After three years of building
on the notes there are descriptions for almost all lines, which helps everybody. Carman said there is less
back and forth conversation to determine what a line pays for now. Carman said this work has been
tedious but has really paid off. Carman said we won't know the outcome of the budget conversation
until late December or January. The city will have to make some tough big picture budget decisions.
Carman said the conversation went well and the library wasn't asked to make reductions.
Carman noted the annual report was included in the packet. Carman said ICPL records many statistics,
and the state report shows them in a slightly different format. Royer and Carman worked on this
document and are happy to answer questions.
Carman noted the date and invitation for Inservice Day in his report. The full plan for Inservice Day will
be shared closer to the event and Trustees are invited to attend.
Departmental Reports: Adult Services. Paulios invited Trustees to review the flow chart in his report.
Paulios said staff completed approximately 3,000 inter -library loans last year and each of those libraries
needed to be contacted for returns. Paulios said he didn't have specific data on the amount of time
saved but noted it was substantial. Paulios said there are many benefits such as the pickup cart being
organized, errors being corrected, and uniformity in labeling. Rocklin asked if the clipboard was at one
time an actual clipboard. Paulios thinks it must have been and shared it was digitized as a database.
Paulios noted Todd Brown's quick work on solving this problem. Paulios said there will be a new ILS
(Integrated Library System) coming that could supplant it.
Community & Access Services. Helmick absent. Matthews asked for clarification on "the Food Bank
library table had an average of 20 visitors per visit". Carman said there was an average of 20 visitors
each time the library had a table at the Food Bank. Shultz asked if that was at Community. Carman and
Paulios agreed yes. Paulios said staff offered library card sign ups and information about library services.
Rocklin asked if the visit was weekly. Paulios did not believe it was weekly.
If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contactlen Royer, Iowa City
Public Library, at 379-887-6003 or iennifer-royer@icpl.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to
meet your access needs.
Development Report. Roche absent. Rocklin said the preview party for the Arts & Crafts Bazaar was a
great idea.
Carman thanked Boothroy who cohosted a fundraising event. Roche and Carman appreciated having a
chance to connect with folks in a comfortable environment to talk about the library. Rocklin agreed it
was fantastic. Boothroy said credit goes to Beth Deninger, on the Friends Foundation Board, for hosting
and thinking of the idea. Matthews said Joan DePrenger is a retired Iowa City School Librarian who did a
lot of fundraising for Iowa City schools. DePrenger was instrumental in Run for the Schools. Boothroy
thanked Carman and Roche for attending the event.
President's Report. Rocklin thanked the Director Evaluation committee folks.
Announcements from Members. Matthews asked if other Trustees got an angry email.
Rocklin said yes, all Trustees got it. Matthews asked if there was a response. Rocklin said it came
through Mimecast and went to the Board email address. Carman shared he and Rocklin discussed it and
because there was not a request for a response or information it was appropriate not to respond.
Paetzold said there was no signature. Carman appreciated Stevenson checking on it. Rocklin said it is
useful to remember what Trustees do affects the whole public in different ways.
Carman noted the Corridor Business Journal article in the packet. Amanda Ray, ICPL Supervising
Librarian, and Carman spoke at a business lunch. Ray did a great job explaining how ICPL supports the
business population and Carman is optimistic about expanding the conversation and amplifying these
services. Paetzold said Forkenbrock was a former Iowa City Public Library Trustee.
Committee Reports.
Advocacy Committee. Rocklin asked if Carman had ideas about the legislative session agenda this year.
Carman said staff are looking at what failed last year to see if it will be brought back. Carman believes
libraries will face a tougher environment in 2025 in terms of trying to re -introduce the library levy.
Carman is watching for legislation like senate file 496, which restricted library materials in public school
collections, and legislation around library governance. Carman thinks changes to library governance will
have the potential to be the most detrimental to public libraries. Carman acknowledged the recent
disruption in state library governance and feels it will be a very complex environment. On a national
level Carman is watching the future of IMLS (Institute of Museum and Library Services) funding which
affects the inter -library loan program, and has other major functions. Carman noted connections made
last year with legislators and hopes people will feel comfortable reaching out with questions. Carman
said there was a meeting on Monday with ILA (Iowa Library Association) but Carman hasn't seen the
report yet. Paetzold said the levee was discussed.
Finance Committee. None.
Foundation Members. None.
Communications. News Articles. None.
Consent Agenda. Shultz made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Johnk seconded. Motion
passed 8/0.
If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contactlen Royer, Iowa City
Public Library, at 379-887-6003 or iennifer-royer@icpl.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to
meet your access needs.
Set Agenda Order for December Meeting. Rocklin said the Authority for Administration of
Personnel Policies for Library Employees, Memberships in Professional Organizations, and departmental
reports will be discussed in December.
Adjournment. Rocklin adjourned the meeting at 5:36 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Jen Royer
If you will need disability -related accommodations in order to participate in this meeting, please contactlen Royer, Iowa City
Public Library, at 379-887-6003 or iennifer-rover@icpl.org. Early requests are strongly encouraged to allow sufficient time to
meet your access needs.
Board of Commissions: ICPL Board of Trustees
ATTENDANCE RECORD
Name
Term Expiration
1/25/2024
2/22/2024
2/29/2024
3/28/2024
4/25/2024
5/23/2024
6/27/2024
7/25/2024
8/22/2024
9/26/2024
10/24/2024
11/21/2024
12/19/2024
Boothroy, Bonnie
X
X
OE
OE
X
X
X
X
Johnk,DJ
6/30/2025
X
OE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
OE
Massa, Joseph
6/30/2027
X
X
OE
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
OE
X
Matthews, Claire
6/30/2023
X
X
X
X
OE
X
X
X
OE
X
X
X
OE
Paetzold, Robin
6/30/2023
X
X
X
X
X
X
OE
OE
X
X
X
X
OE
Raeburn, John
6/30/2027
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
OE
X
X
X
Rocklin, Tom
6/30/2025
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
OE
X
X
X
Santos Green, Lucy
6/30/2029
X
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Shultz, Hannah
6/30/2025
OE
X
X
X
X
OE
OE
X
X
X
X
X
X
Stevenson, Daniel
1 6/30/2027
1 X
I X
X
I X
I OE
X
X
I X
X
X
OE
X
X
KEY:
X
PRESENT
O
ABSENT
OE
EXCUSED ABSENT
NM
NO MEETING HELD
R
RESIGNED
TE
Term Expired
Item Number: 4.k.
a
CITY OF IOWA CITY
"QR T-4 COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Public Art Advisory Committee: November 7
Attachments: Public Art Advisory Committee: November 7
Approved, p.1
Public Art Advisory Committee Mtg, 111712024
Minutes
Public Art Advisory Committee
November 7, 2024
Helling Conference Room
Public Art Advisory Committee
Members Present: Leslie Finer, Juli Seydell Johnson, Andrea Truitt, Sophie Donta,
Scott Sovers, Anita Jung, Jeremy Endsley
Members Absent: Nate Sullivan, Rachel Kinker
Staff present: Rachel Kilburg Varley, Ashley Platz
Public Present: none
Call to Order
Truitt called the meeting to order at 3:34 p.m.
Public Discussion of Any Item Not on the Agenda
None.
Consider minutes of the October 3, 2024 PAAC meeting.
Sovers noted Knoche was erroneously excluded from the "Members Present" list.
Endsley moved and Finer seconded that the amended minutes from the October 3,
2024, meeting be approved. Motion passed (7-0).
Review 2025 Public Art Matching Grant Program Materials
Truitt noted the grant overview, application, and rubric included in the agenda packet
and invited feedback regarding modifications for the 2025 funding round. Committee
members discussed and directed Kilburg Varley to make the following changes:
• Add an optional field for applicants to share the URL to their website, online
portfolio, or social media sites on the application form.
• Add a question to the application form asking whether the applicant has received
Public Art Matching Grant funds in the past. If the applicant selects yes, they will
be asked to explain if the project is different or expanded from the past.
• On the application form, for the question about how the project is defined as
public art, request a description of how the project will also engage the public.
• On the application form, for the question related to project success, include
clarifying instructions to list specific outcomes or measures.
• Add a question to the application form for the applicant to select all types that
apply to their project: functional, unexpected, participatory, ephemeral, and
contemplative. These criteria will be removed from the rubric and will not impact
an application's score but will be made available to the PAAC members to help
assess whether they are awarding a diverse mix of types of funded projects.
Approved, p.2
Public Art Advisory Committee Mtg, 111712024
• Reformat the rubric to align scoring criteria in the same order as the application
questions.
• Reorganize select criteria and section headers in the rubric for clarity.
• Make the rubric available online for applicants to reference.
• Add additional acknowledgements to the introductory/gatekeeper page on the
application form related to additional approvals, access, and responsibilities of
the applicant.
Status of Neighborhood Art Projects
Kilburg Varley provided an update on two neighborhood art projects:
First, due to no progress for 3+ years, including a lack of response from the project
partners recently, consideration of the project proposed by the Lucas Farms
Neighborhood Association has been terminated and they are encouraged to re -group
and apply to neighborhood art opportunities in the future.
Next, Kilburg Varley shared that on the South District Bus Stop Bench Project, the City
has fulfilled its obligation to prep the site and install the cement foundation. The artist
has encountered challenges with the primer rusting, which has set them back a few
weeks, but they are still optimistic about completing installation this year.
Staff Updates
None.
Old or New Business
Anita asked about the status of the process for updating the Public Art Strategic Plan.
Kilburg Varley noted that an overview and schedule for the process was included in the
October 3, 2024, PAAC agenda packet. She shared that a public input survey is the
next step and will be issued in December 2024, the PAAC will review those results in
Winter 2025, and then a work session among the PAAC will be planned for Spring 2025
with the goal of adopting an updated Strategic Plan by Fiscal Year 2026.
Adjournment
Sovers moved to adjourn at 4:29 pm. Donta seconded. Motion passed (7-0).
Approved, p.3
Public Art Advisory Committee Mtg, 111712024
Public Art Advisory Committee
Attendance Record
2023-2024
Name
Term
Expires
8/3/23
917/23
11/2/23
1217/23
1/4/24
4/4/24
6/6/24
8/1/24
9/5/24
10/3/24
1117/24
Ron Knoche
X
X*
X
X
X*
X*
X
X
O/E
X
X*
Juli Seydell-
X
X
O/E
X*
X
O/E
X
X
X
X*
X
Johnson
Steve Miller
12/31/23
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
---
---
---
Eddie
12/31/24
O/E
0
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Boyken
Andrea
12/31/25
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
X
X
X
X
Truitt
Dominic
6/30/23
O/E
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Dongilli
Anita Jung
6/30/23
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
0
X
Jenny
12/31/23
X
O/E
0
X
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Gringer
Jeremy
12/31/25
X
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
Endsley
Nate
6/30/26
X
X
X
X
O/E
X
X
X
O/E
X
O/E
Sullivan
Leslie Finer
---
---
---
---
---
X
X
X
X
X
X
Rachel
---
---
---
---
---
X
X
O/E
X
X
O/E
Kinker
Key
X
= Present
X*
= Delegate attended
0
= Absent
O/E =
Absent/Excused
---
= Not a member
Item Number: 4.1.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
January 7, 2025
Senior Center Commission: November 21
Attachments: Senior Center Commission: November 21
Approved Minutes
November 21, 2024
MINUTES
SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION
November 21, 2024
Room 311, Iowa City Senior Center
Members Present: Nancy Ostrognai, Betty Rosse, Jay Gilchrist, Warren Paris
Members Absent: Ross Taylor, Lee McKnight, Angie McConville
Staff Present: LaTasha DeLoach, Kristin Kromray
Others Present: Cynthia Dietz
CALL TO ORDER:
The meeting was called to order by McKnight at 4:00 PM.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE OCTOBER 17, 2024 MEETING:
Motion: To accept the minutes from the October 17, 2024. Motion carried on
a 4/0 vote. Ostrognai/Paris
PUBLIC DISCUSSION:
Cynthia Dietz, a retired GIS librarian, spoke to the commission regarding an
online map project that will explore information and resources in the Iowa City
area. Cynthia would like to partner with the Senior Center to do a program and/or
gather information from local seniors. Commissioners suggested she speak with
Senior Center programming staff regarding her ideas.
OPERATIONAL OVERVIEW:
DeLoach noted the Senior Center has hired three new evening and weekend
employees. The afternoon receptionist position is still currently open, but an offer
to a potential new employee has been given.
The door and window project is still slated to occur next year. Ostrognai
requested a larger handicap button at Washington St. Paris noted an opener that
is activated by a hand wave might be an option.
Approved Minutes
November 21, 2024
DeLoach reported staff will be revising the code of conduct and locker policies.
Updated policies will likely be in next month's commission packet for review. The
Senior Center has seen an increase in the number of unhoused community
members utilizing the Senior Center. Updated policies will address some of the
items Senior Center staff have been navigating. The Senior Center is working
more closely with Shelter House and the police department as well as starting to
attend a City work group dedicated to unhoused community members. Rosse
noted that there have been some concerns on the Monday Table to Table
distribution and that people have reported to her that they appreciate a police
officer coming through on Mondays. Gilchrist asked if the police are well
resourced. DeLoach noted that Iowa City police officers do receive de-escalation
training and that when calling the Senior Center can request an officer who is
versed in mental health issues. Additionally, there is the Mobile Crisis Unit that
can be contacted for situations that do not warrant a police call.
DeLoach noted that locker pricing has not been increased in many years. It
currently costs $5/month. The recreation center has day use only lockers that are
50 cents a day. The Senior Center will be putting forward a request to increase
the cost of a locker to $15/month. This will put it more in line with the recreation
department pricing.
DeLoach noted that the Table -to -Table distribution continues to evolve and will
soon involve a registration process. She will be keeping an eye on how it is going
and make assessments as things move forward.
Rosse reported that Ecumenical Towers residents are interested in having an
ATM at the Senior Center. As of now, DeLoach understands the desire to have
one, but it is unlikely to happen soon. DeLoach noted that this could be
something that could be discussed during the interior renovation discussions.
There was discussion that there are multiple ATMS's within a block. Gilchrist also
noted that there might be a concern with older adults and scamming that could
occur.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Ostrognai mentioned that a community member asked if congregate meals would
come back to the Senior Center. DeLoach gave a brief history of that meal
program and that it had always been an outside organization who had run that
program. She noted that once a kitchen renovation is complete that there might
be more opportunities for meals at the Senior Center.
The Commission discussed the one application for the at large commission seat.
Motion: To appoint Mary McCall as the at large, non -Iowa City, Johnson
County representative. Motion carried on a 4/0 vote. Paris/Ostrognai
2
Approved Minutes
November 21, 2024
Gilchrist noted that he would like for other Senior Center staff members to meet
at future commission meetings.
Meeting Adjourned.
3
Approved Minutes
November 21, 2024
Senior Center Commission Attendance Record
12/21/23
1/18/24
2/15/202
3/21/24
4/18/24
5/16/24
6/20/24
7/18/24
8/15/24
9/19/24
10/17/202411/21/2204
Name
Term Expires
4
Betty
12/31/26
--
--
--
X
X
X
NM
NM
O/E
X
X
X
Rosse
Jay
12/31/25
O/E
NM
X
X
X
X
NM
NM
X
X
O/E
X
Gilchrist
Tasha
12/31/24
O
NM
O
O
O
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
Lard
Angela
12/31/24
X
NM
X
X
X
O/E
NM
NM
X
X
X
O/E
McConville
Lee
12/31/27
X
NM
X
X
O/E
X
NM
NM
X
X
X
O/E
McKnight
Susan
12/31/23
X
Mellecker
Nancy
12/31/26
X
NM
X
X
X
X
NM
NM
X
X
X
X
Ostrognai
Ross
12/31/24
--
--
--
--
--
--
O
X
O
O
Taylor
Warren
12/31/25
X
NM
O
X
X
X
NM
NM
O
X
O
X
Paris
Key: X =Present O =Absent O/E =Absent/Excused NM =No meeting -- = Not a member
E