Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-06-24 Transcription#1 Page 1 ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER. ROLL CALL. Lehman: Before we do item 2 1 would like to just take note for folks in this community a very dear friend of Iowa City's passed away this past week - Sue Horowitz who served as Mayor of this community, also served on the Council for 8 years. I doubt that we've had a public servant in this community who was more dedicated and cared more about this community and the people who live here. And I would like for us to observe our loss with a moment of silence. Thank you. There will be a visitation at Lensings on Tuesday from 3:00 to 8:00 and the services for Sue will on Wednesday 10:00 at St. Pat's. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #2c Page 2 ITEM 2c. MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS. c. Community Development Day: July 1 Lehman: (Reads proclamation). Karr: Here to accept the proclamation is Amy Correia from our Housing and Community Relations... Housing and Community Development Commission. Correia: It is my pleasure to accept this Mayor Proclamation declaring July lst as Community Development Day in Iowa City. As Marian said my name is Amy Correia and I'm honored to serve the people of Iowa City as a member of Housing and Community Development Commission. The primary purpose of this commission is to provide oversight of program and policy decisions for the City of Iowa City regarding two federal block grants - Community Development Block Grants or CDBG and HOME Investment Parmership. As the proclamation states the primary objective of CDBG is to improve communities by providing decent housing, a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities principally for persons of low- and moderate-income. The HOME program is designed to expand the supply of decent, affordable housing for low- and very low-income families. In fiscal year '04 in Iowa City CDBG funds will support 12 public facilities and public services programs serving low to moderate incomes households. Grant request totally $702,107 were received by the commission and we $357,600 to disperse. Requests for HOME projects totaled $1,464,000 and the amount available to loan was $569,806. CDBG and HOME funded projects provide critical support to households that are experiencing economic hardship. In many cases due to increasing unemployment, proliferation of low-wage jobs and rising housing costs. The federal government supports these local efforts because it is in the national and local interest to ensure that all families have meaningful choices and support including the possibility of mobility in order to make a better life, a safer life for themselves and their children. There is a need for the services funded by CDBG and HOME due to economic inequities that cannot be argued away. Almost half of all jobs in Iowa pay below $10 an hour. The largest growth in the Iowa economy in recent years has been in the service sector, the lowest paying jobs. At the same time the cost of housing has skyrocketed. Johnson County is the most housing cost burdened county in the state. Almost half of all renters spend more than 30% of their income on housing costs. The wage at which a subsidy is not needed is $11.73 an hour. The median wage for many jobs critical to the vibrancy of our community including a childcare worker, home health aid, servers and bank tellers This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #2c Page 3 have average wages between approximately $7 to $9 an hour. To combat these economic inequities Iowa City is fortunate to have the CDBG and HOME program and the core of dedicated service providers ensuring that the best that our community has to offer is available to all people. On Tuesday, July 1st we celebrate Iowa City's accomplishments meeting the housing, services and economic development needs of low to moderate income households. I encourage all in the community to attend this event from 4:30 to 6:00 p.m. at Uptown Bill's Small Mall located at the corner of Gilbert and Court Street. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Just a reminder first 4:30 to 6:00 at Uptown Bill's. That's a really fun event and I'd certainly encourage Council folks to be there. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #2d Page 4 ITEM 2d MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS. d. Chuck Schmadeke Day: June 27 Lehman: Our next proclamation is a particularly special proclamation. (Reads proclamation). Kart: Here to accept... Lehman: You don't see this bunch stand up for very many people. Wilbum: Half of us can't. Chuck Schmadeke: I'm honored by this action tonight. Not just the proclamation, but it's the first time in 30 years that I've been first on the agenda. I'm also humbled by the knowledge that this couldn't have happened without the help of City employees, the City Council and citizens of this community. And I shall be forever grateful. Thank you. Lehman: Well I think it's us who are grateful and I'd like to remind folks that on Friday from 1:30 to 4:00 there will be a reception in this room where you can come in and harass him all you want. It will be one of your last chances to harass him officially. I also have to say this of all the folks who work in this building - and we've got probably a finer group of people who work for this community as any city anywhere - I have in my - this is my l0th year on the Council and that's a long time - in fact a lot of people think it's too long - but I have never heard anybody say a word derogatory about this guy. I don't know of anybody who doesn't like Chuck Schmadeke. And that after 37 years is truly amazing. Chuck we will miss you. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #3 Page 5 ITEM 3 CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED OR AMENDED. Lehman: (Reads item). Champion: Consider adoption. Pfab: Second. Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by Pfab. Discussion? Karmer: I had a question in regards to the emergency shelter grants program which is under number f resolutions. Now we're acting as a (can't hear) for $93,000. Is that money...is that global amount or did each of the agencies have to apply for that and then the final amount is determined from who gets what grant? Atkins: As I understand it it's an amount established by the State Department of Economic Development which folks apply for and we have to act as the agent for the administration of those monies. Unless there is something that has changes. Karin is nodding yes that's how we do it. Kanner: So they apply. Atkins: They apply to the state, limited funds that the state provides. The state then in effect gives us the money which we distribute to the folks as their agent. Kanner: Do they limit the amount given to other agencies if there are more agencies that are applying? If there's one agency that's receiving something does that take away possibly from another agency? Atkins: The only way that I think that would happen Steven is the limited amount of money that the state has to deal with. And to the best of my knowledge - in fact I'm almost positive - the state makes all the decisions based upon the information received by the agencies in how the money is distributed. Kanner: The reason I ask is I see Table to Table is receiving money and I know they're a good organization and I can see the connection to Shelter. I assume they bring food...different organizations -the Crisis Center and other - and shelters. But it's not quite as direct as the other and I'm wonder if it's taking away from those other groups. It doesn't sound like it is. Atkins: It doesn't sound like it is. I can certainly...I understand your observation on the Table to Table emergency shelter might not fit. Yes? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #3 Page 6 Lehman: But Table to Table I think is significant in helping prepare food for the free lunch program. That's pretty direct. Isn't that right? Kanner: I do know that they collect food from different agencies in this town we're lucky that there are a lot of people with providing food. I've talked to homeless people and that's one thing they talk about - food is not so much a problem in a certain way, housing is the main thing. And I'd like to see these funds go more directly towards that housing and shelter thing. Atkins: I think it's a question easy enough to ask the State and we can do that for you. I mean after the fact what kind of criteria they may have used. I'm assuming that's public information. I can't imagine why it wouldn't. Kanner: Yeah not to take away from Table to Table. Atkins: No, I understand what you're saying we can certainly check into it. Kanner: This is something that struck me the first time I saw that they were receiving money. Maybe they had in the past. I hadn't noticed it. And maybe it's bringing more money into the area for these services which is good. Atkins: We'll ask the state for you and see... Wilbum: I don't know what criteria they use, but I do know that not only the other agencies listed who did receive funds as well, but several other organizations that aren't listed here who do receive a significant amount of food and depending upon who you ask you might get an argmnent about whether or not food...I mean food, shelter...you know that type of...I understand what you're saying, but it really does make a difference for the operating budgets for the listed organizations here and others. Vanderhoef: I heard a presentation.just today and Table to Table is getting by on an $80,000 budget and they're running all of those vans and recycling if you will food that would have otherwise gone into the dump. So gas and only volunteer drivers. Their staff is very, very small and they're serving Johnson County so there are deliveries made in other places other than Iowa City also. So they're covering a lot of needy people that can really use this food. Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #4 Page 7 ITEM 4 PUBLIC DISCUSSION Lehman: Item 4 is public discussion. This is the time reserved on the agenda for the public to address the Council on items which do not otherwise appear on tonight's agenda. If you wish to address the Council please sign in and give your name, address and limit your comments to five minutes or less. Lori Benz: Good evening. My name is Lori Benz. I live at 2012 Dunlap Court in Iowa City and I'm a member of the Senior Center Commission. I'd like to just give you a brief update this evening on some of the commission's most recent activities that I think might be of interest to you. First of all I want to let you know that we're working closely with the Staff to implement plans for the new participant levels that will go into effect Julylst. The proximity cards and reading devices have been received and will be installed very soon. This will allow participation hours to be expanded from 7:00 in the morning until 7:00 in the evening. There will be a more aggressive kick-offs celebration for mid-September. I also want to let you know you might have read that our commission chair Jay Honohan spoke with the Board of Supervisors recently about the revisiting the 28e agreement with Senior Center. And the Board did indicate that at some future point they would like to reopen that discussion. So we will be following up with that. And finally I want to invite you to the Senior Center's volunteer recognition breakfast that will be held this Friday, June 27th from 7:30 to 10:30 in the morning. This is to recognize the Center's volunteers for the year 2002. And they will be honoring 491 volunteers who contributed over 26,000 hours which converts to the equivalent of 12 3A full-time staff. So you have an additional work fome you may not have known about. But we would love to have you come. Kanner: Thank you. Lehman: Very good. Charlie Major: My name is Charlie Major and I live at 7 Blue Stem Court in Iowa City. I wanted to ask the Council again - I realize you're up against it with the budget probably being having to be turned in today or tomorrow or at least within the next few hours maybe even - but I wanted to ask you again that you not cut the five police positions, the four firemen and the one library position and I think the two Parks and Recreations positions. And I hope you don't - I've also heard rumors that you're going to have to cut 14 other positions for a total of 25 - I hope you don't do that. I want to ask you again that I think we can find money another way even if we have to cut everything back that This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #4 Page 8 we use. And I noticed...I read in the paper where Des Moines was raising their liquor license fees $500. I think that's something to consider. I know you're considering a lot of fee raises and a lot of other things, but please don't cut those 25 staff. And because I think it's going to be really tough. And I realize that you're up against it because of the state funding and everything and that hasn't made your job easy. But don't cut that 25 staff. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Kanner: Just to let you know I don't assume there's a deadline that we have to file these. These are things that are ongoing process so there is time for further input and discussion. Lehman: Any other public discussion? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5b Page 9 ITEM 5b. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. b. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ENTITLED, "ZONING," ARTICLE G, ENTITLED "OFFICE AND RESEARCH PARK ZONE (ORP)" AND ARTICLE L, ENTITLED "PROVISIONAL USES, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, AND TEMPORARY USES." (1) Public Hearing Lehman: (Reads item). Public hearing is open. Chris Pose: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council my name is Chris Pose. I'm an attorney with an office address of 317 6th Avenue in Des Moines here on behalf of the applicant MidAmerican Energy Company. We've presented a request through your Planning and Zoning Commission and your staff to ask that the office research park zoning restrictions be amended to allow electric substations to be what are: special exception uses. The reason for our request you may have read in the staff materials that were provided to you we do have an existing substation that is located in the northeast part of the City. I still call that the Highlander Inn interchange. It would be the southeast quadrant of there that was built in 1972, one of 3.76 acre parcel of land. MidAmerican has needs to expand that substation within that existing property and in the course of its diligence in determining what would need to be done to do the expansion discovered that the zoning has been changed on the property to the ORP district sometime after the 1972 approval. And presently the ORP district do not allow for electric substations as permitted uses. Simply put the request we have in front of you is asking for permission that we be able to apply to your Board of Adjustment and receive the special exception use which we would like to do this summer so that construction can begin on the property this fall. Because of the limited amount o£meetings that you folks have and rightly so during the summer months we were wondering if it could possible to a certain of the readings be waived to this particular ordinance request so that we can proceed forward and make our request to your Board of Adjustment. We did not have anyone in opposition to our request at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and I think from all the dealings with your staff they've acknowledged that they think the ordinance amendments would be appropriate at this location. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you folks might have of me. But we request your favorable action on this item and if you'd be so inclined to waive the readings we'd greatly appreciate that as well. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5b Page 10 Champion: Emie I thought it was my understanding that this ordinance was going to allow... Lehman: Allows it as a special exception. Champion: Oh, as a special exception. Lehman: Right now it isn't allowed in any... Champion: Okay I thought it was being changed totally because then he wouldn't have to go to the Board of Adjustments. Okay. Pose: There's other provisions...there's other districts in the City where these are allowed as a matter of right or as permitted uses. However, to do one of those at this location we'd have to rezone the property and we really don't think that would be the appropriate avenue to go. Lehman: (Can't hear). Kanner: Eleanor what are the legal obligations of the City as far as allowing substations...these substations with federal or state law? Do we have to allow...I assume we have to allow them to be placed somewhere in the City. Dilkes: Well it's not something I've looked at. Kanner: I mean if we say no what happens. Dilkes: Well I think you need to have a land use reason for saying no. I mean if you think it's not an appropriate land use then you shouldn't amend the ordinance. If Council would like me to look at...are you talking about the electromagnetic issue or... Kanner: No, I'm saying if we say no for whatever reason land use or whatever reason for this that means they have to find new land to expand? Is that the result if they're going to expand eventually to service their customers? Dilkes: I'm not following what your question is. You're going to have to be more specific about that and how it relates to the specific situation. Karmer: If we vote this down we say no because of a variety of reasons... Dilkes: Because of what? Kanner: Well that's not pertinent right now. Dilkes: Well that is pertinent to the question. If Council has a specific This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5b Page 11 question I'm happy to answer it, but... Kanner: Okay because of land use. Let's say I don't think it's appropriate and that means that they would not be able to expand there. That means they have to...the net effect is they have to go out and purchase new land at some other location. Dilkes: I don't know what their particular situation is about what their needs are. I can't address those. The zoning as it is in place right now is presumed to be valid. If you have a reason for denying this zoning change you're well within your rights to do so. It just can't be arbitrary. Kanner: Okay. and are there any legal state or federal law saying that we have to...that we're required to allow them reasonable expansion and access to land for their facilities to provide electricity? Dilkes: I'm not aware of a law that would meet the requirements that you just stated, but I have not researched it. Kanner: Okay. Lehman: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak to this issue? Public hearing is closed. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 12 ITEM 5d. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. d. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 1.1 ACRES FROM CB-2, CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT SERVICE, TO PRM, PLANNED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SOUTH DUBUQUE STREET SOUTH OF COURT STREET. (REZ03- 00012) (FIRST CONSIDERATION) Lehman: (Reads item). O'Donnell: Move first consideration. Champion: Second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Champion. Discussion? Kanner: So this...were there any people that wanted to speak to this? Lehman: Well we had a public hearing on this and we're not going to go through the whole process. But there was some information at the last meeting that was incorrect. We received a letter from Joe Holland who is the attorney for the applicant and I think we've all read that information or I trust that we had. We had some information that wasn't correct. We have that information now. If anybody would like to add to those remarks from the public hearing I would certainly entertain that. Kanner: Well I had a question for if one of the residents wanted to answer this I would appreciate it. Lehman: Okay. Kanner: I think they did answer it in part, but we got a memo about HUD market rates and a survey of current prices and we're told that one of the reasons that it needs to be rezoned is to make it more economically viable - that it's not being filled up and that rents are being offered below market rate. Here we're told that HUD market rate is for 2 bedroom, $516 a month and in 1999 the average price downtown was $585 a month figuring that might have gone up 5% or so - $30 - so maybe $615. Is that the rent that...are people paying less than that amount? If someone could come to the microphone I'd appreciate that. Richard Twohy: My name is Richard Twohy. I'm resident manager at Heritage Manor the property under consideration. The rates presently are for a two This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 13 bedroom $790 and for a one bedroom $670. And well I guess those figures speak for themselves. Lehman: Okay. Kanner: Joe do you still...were you representing the applicants? Do you still stand by your statement before? Joe Holland: I do. I don't think the results of what the Council has received in that memo are necessarily statistically valid. What I'm going to hand you I don't know are statistically valid either. These are figures I downloaded from websites of local property owners advertised in the Daily Iowan or other sources in the Iowa City area. IfI might I'd like to give one of these to each of the Council members. Obviously there's a wide variation in what somebody might call market rent. These properties are as I said there's not necessarily a statistical sample. They represent what's out there on websites where I could validate the information as opposed to using anecdotal information. Some of these projects are one where the City has had a role in bringing these projects to fruition through various ways - through tax abatements, tax increment financing. Some of them are open market. All of these are significantly higher particularly when you look at what's included in the monthly rent. If you look at Heritage Manor and then you compare this to other properties where prices are $200 to $300 a month higher for efficiency apartments which are much smaller than the ones at Heritage Manor. Certainly not scientific, but certainly I think an illustration of what we're talking about when we talk about being below market rates. The other thing I want to say about this is quite simply is we try to do the right thing in coming to the City in asked to have this rezone& The Clark's would have walked away from this 10 years ago, converted the first floor of this property to commercial and ceased operating this property as elderly housing. They can do that tomorrow. You should understand the leases on this property have a 60-day termination clause both for the benefit of the tenant and for the benefit of the landlord. The right thing to do is to rezone this to give the flexibility to fill those vacancies. This building has never been full. The vacancy historically has rrm from 14 to 21 percent throughout the life of the project - that's 19 years. There was no restriction on this property after the first 10 years that there be any elderly in the building. Kanner: I'm sorry could you repeat the restriction. I missed that - what you just said. Holland: The financing for this project had a provision in it that required that for what's called the qualified project period which is a lengthy complex definition of the documents, but it basically amounts to 10 years after This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 14 the building is first occupied. During that period of time there's a requirement that 75% of the property be occupied by elderly. There's also a commitment made that a portion of the building would be occupied by persons receiving Section 8 supplement or people of low- to moderate-income. Those were honored well beyond the necessary period. They're still being honored today. It's the intention of the Clark's to honor those beyond today. However, they're not prepared to cope with the ongoing vacancy rate in the same amount. There has to be a change in the property. I guess that's the long and the short of it. And that's just kind of the way life is that City water goes up, taxes go up, insurance goes up, cost of operation goes up continuously. The rates on those 2-bedroom apartments have not changed in 7 years. And if you notice those include utilities. Those include parking in the garage. It is a good deal for the people who live there comparatively. The problem is because of the vacancy rates has been uneconomical and the reason this zoning is requested was not to remove the people that are there. The reason it's being requested is to give enough flexibility to fill up those vacancies because right now you can't use that property for anything except elderly housing unless you vacate the entire building, remodel the first floor and then use it for whatever housing will eliminate the vacancies. And that's why we're here - to try and do the right thing. And that's why we want to rezone and hopefully the Council will do what we see as the right thing. Kanner: Wait Joe if you changed the first floor you said you'd have to vacate the whole building? Holland: I don't think it's feasible to remodel the building - the first floor of the building - has to be shut down. I don't know how people would access the second and third floors while the remodeling is underway. It's a practical matter. I think probably what will happen is because the first floor will probably stay vacant because there's so much empty first floor vacant space the upstairs is going to be rented for the highest possible rent that can be obtained and that's probably going to exclude the elderly. It will exclude Section 8 tenants. And that's the economics of what's going on here. So in a way I know there's this urge to try to preserve elderly housing. The best way to do it is to rezone it. If it's not rezoned I don't know how soon or when, but there's going to be probably some major changes at that property. Kanner: You said it's been vacant for a long time - a lot of vacancies - how come it wasn't changed earlier to first floor commercial? Holland: That was the owner's decision to do that and I guess finally they had enough. As I say you've seen what's happened to City water rates in the last five, 10 years. They've gone up. They've come down a little bit, but they've gone up substantially. I can tell you a little bit about This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 15 what's happened to insurance rates. You may have seen....some of you may have seen that in your homeowner's insurance premiums where they're doubling, tripling. The same thing is happening on a commercial level. Property taxes have gone up significantly since the state freeze on property tax has dropped off. Times change and costs of operation go up and this is the point in time where the owner chose to do that. Kanner: And what's the vacancy rate? Holland: Right now...well you can look at it any month. Historically it's been 14 to 21%. Right now I believe it's in between those two. I believe there's five units rented. There's one I think coming vacant at the end of the month. I mean you never know when it's going to be vacant. So you look at the historical figures. But right now it's at that historical average. Any other questions I can answer for the Council? Lehman: No, thank you counsel. O'Donnell: Thank you. Twohy: My name is Richard Twohy as it was before, resident manager at Heritage Manor. The information is incorrect about the utilities. We pay electricity. The building is steam heated so that is included. Each of the units is air conditioned by a window air conditioner. And my electric bill which is generally about the $38 to $40 a month for the two hot months last year was just short of $150 each of those two months. I don't know how long it's been - maybe ever - since the window air conditioner units were upgraded. But that's an issue for a person - something to be expected in terms of the rental cost. It should be remembered that the Staff- City Staff- in its written report to the Zoning Commission said that the economic issue of the applicant was not a sufficient reason in their opinion for a change of zoning. Shelly McCafferty appeared at the Zoning Commission for April 17th and according to the minutes said that the comprehensive plan supports diversity of population. There are also services for seniors in the downtown area and it is near mass transit. So for that reason McCafferty said that Staff felt that the applicant's reason for rezoning was not compelling. And then went on to say that it was because in reviewing the 1992 near Southside neighborhood redevelopment plan adopted as part of the comprehensive plan and because of adjacent land uses Staff felt there were sufficient reasons to approve the rezoning. But it's significant that Mr. Holland declared at the last...the prior session here as well as today that the central reason is the economic one. But I think it's equally arguable that the rental has not been appropriately marketed. And we tenants have offered to help market the place because we think that the place is...it really is This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 16 quiet, civilized living, a wonderful place to be. And there is a sense of community there that we tenants feel strongly that if the word gets out to elders and to people who are used to quiet living including the many graduate students. It can be made full we think without a zoning change and we're willing to help. May I offer each member a document? Lehman: You may, but this isn't...I don't mind adding to the public hearing, but we've had a public hearing. If someone has something different to present that we haven't had an opportunity to see I would be...I would certainly welcome that. But...pass that around. That's fine. Twohy: Thank you very much. Lehman: But I would like the public to limit their comments to things that we have not heard at the public heating because I think we need to move on with this. Kanner: While you're passing that out Rich I'll ask a question and perhaps you could answer. I'm leaning towards not doing the rezoning. I think it's appropriate for our comprehensive plan the way it is now. But I'm worded. What I heard as a bit ora threat frankly about booting everybody out. That's what I heard. And I don't want that to happen and it sounds like that's a real possibility and I wonder how you react to that. Do you want us...if we rezone it sounds like that's not going to happen - that you won't be booted out. But if we keep it the way we have it I think there's a real possibility we heard that you'll all lose your leases after 60 day notice and that concerns me. Twohy: I've heard the same (can't hear) as well Steve and I've talked to twice now in these last two days with Jim Clark. My understanding is even with the rezoning - with or without it - apparently it's up to the owner to decide to do away with their elderly accommodation anyway. So that's my understanding from the work session last night. Lehman: Richard that's not totally true. In this community it's illegal to discriminate based on age and he not any other landlord cannot refuse to lease to someone because of their age. He cannot come in and evict you because you're older. Dilkes: Unless you've got elderly housing. Champion: Right. Dilkes: Which is the flip side of what we're talking. Twohy: It was a surprise to me to learn at the work session last night at the This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 17 Council that apparently there is no provision within the City laws to encourage or to support elderly housing - that is there is no requirement. It's a market issue is what Karin Franklin said last night. That is a concern to me because of our City's general concern about diversity and secondly that ifI heard correctly if you have a portion of the building set aside for elderly housing than the entire building must be elderly housing. It seems to me that there must be some kind of flexibility in those roles as well. Otherwise you see a situation like this where without discrimination at all, but simply for market reasons a safe haven like this can be lost. The current situation in any event... Lehman: You need to wrap this up though. Twohy: May I finish sir? Dilkes: I'm sorry for the record there's just a number of misstatements Mr. Twohy and we can correct those and Karin can come up. We don't have to, but... Lehman: Well I think we need to move along... Twohy: Okay I'm concerned because my people have not been given adequate notice. I don't know who to blame - perhaps it's not a blame issue - but my people once again have not had adequate notice about what even the roles are. We came and I heard the City Attorney say last session that she was going to report to the Council back on her research on an issue before the Council voted, but I don't know what it is. Dilkes: There's information in the packet about that. We corresponded with Mr. Holland and corrected the problem and that is in the packet. Twohy: Well it would be wonderful if we citizens could get a copy of the packet and we certainly would like to and to be able to participate to the modest degree that a citizen can in a decision that affects our lives. The functional fact now is that Mr. Clark and I have agreed we're each going to put pen to paper and get together hopefully before the Council's...the next session on this to come up if we can with an agreement that could run with the land that will meet the needs of both the current tenants and the owner. And I know it would be helpful if there were a nod or something from Mr. Clark that that is in fact what we'll be doing. No. The answer is no. Perhaps you could... Lehman: Listen we really need...this has been long enough. We really need to move along with this Richard. Twohy: Perhaps I'm wrong, but my people are wondering what's real and we This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 18 talked this very afternoon and said... Lehman: Let Joe... Joe would you... Holland: Mr. Mayor ifI might correct some of these mistaken statements. First of all this letter from City Attorney Mr. Twohy has a copy of that letter. He knows full well what's in that letter. It was no surprise to him tonight that...to find out the opinion was different. No we're not going to enter into an agreement that runs with the land. Yes there have been discussions about a number of things. One is establishing this as a quiet house - having a provision in the lease which contains stronger than usual language about keeping the place quiet and consideration to elderly that we hope will remain there. Number 2 putting in security cameras in the hallways so it will be a secure building to live in. Three - minimize the impact on rent for the elderly that are currently there. Perhaps putting in a CPI escalator. I think it's time for the Council to discuss this. It's hard to sit there and listen to some of these discussions and recognize that we've tried to be open, tried to be honest. We obviously have our own position on it, but there's been enough information. I hope you can rely on your City Staff, Ms. Dilkes, Ms. Franklin rather than misinformation. I also want to make one point. This came up at the public hearing. There were people from the building at the heating for the Planning and Zoning Commission. If you've been one (can't hear) hearings she holds those public hearings open an excruciating length of time. Not one person got up and spoke against this - not one. I saw residents there that are here tonight nobody said anything. Twohy: Because they couldn't hear in this room. Holland: That's not our problem. And my point is we've done everything we can to have meaningful input and to have discussions with people in the building and I don't know if we can say a lot more than I've already said. Lehman: Right. Twohy: May I respond by pointing out that there is misinformation coming from Mr. Holland as well with regards to utilities and so forth. Lehman: We're not going to argue this because this really is a zoning issue not an economic issue. Twohy: That's right, but I think the Council also and I know that you are paying attention to the concerns of the residents as well. Lehman: As much as we possibly can. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 19 Twohy: Right. Lehman: Thank you. We're going to take this comment and then we're going to have the Council discussion and then we're going to vote. Charlotte Walker: Okay. I thank you for letting me speak. My name is Charlotte Walker. I live across the street from the 400 South Dubuque Street and I'm really concerned about the elderly people that live there and call that their home. (End of Side 1, Tape 03-56, Beginning of Side 2) Walker: ...place in downtown Iowa City that people with higher income can live in a senior only building. Some of us...I live across the street in Kindle House and I have a nice, quiet building. I know what it's like to live next door to a student building. It's just chaos at night sometimes. But if we had them in our building...I mean it's just not a compatible mix of people to have young people and very.., some of the people in Heritage Manor are near 100 years old. There's some very elderly people and we need to protect them. And so I had much more to say, but I am going to keep this brief and hope...and let you listen to your heart on this. Think about the people in that building more so than the profits of this landlord. I heard Mr. Holland say which is so despicable it about made me have a stroke right on the spot when I heard it on the television. He said that one reason they don't like to rent to elders is because they can't predict when they're going to leave. My god. We might die right on the spot. I could die here. You know. Boom. Because I'm 71 years old. I don't know how long I'm going to live. But I don't want to be pushed out of housing because they can't predict when I'm going to die. So I just ask you to listen to your heart. This is...it's not only important to protect the lower income seniors. We have to protect the ones with a little bit more income. They have a nice place to live. They can walk to the Senior Center. They can walk to the post office, walk down to the ped mall. It's a wonderful place for senior citizens. And so we need this senior only building kept for those people. And if you can find a way to do it I hope you will. But I'll end with just one more point a landlord always has the option of raising his rent because of his expenses - his taxes, maintenance, whatever. You can raise those rents. And he's not obligated by any funding source now. You heard them say that. So it's a false excuse to say that they are keeping the rents down...or have to keep the rents down because they don't have to. So thank you very much. Lehman: Thank you Charlotte. No, no, no. Council is going to discuss this. We had the public hearing a month ago. I'm sorry. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 20 Dilkes: I'm sorry, but you know we talked about this before once you start a new public hearing I think you got to let people have a chance. Lehman: Okay fine. We'll take one more. Maxine Simon: I'm Maxine Simon. I wanted to talk a little bit about the security issue. If they start allowing students to come in you can run into substance abuse, drugs, use of alcohol and there's lots of this stuff in Iowa City. And the building won't be secure because there will be more students with students going in and out. So there will less safety for the older citizens. And I'm also concerned about the noise. To older people being quiet is very important. I also want to say I don't know that lady - Charlotte I guess had talked just before me. She gave a very good, very good talk. Thank you. Lehman: Thank you. Council discussion. Kanner: Well I think either way they can boot people out. Whatever way we vote they have a 60 day lease. And I think the zoning is appropriate for what it is now. And I would recommend actually to the residents to organize a tenants' union and do what you can with that. There's a number of cities across the country that do that kind of thing (can't hear) power the residents. And I'll work with you on that. I don't like the threatening tone of the applicant there because I do think the CB-2 at this time is probably the best bet. And if the applicant wishes to change to commercial that is his right on the first floor. Champion: Well I think also this Council sometimes becomes confrontational with people who are asking for changes. And I think a lot of the behavior people who come from (can't hear) are reacting to what's going on up here. I've never heard the applicant say that they wanted to kick anybody out of this building. I think they specifically said that they would everything they could to keep the people there who are there. And I believe them. And maybe I'm a Pollyanna, but I do believe them. I think also that it would be nice to have some mixed ages in that house. I agree with you I don't think you want young students who are into partying, but there are a lot of students out there who are not using drugs, who are not using alcohol, who are diligent about their students and also would like a quiet place to live. And I definitely hope that Mr. Clark will come up with some kind of lease that would make sure that anybody who rented that property would be a quiet graduate student, an older student. I wouldn't necessarily have to be a student. There are people out there who also like a quiet place to live. And I'm sorry you all feel like he's trying to put you out. I haven't heard that at all. I am going to support it. I think it's unfair to ask people to keep property at a level that it's not feasible. And I would hate to see that building demolished in order to get commercial This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 21 stuff downstairs and whatever they want...apartments upstairs. So I'm going to support it with the hope and desire that the Clark's mean it - that they're going to try to work with the tenants to make sure the building remains quiet in the...and certainly you can stay there. And I think he'll do that. He's getting older too. Lehman: You know I think if I'm not mistaken that property is I believe 19 years old. If the vacancy rate is between 14 and 21 percent over a period of 19 years and I don't question for a heartbeat that that's a wonderful place to live. But 14 to 21 percent vacancy is something that is not basically tolerable. And this really is not an economic issue. This is a CB-2 zone surrounded by PRM. And I suspect that if Mr. Clark or anybody else came in and asked the Council to change the zone for an economic purpose where the zone was not appropriate that no one would make that recommendation nor would it be approved by Staff, recommended by Staff or approved by p&Z. But this is a logical zone for that area. The economics of that I think are secondary. If it were not an appropriate zone I don't think it would ever been recommended to us in the first place regardless of the economics. We have laws in this town and I suppose around the state we cannot discriminate against folks based on their age. So anyone can rent there, and from an occupancy standpoint if you can't afford to maintain a property with a vacancy rate of 14 to 20 percent you will change that property to commercial on the first floor and then you will have apartments...you may have the whole first floor empty, but if you fill all the rest of the floors you're going to be money ahead. And I don't think that leaves a whole lot of choice for Mr. Clark. So I will also support that because it's a natural thing for that zone. Kanner: Ernie... Vanderhoef: Well I'm going to... Karmer: There is CB...other surrotmding CB areas around there. Lehman: There is some in the area, but not surrounding. Kanner: Yeah surrounding. I believe touching it. Lehman: No. Kanner: And public area too. Lehman: But that's not CB-2. Karmer: But you said it was all PRM. Lehman: CB-2 sticks out in the middle of PRM. It's PRM on three sides of it. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 22 Dilkes: There's CB-2 to the south. Lehman: To the south. But three sides of it. It is a finger that sticks up into the middle of PRM zone. Kanner: And CB-2 off to the side here. And then there's public here. Lehman: To the south there's... Kanner: And to the west I believe too. Lehman: Anyway. Other discussion? Pfab: I would just like to make a comment. I think it's one of those Solomon issues you can't cut the baby in half. But I don't think there's any pleasant decision no matter how you look at it. It's a fact of life that it is as it is. I'm going to support the change and I don't do it with any great enthusiasm. But I don't think the owner came with any great enthusiasm (can't hear) change either. Vanderhoef: Well I'm going to support this. CB-2 as I understand it 20 years ago was to accommodate some zoning needs around the near downtown where there had been building conversions and there were people living in...they were sort of a work/live properties. Some of them I believe are up on Market Street or Jefferson Street - up in there - a few of those homes. So it fit at that time. It was also a time that they were starting to think about doing something on the near Southside. It took another 10 years or so for the near Southside plan to be put together. And in my mind when I look at that building and know that we have in the comprehensive plan talking about using high-density residential in that area and the fact that that building sits with properties all around it that have been developed other than commemial and we have more identified where the commercial will be in the near Southside primarily along Burlington Street and maybe the first block in and also along Gilbert Street. So it makes sense to me at this time as we look at the whole rewrite of our comprehensive zone that we're going to be eliminating this CB-2 or quite likely I should say eliminating CB-2 and whether we rezone it this moment or whether it might be 3 months or 4 months whenever we get that plan I don't see that it makes that much difference. And I think it is in keeping with the comp plan. I have sympathies for and I hope that it will be continued to be a quiet living space and that seniors will be there because I too wish to have market rate senior living in the downtown area. And so I have those sympathies, but I will be supporting the zoning change. Wilbum: I didn't hear any direct threats from the applicant as was implied, but I think as you were saying Ernie that the fact of the matter is we don't This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 23 make this change then at some point the owner is going to make something that will be in his best economic interest. So I'll go ahead and support the change. It sounds like while there may be some misunderstanding that there has been conversation at least listening on the applicant's part to some of your concerns. I would encourage you to keep...continue talking with him. And you had talked about marketing. I don't see why that couldn't continue. I'm sure that if you come up with a handful of folks regardless of who they are, what age they are, that he would take the income. So... Kanner: I just wanted to confirm something. PMR they would have to have more parking spaces? Dilkes: I think the - Karin correct me if I'm wrong - but you need more parking spaces for non-elderly housing than you do for elderly housing. Franklin: Correct. Kanner: Okay. that's another reason I think it would be better to keep it the way it is especially with a big parking ramp that's going to go right next door. I don't think it's good for that area to have even more parking spaces. Lehman: I don't think there is more parking available. It has to be in the ramp. It won't be on-site. I don't think... Kanner: For PRM? Champion: Yeah. Lehman: There's no room on site for it. Dilkes: That's a possibility given our parking impact. Lehman: Right. Other discussion? I just have to say this because I've been thinking this all along. I cannot believe that this building isn't full of really fine folks who live there, good tenants. I also can't believe that Mr. Clark is not a good, reasonable landlord. And that the folks who live there have every reason to expect that they will continue to stay there and continue to enjoy the quiet living. And my guess is that Mr. Clark who I think is a very astute landlord will see to it that whatever tenants move into that property will be compatible with the folks who are already there. Roll call. Motion carries, 6-1, Kanner voting the negative. Kan': Motion to accept correspondence. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5d Page 24 O'Dormell: So moved. Wilburn: Second. Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, seconded by Wilburn to accept correspondence. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5c Page 25 ITEM 5c. PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS. c. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT HOUSING OVERLAY (OPDH-5) PLAN FOR THE PENINSULA NEIGHBORHOOD BY AMENDING THE PENINSULA NEIGHBORHOOD CODE AND REGULATING PLAN. (REZ03-00016) (SECOND CONSIDERATION) Dilkes: I'm sorry Emie. Could we go back to c for minute? Lehman: Yes. Dilkes: There was noted in the comment there was a request that that be expedited by the applicant. If the Council was...intentionally didn't expedite then we can move on, but I wanted to bring that to your attention. Lehman: We tried to expedite and you told us that was with second consideration. Dilkes: No, that was one before. Lehman: Oh. Dilkes: This is the peninsula. Lehman: Oh. Dilkes: So I think if there's interest in...I mean if it was intentional than we can move on. Lehman: Oh no. I don't think it was. Is there interest in expediting Item c? Champion: Sure. Pfab: yes. Champion: Yes. Dilkes: I think what you need then is a motion to reconsider. Lehman: We need a motion to reconsider item c. Dilkes: By any of you. It was a 7-0 vote. Lehman: Moved by Pfab. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #5c Page 26 Champion: Second. Lehman: Seconded by Champion to reconsider item c. All in favor of reconsideration. Opposed? Motion carries, 6-1, Kanner voting the negative. Now do we...? Dilkes: Just do like you normally would to collapse. Lehman: Now do we have a motion to approve item c? Wilburn: Move that the... Dilkes: Well you need...yeah there you go. Wilburn: Move that the role requiring that ordinances must be considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finally passed be suspended; that the second consideration and vote be waived; that the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time. Vanderhoef: Second. Lehman: Motion by Wilburn, seconded by Vanderhoef for expedited consideration. Discussion? Roll call. Motion carries 6-1, Kanner voting the negative. Wilbum: Move that the ordinance be finally adopted at this time. Vanderhoefi Second. Lehman: Moved by Wilbum, seconded by Vanderhoe£. Discussion? Roll call. Motion carries 6-1, Kanner voting the negative. Pfab: I'm glad that was brought up. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #7 Page 27 ITEM 7. A CIVIL PENALTY OF EITHER THIRTY (30) DAY RETAIL CIGARETTE PERMIT SUSPENSION OR $1,500.00 AGAINST DELI MART #2. Dilkes: On item 7 Deli Mart has waived their fight to hearing and made the $1500 payment so we just need you to do a resolution accepting waiver of the hearing and payment of the $1500 penalty. Champion: So moved. Lehman: We have a motion to that effect from Champion. O'Donnell: Second. Lehman: Seconded by O'Donnell. Discussion? Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #8 Page 28 ITEM 8. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 3, "CITY FINANCES, TAXATION AND FEES," CHAPTER 4, "SCHEDULE OF FEES, RATES, CHARGES, BONDS, FINES AND PENALTIES" OF THE CITY CODE TO INCREASE THE FINE FOR PARKING TICKETS, INCREASE MONTHLY PARKING PERMIT FEES, AND CHANGING THE PARKING TICKET ESCALATION. (PASS AND ADOPT) Lehman: (Reads item). Karr: Mr. Mayor that's the one that you passed and adopted last night. You don't need to act on that one tonight. Lehman: Oh, I'm sorry. Kart: I'm not. Lehman: Sorry I didn't catch it. That's why you're keeping track of me Marian. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #9 Page 29 ITEM 9. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 00-3947, PROVIDING THAT GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES LEVIED AND COLLECTED EACH YEAR ON ALL PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE AMENDED SYCAMORE AND FIRST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL AREA OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, COUNTY OF JOHNSON, STATE OF IOWA, BY AND FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE STATE OF IOWA, CITY OF IOWA CITY, COUNTY OF JOHNSON, IOWA CITY COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND OTHER TAXING DISTRICTS, BE PAID TO A SPECIAL FUND FOR PAYMENT OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST ON LOANS, MONIES ADVANCED TO AND INDEBTEDNESS, INCLUDING BONDS ISSUED OR TO BE ISSUED, INCURRED BY SAID CITY IN CONNECTION WITH THE AMENDED SYCAMORE AND FIRST AVENUE URBAN RENEWAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PASS AND ADOPT) Lehman: (Reads item). Vanderhoef: Move adoption. Champion: Move adoption. Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, seconded by Champion. Discussion? Pfab: I have one question. No where here does it say that the tax collected will be rebated (can't hear) and I was wondering how they resolve that. Lehman: I think we deal with each one of those on an individual basis. Franklin: Each project. Lehman: Each project it has to be approved. All we do is... Franklin: This ordinance just allows for the tax increment financing revenue collection. The rebate is through the development agreement we have with the individual development project. So this isn't' about the individual development project at all. Pfab: Okay. No problem. [gut when I look at this...when I read it through it says... Franklin: What it allows us to do is to collect those taxes that would normally go to the school district and the county for this area and use them for tax increment financing purposes according to state law. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #9 Page 30 Pfab: What puzzled me was paying principle interest on loans, monies advanced... Franklin: I understand. Yeah. Pfab: So in other words... Franklin: It's some boiler plate language from the state that we get from our bond counsel and that's what this ordinance does is it enables us to collect that revenue. Pfab: So basically the way this is worded it just used to...in case bonds are issued it's just to pay those off. Franklin: That's correct. Vanderhoef: And it would also be wouldn't it for any public use. Franklin: Yes. Vanderhoef: So we'd certify in December or... Franklin: Right. Vanderhoef: ...whenever it is and to do a public project if we were going to do streets or something like that. Franklin: And all those possibilities are outlined in the district that was adopted. Lehman: Okay. Roll call. Motion carries, 6-1, Kanner voting the negative. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #11 Page 31 ITEM 11. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST A LICENSE AREEMENT FOR THE TEMPORARY USE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, THE MOEN GROUP AND TERRAPIN BREWERY, INC. D/B/A TERRAPIN COFFEE IOWA CITY FOR A SIDEWALK CAFI~. Lehman: (Reads item). Champion: Move adoption. Wilbum: Second. Lehman: Moved by Champion, seconded by Wilbum. Discussion? Champion: Well I'd just like to say that I think the sidewalk cafes have been a real plus for the downtown and citizens of Iowa City are really enjoying them. Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #13b Page 32 ITEM 13b. COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS b. Police Citizens Review Board: One appointment for a current or former Peace Officer to fill a four-year term September 1, 2003 - September 1, 2007. The City Council also reserves the right, for good cause shown, to waive the requirement that the Board include one current or former peace officer as that term is defined by State law. (Term expires for John Watson) (3 males and 1 female currently serve). Lehman: Police Citizens Review Board we did have an application and we agreed last night to appoint Candy... Vanderhoef: Barnhill. Lehman: Barnhill. I didn't write that down. Do I have a motion to that effect? Dilkes: And I think as part of that motion you need to waive the requirement that the board include a current or former peace officer since you do have an applicant that meets that and state your reason why. Lehman: Who made the motion? O'Donnell: Vanderhoef didn't you? Wilburn: Even if we're not accepting that person we need to do that? Dilkes: No I think you need...you need to say what the good cause is for waiving the police officer appointment. Champion: I move we waive the requirement for a peace officer on the Citizens Review Board at this point because we had a good applicant from town that was not a police officer. And the police officer applicant was also a very good applicant, but lived in North Liberty. Karmer: Other reasons are... Dilkes: Yeah I think maybe Steven is going to do this, but you can waive the residency requirement so I think what your discussion was last night was based on his being a former member of this. Champion: Former member of the Iowa City Police Force. Right. O'Donnell: Okay I'll second that. Lehman: We have a motion and a second. Is there discussion? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #13b Page 33 Karmer: Also...I think those are valid reasons and again it was a good applicant. Also I think it's important to have more women on there. That it was dominated by men and so I think... Champion: Another good reason. Lehman: Okay. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carried This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #14a Page 34 ITEM 14a. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES. a. Current Vacancies. (1) Police Citizens Review Board: One vacancy for a current or former Peace Officer to fill an unexpired term ending September 1, 2005. Thc City Council also reserves thc right, for good cause shown, to waive the requirement that the Board include one current or former peace officer as that term is defined by State law. (Pending vacancy for Bev Smith) (4 males and 0 female currently serve). Lehman: Do we still have...is there another vacancy on the PCRB. Champion: Yes. Karr: There's one coming up. Lehman: (Reads item). Dilkes: Can I interrupt for just one minute? Lehman: Yes. Dilkes: On this PCRB issue the appointment of a police officer. I think you as a group need to talk about that because we're getting applicants from former members of our police department. If those are not going to be acceptable it may be...we should amend the ordinance rather than each time having to waive the police officer requirement for that reason. I mean ifa former member of the police department who applies thinking there is going to be some preference given that he or she is a police officer that expectation shouldn't be out there if we're just going to do this every time. Lehman: Can we do that...put that on a work session? Dilkes: Yeah. Lehman: Okay. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #15 Page 35 ITEM 15. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION. Lehman: City Council information. Irvin? Pfab: I'd like to set...bring up an issue I'd like to see it handled at a work session it regards the City vehicle towing and service.., storage service contract that was bid and the bid was accepted. But I believe that we've got some problems that bother me quite a bit. So I would be happy to have this brought up at a City work session. Lehman: Eleanor? Dilkes: You may not have seen it, but there is a letter from Andy Matthews of my office to Jon Pearce who represents the company with the towing contract currently addressing the issues. We have spent a considerable amount of time on these towing issues. There are certainly different positions by them, by us and by the towing company who last had the contract. And as stated in Andy's letter our recommendation would not be to re-bid. But I wanted to make you aware of that and now you can have your discussion about whether you're going to put it on the work session. Pfab: I believe that there's enough questions there that I think it definitely warrants some work at a work session. Steve brought up to us. Lehman: I think those are legal issues that are best left to the City Attorney's office, but is there interest in this being placed on a work session? Pfab: This gets fairly complicated. Lehman: I know that which is another reason why I think that the City Attorney's office is the appropriate place for it. Is there any interest? Kanner: Well if there's concern it might be worth taking another look at it by our legal department and have (can't hear). Lehman: I think we just did. Dilkes: We've taken a long look at this already. Maybe I can suggest this. Why don't you all read Andy's letter to Mr. Pearce and maybe if you're still interested you can talk about it next time about a work session. Lehman: Okay. O'Donnell: Good idea. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #15 Page 36 Lehman: Alright. Pfab: Then I'd like to offer these adoptions as correspondence. Can we get a motion to accept these as correspondence? Vanderhoefi What are they? Pfab: Letters back and forth. I've been in touch with these people and they've asked me to help them out. And I believe we've got a problem here and there is a solution. It's not hard. But I think we definitely have a problem. Vanderhoef: Has the Attorney's Office seen those letters? Pfab: I think most of them they have. I don't know. So that's why I want to submit them. Dilkes: I don't know what the letters are. Vanderhoef: I don't either. Lehman: If we just submit those to Marian will they appear in the next packet? Marian wants to get them in the next packet. Okay. Champion: Move to accept the correspondence. Do we have to move that? Kanner: Second. Lehman: Well that don't make any difference. We have a motion and a second to accept correspondence. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. Is that it? Pfab: That's it. Lehman: Connie? Champion: I'm fine. Lehman: Mike? O'Donnell: Nothing. Lehman: Dee? Vanderhoef: Nothing. Lehman: Ross? Wilburn: Congratulations to the winners of the Johnson County Tobacco This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #15 Page 37 Coalition Anti-Smoking...Anti-Tobacco advertisements. There's some real creative advertisements...television ads that were put on by some junior high, high school and college age students. They were real creative. They showed them Sunday over at the business school. So well done. Also just congratulations to the successful Pride festival. It looked like you folks had a good time. Lehman: Okay. Steven? Kanner: A few things. First in our info packet we got a copy ora 6-17 memo from Dale to the firefighters' union and I appreciate that. And I thought he made some good points in regarding the financial risks that the firefighters' union made - some of the points that they made. They talked in regards to the Houston fire death investigation. And Dale pointed out that what's called NFPA 1710 which are guideline for adequate staffing was not cited. And there was no litigation resulting from this. And Houston still does not meet those 1710 guidelines. And for the City of Iowa City the 1710 standards is not enforceable. I think they are a goal that we want to work towards. And I think we're all trying to do that. And some of that has to do with financing to get the staffing that is requested by the firefighters' union and by the 1710 guidelines. But we don't live in a perfect world with all the funding that we want. But as it was pointed out we do have good firefighter coverage. I think we all understand that. I do appreciate this exchange of information. I think again it's good for the City government and if there's a response from the firefighters' union that would be appreciated. But thank you to everyone for the correspondence in regard to that. Also maybe this is a question for Marian. In the preliminary airport committee minutes that was in the info packet normally we get more extensive minutes and this one was rather short and inconcise and I was wondering if there was a reason for that that you know of?. Karr: No. I take what's submitted. Kanner: Okay. Lehman: That was like an agenda. Kanner: It was just the agenda and one of the reasons that we wanted to get those minutes ahead of time is to be up-to-date instead of having to wait a couple months. And this...these minutes really didn't tell us anything and I was wondering if someone could just ask what... Kart: We certainly can communicate. There was also a suggested format for minutes to come to you and we certainly can give that information to Staff as well. Follow up. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #15 Page 38 Karmer: Okay. Thank you. And in...I'm sorry I didn't remember what we decided to do with the National Housing Trust Fund. Champion: It's going to be on a work session. Lehman: It's going to be on a work session. Kanner: We're going to have that on a work session. Lehman: Right. Kanner: Okay. That's good. And a couple things regarding the Police Force. We did have a memo from the PCRB - Police Citizens Review Board regarding detainees who are handcuffed. And Steve asked the Police Chief to look into that and we did get a reply. And I was hoping that we would get more in that reply. It was rather short reply saying...the remark from PCRB was that would like to know what the training is in regards to handling people with handcuffs so that they're not put in further danger - detainees by the Police. And the reply from the Police Chief is we do training. I guess if that is the case was it followed would be my natural follow-up question that was not really answered. Was that training followed? Atkins: To the best of my knowledge there wasn't any further complaints on the part of the officer or the individual. I can find out for you. Kanner: Well the PCRB was making I think the inquiry as a result of a complaint. Atkins: Yeah. I thought I answered it, but I can embellish it. Kanner: But he said...basically what I saw is that we do the training. And it seems to me that we want to follow-up a bit on was the training followed. If not, why not or what is the training. Is it adequate? Maybe it needs to be done in abetter fashion. I think some of the things that I would be looking for. Atkins: Qualitative things such as adequate, better fashion - those arc tough to answer. I mean we have training standards at the academy, mobile training system that we participate in for the other departments. I'm just...I mean I can certainly get you more information. Dilkes: I think the PCRB evaluated that particular situation. I think maybe what Steven is interested in is an explanation of what the training is with respect to that issue identified. Atkins: That's easy enough to get. Yeah. I mean the questions of adequacy are (can't hear). This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #15 Page 39 Karmer: Well and did they follow the training. I don't know if that was answered in the memo from the Chief. Atkins: To my knowledge they did, but...apparently it was too short a response. Again we can certainly embellish that. That's not a problem. Kanner: Thank you. And then another concern was get a report on Use of Force every month. And most of the use of force seems reasonable with what the police are dealing with. There was one concern I had in the last May report. This was for May 2003 concerning case number 3-24630, officer number 36 quoting "the subject tensed up as he became verbally and physically aggressive towards the officer. The officer place two (spelled t-o, but I believe that was a mistake) fingers on the subject bronchial notch and directed him to his seat." And I asked Steve about this. And he says that the bronchial notch was a misnomer and is actually a jugular notch pressure point. And that this is one of the control techniques that are taught. I just have some concerns with that technique. I know in other cities...actually I don't know what the technique is that was used and I'd like to find out more about that. But if it's grabbing across the throat there have been a number of deaths across the country of police officers grabbing people, cutting off oxygen. And it just worries me when that is being used. I've not seen that before and I'm wondering perhaps that is the correct term. That maybe it was a bronchial notch and then later saying it's a wrong term. I would just like some further information. It seems that it's worth checking into and if it's the technique that's used then perhaps there's some possibility of danger to human lives. And there's other ways that police officers can protect themselves I'd like to look into that. SO I don't know if Council is okay with that if we get a further memo from the City Manager or just want to drop it at that. Pfab: Steve, are you going to follow up on that? Atkins: Steve's addressing you all. Lehman: I mean is this a commonly accepted procedure? Atkins: It's taught at the academy and it is not a choke hold. I was assured of that. I did ask that specific question. And the individual was being placed in the back of a car and chose to fight. And evidently place your fingers on a certain part - I'm doing this very badly - and the individual will sit. And they were trying to sit this person in the car and they were fighting. And of course you are confined. Remember the most important thing it's a defensive tactic. The officer is using it to defend in this case himself. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #15 Page 40 Lehman: Well I suspect it's also for the protection of the person that they're arresting as well so that neither one of them get hurt. Atkins: The idea was to get the person in the car and they weren't cooperating. Remember the purpose of the use of...again I do believe we're the only department in the state that...when we give you a use of force it's intended to be public demonstration of how we go about our policing. And it's intended to raise questions because each of those are then reviewed by an internal committee from what happened. And of course we go so far as use of force actually cuffing someone is a use of force and those have to be explained. If you would like me to get a little more detail of what this particular circumstance is I can certainly do that. Pfab: I would appreciate if we could get a little more detail. O'Donnell: I don't think we need anymore. I mean if this is taught at the Police Academy I don't see any reason to carry this any farther. Pfab: I know when I read it I was a little taken back by it just because... Wilburn: You know one of the things that comes to mind for me and our department just received was it a national... Atkins: Accreditation. Wilburn: Accreditation. Atkins: Yes we do. Wilburn: And so these types of defensive techniques and strategies, you know, I presume and I'm thinking related to my past military experience that that thought goes into you know the legality or potential danger use of specific techniques. And you know I think as part of that accreditation and through the academy you know that that careful thought goes into what is...which particular techniques are used. I think it's a valid question to say was proper technique used or did they follow their training. I think that's a legitimate...not that your point is illegitimate. But I think that's a line of questioning for us to do, but I think we could go through each defensive technique and a knee strike to me is something that looks (can't hear), but it is a defensive technique. And again some thought has gone into that being used. And it's I guess I'll leave it at that. I think your point earlier about was...give us information about was proper technique used - whatever the technique was. I would think that at the Council level I'd be willing to look at, but I'm not looking for us to review specific techniques if it fits within that accredited accepted standard. If there were some new technique This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #15 Page 41 that officers here were using that wasn't part of that then I could see... Lehman: We're about to get... D ilkes: I'm sorry...Marian just reminded me - I was kind of spacing out over here. But we have been talking about this for awhile. Lehman: Right. Is there an interest in discussing the police procedures particularly the one relative... ? O'Donnell: No. Kanner: Well before that Emie a memo is what was asked for...a memo. Pfab: A memo just... Kanner: ...more in-depth. Vanderhoef: A little more explanation. Pfab: Yeah. That's all. Lehman: I hear that. Okay. Give us a memo. Atkins: Okay. I plan to. Lehman: Anything else Steven? Kanner: I just wanted to note that Irvin's strategy was questioned at a previous meeting and though I might not agree with his particular strategy I do applaud Mr. Pfab for approaching U.S. HUD with his concern... (End of Tape 03-56, Beginning of Tape #03-57) Kanner: ...to be corrected especially as a minority position I think you have an obligation to use legal methods - whatever legal methods out there - to try to correct that. And it's incumbent upon all of us to use all legal methods to help correct what might be perceived as a grievous fault in how we do business in Iowa City. And I would ask you Ernie leadership would be...you asked Irvin did he go to the Staff. Did you go to Irvin before you went public, sort of jumped him at that meeting and say... ? Lehman: Irvin went public. Irvin went public. Kanner: But did you talk to him? Lehman: The issue was...no I wanted to know if he went to the Staff which This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #15 Page 42 seemed to be the appropriate procedure. I have not problem... Kanner: But maybe talk to him one on one. And certainly it's your right to bring it up publicly any time you want to. Lehman: Irvin made it public. Kanner: But leadership I would think... Lehman: Irvin made it a public issue. I didn't. Is that correct? Would you subscribe to the fact that Irvin made that a public issue, not this Council or any member of this Council? Kanner: Well I think the issue itself is public. Lehman: That's correct. He made it a public issue. Kanner: And certainly... Lehman: And I think the public deserves I think an answer as to why it was public and that's why I asked because I think it was relevant. O'Donnell: I wonder what we're going to accomplish here. Lehman: We're accomplishing nothing. Do you have anything else? Kanner: That's it. Lehman: Okay. I have...don't forget Friday 1:30 to 4:00 please be here for Chuck Schmadeke. What a tremendous person and I think that's a celebration that we all should be more than happy to participate in. CDBG celebration at Uptown Bill's on the 1st. Now we have also...last night we mentioned we need to do a Staff evaluation. There's also a probability of a special Council meeting that will need to be held on either Monday or Tuesday morning of next week and I think that we can accomplish the special Council meeting as well as the Staff evaluations. Are there conflicts with either of those days and this will probably be at 8:00 in the morning? Pfab: And of next week Monday or Tuesday? Lehman: Yes. Karr: Mr. Mayor there's still quite a bit of unknown. If we could just leave Monday or Tuesday wide open - not 8:00 in the morning. Monday because I'm not quite sure I can meet (can't hear). Lehman: Oh okay. Monday or Tuesday. If we have conflicts of people who This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #15 Page 43 cannot be there you need to let Marian know. The 30th or the 1st. Kanner: Monday is not available for me until in the evening. Dilkes: I'm on vacation Monday and Tuesday. Lehman: You do have an assistant. Dilkes: So if you want to evaluate me you can go ahead and do it, but I won't be there. Lehman: That would be a little bit difficult. Well okay irregardless of that. We will probably have to have a special meeting on Monday or Tuesday which may or may not...at this point will not include Staff evaluations because one of the Staff will not be here. Karr: Mr. Mayor, can I make a suggestion? Lehman: Please do. Karr: Is it possible if Council could look at their calendars and just get back to me on Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday. Eleanor will be back on Wednesday. Just so we know what options are available for next week. Pfab: Through the 2nd. Kanner: What's the purpose of the meeting? Lehman: I don't know. Karr: There's just a number of issues that may have to be resolved. We don't know at this point. Vanderhoefi I'm available Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. Lehman: Alright as am I. Steven is not available on Monday during the day right? Kanner: Or Wednesday. Atkins: I'll speak to the special meeting. We have a company that is having their board meeting about the potential for an expansion. Champion: Good. Atkins: And they're at the state, they're here. We're tying to get the paperwork done. And I can't promise you. You know how these This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #15 Page 44 things go. It's go, go, go. Lehman: If it was ready we would have had it tonight. Atkins: If it was ready I would have given it to you whenever it was ready. Champion: Steven is available on Wednesday did you say Steven? Kanner: Wednesday... Champion: Morning? Kanner: ...morning until 11:00 a.m. Champion: Is everybody else available on Wednesday moming? Lehman: Well we don't know. Karr: We have Susan's. Atkins: Susan's services as well. Kan': Services as well. Lehman: Services Wednesday morning. Champion: Oh. Lehman: At this point Marian it looks as if Tuesday is available. I didn't hear anybody who said they couldn't be here Tuesday. Champion: Just the special meeting. Karr: Not evaluations. Lehman: Is that correct? Atkins: Would you remind me again on what Susan's services were? Karr: 10:00 on Wednesday morning. Visitation is Tuesday 3:00 to 8:00. Lehman: gt. Pat's. Karr: St. Patrick's. Lehman: Right. Karr: Lensing Funeral Home 3:00 to 8:00 Tuesday the 1st. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003. #15 Page 45 Lehman: Do we want to pick a time for evaluations like next Friday morning. Does that work? O'Donnell: What and then can talk about (can't hear). Champion: Friday morning would be fine with me. Karr: July 4th? Atkins: Fourth o f July. Lehman: Oh, forget it. O'Donnell: Let's schedule this next week. Lehman: Alright. We'll do that next meeting. Champion: Then we're going to have trouble getting those done in July. O'Donnell: We don't have a meeting in July really -just one meeting. Champion: But I mean evaluations. (Can't hear). Lehman: Well perhaps we can do that at the special meeting on...which will probably be on Tuesday. Alright. O'Donnell: Eleanor, are you going to be on vacation in July? Dilkes: I don't know. Maybe. Lehman: Alright. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City Council meeting of June 24, 2003.