Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-09-02 TranscriptionIowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:00:21] All right, it is 6:00 PM on September 2, 2025. And this is the city of Iowa City Formal meeting. I'm going to call this meeting to order. Roll call, please. [00:00:32] Alter? [00:00:32] Here. [00:00:33] Bergus? [00:00:33] Here. [00:00:33] Harmsen? [00:00:34] Here. [00:00:34] M oe? [00:00:35] Here. [00:00:36] Salih? [00:00:36] Here. [00:00:37] Teague? [00:00:37] Here. [00:00:38] Weilein? Page 1 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:00:38] Here. [00:00:40] All right. Want to welcome everyone that is in Council chambers to your city hall, and to those that are joining us virtually, welcome, as well. Item number one- actually, we're going to move on to the consent agenda items. Watch your items two through six? Can I get a motion to approve, please? [00:00:58] So move. Salih. [00:00:59] Second. Alter. [00:01:01] Anyone from the public like to address a topic on our consent agenda? If you're online, please raise your virtual hand. If you're present, please come forth. Seeing no one in -person or online, Council discussion. [00:01:18] 1 just wanted to take note of item 5d, the Iowa River Powerhouse Dam Repair Project. The motion in the consent agenda is to reject the bids because it came in more than double. Well, I shouldn't say- yeah, more than double. Nearly $1 million over and to reset bids for October 14. And so I'll vote yes for this. But I think if we have another bid opening where this happens again, we should seriously consider alternative methods than fixing that dam and also if we can align that with any plans that we have for re -envisioning the river that would align with that, that would be really helpful. But I wanted to flag that as a- if this happens again, I will probably vote no to spend that much money on it. [00:01:59] Got you. I would also just like to point out item 5b or national opioid settlements and basically, um, we do different things with our settlements, um, but I just wanted to put out there that Johnson County has vending machines around town now that has free sexual health products that anybody can get, and they have Narcan, and just lots of really, really cool things. I know that there's one in Deadwood. I know that there's multiple downtown. Um, so maybe just getting everybody's help spreading the word that those things are available, and it's a really good resource and thank you to the county for using your opioid settlement in that way. Anything else? Roll call, please. [00:02:54] Weilein? [00:02:56] Yes. Page 2 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:02:57] Alter? [00:02:57] Yes. [00:02:58] Bergus? [00:02:58] Yes. [00:02:59] Harmsen? [00:02:59] Yes. [00:03:00] Moe? [00:03:00] Yes. [00:03:00] Salih? [00:03:01] Yes. [00:03:01] Teague? [00:03:02] Yes. [00:03:02] Motion passes 7-0. Item number 7 is community comment. This is an opportunity for the public to make a comment on items that are not on our agenda. I wanted to see the hands of those that wanted to speak on items not on our agenda. I'll welcome you at this time, and you'll be alloted 3 minutes. There is a sign in sheet here at the podium that we ask everyone to sign in when they give public comment. And Page 3 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. the back, there is a card that you can fill out your name and drop it in the basket. Welcome. Please state your name and city you're from. [00:03:47] My name is Mary Gravitt, and I'm from Iowa City. And I'm here to talk about the needs of common people. The first thing I want to talk about is bus shelters. Now because I'm a Democrat, I intend to ride this mule to the end of the line and repeat myself, regardless until I feel that the people of Iowa City have been given justice. The bus shelters. Bus shelters are sorely needed in Iowa City because of the ADA and the large disabled population. Some agency has been kind enough to place wooden benches at bus stops throughout the neighborhoods, but this is not enough due to climate change. There are bus shelters, warehouse and funds, $100,000, that was provided by a previous administration for said shelters. And I have observed only one bus shelter being replaced, not added. And that is located at the Autumn Park bus stop. I want to know what happened to the allotted funds and the bus shelters. There are still some around town, but they're not being used because the buses no longer go there. And class warfare. The tenants living in Hilltop Court behind the Iowa City shelter house have a legitimate complaint about the lawless- lawlessness that the tent city surrounding shelter house is practicing. I have made suggestions in the past about establishing a 24/7 police presence at the location, as was done at Pepperwood Plaza. Or is it because the complainants live in mobile homes, trailer trash to some people that their complaints cannot be dealt with as with middle class brick and mortar residences? Class warfare is subtler than racism, but it has the same affect and effect as racial discrimination. However, it is not the salary that is in question, as some speakers said at the last meeting, but the service shelter house provides. It houses people and seeks to find permanent housing. But this is not an easy task because payees do not seem to be available to a great deal of their clients, and they are evicted after three months from residence and are homeless again. I only know this from people telling me. Three months rent and utilities are paid by shelter house or some agency then the client is evicted.We can't have this in Iowa City. I have seen Iowa City deteriorate in its social promises, but these people at Hillcost- Hill- Hilltop Court have been here twice for the same complaint. Where's the police protection? Where is the duty to the citizens? Thank you. [00:06:53] Thank you. Anyone else want to speak during this time on item that is not on our agenda? Seeing no one we're going to move on to items 8, which is planning and zoning matters, 8a, rezoning Maiden Lane East Benton Street, ordinance rezone approximately 1.04 acres of land at 804, 810, and 824 Maiden Lane, 410, 416, and 418 East Benton Street and 815 Gilbert Court from intensive commercial zone and medium density single family residential zone to community commercial zone. And I'm going to open the public hearing, and welcome. [00:07:37] Thank you, Mayor. Danielle Susman, Neighborhood and Development Services. As you introduced this item, this is a rezoning located along Maiden- Maiden Lane and East Benton Street, shown here in that white dashed outline. The owners are Frank Simon and Sheridan Family, LLC, and they're requesting approval of the rezoning of approximately this 1.04 acres of land as you listed the addresses there. From Page 4 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. intensive commercial, which is CI-1 zone and medium density single family residential zone, which is RS- 8 to all of those properties to one single zone, community commercial CC-2 zone. The affected properties were platted under Lions First edition subdivision back in the 1800s, and these properties are currently for sale, and the Great Plains Action Society is looking to purchase them. This shows that mix of current zonings. The subject property currently has those two different zoning desi- designations applied to them. These properties are currently for sale, as I said, and of interest to Great Plains Action Society, which is looking to purchase them. Their vision is to reuse the existing buildings to create a community focused space and includes a variety of uses, which are spaces for entrepreneurs and start up businesses, which would be sales oriented retail in our zoning code, a community meeting space, which we would consider hospitality oriented retail in our zoning code, a cafe, offices for the use of the applicants, and a green space for gardens and outdoor gatherings. And one of the contingencies of the sale is successful rezoning of this property. So as I mentioned, there are a mix of two current zonings on the property. The current intensive commercial zoning is not really compatible with the existing neighborhood. It's a- old zoning district that's been in place for a while, but we would not consider it currently to modern standards to be appropriate for this neighborhood. It's really more intensive, much more outdoor sales and service functions, really a difficult transition into the existing single family neighborhood nearby. And the properties at 6- let me see, 416 and 418 East Benton Street are zoned medium density residential. The purpose of that zone is a flexibility of single family housing designations. So the request to rezone all of this to community commercial CC-2 zone would allow both residential and non-residential uses, but those non-residential uses would be more like group living, multifamily, office, retail, and restaurants, things that are much, uh, smoother transition into the single family neighborhood. So when we review a rezoning like this, we use our two standard review criteria. First is consistency with a comprehensive plan. As far as consistency with the comprehensive plan, we would be looking to that future land use map, which designates the kind of encouraging continued compact and efficient development, so infill and reuse of existing properties, planning really for commercial development in this area, discouraging linear strip commercial development, um, providing an appropriate transition to the surrounding neighborhood, and really encouraging a healthy mix of independent local businesses in the neighborhood to serve the folks that live there. Consistent with the comp plan also includes the Downtown and Riverfront Crossings Master Plan, which was developed in 2013. Some of the subject property is within that, um, master plan area, specifically the South Gilbert subdistrict. The South Gilbert subdistrict is intended for lower intensity mixed use development, and again, to create a transition between higher intensity mixed use areas to lower to medium intensity residential areas. The proposed rezoning aligns with the directions of the master plan objectives, even though it is not a form -based code at this time. We really see this as an opportunity for incremental change in the correct direction. The intent of the properties right now is not for their wholesale redevelopment, but just adaptive reuse with some minor changes. So again, staff supports this in the context of consistency with the district plan. These are images from the master plan. Basically, all of those white outlined buildings in this vicinity are ones that were anticipated in the master plan to eventually be completely redeveloped. So quite- quite a bit of change potentially to this neighborhood would be endorsed by that district plan. As I said, that's not exactly the step that we're at right now, but just kind of an incremental improvement and reuse of the properties. Staff did find that this was compatible with the existing neighborhood. It's surrounded by, um, a variety of uses right now, and the Page 5 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. lesser commercial district would be more compatible with those surrounding neighborhoods. So this step shows you the steps in development. Again, this is not redevelopment, but we're at the rezoning step here, rezoning the property from those two zoning districts to this one commercial one. If there were to be any future development, certainly, if buildings are torn down and new ones proposed, there would be site plans and building permits involved. So based on a review, the relevant criteria, staff did recommend approval of the rezoning with no conditions. At their August 6 meeting by a vote of 5-1, the Planning and Zoning Commission concurred with staff's recommendations. [00:12:47] A good neighbor meeting was also held, [00:12:50] and I believe that concludes my remarks. I'm happy to answer questions. [00:12:58] Were you going to ask something? [00:13:00] I'm going to see if it is answered in the report, so go ahead. [00:13:03] Um, I just wanted to- I watched the, um, planning and zoning meeting regarding this, and, uh, there was one commissioner who dissented, correct? [00:13:14] Yeah. It was 5-1. [00:13:16] Yeah. Um, I was just, uh, wanted to, like, uh, for the record, hear it from you. It seemed like there was may- maybe confusion as to why this couldn't just be mixed use. Um, why choose the CC-2? Um, I was wondering if you could speak on that. [00:13:34] So staff doesn't necessarily dictate what the zoning district the applicant chooses to apply for are. I mean, we look at the mix of uses they propose and advise them on what hap- what direction to go. I'm sure they could have picked a form based code zoning district, but there would have been consequences for that as far as making things non -conforming. So generally, staff advises applicants to pick a zoning district that meets the needs that they're anticipating in their vision and creates the least amount of kind of non -conforming or conflicts with the zoning code. So while that commissioner may have an opinion about which zoning district they would -preferred, really, we react to what the applicant and the property owners are proposing to us. Page 6 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:14:15] Okay. Thank you. [00:14:19] Any other questions? Hearing none. Thank you. All right. Um, wanted to know if anyone from the applicants are here to speak. Invite you at this time. Welcome. [00:14:32] Um, I'm Annie Pallas. I'm here on behalf of Shoemaker. So if anybody has any questions, I would be happy to answer them. Do I stay? [00:14:45] Hearing none. Thank you. [00:14:46] Thank you. [00:14:47] All right. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Please welcome. [00:14:54] There is a sign in at the desk that we asked you to sign in. [00:15:00] Now? [00:15:01] Yes, please. Yes. And I'll just remind folks that in the back, there is a little card that you card fill out and then drop it in the basket at the- at the podium. Welcome. Please state your name and city you're from and you'll be allowed 3 minutes. Welcome. [00:15:18] Thank you. Good evening, everyone. My name is Joe Maxwell, and I am a proud resident of Iowa City. I am a second year masters student in Urban and Regional Planning, as well as the president of the Native American Student Association here at the University of Iowa, and I am speaking today to express my strong support for the rezoning of this property. I have met with the leaders of the Great Plains Action Society, Sikowis and Marie, and they have shown me their plans and I believe, um, both professionally and personally that not only do they have the vision to make their planned resiliency hub a success, they also have the acumen and the connection to community outside of Iowa City, uh, to create a really resilient social structure to support Iowa City's indigenous and BIPOC populations. Uh, they are lovely people, and I am excited to see, uh, this plan progress. Thank you. Page 7 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:16:22] Thank you. Anyone else like to address this topic? [00:16:28] Anyone online? Seeing no one in person or online? Before I close this public hearing, is Council inclined to vote with P&Z? [00:16:39] Yes. [00:16:40] All right. Gonna close the public hearing? Could I get a motion to give first consideration, please? [00:16:45] So moved, Harmsen. [00:16:46] Second, Salih. [00:16:47] All right. Council discussion. [00:16:50] Sounds great. [00:16:51] Yeah. [00:16:52] Um, I particularly remember a conversation that I had with an indigenous friend of mine, and, you know, it made me think a lot that sometimes people say, Well, there isn't a large indigenous population in Iowa City. And they said that, you know, it's really because unfortunately, there's not a lot for and by them here. So I just think this is a really good step in the direction of, you know, fixing that problem. And yeah, I'm really excited about it. I think it looks amazing. [00:17:28] Yeah. I agree. [00:17:30] Yeah, I love how all of the- [00:17:33] Page 8 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. The planning. [00:17:34] Yes. Lots of buildings, lots of opportunities, and looking forward to see what they do with it. [00:17:40] And I think it's going to work really well in that section of town. I actually there quite a bit in the area. And it's true. I mean, any actual kind of, like, industrial type or commercial that it was previously zoned for however long ago, it's just- it doesn't fit. And so I think that this is going to be a really nice way to expand, sort of to bridge what's further. Oh, I'm directionally challenged, but, you know, the retail that's a little bit over. So anyway, I'm excited about this. [00:18:17] Roll call, please. Alter? [00:18:19] Yes. [00:18:20] Bergus? [00:18:20] Yes. [00:18:21] Harmsen? [00:18:22] Yes. [00:18:22] M oe? [00:18:22] Yes. [00:18:23] Salih? [00:18:23] Yes. Page 9 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:18:24] Teague? [00:18:24] Yes. [00:18:25] Weilein. [00:18:25] Yes. [00:18:26] Motion pass is 7-0. Item number 813, Comprehensive Plan Amendment 611 Greenwood Drive. [NOISE] Resolution to amend the Comprehensive Plan future land use map from public semi public to residential 16-24. Due acre and the Southwest District Plan future and use map from Public Services Institutional to medium to high density multifamily for approximately 9.9 acres of land located at 611 Greenwood Drive. I'm going to open the public hearing and welcome back. [00:19:04] Thank you, Mayor. Again, Danielle Susman, Neighborhood Development Services. This application is the first of two that are tied together. This is a comprehensive plan amendment, shown here in the bounded white dashline is the former Roosevelt Elementary School, which was constructed in 1931, opening for its inaugural year classes is 1932. After 80 years of operation, the school closed its doors in 2012, at which time the Iowa City School District rebranded the building as the Theodore Roosevelt Education Center. Or TREC, which housed the home school assistance program, as well as other programs for non traditional students. In 2018, the TREC announced it would cease operations at the end of the academic year, including services in the summer of 2019 and transferring those services to individual school buildings. After that occurred, the current owners, TWG purchased the former Roosevelt elementary school site from the Iowa City Community School District in 2021. The owner, which is still TWG is working with MMS consultants to prepare these two applications to allow for the eventual redevelopment of the 9.9 acres of land at 6:11 Greenwood Drive. The first application, as I mentioned tonight for consideration is a comprehensive plan amendment. This slide shows both on the right hand side, the citywide comprehensive plan, and on the left side, the more specific district plan for the Southwest District, with the Roosevelt school site kind of centered in those images to show basically what it was anticipated in the future land use planning efforts of the time that those two plans were developed. Both of those plans are several years old, almost 20-years-old, and actually really we're just memorializing the fact that it was a school at the time those plans were anticipated. So it's shown either depending on the terms in either plan basically as public land, and it's currently zoned public, which is intended for ownership by cities, states, and school districts. So this application, really, because this property is no longer owned by one of those types of governments, needs to shift the zoning designation eventually, but also be addressed in our comprehensive plans as understanding that this is Page 10 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. no longer a public site. The comprehensive plan amendment goes through two review standards, much like our rezonings, but they are slightly different. First is whether circumstances have changed and or additional information or factors have come to light. And the second, even though it says two ones, the proposed amendment is compatible with other policies or provisions. So obviously, circumstances have changed a great deal since the comprehensive plans were adopted in 2013, and I forget the date of the district plan. I think it's at the end. I think it's early 2000 2002. So, unfortunately, Roosevelt school is no longer. So ownership has changed. The use of the land was always anticipated to change once that sale took place. And it's taken a number of years for the new owner of the land to formulate a plan, but that's what they're proposing with their second application tonight about the subject property. So recognizing the change in ownership and the opportunities for new residential development, looking at whether the proposed comp plan designation that's being proposed would be compatible with other policies and provisions of the comprehensive plan, reviewing the comprehensive plan, there are a number of policies related to land use and housing goals and strategies as well as environmental goals. All of those really center around focusing on compact and efficient development, focusing on areas that would be appropriate for compatible infill, encouraging those types of developments to diversify the housing options in all neighborhoods. To maintain housing stock in those neighborhoods. Really, the environmental goals are supported by encouraging that efficient development inside cities so it does not sprawl outside of cities and raising awareness of the benefits of those types of developments that are also able to reduce reliance on cars for transportation. As far as comprehensive plan steps, this is the first application of two highlighted here in green. The next case on your agenda will actually be the rezoning. Anticipating that this site will redevelop, just wanted to lay out that there would be site plan and building plan review as well. So based on a review of the relevant criteria, staff recommended approval of the amendments at their August 27 meeting by a vote of 6-0. The applicant did hold a good neighbor meeting in May. We did receive, I think, both on this case and the next case, a comment letter in opposition to this case filed out on a protest petition form, but that was the only such application you received, and it did not meet the threshold for the rezoning to need a protest petition super majority. So I think that's it for my comments. Happy to answer questions. [00:24:13] Given there's a variety of zoning around it, I assume that there's a variety of possibilities this could have been from RMA all the way to RM44, and this is kind of in the middle. Is that a fair assessment? This is like the middle of the spectrum of what would be possible? [00:24:28] Yeah, so when you look at comprehensive plan, future land use map designations, they don't match up with zoning districts. They're meant to be a variety of possible a spectrum of possible uses. So I believe in both of the comp plan and the district plan, the wording is medium to high density, which could be, yes, a variety of different zoning districts that would meet kind of that flavor of a future land use appropriate use. [00:24:54] Page 11 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. So while we know this is early, we're not considering full plans for this. The good neighbor meaning that it was brought up about the parking and kind of the traffic. Can you speak to that a little bit? [00:25:08] That might be more appropriate for the rezoning case because it is an OPD rezoning, and I'll be showing you a OPD plan or a sensitive area site development plan, which is a little bit closer to site plan. It's the level of detail that you would see at that kind of rezoning. [00:25:23] So we'll save it for the next? [00:25:24] O kay. [00:25:25] Yes. All right. Hearing no more questions. Thank you. All right. Anyone from the public would like to address this tonight? Seeing no one in person? Anyone online? Seeing no one there. I'm going to close the public hearing. Can I get a motion to approve, please? \. [00:25:47] So moved, Moe. [00:25:48] Second, Alter. [00:25:49] Council discussion. Roll call, please. [00:25:54] Bergus? [00:25:55] Yes. [00:25:55] Harmsen? [00:25:56] Yes. [00:25:56] Moe? Page 12 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:25:57] Yes. [00:25:57] Salih? [00:25:58] Yes. [00:25:58] Teague? [00:25:59] Yes. [00:25:59] Weilein? [00:26:00] Yes. [00:26:00] Alter. [00:26:01] Yes. [00:26:02] Motion passes 7-0. Item 8C. [00:26:05] Mayor, I'm sorry. Can we get a motion for correspondence? [00:26:09] Okay. Can I get a motion for correspondence, please? [00:26:12] So move, Weilein. [00:26:14] Second. Page 13 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:26:15] Move by Weilein, seconded by Salih. All in favor say Aye. [00:26:19] Aye. [00:26:19] Any opposed? Motion passes 7-0. We're on to Item number 8C, rezone at 611 Greenwood Drive. Ordinance conditionally rezone in approximately 9.9 acres of land located at 611 Greenwood Drive from neighborhood public zone to medium density multifamily residential zone with a planned development overlay. I'm going to open the public hearing and welcome Danielle. [00:26:42] Thank you, Mayor. So this is the rezoning application for the subject property we're just talking about comp plan amendments for the former location of the Roosevelt School. The request is to rezone the property, which is 9.9 acres to a sorry, medium density single family residential with a planned development overlay. The planned development overlay is triggered because there are sensitive areas on this site plan or on the site. And so they need to do the OPD rezoning, and they need to show an OPD plan to be in compliance with this rezoning designation. Goal is to develop 187 units of affordable housing in a multifamily building. The applicant would be seeking low income housing tax credits or LIHTC credits, and all 187 units would be income restricted. As I mentioned, due to the impacts to the sensitive areas, they are filing an OPD rezoning. The applicant is also requesting to increase as part of that OPD, they're allowed to request slight waivers. They are requesting to increase the maximum building height, which would normally be a maximum height of 35 feet. They're requesting to extend that an additional seven feet to 42 feet. This shows the current zoning. Again, of the subject property and the properties around it. So, as I mentioned, it's currently a P1 zone, which is reserved in our zoning code really for public entities to own land, have separate kinds of regulations for them. The proposed zoning is to a medium density multifamily. [NOISE] This would show you kind of more of the details than you would typically see with just a regular base rezoning. So this shows in pink, the courtyard, a loop of the proposed multifamily building with the parking around it. This is a single lot development, 187 units of income restricted, an OPD waiver for that seven feet of additional height and the sensitive features, which are primarily to the north and west of the site along a ravine that parallels Greenwood Drive. So this shows the building with a parking lot to the east, the access point from the north off of Greenwood Drive, and some drive access aisle and additional parking wrapping around the building to the north. Because this is an OPD rezoning, there are a few more review criteria than the regular rezoning, so we still look at comprehensive plan consistency and compatibility with existing neighborhood. But we also do look at several other criteria. Regarding consistency of the comprehensive plan, obviously, we just changed our comprehensive plan to allow for medium to high density. So this is acceptable zoning district to meet that future land use plan map, which does, like I said, encourage compact, efficient development, a diversity of housing options, supporting infill development for environmental and just good planning practice for people to have access to amenities and be part of neighborhoods. Um, Page 14 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. compatibility with the existing neighborhood. The area does contain a mix of uses. It's, um, as you can see here on the map, surrounded by not only single family houses detached houses on lots, but also a variety of sizes of multifamily. There's also some non residential land uses located to the north and east, including a long term care facility and child education center. And then there's a public park directly to the south across Benton Street. I mentioned that ravine. You can see it here with the kind of dark tree area to the northwest of the current building. That does have slopes, and it's a ravine with woods. So as far as those additional criteria that we review, the first is density and design, this isn't allowed density. The proposed density is below the maximum in the zoning district. RM 20 allows for 24 dwelling units per acre. This Talis at about 18 or 19 dwelling units per acre. That's primarily because they cannot develop where those sensitive areas are, so they're clustering development away from those areas. [NOISE] As I mentioned, there's a variety of surrounding land uses, including the proposed multifamily apartment use that's proposed here. We also review mass scale and general layout. The layout of this development would be a four story multifamily building surrounding a courtyard. They are respecting the setbacks that are required from West Benton Street and more than the required setbacks to the properties from the east. There's almost approximately 140 feet of distance from the building on this proposed site from the adjacent lots to the east. As I showed on that drawing, parking is provided behind and to the side of the building rather than anywhere in front of it along Benton Street or in front of it along Greenwood. The building height, again, there's a waiver request to go to 42 feet in height. There's quite a bit of elevation change of the site. If you've gone on Benton Street, you know that that's a hill, and this is even higher up on top of that hill. [NOISE] [00:31:55] Uh, open space requirements, uh, private open space is required at a certain ratio, depending on the number of dwelling units on site. Uh, they have proposed development showing the adequate provision of private open space, [NOISE] including the courtyard of the building, as well as a playground, an open field area and seating and a dog park. Uh, the natural areas, including the ravine and woodland to the north end of the site would still largely remain as well. Traffic circulation for the site is currently provided from Greenwood Drive. That would remain. And there's also an access off of Benton Street, but the, uh, conditions on the rezoning would actually limit that to emergency vehicle access only. I think there's one other drive, um, not into a parking area currently, a little bit farther on west on Benton Street, which would no longer be allowed. Some of the rezoning conditions that triggered by this rezoning were a need for improved pedestrian circulation. There's currently a sidewalk along Benton Street, but none along Greenwood Drive on this property side of the street. Uh, it's functially impossible to fit a sidewalk in along that because of the ravine that's there and very close to the street. So rather than try to, um, a sidewalk in where it would either disrupt quite a bit of trees or be finding quite a bit of elevation. The, uh, circulation for pedestrians is being accommodated in a direct north south connection between Greenwood Drive and Benton Street along the east side of the property. So a 10 foot wide pedestrian connection with public access easement overlaid on it, uh, for a direct connection to pedestrians to basically connect from Benton Street up to Greenwood or vice versa. Uh, when I get to the conditions, I'll detail that a little bit more. There's a requirement for lighting, uh, along that as well. So again, here's that site drawing. Here's one with a little bit of landscaping, detail shown. These are all very preliminary. These would not be the level of detail you'd see on a site plan. Uh, we will review Page 15 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. these drawings when they get to a site plan stage against all of our multifamily site development standards. So these types of plans are not meant to show you every detail because this is still kind of a preliminary stage of development. The applicant did share renderings of the exterior of the building as they are envisioning it currently. Uh, those renderings show, uh, an incorporation of design aspects to mimic town homes with separate entrances. The buildings are also shown incorporating a step back between the second and third stories at the southwest corner of the building. Uh, these design features are intended to incorporate- to show how the building is compatible with the areas closest to it that are single family homes. And then lastly, the building is broken up by various levels of articulation, different materials, and changes in roof lines to help, uh, break up this overall scale of the appearance of this building. The next criteria that we review is whether development will have, uh, sufficient infrastructure to, uh, support it and not overburden those. The property can be served by existing sanitary and water infrastructure. Staff did request for a traffic study to be completed to anticipate what additional impact this number of dwelling units would have on the surrounding street network. That traffic study did result in tilling additional trips that would be generated both in the morning and evening peaks when folks are coming and going from the building. Um, overall, though, surrounding streets are intended to be able to accept that additional capacity and continue to function at acceptable levels of surface without requiring additional improvements to the- to the street network surrounding the development. Excuse me. Um, there are some pedestrian improvements, though, that can certainly be made, uh, talking a little bit about the- the difficulties of getting a sidewalk along Greenwood. There are some other types of improvements that can help folks circulate more easily around and through the site, including that walkway through the site, but also a raised crosswalk at Greenwood Drive near the entrance of the site, really to draw attention to the fact that folks are crossing there because that's where the sidewalk network gets to, uh, connect. And then also ensuring that that driveway at Greenwood is aligned, uh, at a 90-degree angle to the street to allow for vehicles that are entering and exiting at that point to clearly see each other and pedestrians. And the next criteria is whether development will adversely affect views, property values, and privacy any more than a conventional development would, a conventional development being one that is not an OPD zoning, so just an RM20 zoning designation. Uh, really no impacts are expected beyond conventional development for- for being an OPD. The nearest neighbors to the northwest of the proposed multifamily building are separated by that ravine woodland preservation area that I showed on the slide earlier. The property to the east is separated by the proposed by- development by mature existing trees on their own property, but also a side setback of 30 feet. And additionally, that this proposed building is well away from that east property line, approximately 140-160 feet away from that east property line. Also, there's a change in grade that is significant. The home is at an elevation of approximately 712 feet while the proposed building is at an elevation higher than that, uh, which really kind of puts it out of the direct view of each other. As such, the proposed development would not adversely affect light views and air, property values or neighboring properties, any more than a conventional zoning district with the base zoning standards would. And then finally, whether land uses, building types and modified requirements are in the public interest. Uh, this preliminary OPD plan does include multifamily housing that would be income restricted under a LIHTC approved project. Uh, its max height is not that much more than a multifamily or mixed use building, uh, would allow. It is contains significant protection of that ravine and woodland. And, again, it would be redevelopment of an underutilized site that really has not had much Page 16 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. activity on it. As I mentioned, the trigger for this OPD was those sensitive areas. So just to kind of itemize those real quickly for you, there are wetlands. There are slopes and there are wooded areas on this site. Two identified wetlands exist. We have not gotten a determination yet from the US Army Corps of Engineers, whether both or any of them would be actually jurisdictional wetlands subject to our standards, but we went ahead and reviewed those anyway. Uh, if they are jurisdictional wetlands, then the applicant is requesting a reduction in the buffer around them to make this, uh, development work. Really, they are one of those wetlands is what we would consider kind of a nonconforming wetland anyway, it's already adjacent to the driveway, so there wouldn't really be any impact from redevelopment. The other wetland might be slightly closer to one of the northern parking lots, but it's still within what our ordinance would allow a buffer to be reduced to. Um, as far as slopes, there are some slopes on the site that are absolutely protected slopes that are not being impacted. There are some slopes that are altered protected slopes that are, and those are the slopes that would trigger this review. Those altered protected slopes are essentially man-made slopes, and the level of impact is itemized in the sensitive areas development plan. As far as woodlands, it's on here, but it's actually, uh, not subject to this, um, sensitive areas, um, plan because they are actually protecting well above the amount of woodlands that need to be protected. They may impact, um, only- they may impact it to- up to 80%, but they are, in fact, only impacting, sorry, I probably just have that reversed. 20% of woodlands must be retained. They are retaining 61.5%, so they're well above the minimum standard for woodland protection. Again, this is the development of schedule of activity showing what happened with the last case for the comp plan amendments and then this rezoning. And again, eventually a site plan and eventually building permits. So based on a review of the relevant criteria, staff recommended approval with four conditions. At their August 27 meeting by a vote of 6:0, the Planning and Zoning Commission concurred with staff of- staff's opinion and actually added one more condition. Those conditions include the installation of the 10 foot wide pedestrian connection on the east side of the property. Um, the pedestrian path must also include pedestrian skied lighting, and that would all be reviewed during site plan. Um, again, the access off Benton Street, if it were to be maintained, would be for emergency vehicles only. Also the installation of a raised crosswalk across Greenwood Drive near the entrance to the subject site. Fourth, uh, the access drive from Greenwood onto- I'm sorry, the driveway with access onto Greenwood should be, uh, re -engineered to be a 90-degree angle. And then the PNC condition that was added at their meeting was that the owner will screen the parking spaces located within the eastern parking lot area so that area on the east side of the building from the abutting neighbors to the standard of the S3 screening standard in the zoning code. So as I said again, the applicant did hold a good neighbor meeting. Uh, we did receive one protest petition style, uh, petition, but that's not enough to meet the threshold for a change in the vote, and I believe that concludes my remarks. [00:42:25] Danielle, can you talk to me a little bit about, um, the wetlands requirements as they have changed. I understand in this last year. Are the city's requirements the same as the federal government requirements, and do we care? [00:42:38] For which standard? Page 17 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:42:39] Um, the waters of the United States. [00:42:42] Okay. Sure. [00:42:42] And our wetland requires. [00:42:44] Our sensitive areas ordinance is tied to that. So when there's a jurisdictional wetland, meaning the federal government claims jurisdiction over it, that's when our standards kick in. [00:42:54] Yeah. [00:42:55] So we use their definition, and so we're waiting for them to tell us. [00:42:59] [OVERLAPPING] What their new? [00:42:59] What determination is. And they take all of that into account. [00:43:03] Does that prevent forward motion? We just have to wait for a ruling or guidance? [00:43:10] We hope that they have time to address that before the applicant would be to that stage. That's usually several months to a year ahead of time. The stage before an actual site plan needs to be approved in the building permit. And worst case scenario, they could observe the full buffer and then find out that they didn't need to. Uh, in this case, if you approve it tonight, the full buffer would just be the 50 feet of buffer. For the woodland or sorry, the wetland that's not already kind of non -conforming. [00:43:42] Yeah, I think I understand. [LAUGHTER] Yeah. Next question is actually about condition one. Can you put the, um, site plan up that shows that sidewalk? I'm curious as I look at that sidewalk, the- first of all, it makes a lot of sense. That's a really steep slope there. And, um, I understand why they're proposing cutting through the site to access Benton. But I- I- I- I see a sidewalk to Benton, but I also see or stairs to Benton and then also sidewalks. Where is the lighting requirement line? Is it just up those steps or does Page 18 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. it continue all the way so that you access, let's say, if you were in a wheelchair Benton? Does that? Is that determinant by that condition one? [00:44:29] So we have- so there's two pedestrian paths. I think you've described them accurately. One is with stairs for folks that can easily go up and down stairs. The other path would be kind of a longer route that would be at the ADA, um. [00:44:45] Slope. [00:44:46] Slope. And the- my understanding is the lighting would be for the part just along the East property line where it's not illuminated by street lighting. So where you would be cutting through, let's just say cutting across the site where there's not already street lighting. So the walkway along the front of the building and as it kind of switches back down to Benton Street would probably be illuminated just fine by street lighting. And so I don't know that the intention was for street lighting the- the special lighting standard to be applied there, the pedestrian lighting. I would say, if I could show you with a cursor, I would say that just the north south alignment of the pedestrian. [00:45:32] And just to be clear, on that, Danielle, the north south is on the very eastern edge of the property, right? So it's like east of the driveway, all the way down and then takes a right angle and then goes south on the stairs or further west for the slope. [00:45:46] That's correct. [00:45:47] Okay. Thank you. [00:45:56] Any other questions for Danielle? You're a none. Thank you. All right. So is the applicant wanting to speak to this? Welcome. [00:46:23] Okay. Good evening, Mayor Teague, Councilmembers and members of the community. My name is Jackson Taylor. I'm a Senior Development Director with TWG development. So I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you all tonight about a project we believe will make a meaningful impact on housing in Iowa City. We're proposing 187 unit affordable multifamily housing located at 611 Greenwood Drive. This project is is- designed to serve working families, seniors, and individuals who are currently struggling to find safe, stable, affordable housing. This development will provide long-term Page 19 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. affordability while enhancing the surrounding area. Before I get into a little bit more about the project, I just wanted to overview a little bit about our background and who we are. Uh, so at TWG, we've spent the last 18 years focusing on building exclusively housing that strengthens communities. So over the past 18 years, our team has developed over 11,500 units, $2.5 billion in transaction costs, and we've expanded into 23 states. Um, despite all that breadth and depth, uh, we are based in Indianapolis, and Iowa was actually the first state we expanded into, and it's our second largest presence besides our home state. So we're very, very familiar with Iowa communities. Um, throughout each of those developments, uh, we've always strive to pride ourselves on thoughtful design, community engagement, and providing long-term assets to communities in the neighborhoods that they serve. [00:48:01] So Roosevelt Ridge will include dog parks. It'll be designed to NGBS silver. So some energy efficiency standards, potential amenities can include a fitness center. We're looking at in unit washers and dryers for tenants, among other standard unit amenities such as dishwashers, etc. We've worked very closely with Iowa City Planning through the years. We've gone through a handful of different iterations and variations of the site plan. All told, it's been a great process because now we know what we're actually presenting to you guys today here. We feel pretty confident that it strongly aligns with community values and priorities throughout that planning process and throughout the revisions and iterations getting to there. To make this vision a reality, we are requesting a rezoning and a change to the comprehensive plan. This change is essential to allow for the density and layout needed to support affordability, while maintaining compatibility with a surrounding area. We understand the importance of responsible growth and we're committed to being a transparent and collaborative partner through this process. Ultimately, this project is about creating opportunity, giving families a chance to live in quality housing they can afford in a neighborhood where they can thrive. We respectfully ask for your support in approving the rezoning request so we can move forward in building a more inclusive and resilient future for Iowa City. Thank you for your time and consideration. [00:49:26] Thank you. Any questions by counsel? [00:49:30] Um, thank you for that overview, and it was heartening to hear right upfront that you are anticipating that this would be for families and seniors and individuals who, you know, need units. As you probably know, from the area where it's at further to the west is- are some older apartment buildings that house a number of students, both undergraduate and I know primarily graduate students as well. There's also a newer apartment complex that's at the base of Riverside Drive in Myrtle. That was going to be more family oriented, and it has turned into more student oriented. So I guess I'm asking for real for real. Are you planning on this complex being intended for all types of dwellings, not just students? [00:50:23] Yeah, so this is- so this will be a LIHTC project- part of the LIHTC program rules and requirements, there are various income restrictions and requirements where students aren't necessarily by default, Page 20 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. automatically eligible. It becomes it- almost students are actually extremely tough to qualify as LIHTC tenant base. It's more primarily geared towards families individuals, I would say, than a student front. There are exceptions to students being able to get into LIHTC projects, but I would say that that's probably more an exception than the rule. But, yeah, sorry. [00:51:02] 1 stepped on your words. [00:51:03] Go ahead. Right. [00:51:04] Yeah, so I would say the LIHTC program requirements would kick in at that point, and we obviously can't violate any of those. [00:51:11] Correct. Yeah. No, thank you for that. [00:51:13] 1 actually did not realize it simply because I also know that students are usually incredibly cash strapped. But to my mind, it's good to know that a LIHTC project has very specific regulations towards that because what we've been talking about on Council is the need for additional housing for more folks than simply students. So thank you for that clarification. [00:51:37] Thank you. [00:51:38] Is this like senior LIHTC or just regular LIHTC for everyone? [00:51:42] This is regular LIHTC, yes. So it would be open to families, seniors, individuals. Part of that, as well. Instead of traditional walk up style apartments, what we're doing here, even though it is a LIHTC community is we are making the building interior corridor and elevator serviced, so that really makes things a lot easier for people to get around, to be able to access different stories. [00:52:03] Yeah, you know, like, normally, when you just say regular LIHTC, that senior also can. [00:52:08] Yeah. Page 21 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:52:09] Okay. And do you know, like how many- this is like a two bedroom apartment, three, four? [00:52:15] It's a mix of one, twos, and threes. [00:52:17] Okay, good. [00:52:18] Um, [NOISE] are the applications the LIHTC applications that you're hoping for slash applying for, are they the 4% or the 9%? [00:52:30] Correct. Yeah, 4% LIHTC. [00:52:33] Okay. Which is, um, as far as I can tell, the 60% threshold AMI, is that correct? [00:52:40] Yeah, you'll usually see those geared towards the 60% AMI bracket. [00:52:44] Yeah, it just naturally falls in that positions. I was also thinking about the- what were we going to say? [00:52:52] No, I missed that. You saying it's only, like what is 60% is not like less than 60% or it's threshold. [00:53:02] Generally, it's around there. [00:53:04] Is that means that the median, like there is 40% like 40% of the area median theory or just I don't understand that. Can you just talk a little more about this? [00:53:14] Yeah, I would be happy to. So the way that kind of the income brackets are designated, it's based on the US census data, and they'll survey- it's primarily based on county until you get into a metropolitan area. And they'll survey the primary metropolitan area, and they'll actually list it out demographically and they'll list it by median. It's the area median average. That way, it's not means, and it doesn't get skewed high or skewed low or any of the above. So within that ranking system, within the primary metropolitan area, like, that's how they designate that like 60% mark, 50% mark, 40% mark. Page 22 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:53:55] Yeah, I know this. I just talking about your project, is it like 30% of the area median income or 60% 40%. That's what I'm talking about. [00:54:04] 1 apologize. [00:54:05] That's okay. No. My bad. I did not make it clear. [00:54:08] Yeah, we are targeting 60% area median incomes. [00:54:12] That's what I was thinking, yeah. Okay, it's not less than 60%. [00:54:17] Yeah, [NOISE] so as far as I can tell, the due to my someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the AMI for Iowa City right now is about 125,000 130,000. So a 60% of that would, you know, you do the math. But another thing that I was thinking or I was under the impression, like what I was glad you brought that up, Councilor Alter, about the replay. Replay is what it's called the complex by the Dairy Queen. [00:54:50] Oh, yeah. [00:54:50] At the bottom of Myrtle. That has the podcast studios in it. So I was aware of that history that it was potentially going to be, like, a family affordable housing project. Do you remember- Jeff, do you remember if that was going to be LIHTC or some other mechanism? [00:55:13] 1 don't recall it ever being proposed as an affordable housing LIHTC project. There was some commercial hotel and I believe just market rate housing. I don't believe it was ever a LIHTC proposal there. One correction because we know this from the. [00:55:27] It's go ahead. [00:55:29] Were you going to address the - Page 23 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [00:55:31] No. I mean, I just the 60%, 30% AM numbers are just not so confident right now. [00:55:39] So if I can jump in and address one of the good points that Councilor Weilein just raised is kind of one about the use versus the user. This is- of course, Council is very interested in affordable housing. It's a priority of theirs. But again, there's no guarantee about what's moving forward. This is a zoning question about whether the zone that is proposed is appropriate for this location. So I don't want Council to think that's conditioned upon this being a LIHTC project or anything like that. Again, it's the use, not the user. [00:56:15] Yeah. [00:56:16] Thank you from Ramin there. [00:56:18] 1 just like talking about it. [00:56:20] Yeah. [00:56:22] We just want to have each opportunity to talk about that, even though this will have nothing to do with our decision making process. [00:56:29] Perfect answer. [00:56:30] Thank, yeah. Absolutely. I was wondering if there was any update. I think the planning and zoning meeting was, like, August 27 or something like that for this project or a little bit earlier in August. But, has there been any updates on the application status for the 4% LIHTC? [00:56:53] Well, there hasn't been- not a hard update, but yeah, the hearing was last week, and we've just been nose down ever since. Still going forward for it. So it's due here in about a week and a half. Two weeks? [00:57:07] Okay. [00:57:10] Page 24 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Any other questions? [00:57:12] No thanks. [00:57:13] All right. Thank you. Thank you all for your consideration. Yes. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? If so, please raise your hand. All right, two, and seeing no one online, please come forth. Please state your name and city you're from, and there is a sign in, right there. And you'll be allotted up to three minutes, and Council can't respond, but we'll hear. Yes, welcome. [00:57:48] Thank you. Judith Crosset, Iowa City. I realize this is not directly to do with the zoning, but I wish to speak very much in support of affordable housing and my sincere hope that the Council will hold that line, keep this as affordable housing, and expand and do additional projects with truly affordable housing for the poorest among us. [00:58:13] Thank you. [00:58:13] Thank you. Welcome. [00:58:20] Great. My name is Corey May, and I live at Well, my parents live at 612 West Benton Street, which is the property right next door. It's the house my family's been there for 70 years. And to see Roosevelt leave made us sad. We support affordable housing, but this is the wrong footprint in this area. While we recognize that the 9.9 acres are there, there is no- well, the biggest problem that we see at this moment is the ingress and egress on Greenwood Drive. Having lived on Benton Street for most of my- well, most of my years, please recognize that there are stoplights at Benton and Riverside, and the next set of stoplights are at Benton and Sunset. At the top of the hill is Greenwood Drive, and that curls down. That is a nightmare to get out in and out of Benton Street. As you are going up the hill, you are looking at a weight at the top of Greenwood. Or if you are leaving Greenwood, there are railroad tracks at the base of that hill, and then you go up Greenwood and then you run into Myrtle. Getting out at most times of the day are well, something. If we are putting in 187 units with a proposed 113 parking spaces, that's 113 extra parked extra cars trying to get in and out of Greenwood Drive and either going to Myrtle or going to Benton Street. If you're looking at the spillover into the adjacent area, one, there is no parking, and two, you're going to have to find one of the major thoroughfares to get out. This is going to be even more difficult in the future than it is now. Be mindful that we support affordable housing. We're not Nimbi people. But this is too big, and we are not looking at the long term consequences here of additional people with additional cars trying to get out onto Greenwood Drive, because they have no other access to Benton Street. I yield the floor in the balance of my time. Thank you. Page 25 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:01:00] Thank you. Anyone else like to address this topic? Seeing no one else? All right, before I close the public hearing, Council inclined to vote with P&Z? All right. We're gonna close the public hearing. Could I get a motion to give first consideration? [01:01:24] So move, Moe. [01:01:25] Second, Weilein. [01:01:27] Move by who? [01:01:29] Moe. [01:01:30] Moe. Second by? [01:01:32] Weilein. [01:01:32] Weilein. All right. Council discussion. [01:01:40] I'm planning on voting, yes, but I also totally understand what the speaker is saying about that crappy intersection. When I visit friends who live at Oaknoll, it's my regular route, and it is not a good place to drive through as it is, and I think that it probably will be challenging. I also hear from people who live in that neighborhood about this sort of frustration about lack of sidewalk connectivity to Benton Hill Park. I don't think that's a reason to stop this rezoning. I think it's just us saying, Hey, city staff, can we look at maybe the sidewalks and the intersection there to improve that safety. And so, anyway, that's my current thinking is, yeah, I think that we can rezone and we can maybe improve that both pedestrian and traffic connectivity. [01:02:29] 1 agree. I think that especially with Greenwood, that street reminds me, and I used to live at the bottom of Oak Crest. So from going from Benton, you just took Oak Crest right down, you'd run into my apartment. A car did once, but anyway. Thanks. But it reminds me of actually sort of, you know, the way our cars have gotten so much bigger and the road, you know, when we got cute, smaller we've just I Page 26 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. think some of our roads, our streets are outgrown. And so I am not sure exactly what we can do about it. Other than to sort of flag that with increased volume and capacity of residents, that this is something that we will- I think we're going to have to address in some way, and to put that on our radar that, you know, quaint curvy roads may not end up being something that we can, um, leave fallow, given that growth is happening. So I- I do appreciate what you are saying, sir. But I also know that we desperately need, as you also acknowledged, affordable housing of all stripes. And Roosevelt in its current state, it's dilapidated. It's a known entity for kids to go hang out. And actually, there's some kids who are like, Yeah, I'm not even gonna go there, because knows what's going on. So at any rate, I think it is time that we actually get something really productive and good out of the space, but I absolutely am hearing you about that we need to also look at sort of egress and ingress. [01:04:19] 1 am curious as to when Roosevelt's school was there. I don't know if we have any numbers of the in and outs of students and their families. Do we have any of that information? Because I imagine it was pretty busy. [01:04:34] 1 was thinking about that, too, with the projection of 83 or 85 at the peak. Was that something like? That's several slides and presentations. Half an hour ago, so but it seems that number seems to stick out at me, and I was wondering the same thing. My kids didn't go there. Timing would have been wrong. But I remember what those elementary school drop offs were like and pickups, especially when there was bad weather and a lot more people were driving, and it seems like'80s would be a low estimate. But again, I don't- I don't have any knowledge of that particular school back when it was open. [01:05:06] And is that Miss Salih's house? [01:05:08] Yes that is. [01:05:09] Tell her I said, hello. [LAUGHTER] [01:05:12] Nice. [01:05:13] Yeah, I was glad to see Oh, sorry. [01:05:15] Go ahead. Page 27 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:05:16] No, just speaking to the traffic part, I was glad to see the traffic study kind of, like, you know, thought about where most of the circulation would be. And it looks like the vast majority, which makes sense if you were in that area and heading north out of, you know, which is the access for the residents, that the fastest way out would be to the right or to the east and through that traffic signal at Myrtle. So that makes sense to me, made me feel a little better. I was glad to see there's not direct access on Benton because that would be a nightmare. But I also agree about the Greenwood Drive as not a great spot to get in and out. [01:05:54] And can someone remind me about how many bargain slot we are requiring? [01:05:58] A hundred and thirteen. [01:06:00] And how many apartment there. [01:06:02] A hundred eighty-seven. [01:06:03] And 187. Yeah, you know, that's also something that I think we as a city need to talk about. Like, I think, now, even though I'm voting yes for this and whatever I'm going to say have nothing to do with, like, my decision. I just I would like to encourage the developer to think about, like, more affordability than 60%, encouragement. I'm voting yes for this. I want to be clear. And also, like, maybe we can think about reducing the bark requirement and allowing, you know, the developer to build more affordable unit than 60% of the median income. Just saying that. [01:06:52] Yeah, and I think that was it as recent as last year that for affordable housing Tech projects, we did we did reduce the parking requirement. Is that a thing that happened, am I making it up? [01:07:07] Correct. I believe that still applies to this zone, correct? So for affordable units, there is no parking requirement. Just a market driven decision at that point? [01:07:16] So they didn't need to have any parking spots? [01:07:20] Oh, they are, but it's not. Page 28 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:07:23] But they just are for. [01:07:25] Correct. [01:07:25] In order to market the units and get them occupied, you're probably going to need some parking. [01:07:29] No, I just wanted to, you know, to understand. I mean, I get when people say there's gonna be 187 units and 113 parking spots, but at the same time, you know, when we are thinking about, like, long term climate things, we are thinking about discouraging sprawl. We are thinking about wanting more density. We are thinking about if we want to live in a world that isn't on fire in 50 years, like, we're going to have to take a step away from cars, and I think that planning and I think planning starting now should reflect on that and force us to make decisions about expanding public transit, maintaining fare free public transit that we already have and expanding it. So if someone doesn't have a parking spot, they still have just as much access to the town. And yeah, I just think that we could be looking forward now into that future. [01:08:34] Yeah, you said, very good. Yeah, I agree. [01:08:40] Alright. Roll call, please? [01:08:43] Harmsen? [01:08:43] Yes. [01:08:44] Moe? [01:08:44] Yes. [01:08:45] Salih? Page 29 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:08:45] Yes. [01:08:46] Teague? [01:08:46] Yes. [01:08:47] Weilein? [01:08:47] Yes. [01:08:48] Alter? [01:08:48] Yes. [01:08:49] Bergus. [01:08:49] Yes. [01:08:50] Motion passes 7-0 8D, rezoning North Dubuque Road, ordinance conditionally rezone in approximately 22.5 acres of property located east of North Scott Boulevard, along North Dubuque Road, from rural residential zone, low density, single family residential zone. IRS five with a planned development overlay. Research Development Park zone and interim development single family residential zone to mix use zone. This is a second consideration, and the applicant is requesting expedited action on this item. [01:09:27] 1 move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for final passage at two city Council meetings prior to the meeting which is to be finally passed, be suspended, that the second consideration and vote be waived and that the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time. [01:09:41] Second, Salih. Page 30 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:09:42] Move by Moe seconded by Salih. And anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online. Council discussion. [01:09:59] Roll call, please. [01:10:00] Moe? [01:10:01] Yes. [01:10:01] Salih? [01:10:02] Yes. [01:10:02] Teague? [01:10:03] Yes. [01:10:03] Weilein? [01:10:04] Yes. [01:10:04] Alter? [01:10:05] Yes. [01:10:05] Bergus? [01:10:06] Yes. Page 31 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 202S (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:10:06] Harmsen. [01:10:07] Yes. [01:10:07] Motion passes 7-0. Can I get a motion to pass and adopt? [01:10:11] So moved, Alter. [01:10:12] Second, Salih. [01:10:14] Roll call please. [01:10:16] Salih? [01:10:16] Yes. [01:10:17] Teague? [01:10:17] Yes. [01:10:18] Weilein? [01:10:19] Yes. [01:10:19] Alter? [01:10:20] Yes. Page 32 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:10:20] Bergus? [01:10:20] Yes. [01:10:21] Harmsen. [01:10:21] Yes. [01:10:22] Moe. [01:10:22] Yes. [01:10:23] Motion passes 7-0. Can I get a motion to accept correspondence? [01:10:27] So move, Bergus. [01:10:28] Second, Moe. [01:10:29] All in favor say Aye. [01:10:30] Aye. [01:10:31] Any opposed? Motion passes 7-0. We're on to item number 8E, rezoning east of North Dodge Street and south of 180. Ordinance conditionally rezoning approximately 33.6 acres of property located east of North Dodge Street and south of 180 from Office Research Park zone to Community Commercial zone. This is the second consideration, and the applicant is requesting expedited action. [01:10:58] Page 33 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting which is to be finally passed be suspended, that the second consideration and vote be waived and that the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time. [01:11:12] Move by Moe? [01:11:13] Second. [01:11:15] Second by Alter? Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online. Council discussion? Roll call, please. [01:11:27] Teague? [01:11:28] Yes. [01:11:28] Weilein? [01:11:29] Yes. [01:11:30] Alter? [01:11:30] Yes. [01:11:31] Bergus? [01:11:31] Yes. [01:11:32] Harmsen? [01:11:32] Page 34 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 202S (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yes. [01:11:33] M oe? [01:11:33] Yes. [01:11:33] Salih. [01:11:34] Yes. [01:11:34] Motion passes 7-0. Could I get a motion to pass and adopt? [01:11:38] So moved Moe. [01:11:39] Second, Salih. [01:11:40] Roll call, please. [01:11:41] Weilein? [01:11:42] Yes. [01:11:43] Alter? [01:11:43] Yes. [01:11:44] Bergus? [01:11:44] Page 3 S Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yes. [01:11:45] Harmsen? [01:11:45] Yes. [01:11:46] M oe? [01:11:46] Yes. [01:11:47] Salih? [01:11:47] Yes. [01:11:48] Teague. [01:11:48] Yes. Motion passes 7-0. Could I get a motion to accept correspondence? [01:11:52] So moved, Moe. [01:11:53] Second, Bergus. [01:11:55] All in favor say Aye. [01:11:56] Aye. [01:11:57] Any opposed? Motion passes, 7-0. 8F, rezoning 2510 North Dodge Street, Ordinance rezoning approximately 37.9 acres of land located at 2510 North Dodge Street from Research Development Park Page 36 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. zone to an Intensive Commercial zone. This is the second consideration, and the applicant is requesting expedited action. [01:12:21] All right. I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting, which is to be finally passed, be suspended, that the second consideration and vote be waived and that the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time. [01:12:34] Moved by Moe. [01:12:36] Second, Alter. [01:12:37] Second by Alter. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? See no one in person or online. Council discussion. Roll call, please. [01:12:47] Alter? [01:12:48] Yes. [01:12:49] Bergus? [01:12:49] Yes. [01:12:50] Harmsen? [01:12:50] Yes. [01:12:51] Moe? [01:12:51] Yes. Page 37 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:12:52] Salih? [01:12:52] Yes. [01:12:53] Teague? [01:12:53] Yes. [01:12:54] Weilein. [01:12:54] Yes. [01:12:55] Motion passes 7-0. Can I get a motion to pass and adopt? [01:12:58] So moved, Alter. [01:12:59] Second. Move by Alter? [01:13:02] Second, Harmsen. [01:13:03] Second by Harmsen. Roll call, please. [01:13:05] Bergus? [01:13:06] Yes. [01:13:06] Harmsen? Page 38 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 202S (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:13:07] Yes. [01:13:07] Moe? [01:13:08] Yes. [01:13:08] Salih? [01:13:09] Yes. [01:13:09] Teague? [01:13:10] Yes. [01:13:10] Weilein? [01:13:11] Yes. [01:13:11] Alter. [01:13:12] Yes. [01:13:13] Motion passes 7-0. Can I get a motion to accept correspondence? [01:13:16] Move, Salih. [01:13:17] Second, Weilein. Page 39 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:13:19] All in favor say Aye. [01:13:20] Aye. [01:13:21] Any opposed? Motion passed 7-0 8G. Zoning code, Text Amendment, Neighborhood open space. Ordinance amending Title 14, zoning code on Title 15, and subdivision to update the neighborhood open space requirements. This is a second consideration, and staff is requesting expedited action. [01:13:40] And I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting, which is to be finally passed, be suspended, that the second consideration and vote be waived, and that the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time. [01:13:53] Move by Moe? [01:13:54] Second, Alter. [01:13:56] Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no no one in person or on line. Council discussion. Roll call, please. [01:14:04] Harmsen? [01:14:05] Yes. [01:14:05] Moe? [01:14:06] Yes. [01:14:06] Salih? [01:14:07] Page 40 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 202S (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yes. [01:14:07] Teague? [01:14:08] Yes. [01:14:08] Weilein? [01:14:09] Yeah. [01:14:10] Alter? [01:14:10] Yes. [01:14:11] Bergus? [01:14:11] Yes. [01:14:12] Motion passes 7-0. Can I get a motion to pass and adopt? [01:14:16] So move Bergus. [01:14:18] Second, Salih. [01:14:20] Roll call, please. [01:14:21] M oe? [01:14:21] Page 41 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yes. [01:14:21] Salih? [01:14:22] Yes. [01:14:22] Teague? [01:14:23] Yes. [01:14:23] Weilein? [01:14:24] Yes. [01:14:24] Alter? [01:14:25] Yes. [01:14:25] Bergus? [01:14:26] Yes. [01:14:26] Harmsen. [01:14:27] Yes. [01:14:28] Motion passes to 7-0. We're on item number nine, our regular formal agenda, 9A. This is 36 million sewer revenue capital loan note public hearing. Resolution instituting proceedings to take additional action for the authorization of a loan and disbursement agreement and the issuance of not to exceed Page 42 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. $36 million of sewer revenue capital loan notes. And I'm going to open the public hearing and welcome Nicole Davies. [01:14:59] Good evening, Mayor and Council. Nicole Davies, finance director. I'm going to walk you through our not to exceed $36 million of sewer revenue capital loan note. So first, this debt is going to cover two different projects. One in my non engineering technical terms. The first one is kind of our existing digester complex, its end of useful life needs to be rehabbed. This part of the project would be needed, regardless of what else we did. The second piece and a little bit more exciting is the renewable natural gas, where this will take off what's being flared, condition it, retreat it, put it back into the pipeline, to be sold and reused. As you can see, those two projects total more than the not to exceed $36 million. We are planning to use probably $8-$10 million of cash on hand so that our debt is not quite so large. Just to walk through the timeline, I won't go through every piece of this, but these projects have been a long time coming to finally get to this point. The first project was on the CIP plan back in 2019, adopted as part of the 2020 budget. The second piece was part of the 2024 adopted budget in 2023-2027 capital improvement plan. Shortly after that, we approved the design contract. A year later. So about a year 15 months ago, you approved the 0% capital loan note that was for the planning and design. That 3.3 million will roll into this not to exceed 36 million. Later that summer, you approved resolution to be able to reimburse from this funding that we'll be getting to pay so that the construction on the piece of equipment for the new renewable natural gas could be started. And this was to be able to apply for tax credits. We had to meet a begun construction timeline. We're still hoping that those tax credits will exist once this project is done. But that's one of those things we're hoping if you guys can tell us that they'll still be there, we'd appreciate it. But we know that's kind of an up in the air type of thing. Then that following August, that was when the equipment was approved. Then also just this summer approved the agreement with Mid American Energy so that they could start working on the pipeline to be able to transport that renewable natural gas. Just last month, you approved the $32.9 million construction contract with Woodroof. Tonight, we're authorizing for us to proceed with a loan and disbursement agreement. This fall, that will come back to actually authorize the actual agreement, and then we'll set a closing date that'll be about three weeks after that agreement is authorized. This December, we'd have our first interest payment, and then the first principal payment would be in June of 2028, which is also when they're hoping for final completion of these projects. There will be two different loans, technically, one that's a 32 million tax exempt. That's really covering the first just basic rehab of the digester and then a three million taxable that covers the renewable natural gas piece. So most of the cash that we're using on hand is to pay for that taxable piece. Obviously, it has a higher interest rate. So again, trying to reduce the cost of that debt. This is through the state Revolving Fund, through the Iowa Finance Authority, just giving the website. If you guys want some late night reading to learn about the program, and then just to pay for this debt, we are planning on a 5% rate increase for FY27, and we anticipate there will probably one or two more 3-5% increases over the next few years. Again, a lot of variables. We don't know about the tax credits. We don't know exactly what the natural- natural gas rates will be once it's constructed, so it's going to be how much revenue we get off of that. But the rates most recently were increased 2% in FY24 and 5% in 2025. Um, mainly due to inflation at the time. Also, that 5% and 2025 was knowing that these big projects were coming so that we wouldn't have a real large Page 43 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. increase as we were getting the debt finalized. And before that, rates had not been increased since FY 2009 for wastewater. Any questions? [01:19:36] Nicole, can you explain the difference between the tax exempt and the taxable loans? Like, what- why? What is that? [01:19:45] So the tax exempt debt, if you were to buy that, it's federally tax exempt. You wouldn't pay tax on that interest. [01:19:56] O kay. [01:19:56] If you have a taxable, then you have to pay interest. That's why the interest rate is lower for the tax exempt. [01:20:05] Early in your presentation, you mentioned that there was roughly a $3 million capital loan note. It was a little bit over that for planning and development. And you mentioned it will roll into I believe it's the not to exceed. Can you explain that? I'm not quite. [01:20:23] Yeah, so that part was taken out. It will be part of the not to exceed 36 million. Additional 36 on top of the three. It will be part of. [01:20:32] Okay. [01:20:33] Yeah. [01:20:34] Thank you. [01:20:37] All right. Hearing no more questions. Thank you. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online. I'm gonna close the public hearing. Can I get a motion to approve, please? [01:20:55] Page 44 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Move, Salih. [01:20:56] Second, Alter. [01:20:57] Council, discussion. Roll call, please. [01:21:02] Salih? [01:21:03] Yes. [01:21:04] Teague? [01:21:04] Yes. [01:21:05] Weilein? [01:21:05] Yes. [01:21:06] Alter? [01:21:06] Yes. [01:21:07] Bergus? [01:21:07] Yes. [01:21:08] Harmsen? [01:21:08] Page 45 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yes. [01:21:09] M oe? [01:21:09] Yes. [01:21:10] Motion passes 7:0. Item Number 9b, CPRB Dissolution, Ordinance Amending Article 5 entitled Boards Commissions and Committees Section 5.01 entitled Establishment of the Iowa City Charter and repealing the Title 8 entitled Police Regulations, Chapter 8 entitled Community Police Review Board to Dissolve the Community Police Review Board. This is the second consideration, and staff is requesting expedited action. [01:21:45] 1 think I'd have this memorized by now. [LAUGHTER] I move that the rule requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting which is to be finally passed, be suspended, that the second consideration, uh, vote be waived, that the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time. [01:22:02] Move by Moe. [01:22:04] Second. [01:22:06] Second by Salih. And anyone from the public like to address this topic? Seeing no one in person or online, Council discussion? Roll call, please. [01:22:18] Super sorry. [01:22:19] Yeah. [01:22:20] Just like what happened with last time, I think some people who don't have background on what's going on, um, [LAUGHTER] the last two times, I see people in the audience just like, what in the absolute hell is going on? So, um, the state passed a law that said, uh, the main function of Citizens' Police Review Boards, which is to review the conduct of individual officers, uh, was illegal. So under state law, now we Page 46 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. can't do that. We could technically still have a Citizens Police Review Board in name that only talks about policy, but the Citizens Police Review Board themselves recommended that we dissolve the formal Citizens Police Review Board, and we're in the process of trying to come up with a structure of a more informal process to serve a similar function. Just want to make sure that makes that's said, you know. [01:23:10] Okay. [01:23:10] Yeah. [01:23:10] Ye p. [01:23:10] Great. [01:23:13] Roll call, please. [01:23:14] Teague? [01:23:15] Yes. [01:23:15] Weilein? [01:23:16] Yes. [01:23:17] Alter? [01:23:17] Yes. [01:23:18] Bergus? [01:23:18] Page 47 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yes. [01:23:19] Harmsen? [01:23:19] Yes. [01:23:20] M oe? [01:23:20] Yes. [01:23:21] Salih? [01:23:21] Yes. [01:23:22] Motion passes 7:0. Can I get a motion to pass on adopt. [01:23:26] Move pass 1. [01:23:27] Second. [01:23:28] Move by Salih. Second by Alter. Roll call, please. [01:23:33] Weilein? [01:23:34] Yes. [01:23:35] Alter? [01:23:35] Page 48 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yes. [01:23:36] Bergus? [01:23:36] Yes. [01:23:36] Harmsen? [01:23:37] Yes. [01:23:37] M oe? [01:23:38] Yes. [01:23:38] Salih? [01:23:39] Yes. [01:23:39] Teague? [01:23:40] Yes. [01:23:40] Motion passes 7:0. 9C Hy-Vee Watermain Easement release. Resolution approving the partial release of Watermain Easement at Waterfront Hy-Vee. Can I get a motion to approve, please. [01:23:53] So moved, Moe. [01:23:55] Second, Salih. Page 49 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:23:56] All right. And Eric Gores? [01:24:00] Thank you, Mayor. Very briefly, the Waterfront Hy-Vee underwent some expansion in 2008 and 2009. That expansion went over some water main easement that was already present, but was not then being used from that point forward. Uh, and now that there refinancing has come to their attention, a minute, we need to, uh, relieve ourselves of this water main, which is perfectly appropriate. So we're, uh, doing so through a quick claim deed in this instance. [01:24:34] Okay. All right. No questions. Anyone from the public like to address this topic? Say no one in person or online. Council discussion. Roll call, please. [01:24:48] Alter? [01:24:49] Yes. [01:24:49] Bergus? [01:24:50] Yes. [01:24:50] Harmsen? [01:24:51] Yes. [01:24:51] Moe? [01:24:52] Yes. [01:24:52] Salih? [01:24:53] Page 50 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yes. [01:24:53] Teague? [01:24:54] Yes. [01:24:54] Weilein? [01:24:55] Yes. [01:24:56] Motion passes 7:0. All right. [BACKGROUND] 9d. Council Mayor Pro Tern Salih and our City Attorney Gores are recusing themselves from this item. Uh, we're going to move on, which is 9d, and which is our Fiscal year 2026, Non -Legacy Aid to Agencies. Resolution authorizing non -legacy aid to agencies funding awards for fiscal year 2026. Motion. Can I get a motion to approve, please? [01:25:26] So move to Alter. [01:25:28] Second, Moe. [01:25:29] All right, and welcome to Erika. [01:25:32] Hi, Erika Kubly with Neighborhood Services. So this is our FY26 Non -Legacy Aid Agency funding recommendations. Uh, we were here in June for the legacy funding, uh, resolution. So this is specifically non -legacy aid agencies provides flexible operational funding for nonprofits serving Iowa City's low income residents. We have a 30,000 budget for FY26 non -legacy. It's one time funds, uh, for the annual year. Uh. eligibility for this funding includes 501C3 non -profits in good standing. Agencies that provide services to LMI residents of Iowa City and recipients of Legacy aid agency funds are not eligible. Our awards can range $5000-15,000. We set our funding priorities in City Steps 2030, so that includes homeless and shelter services, food insecurity, healthcare, including mental and behavioral health, childcare and youth services, housing stability services, and transportation. Uh, our process at this point, the application was made available on the city website in June with a month to respond. Uh, deadline was in July 16. Uh, we then had a written Q&A opportunity for both staff and commissioners to ask questions on the applications with, um, the applicants. Um, staff provided a funding recommendation to Page 51 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. the Housing Community Development Commission on August 1 of this year, and then HDDC discussed and made their recommendation to Council at their August 18 meeting. So here are the funding recommendations, uh, Agape cafe, $7,500. This is for made to order breakfast that they provide for free, community inclusion club. Uh, they provide recreational services for people with disabilities. Escucha Mi Voz is provided- recommended funding for their equity Anchor project. It's case management for immigrants, uh, connecting them with public services. Free Mental health clinic, um, is for mental health workshops for, um, people on probation or parolees. And then the Kids First Law Center, um, they provide services to children whose parents are low income and going through divorce, and they advocate for the children. So this is the recommendation provided by the Commission. We received 21 applications for funding this year with requests totaling $246,500. Uh, I have those available to put up on the slide, as well. Um, so we don't have a specific scoring rubric for this funding. Uh, considerations by the commission include the overall quality of the application, uh, receipt of other city funding. Um, specifically, we're looking at 2021-2025, um, financial stability of the services and the impact to vulnerable populations. I can answer any questions you have. Thank you. [01:28:27] Hearing no questions. Thank you. All right. [01:28:32] It's okay. [01:28:33] All right. Does anyone from the public like to address this topic? If I can see all the hands of those that want to speak, great. You'll be given five minutes. And please, three minutes. Yes. [LAUGHTER] And there's, uh, basket there to,uh, place your, uh, sticker, or you can also sign in. Please state your name and city you're from. [01:28:55] My name is Tom Rocklin. I'm from Iowa City. Mayor Teague and members of the Council, let me begin by thanking you for the opportunity to serve on the Housing and Community Development Commission. In the first two meetings of my term, I've been impressed by the broad knowledge, critical thinking, conscientiousness of my fellow commissioners, and by the diversity of perspectives that we bring to our work. I've also been very impressed with the work the staff has done to support our work. Neither our chair nor our vice chair was able to be here this evening, so I volunteered to appear in order to provide a bit of background on the process we used in developing our recommendations regarding the non -legacy agency allocations for this year. Each of us independently read the materials submitted by the 21 agencies seeking support. And although I can't speak to the amount of time other commissioners spent on this task, it was clear that all were well prepared when we met. In my case, as a new commissioner, unfamiliar with the process, I spent something like 12-15 hours reviewing applications and associated materials. Several of us had questions for the agencies after reviewing the applications, and the staff compiled these questions, submitted them to the agencies, collated the responses, and provided those answers to the commissioners. At our meeting, we reviewed staff recommendations and discussed each Page 52 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. commissioner's conclusions in what I found to be an impressively collegial manner. We eventually reached a consensus on our recommendations that are before you today. And I think it's fair to say that the commission's recommendations do not match the initial position of any of the commissioners or of the staffs. That is to say, each of us was convinced by at least some of the arguments other commissioners made, and that I would say, is a sign of a healthy commission. There were, of course, many more worthy applications than could be funded, but we respected the process that had assigned a budget to this process and worked within that budget to determine the amount available to non -legacy agencies. Again, thank you for the opportunity to serve on the HCDC and for your consideration of our recommendations today. [01:31:03] Thank you. Uh, please come up at this time. Yep, welcome. Please state your name and city you're from. [01:31:13] My name's Will Cap. I live in Iowa City. [01:31:16] Great. [01:31:21] Um, again, my name is Will Cap, sir, it was the first thing I wrote down, so I had to say it again. [LAUGHTER] I'm speaking as the Board President for Immigrant Welcome Network of Johnson County. Uh, I'm here to advocate for moving the $40,000 that was awarded to Center for Worker Justice and aid to Agencies funds to the other organizations in the area that are continuing the important work that CWJ did for so many years. This includes immigrant Welcome network, but also Escucha Mi Voz, open Heartland, IC Compassion, and other local organizations that are focused on serving individuals and families from immigrant communities. The primary function of Immigrant Welcome Network of Johnson County is housing, specifically providing a soft landing at our welcome house to newly arrived families and connecting them to services that are provided in our community employment and permanent housing. We extend that community connection piece of our work to folks that we cannot provide space for in our house. Folks here that we help-, uh, we help, um, sorry, I miswrote this. Um, we help immigrant- folks here that we help immigrant communities through the grapevine. Um, find us at our offices, and we do what we can for them. This is how many non -profits function, and CWJ was a shining example of this in our community for many years. CWJ was flexible, adaptable, and responded to community needs. After their closure, we've seen an uptick in folks coming to our office looking for a variety of services that they need. Our organization has taken up a lot of the slack around community connection, things like employment, housing, assistance, uh, school registration, etcetera, while others have taken up the work such as wage theft that CWJ focused on. It's a hodgepodge approach to filling the gap, admittedly, but something- but that is something that anyone who's worked in community based non-profit is well acquainted with. But the other option is to turn away from the problems of our community, which is not in our nature. Please honor CWJ's legacy, one which certainly lives on with us at Immigrant Welcome Network, by keeping the funds awarded to them with other organizations that Page 53 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. are continuing to provide the vital lives and voices of, uh, immigrants in our community at a time when other arms of our government are working to further marginalize their lives and silence their voices. Thank you. [01:33:34] Thank you. Holcomb, please state your name and city you're from? [01:33:43] 1 am from Iowa City. My name is Simona Gala. Um, good evening, uh, Mayor and, uh, the Council members. And, um, I serve on a board. I'm the Vice President of, um, Immigrant Welcome Network of Johnson County. And thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak tonight. Um -um, we are asking the council to transfer the 40,000 legacy allocation originally designated, um, for the center for worker justice into the A2A, non -legacy pool. So those dollars can continue serving immigrant and low income, um, Iowa City residents as they, um, were intended. Uh, with a non -legacy COP, no single organization can receive more than $15,000, which means that multiple groups, uh, as our president here mentioned also, can benefit. Uh, here is what we, uh, kindly request. Um, if you move those funds into non -legacy pool, took a three organization now carrying forward the work or CWJ's work. Immigrant Network of Johnson County. Open Heartland and Escucha Mi Voz would all be able to benefit. Currently, Immigrant Welcome Network of Johnson County and Open Heartland are recommended at $0. And Escucha Mi Voz is recommended at $6,250. Together, uh, this organization are stepping in, uh, to serve the former center for worker adjuster kind, and the demand for support is growing every day. Uh, at a time when the politics,- the political climate toward immigrants and low income people is more challenging than ever, and ensuring that those funds continues to support, um, those most in need is vital. Uh, by fully funding this three organization, you, uh, would help fill the gap left by the center for worker justice and keep the important work moving forward. Uh, We will always respect your decision regardless, and we thank you for your service to this community. [01:36:36] Thank you. Anyone else like to address this topic? Welcome. Please state your name and city you're from? [01:36:45] Eric Jones. Uh, I'm a business owner here in town and the most recent board member to the immigrant welcome network of Johnson County. Um, and I just have to say my involvement in, um, sort of welcoming people to the community is fairly recent. And so I was allowed to join the board, um, sort of because of a connection to a sponsor circle that brought an Afghan family here to town. That I was involved with, but just amazed to see the number of people, um, in town who, uh, supported this family. Uh, and so it was just a learning experience for me that led to my involvement with the Immigrant Welcome Network. And, uh, as a small business owner, I started with a Bag of Tools, and I now work with 50 great co-workers. So I know what bootstrapping energy can accomplish, but I've just been blown away by the work that the Immigrant Welcome network does, uh, within four weeks, people move from the house that they provide, uh, into a job, new housing. Um, there's help long after with the Page 54 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. complicated and incredibly, um, difficult process of applying for green card, citizenship, and all of that. And, um, it's just amazing for me, uh, to see the work that they do. I just wanted to stand up in support of those legacy funds going to the non -legacy pool. I'm not as familiar with the other organizations that do the work because I'm kind of new to this, but, uh, I just wanted to stand up and attest to the incredible work that, uh, these folks have been doing and others for, um, immigrants who need a place to live and then need a toehold, uh, just to get started in our community, and they're doing amazing work. Um, and I just wanted to, you know, show my support and give that to you. [01:38:40] Thank you. What city are you from, please? [01:38:42] Iowa City. [01:38:43] Thank you. Anyone else like to address this top? See no one in person or online? All right, we'll move to Council discussion. [01:38:58] 1 just want to say that I actually did get the opportunity to- to watch the meeting. And so I want to say and heartily second my appreciation for the HCDC and for Commissioner Rocklan's comments tonight. I completely agree. It was a fantastic meeting. The conversations. Everyone was so incredibly well prepared. There were different viewpoints. There was disagreement. There was influencing, but all in the most productive and supportive ways from staff who came with initial recommendations, and they're opening it up to say, you know, we can play with these numbers, and they even had a tool in order to do that to the way in which the dialogue happened, I was incredibly impressed, and I thank everyone for their obvious, huge preparation and coming to this conversation well armed to be able to think through how best to spend too few dollar, right? So I just wanted to say thank you to the commissioners and to staff because this was really a wonderful example of how this kind of work as difficult as it is proceeded. And I think that the roundup at the end, like, and so we have, you know, we're making sure that these interest areas of need are covered and in what ways and having to make decisions about that we're going to fund more than staff recommended and what the criteria kind of came to be for that. Um, I'm just incredibly impressed and I'm incredibly thankful for what the non legacy agencies, um, for the work that they're doing, but also HCDC for coming to their conclusions in such a thoughtful manner. [01:41:01] Um, so in terms of what the process would look like if suddenly, um, because I will admit until pretty recently, and again, this is, I swear I'm not gonna be pulling the baby counselor card for much longer, y'all. But there's part of the process that I didn't really realize was what I thought it was until recently. So, and that was I thought that these dollars were coming from the unused dollars, not a fund in and of itself. So, uh, if we were to decide to add $40,000 to it, what could that process look like, do you think? Page SS Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Would that mean having to go back through the same process with HCDC? Would that mean I'm not entirely sure. I just would love to hear. [01:42:02] 1 think it can mean a lot of things. Right now, I think what's before us is the non legacy aid to agencies that is on the agenda. I guess, in my- yes, we certainly can talk about if we want to add funds to this and where it would come from. [01:42:26] Doesn't it have to be noticed? [01:42:29] 1 don't know that it needs to be noticed. I mean, if we were to bring general funds or if we wanted to increase funds from somewhere else, typically, we say to staff, either figure it out or if we identify funds. But I think your question is, what are the process of this? I think that's up to the Council as to if we want to discuss um, bringing $40,000 that was in legacy funds over to Lun legacy funds, which I think that in itself deserves his own conversation. The Council also did increase, as we know, legacy funds. And so, you know, there's an argument to be made that those funds can remain, you know, within the legacy funds for that increase that was done. I think personally, what I'm hearing from folks in the community that have a need Um, regardless of how it plays out for them, I want to remind people that we do have emergency funds for our organizations that do find themselves in situations. And so I think that is a process in itself that could also be followed. [01:43:55] 1 can speak personally. I think that if we were to make a choice to increase funding, I would want strongly for that to go back through the process of review with staff and HCDC. That to me, I feel like is the ethical way to do that. I don't think that us standing up here saying, Sure, let's just give these organizations money because of whatever good reasons we might have. I feel strongly that's not the right way to do it. I feel like the way to do it is to either next year budget year, have a larger money amount or do something in the interim. [01:44:28] 1 feel like the absolutely, for sure. Um, I feel like the- what people are thinking and what kind of confused me was, you know, these are $40,000 that were going to be spent that are now not being spent. And then- [01:44:45] Borrowed? [01:44:46] Yeah. Page 56 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:44:47] It was deficit spending that we agreed to. [01:44:49] Yeah. Um, so, you know, that we agreed to spend and that is not being spent. And, uh, if now we already have, like, applications from all these people like us if we decided, you know, it would come at a I think that would be a conversation in of itself, Mayor Teague that I agree with if we're going to be sending it from legacy to non legacy, there should be a conversation with that as well. But given we have that conversation, and it's agreeable that we transfer the money from legacy to non legacy, then I think now that we have those applications already in place and a process to go through, it seems like the process could happen again with other funding or with the additional funding. [01:45:41] Yeah, I think if we're going to have that conversation, which, you know, the agenda item before us is the non legacy agency, you know, non legacy aid to agency allocations. So if we're going to have that funding another discussion and not bring that I don't know if people want to, um, you know, bring 40,000 into this conversation at this moment. So if that's not the case, then I think that is a topic that we'll have to bring up for a work session. [01:46:15] Okay. Um, would we be agreeable to discussing it at a work session? [01:46:21] 1 mean, I think if we discuss it at all, we need to do some sort of, like, notice there's here a couple of different questions. One is, do we- you know, one option is, you know, we already went way over the original budget, and that 40,000 isn't like that's not extra so much as, you know, from at least with the original intent one. So is there even 40,000 on the table, I think is Question 1? Question 2, in my mind, would be, do we leave it in that same pool with legacy agencies, and then or do we switch it over? And then Question 3 is wherever we leave it? How do then we allocate it? [01:46:55] Again, I think we have to- [01:46:57] So I mean, those would be three questions we'd have to deal with separate from this. I'm not at all arguing for any of those positions. I'm just laying it out. [01:47:05] Yeah. So is this an item that folks want to bring to a work session? [01:47:11] I'm curious when these funds are actually distributed before I can answer your question. Page 57 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:47:18] Look to Erika for some help here. [01:47:24] Sure. So we're a little behind with our schedule this year just because we have a later allocation process. But after this, once approved, we'd enter into agreements with the agencies, make sure we have all the documentation we need to collect, and then we do our first disbursement. And then after their first report, we would do our second disbursement. So they do two reports throughout the year. [01:47:46] Both within this fiscal year? [01:47:48] Yes. Yeah, so it's kind of a condensed timeline this year. [01:47:52] O kay. [01:47:53] So if we send it back, we're delaying that disbursement. Is that a fair thing to say? The first disbursement? [01:48:00] If- if nothing's- if the recommendations today aren't approved, yes. [01:48:04] Okay. Can we approve what's before us and then have this. [01:48:10] Deal with the other stuff later. That's what I'm thinking, as well. [01:48:13] That's what I was thinking. [01:48:15] 1 don't want to hold this up. [01:48:16] Yeah. [01:48:16] Page 58 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. No way. [01:48:21] So, I guess, just to finalize, is there support to have the $40,000 discussion on a work session? [01:48:30] I'd like to think about it a little bit. [01:48:33] 1 recall us talking about it at the June meeting, didn't we? [01:48:38] We had- It's always so hard to say no to all of these agencies, and we've caught this trap or we talk about? [01:48:45] Never mind. Sorry. No, I was thinking of something else. No. [01:48:48] You're right. You're right. [01:48:49] 1 can do if it's helpful, I can tell you that staff, myself included, after the CWJ announced its closure, took several calls from non profits inquiring about the $40,000 and our response has been that, no, they were not to be reallocated because they were spent over the budget that was sent. So I guess just reiterating the point that I'd be very cautious to spend those dollars now without being very transparent to all of those agencies, legacy, non legacy. And really engaging HCDC heard HCDC tonight and how much time they spent reviewing those apps. I think it would be helpful to engage them. So, um, I would- I would be cautious. I think you're going in that direction already, but I'd be cautious to make that decision tonight. If you're inclined to continue to bolster this budget, that would probably be a separate work session. [01:49:45] So could that be a conversation that HCDC could have? I'm I'm not entirely sure about if Council can direct what HCDC can talk about or would you can always make a request of your commission if it's within their scope, and that would be. [01:50:04] You could ask if you provided them a budget, and you said, this is what I'd like you to consider, I'm sure they would work through that. The probably, you know, hopefully, this is kind of bringing in another - another issue here, but we have lost on the ballot, and one of the stated purposes of lost was community partnership. So there's going to have to be some of these decisions regarding budget to be Page 59 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. made for next fiscal year, hopefully, if that measure passes. But the um, you could- I suppose you could do an interim funding- additional funding round if you so uh felt that was appropriate. [01:50:53] So we do want to continue conversations related to what's before us, and I guess my question will be, is there a desire by this council to have this one work session relating to the 40,000 because we really can't do that right now. No. [01:51:16] 1 mean, no, I'd like to think about it more before agreeing to add that to our work session. Burden I would also just like to echo Councilor Alter's gratitude to the commission and also gratitude to Will and the team at the Immigrant Network for the work you guys do. You know, myself and several of us, you know, from our personal lives, support have supported and we continue to support through donations and adopting a family for Christmas and all those kinds of things. And you do great work in this community. And this decision reflects not at all on, you know, the amount of enthusiasm and gratitude that I and I'm sure if they'll let me speak for them, this entire Council has for the work that you're doing. So thank you for that very much. [01:52:02] And I just want to reiterate the gratitude to the commission and draw the distinction between this process and the legacy funding process because, you know, I think we all learned a lot through that. And I also know that that was the Commission did not meet Quorum, didn't have an opportunity to review those, couldn't give us a recommendation, and do deeply appreciate the level of engagement and service of the commissioners and tend to want to support recommendations from the commission that they are tasked to provide to us. So just, you know, want to thank you for that and understanding that there are of course times when we don't do that. But I think this was a particularly thoughtful and careful process, and I support the commission's recommendations tonight. [01:52:51] Yeah. Thank you for saying that. I agree. [01:52:53] Yeah. Okay. We step it up. [01:52:56] And I'll support the recommendations as well tonight. And just to be clear, there will not be a work session for the $40,000 set by this Council. Okay. Any other comments? Roll call, please. [01:53:12] Bergus? [01:53:12] Page 60 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Yes. [01:53:13] Harmsen. [01:53:13] Yes. [01:53:14] M oe? [01:53:14] Yes. [01:53:15] Teague? [01:53:15] Yes. [01:53:16] Weilein? [01:53:16] Yes. [01:53:17] Alter? [01:53:17] Yes. [01:53:18] Motion passes 6-0. Alright. [01:53:22] Mayor, could we get a motion for correspondence. [01:53:24] Yes, can I get a motion to accept correspondence? So moved Moe. Harmsen. All in favor say aye. [01:53:29] Page 61 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. Aye. [01:53:30] Any opposed? Motion passed is 6-0. All right. They can come on back. All right. We are on to 10, which is announcements of vacancies new 10A is going to be Housing and Community Development Commission. One vacancy to fill unexpired term. Upon appointment through June 30, 2027, applications must be received by 5:00 PM Tuesday, October 14, 2025. Could I get a motion to accept correspondence, please? [01:54:16] So move Alter. [01:54:17] Second, Bergus. [01:54:18] All in favor say Aye. [01:54:19] Aye. [01:54:20] Any opposed? Motion passes 7-0. Eleven is announcements of vacancies previous 11A, Civil Service Commission one vacancy to fill a new member position. Civil Service Commission, one vacancy to fill a new member position. Housing and Community Development Commission, one vacancy to fill unexpired term. Library Board of Trustees, one vacancy to fill unexpired term. Applications must be received by 5:00 PM Tuesday, September 9, 2025. Airport Zoning Board of Adjustment, one vacancy to fill a five year term, Airport Zoning Commission, one vacancy fill a six year term, Board of Appeals HVAC Professional, one vacancy to fill a unexpired term, Historic Preservation Commission Brown Street, one vacancy to fill a three year term, Historic Preservation Commission Jefferson Street, one vacancy to fill a three year term. Historic Preservation Commission Wlawn Avenue, one vacancy to fill a three year term. Vacancies will remain open until filled. What city Council information. All right. Hearing none? We're gonna move on to item number 13. Reports on items from city staff, City manager's office. [01:55:40] Nothing tonight, Mayor. [01:55:41] City attorneys? [01:55:42] Nothing for me, either. Thank you. Page 62 Iowa City City Council Formal meeting of September 2, 2025 (audio and video recordings can be found at https:,[/citychannel4.com/city-council.html) This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription through Verbit: AI -Based Transcription & Captioning Services. For greater detail please refer to the meeting recordings. [01:55:43] And our city clerk's office. [01:55:44] No, thank you. All right. [01:55:47] Item number 14, we're at adjournment. Can I get a motion, please? [01:55:51] So move. [01:55:53] Second, Bergus. [01:55:54] All in favor say Aye. [01:55:55] Aye. [01:55:56] Any opposed? Motion passes 7-0. Have a good night, everyone. [01:56:00] Night. [01:56:01] [MUSIC] Page 63