HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-09-23 Transcription#2a Page 1
ITEM 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
a. Iowa City Kickers.
Lehman: Item 2 is a special presentation of Iowa City Kickers, if they would come
forward please. We're not real high-tech; we use a wire.
Oberg: Okay. Hello, Mr. Mayor, my name is Jotm Oberg.
Lehman: John, how are you?
Oberg: And this is Laura Graham.
Lehman: Laura.
Graham: Nice meeting you.
Oberg: We're members of the Board of Iowa City Kickers and we've been serving
the Iowa City area for 25 years. This is our celebration this year. We have
a check to present to you in the amount of $10,000. (applause)
Lehman: Wow!
Oberg: For improvements out at the park with the cooperation of the Parks &
Recreation Department, and this puts our donations up to $408,000.
Lehman: Wow, that's unbelievable! Why don't you tell folks who the Kickers are?
Graham: The Kickers is a recreational soccer league. We begin with kindergartners
and play up through high school.
Lehman: You know, I think there are more kids and parents and grandparents
involved in soccer than probably all of the other sports in the entire
community. When I was a youngster, soccer was something I'd heard of, I
had no idea what it was. In fact, even when my kids, dates me, went to
school there was not a lot of soccer. Today soccer is a tremendous part of
the community, and you folks obviously have been a tremendous benefit to
the community. I remember your bringing the earlier checks. I did not
remember, I knew it was a couple to $300,000 but I did not realize the
extent you've done it so thank you so much. If everybody in the
community pitched in like you folks do, Steve, we wouldn't have the
financial problems we have now. So thank you so much. (applause)
Kanner: Is the USA going to win the World Cup this year?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#2a Page 2
Oberg: They should!
Lehman: I trust that TV cameras showed me taking that check and giving it to the
City Clerk. At one time there was a question about what happened to a
check at one of these meetings (laughter).
(from audience)You didn't spend it all in one place, did ya?
Lehman: (laughter) No!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#4 Page 3
ITEM 4. CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS
PRESENTED OR AMENDED.
Champion: Move adoption.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Move by Champion, second by O'Donnell. Discussion?
Kanner: I'd like to remove two items, d.1. Approval of the Streets and Parking
Annual Report; and d.2. Approval of Contract With Elder Services for
Senior Dining at the Senior Center.
Lehman: Okay. Other discussion?
Kanner: I have a couple things here. First, would like to make note once again in
Item b.6. Police Citizens Review Board dated August 12th, that they
did make a comment which for the Police Citizens Review Board is
just about the strongest thing they can do in many ways, in regards to
videotaping. They noted that, this is in regards to a case that they
recently heard, in which the one complaint was not upheld, but they
did make the comment that although they accept the Chief of Police's
conclusion about the videotape not being altered, they do have
questions that remain, this is quoting "Why the videotape was not
begun when the officer arrived on the scene? Why the video camera
remained pointed at the hood of the car instead of where the officer
was? And Why there are fifteen minutes unaccounted for when that
period of time to be no different than the immediately preceding and
following the unaccounted for time?" And the Council majority
decided not to pursue this issue. I think we should though reconsider it
and get further information. And I would urge the Council to ask for
that information, at least in the form of a memo from the City Manager
so that we can have further discussion on this issue as a community, if
need be. Are there any thoughts of reconsideration?
Pfab: I would second that.
Lehman: Is there interest in reconsideration besides Mr. Kanner and Mr. Pfab?
Apparently not. Is there any discussion?
Pfab: I think that's a real serious thing. I think there's no reason after the
amount of money that's invested in that equipment why that isn't ......
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#4 Page 4
Lehman: Irvin, I'm sure that's correct, and I'm also sum the Police Department is
looking into it, and there are not four people who want to pursue this.
Is there other discussion on the Consent Calendar?
Karmer: Yes. #b.8. Public Art Advisory Board from their minutes from August 7th,
this is directed I guess in part to Karin Franklin and the Board
members, them was a discussion on changing the composition of the
Commission, which was noted in the minutes. And there appeared to
be a slight misconception that I wanted to correct, at least from my
personal point of view, that we have trouble recruiting people for the
boards and conunissions, and that was one reason given why at least
one person didn't want to possibly change the composition to an all
citizen appointed board as opposed to staff and community at large
board, a mixture. And since I've been on Council for most of the
commissions, certainly the popular ones like Public Art Advisory, we
haven't had any problem recruiting people for the most part. We've
had more applicants usually than we've had positions open, certainly
for Public Art Advisory Commission. So I would ask that again that
the subject be brought up and let them know that that should not be a
reason why they perhaps consider a change, cause I think it is
important to have it be an all community member commission with
certainly advice from staff to get that broader input.
Lehman: Any other discussion? Roll call.
Kanner: Um, there's a couple other things. In regards to Correspondence # 10, e. 10.
from the traffic engineer, just wanted to make note that the spaces we
are giving four spaces to the Mod Pod, is that correct? And is there
anything else that we are giving to them in regards of settlement or
anything else like that?
Dilkes: There was a $6,000 compensation.
Kanner: Okay, so this is in response to the ................
Dilkes: Mod Pod made a claim against the City in connection with the threatened
condemnation for the near south side transportation center project.
Kanner: Okay, in regards to the parking ramp at Court Street, and so that's another
$6,000 and four parking space, revenue from that to them for the
duration. Steve, do you have an estimate of what that might cost
four parking spaces, what we might receive from that in terms like a
year and a half or something like that?
Atkins: It'd be tough to say but I imagine $1,000.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#4 Page 5
Kanner: $1,000 total?
Atkins: I would suspect $1,000, yes.
Kanner: And that's it on the Consent Calendar.
Lehman: Okay. Roll call. Motion carries.
Champion: Recommend approval of d. 1.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Motion to second recommend approval of d. 1. Discussion?
Karmer: Um, this is an annual report that we give to the State, the Iowa Department
of Transportation, that we're required to give. This is the official
financial report for city streets. It's very informative in regards to how
much we spent, not in totality actually, for different types of
transportation in our City, and we did not receive this until just within
the last hour or so, and because of that I'm going to ask that we defer
this and have a chance to look at it and then vote on it at our next
Council meeting which would be scheduled for October 13th, so I'll
make that motion to defer this to October 13th.
Karr: 14th or 13th? 13th is a Monday.
Kanner: 14th, I'm sorry. 14th is our formal meeting.
Lehman: We have a motion to defer.
Pfab: Second.
Lehman: And a motion and a second to defer.
Franklin: Can I just point out that this is due to DOT by September 30th.
Lehman: Thank you. It would appear that delaying this might not be a good idea.
Champion: Well it's just a report anyway.
Lehman: All in favor of delay would they indicate by ...............
Kanner: Let me amend that that we then have a special meeting before September
30th to approve that, at least.
Lehman: You're withdrawing your motion to defer?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#4 Page 6
Kanner: No, I'm moving that we ...... til before September 30th but not tonight, til
we have a chance to look this over. I think it's a critical report that we
should have a chance to look at and comment on in depth because it is
critical to how much money is being spent, especially on private
transportation use, which a lot of people don't realize.
Lehman: I have one question: this is an accounting for what we spent in the last
year? Has nothing to do with policy or anything. This is strictly a
matter of telling the State what we spent our money for. Now I would
have no problem with discussing the policy of how we spend our
money but this is nothing more than a report to the State, an
accounting of what we did with our money. I fail to see where a delay
in this bears any purpose whatsoever.
Kanner: Well, I think that if we're going to give our stamp of approval on
something going up that we're specifically asked to approve I think we
should have a chance to look at it. I think that is just sound policy. It's
good business, and we should make sure the figures are correct.
Lehman: How are you going to make sure the figures are correct?
Kanner: I'm going to do it to the best of my ability. I actually read this stuff.
Maybe some people don't read it and don't want to read it and that's
their prerogative. I think we have a right as Council Members to have
some time to read things we're approving. It just makes common
sense to me.
Lehman: All in favor of deferral please indicate by saying "aye". All opposed same
sign. How did you vote, Irvin?
Pfab: I was going to make a comment. At this point I would vote to defer.
Lehman: Motion was completed 5 to 2, Kanner and Pfab voting in the affirmative.
Further discussion?
Kanner: I'd like to make a motion for accepting d.2. I'm sorry.
Lehman: All those in favor of d. 1. Opposed? I'm sorry, we're going to have a roll
call. Motion carries 5 to 2, Kanner and Pfab voting in the negative.
Kanner: Okay, I'd like to move resolution d.2. Contract with Elder Services.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Motion and a second to approve d.2. Discussion?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#4 Page 7
Karmer: I pulled this cause I have some concerns about not attempting at least to
obtain rental payments. I used to work at senior dining when it was
under Johnson County control, and then Heritage Agency which is the
contractor, decided they wanted a new subcontractor. I think one of
the things they didn't take into account that Johnson County considers
part of its "rent of the space" their $150,000 they used to give, and I
think one of the reasons, maybe it's small, that they decided not to
continue to pay that amount is because they didn't have a major
program in there. So I think that we, at the least, need to ask them for
some money. Over the last year I've asked that that be put to them.
I've never heard that there was a mention of any amount being asked
for them. I also have some concern on page 82 of our package that
there's a dispute between Johnson County and um Heritage Agency.
Leasee further acknowledges that presently there is a dispute among
the City, the Heritage Agency, and Johnson County with respect to the
ownership of certain items contained in Exhibit B." I think that should
be cleared up before we sign a lease. It doesn't seem too good to
include that, and I don't know exactly what that dispute is. That's
another reason I think we should defeat this lease at this time.
Champion: In some ways I agree with you, Steven. I guess I need to ask a question
and that is do they pay for utilities and water which are quite
expensive? Do you happen to know that? They do not. They don't
pay anything. So the City of Iowa City is basically subsidizing the
whole nutrition program at the Senior Center with our general fund
monies. Is that true?
Atkins: That's a pretty broad statement. Completely subsidizing? We're awful
close, yeah.
Champion: So I agree with you, and I think they should be paying at least water and
utilities.
Lehman: Do they have the ability to pay?
Champion: I don't know.
Pfab: I think that's for them to make the point that they can't.
Kanner: I think it needs to be asked. Certainly it's a good program and we want to
support it in certain ways, and we want to find some way to support it
that works for both of us, and I think at this point, this isn't the best
way to write a lease. I think we need to do further discussion. We're
not going to throw them out. They've operated without a lease for the
last year, has it been? Or so? About a year, and I think they'll
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#4 Page 8
continue to operate it, and I think we'll negotiate in good faith, but I
think we need to negotiate a bit more and see if we can work
something out. And we need to solve this dispute that's listed in the
lease.
Lehman: Jay, would you speak to this?
Champion: Yea, do they have their own janitorial service?
Honohan: Excuse me, Connie, I didn't ..................
Champion: Do they have their own janitorial service to clean that room up after senior
dining is over?
Honohan: They clean up after themselves, that's correct. We also get to use their
facilities for a lot of our special events, like last week when we had the
Giovanni put on the spaghetti dinner, and the evening with President
Skorton we used their facilities and their equipment. And the
Commission has wrestled with this, and we feel at the present time, it's
our recommendation that they not be charged. This lease is only for
one year, and we hope to work out details of some of these costs and
see if they can share the burden with us the things that you are
mentioning. As far as the disputed items go, um this is basically due to
the fact that Heritage, as far as we can tell, have very, very poor
records, and where we believe both the County and the Commission
believe that an awful lot of this equipment belongs to the Connty and
the County gave it to the City, um, but we have been unable to resolve
that at the present time so we just left that as an open-ended thing in
the lease to try to get Heritage to move on it one way or the other.
They're very difficult to move on something like this where you're
claiming something, ownership over something that they don't know
anything about.
Wilbum: Jay, you had left....they referred in the contract to the possibility after this
first year, a month-to-month lease. Was it the Commission's belief or
hope that that would be a time to work out some of these other issues
or.....9
Honohan: Absolutely, that's why we made it just a one-year lease and not a three-
year lease, and basically I think the Commission's position is that we
want these agencies that use this Senior Center, Visiting Nurses'
Association, AARP. Elder Services has another office on the second
floor, as you know, in which they serve RSVP and a few other things
like that. We feel we should encourage as much as possible these
agencies to use the Center and we're ....... of course Heritage's policy
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#4 Page 9
is not to pay any rent. At the same time, that since Elder Services is a
subcontractor, I think we would have the ability to charge them rent.
But as usual with all our agencies they're financially strapped too, and
at this time we just didn't have enough definite figures to feel that we
should charge them something.
Champion: I think what I'm interested in, Jay, is that they do help. I'm not saying you
should charge them rent, but I think you ought to seriously consider
talking about electricity and water which I know is a very large bill for
the Senior Center.
Honohan: And that has been under discussion.
Champion: Okay.
Pfab: I have two questions. With a year lease and a month-to-month to follow,
what's the incentive for Heritage to seriously negotiate?
Honohan: We can terminate.
Pfab: Well, but ......................
Honohan: Excuse me, it's not Heritage. It's Elder Services.
Pfab: Elder Services I mean. What is the incentive for them to negotiate?
Honohan: We can terminate by giving them notice.
Pfab: At the end of the year?
Honohan: That's right.
Pfab: Okay, now you say their records are very poor. What kind of a budget
does Elder Services, what size, how much money do they go through
in a year?
Honohan: Heritage or Elder Services?
Pfab: Well, whoever you're writing the lease with. Elder Services.
Honohan: I do not know what their budget is.
Pfab: I think that that's a very lame excuse for ........ that their bookkeeping is
bad. I think that's a big enough agency. It's enough money used ......
Honohan: You're confusing whose bookkeeping is bad. I didn't say Elder Services'
bookkeeping was bad. It's Heritage. You see, there's all kinds of
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#4 Page 10
federal rules involved with what federal money pays for, and there's
also time limits. After so long they have no interest. It's kind of a
graduated scale where after five years their interest is so much and
after six years it goes down, and they have very poor records as far as
we can tell because they can't really respond to us one way or the other
on what they think they own. We have taken the position that we have
sent them a list saying, "this is what we own", or what the County gave
to the City. And we have not gotten a satisfactory response.
Pfab: Okay, so when I originally stated that "what was the budget of Heritage?"
because of the fact that they have such poor bookkeeping, what kind of
a budget do they have as an annual budget?
Honohan: I don't have the slightest idea.
Pfab: Okay, I think that that is not a very good excuse just to let this thing ride.
These people move and handle an awful lot of money, and they have quite
an organization put together, and move around and exercise a lot of power.
And I think that they should be held accountable.
O'Donnell: I'm prepared to let the Senior Center Commission work this out over the
next year. I'm very comfortable with you doing just that.
Lehman: You're comfortable with this agreement?
Honohan: This is the recommendation the Commission has made unanimously.
O'Donnell: Okay.
Lehman: And obviously the service provided is a very critical service to the Center.
Honohan: It's a very important service, and one of the things just as another item in
it, we're looking at the fact in our negotiations with them, is how much is
served inside the Center, and how much actually is a kitchen for delivery
to various satellites and the meals-on-wheels program.
Lehman: Well I think you obviously have heard some concerns on the part of the
Council. My guess is, considering the financial situation of the Senior
Center, that if you could have gotten some sort of rent you certainly would
have come to us with ...................
Honohan: We take anything we can get, Mr. Mayor.
Lehman: Okay. Other discussion?
Honohan: Thank you.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#4 Page 11
Kanner: Well, I want to add again that I think the time is now before the contract is
signed to work these things out, not after where there's already a status
quo of not paying rent. I think a year has taken place to negotiate. There
hasn't been any asking for rent or some of these other things, and I say
take a few more months and let's get it in the contract right before having
the contract and then doing it.
Lehman: What's the benefit of the contract? If they're there right now with no
contract?
Honohan: Well the contract does carry some stipulations about their duties and their
responsibilities, and our duties and responsibilities, and we wanted to get
that in writing.
Wilbum: So it's your position that if we have something then in the meantime
there's agreements about other things, as opposed ..... um, that there can be
no question about other items in dispute if there's some type of a
framework or agreement in place now.
Honohan: That's correct. The hours, for example, that they can use the assembly
room, is a critical thing for both of us because they need to know when
they can use it and we need to know when we can have our special events.
Lehman: Alright, very good. Other discussion?
Pfab: I won't be able to support this. I think the time to sort this out is now and
this has been hanging on for what, a year and a half now, or something
about that time. I think this is not good business. It reflects badly on the
Senior Commission. It reflects badly on Elderly Service, and it reflects
badly on Heritage Agency. I think the time to get this cleaned up is now.
Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries 5 to 2, Kanner and Pfab voting in the negative.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page 12
ITEM 5. PUBLIC DISCUSSION (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA). [UNTIL 8 PM]
Lehman: This is the time reserved on the agenda for the public to address the
Council on items that do not otherwise appear on tonight's agenda. If
you wish to address the Council, give your name, address and limit
your comments to five minutes or less.
Honohan: You're going to get tired of me tonight.
Lehman: Already am (laughter). No.
Honohan: I just want to report that we had an outstanding week last week. We had
approximately 100 people at the spaghetti dinner, which was free by
Giovanni's. It was an excellent dinner. Ernie, I learned pancakes one
time and now I'm a salad person. Pretty soon I'll be able to go into the
restaurant business (laughter). But the thing that .......... the Silver
Swing had a dance and it was well attended on Tuesday, but on
Thursday we....I want to thank you, on behalf of myself and the
Commission, for allowing us to block off Liun Street for that block.
That was an outstanding event. I'm going to encourage the staff and
the Commission to do that every year from now on instead of the
picnic. We took people through the Center. In fact we had so many
people who volunteered as guides and we were planning on doing
about three or four people, and we had to do six or eight because we
had so many people who wanted to see the Center, and it was an
outstanding event, and we're going to plan on doing it again next year,
and we just got in out of the rain in time! Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you!
Spears: Hi, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak tonight. My name is
Julie Spears. I'm here tonight representing the Iowa City Bill of
Rights Defense Committee. I am also a member of the Iowa Civil
Liberties Union, and as you may remember, I introduced Ben Stone to
you last December. He's the Executive Director of the ICLU and was
here to ask you to consider supporting a pro-civil liberties resolution.
Um, the Iowa City Bill of Rights Defense Committee is a diverse
coalition of community members, concerned about the local effect of
the U.S.A. Patriot Act. In your Council packets this week you received
from us a number of items for background information about the
Patriot Act, some locally published reactions to it, and a draft
resolution for you to work from. For me, defending the Constitution of
the oldest democracy in the world is the most patriotic thing that we
can do as Americans. The signs you see tonight uh, provided by the
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page 13
Arab-American Institute, say, "Defend the Constitution, Repeal the
Patriot Act". Now clearly those are aimed at federal legislators, and
we're not ....... who have the power to do so, to repeal that Patriot Act.
We're not here to ask you to do that, rather, 'cause that's out of your
jurisdiction, but we're asking the City Council to take a thoughtful
look at the local effect of this federal legislation on the City of Iowa
City. Specifically we're asking you to take simple measures to
monitor the use of the Patriot Act with the Iowa City Library and with
the Police Department. The library has recently provided us with an
excellent example of simple protective measures that can be taken
against the Patriot Act, as you saw in their uh newsletter. At their last
Board meeting, the Library Board endorsed the American Library
Association's resolution against the Patriot Act, and they will soon be
posting the very same type of warning to patrons about Section 215 of
the Patriot Act that we were proposing in the resolution, so that's
actually done, item 5.a. I think, is done. So, and Susan Craig, the
Library's Director, works very hard to protect the privacy of library
patron's, and she and the Library Board and staff should be
commended for their hard work, and for recognizing the truly local
effects of this legislation. The City Council as a whole, I believe
should follow the Library's lead by approving similar measures
through a resolution, such as the one in front of you. We see the
resolution that we drafted as a group of community members as a
working document. Several highly respected Iowa City Constitutional
lawyers have reviewed it. We've reviewed it in person with several of
you, and the Bill of Rights Defense Committee wants to work with you
to come up with a resolution that protects city staff, city residents, and
our Constitutional rights. We believe that after a year ofuh, almost a
year of informal requests, that this matter deserves your immediate
attention. We ask that you vote for placing the resolution on the next
Council agenda, and we'd be happy to meet with you further to discuss
any questions that you may have. Thank you very much.
Lehman: Thank you.
Huedepohl: Good evening. My name is Kathy Huedepohl. As you all probably know I
am running for a City Council at-large seat and I also wanted to speak
about the um the resolution, the draft of the resolution that the Bill of
Rights Defense Committee is presenting. Um, I read their resolution,
which is Section 4.e.2. in your Council packets. If you haven't had a
chance to read it you can open it up now and follow right along. Um, I
just think it was a really well thought out resolution. They gave
specific examples of how they felt that the Patriot Act was abusing the
rights of local citizens, and specifically what they felt that we, as a City
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page 14
and you folks as a City Council, could do about that, and um, I was
really thrilled to see the article in the Daily Iowan which appeared in
the September 19th edition about the warning notices that will appear
in the library now, telling people that the government may be spying
on them. Please check that out, and um, I just think that this would be
a really positive step in working with the local government to protect
the rights of citizens. I know that as City Cotmcil members when you
were sworn into office, you were sworn to protect and defend the
Constitution, and um, we feel that the Constitution is in jeopardy, and
you know this has had some local effects. I know ora gentlemen who
was in the city, had a local business, um, he was on a visa and he was
illegally detained for six days without the proper warrants and
subjected to possible deportation, so that does affect local people, and
we have lots of people here from other countries, um, in the university
community, and we want to welcome them and um help them feel safe
and comfortable here, and urn, just in closing I'd like to just sort of
poll the Council members and find out who has taken the time to read
this proposed draft and what are your thoughts on that. Anybody want
to jump in first?
Champion: Do you want discussion on this now, Ernie?
Lehman: No, this is a time for the public to talk and visit with Council. It really
isn't the time to engage the Council, but we limit the public discussion
to the first part of the meeting. If Council wishes to discuss this during
Council time, they certainly may.
Huedepohl: Okay, well I have in the past addressed Council and they have responded
to questions that I've had. As far as I knew that was appropriate to do
so. Thank you for your time.
Lehman: You bet.
Klein: Hello, my name is Garry Klein, 628 2nd Avenue, and I am following the
lead of some very thoughtful people in that I too am here to talk a little
bit about the resolution we brought before the Council, in your
packets. I had the opportunity to speak for 45 glorious moments with
Connie Champion yesterday, and I really appreciated her time, not to
mention spending time in her gorgeous house. I would like to say that
one of the things that made me get involved with the Bill of Rights
Defense Committee is one of just genuine outrage that a law could be
passed that many people didn't understand what they voted for -- 374
pages of information to read through and not much time to make a
decision off the heels of 9/11 which of course we all recognize as a
great tragedy. However, what the Patriot Act says to me is that any of
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page 15
us can be in the position of being looked at by our government because
we don't look the right way, we don't think the right way, we don't
have the same ideals as others, and I think that that is unfortunate. So,
why is this a local issue? It's a local issue two different ways: we are
an international town. We have an international writing program. We
have international business programs, and we attract international
students. What kind of message does it say to people who come to
Iowa City if we don't stand up for them, whether they are full time
residents of Iowa City. So what I'm asking you to do is please read the
information we've sent along. We thought about it very long, very
hard, and very thoughtfully. I don't think that we are being dramatic in
anything that we are presenting to you, and I would ask that you, if you
are unable to talk about it this evening in the course of time because
you have a full agenda and I understand that, I hope that what Connie
mentioned to me yesterday of bringing it up as a working meeting
topic will be taken seriously. And with that I thank you very much for
your time.
Lehman: Thank you.
Pfab: Thank you, Garry.
Weston: I'm Hanna Weston. I'm here because I'm a member of the Bill of Rights
Defense Committee and a member it seems like my whole life of the
ACLU, and I'm the daughter of an immigrant from Austria, which makes
me particularly sensitive I think to things that are threatening our liberties.
I understand the concern that the Council should be doing only things
which have local implications, but I'd like to tell you about one thing that I
just learned, and I think we just learned in general. It was recently
revealed that the surveillance, in fact all of the Patriot Act, has been
applied, is applied, throughout our whole nation. That within six months
the Department of Justice was having training sessions for how the
elements of the Patriot Act could be used throughout the civilian society.
And the article which described this, gave the example of a young man
involved with meth in South Carolina. We have a fair number of young
men involved in meth around here.
Kanner: Involved with what?
Weston: Meth, meth, methamphetamines, and that they could, he could, have been
charged under an element of the Patriot Act and ended up with a lifetime
in prison instead of the federal minimums. So in fact what's happening is
the Patriot Act which was designed to be worth, only to be used for
terrorists, whatever that is. To be only used for terrorists is in fact being
implemented through the whole society, so it has an intense local use
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page 16
cause there are few people around here, for example, who get involved in
methamphetamines. I'm not here arguing, though it sounds like I am,
against the Patriot Act. I'm arguing for putting it on your agenda so that
you can consider some of these various uses of the Patriot Act. It cannot
be possible that the war in Iraq can be a tool for ending constitutional
liberties in our country.
Kanner: Thank you.
Dieterle: I'll be very brief. I think I've sent you over the months um posts now and
again on this subject. I really fail to see how anyone can say that what's
happening doesn't have any local application because as we've often noted
all politics are local politics in the end, in the beginning, and it's the grass
roots movement in this country that has really achieved any real change,
and it's time for that to happen again and that happens in places like this
Council chamber. I really implore you to pass this resolution. I've read it.
I think it's exceedingly well put together, very thoughtful. It's not
extreme, and it expresses the concern of this city for what's happening.
The appalling situation in Washington where Attorney General Ashcroft is
actually asking for an even more strong draconian form o£the Patriot Act.
I think that it's time for this Council to behave you know like a national
body would, or should, and isn't. Um, the Congress has basically done
things I think without thinking about them well enough, and I think that if
it isn't for people like the people who have done work on this resolution,
and I hope you people for passing it, um I think that this country could
easily slide into fascism the way things are going. It's really exceedingly
frightening and I worry about it all the time. I worry about it for my
children. I worry about it for my grandchild, and ! think that anybody who
really considers the situation for any length of time can see what I mean, if
you really read between the lines. The situation now is something that I
don't think any of us in our grade school days when we were learning
about civics would ever have envisioned happening to our Constitution.
So please, do not put this aside, and please pass it. Join the hundreds of
cities across the country who are registering their dismay. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Berkowitz: Holly Berkowitz. I'm a candidate for City Council and Iowa City at-large.
This Patriot Act is unconstitutional and you have the responsibility to
uphold the laws of the nation as a Constitution, and um, it's easy to get
lost in our own private world, in our own local world, and to think that we
need to limit our City Council business to City Council things. This is to
the city limits but we need vision beyond that to be a civil society. I hope
we pride ourselves in that, that we are civil but we're slipping very, very
rapidly down into the depths of fascism. In fact, I quoted FDR that, I wish
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page 17
I had it here, that tun when private organizations or private groups own the
government, that is fascism and I believe that has already happened when
the cash driven forces seized control of Washington D.C., both the
executive, legislative, and the judicial. So I think we need, everybody
needs, to stand up and speak out, wake up, seek ...... um, conscience to see
what's happening. The Wolfowitz Doctrine was written in 1991 or 92 and
it morphed into the project for the new American Century which is the
model, the blueprint, for George Bush's policies at this point. Um, it cites,
it states that that the purpose of our nation is to crush military challenge
from other nations, and that we need, we are lacking a new Pearl Harbor.
This was before 9/11. Said we needed a Pearl Harbor to implement this
plan. In that light, I request that you request an investigation from Jim
Leach, from Senator Grassley, and Senator Harkin, and demand
investigation into the possible causation of 9/11 to implement the Right
Wing agenda because the events after 9/11 fit perfectly into the agenda of
the Radical Right, and I know this is beyond City but in the short term as a
stop to protect us in the meantime, please implement the resolution and
uphold the Constitution, the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th amendments that
it violates. Um, I believe that supremacist forces that helped Hitler's rise
to power are also at work here, and it is the resources, and I believe that
there are forces at work to try to seize control of resources in the world and
take from other people. Um, it's very Orwellian. It's very Koskian. Um,
Koska, read those two authors. Um, we need a vision for what we want
from our future and this definitely is not it. We need to shape a better
future. We are a critical subset of the whole. Um, and we need to shy
away from symbols and labels, and erroneous assumptions that seem to be
permeating the Patriot Act. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you, Holly.
Berkowitz: Oh, it seems that there have been, so well written, the Patriot Act seems to
have been so well written, I wonder if it was written before 9/11.
Lehman: Thank you.
Kanner: Thanks, Holly.
Berkowitz: Uh-huh, sure.
Fales: I'm Evan Fales from Iowa City. I also want to speak to the issue of the
resolution concerning the Patriot Act. As all of you I'm sure know,
Attorney General John Ashcrofi recently defended retaining the, all the
provisions of the Patriot Act in part by pointing out that section 215 which
concerns access to the reading habits of library users has not been used in
their efforts to track down terrorists. I find this a decidedly peculiar and
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page 18
disturbing argument. I suppose by the same token it would be equally
acceptable to have any statute on the books, perhaps one that allows
simply arresting people at random, as long as the government can claim
that it hasn't yet used that statute. I have also heard people, well-educated
people suggest that we shouldn't be worried. Those of us who haven't
done anything wrong will have nothing to worry about. That argument, of
course, betrays an ignorance of the fact that inalienable rights are rights
that are had both by the guilty and by the innocent. But I think it would be
a mistake to suppose that the innocent can't be harmed. In this town
already I know of two cases of residents of the town who have been
arrested by federal agents. In at least one case a person was threatened
with falsehoods, and they were threatened in a way that essentially fomed
them to allow those agents to search his apartment. The claim was made
that they could have gotten a warrant. It seems they could not have; there
was no probable cause whatsoever. This is somebody who is highly
skilled and a very valuable member of our community, and I think it would
be a mistake to suppose that we are not affected in this community,
especially when there are a great many university people here who come
from foreign countries. I would just want to note, finally, that each of you
took an oath of office, which begins, "I do solemnly swear that I will
support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the
State of Iowa", and I think in discharging that duty, I would hope that you
would at least put on your agenda this resolution. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you.
Ross: My name is Brandon Ross and I have read the resolution that has been
spoken about in the past fifteen minutes, and I think it's very well thought.
I would like to just begin by saying thank you to the Council and city
government, that I am in full support of citizen speak before the Council
and before the citizens. If we're going to talk about Constitutional rights, I
think this is one of them, that is freedom of speech, which is so important
and I just encourage the continuing of that. I think that's exactly what
we're talking about tonight. So I really thank the Council for continuing
to work in this area. As I said, I have read the resolution and I think that
for patriots in this country that a resolution like this is important because it
certainly is patriotic to protect our Constitution and our Bill of Rights, and
so to have consideration and to have open discussion about this ! think is
exactly what we're talking about here. My parents are second generation
and my father fought in the second World War, and they were primarily
working class people, and they worked hard and long all their lives, and
this is really what they worked for, and so let's not lose sight of that. So I
will not add much in the way to this. I would also, though, add that the
police in this town also like to support good policy, and policing doesn't
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page 19
necessarily mean violations of your rights. Good policing is well
integrated into the community and helps the community. I have a couple
of friends who are on the force, from where I come from, and they're great
people and they deserve to have a policy that they can support. I think in
an atmosphere where there is a resolution protecting our civil liberties, that
it is easier on the police and that they would concur as well. It is not just
citizens against, you know, big bad something or other. We really want a
discussion of the Constitution here. I would like to say that in my final
words I do want to remember the young woman who was, and this is a
change of subject, was tragically run over on Burlington Street. She was
20 years old and she was just crossing the street walking, and uh, I do want
to say that the Burlington Street situation, I believe, is not a good one, and
is not very easy for walkers, and I would like the Council to consider that,
that the street actually is very heavily traveled, is a very fast road, and that
amenities for pedestrians should be highly considered in the first degree.
Because she is 20 years old, you have to wonder that she's a young person
and she couldn't walk and move around. Think about our seniors, and our
children, and others. I really consider Burlington to be part of Iowa City,
and that we should really treat it as such. Right now it looks like basically
it's a bunch of parking areas. It's a fast road, and the pedestrians have a
long way to walk across in order to be safe. So that's my second point and
I hope you consider. Thank you so much for your time.
Lehman: Thank you.
Kanner: Thank you.
Pease: Hello. My name is Karen Pease. I just wanted to thank you for your time,
um letting us all be up here to speak. Let's not kid ourselves. This is a
major issue. This is a very controversial issue as well. Jim Leach, Tom
Harkin, especially Charles Grassley, have all been fighting the U.S.A.
Patriot Act at the federal level. Here in Iowa City we have a very good
police force. We also have a Police Citizens Review Board to watch over
and make sure that nothing bad happens and I think that's vital. Some
concerned people think we should do something concerning the national
level as well. Make sure that there are no local abuses of this national
legislation. Somewouldjust like you to pass a resolmion. Idon'task
that. In the interest of open government however, I do encourage this to
go on a ballot. Leave it up to the citizens to decide. Approval would give
ammunition to our senators, and to our representatives. Disapproval
would end the controversy. Patriot Act does concern me, um there are a
lot of issues in it I'm sure you're all quite familiar so I won't focus on it
too much. There's the surveillance of Internet usage, which they have to
request, but it has to be approved, and there is no reporting on it. There's
mobile wiretaps which it's irrelevant which user, which person is talking
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page 20
on the phone. Also wiretaps can span multiple phones. New definitions
of terrorism, which allow the inclusion of people doing normal protest
activities, etc., the list goes on. Um the big problem with this is that a lot
of the things that it's bridging over were established to prevent abuses that
have already occurred, namely in the case of(can't hear). For those of you
who are not familiar with it, there were five (can't hear) programs. Only
two of them were acknowledged initially. It took a break-in to expose the
entire program. It's Communist Party (can't hear), Socialist Workers'
Party, White Hate Group, Black Nationalist Hate Group, and New Left.
The National Committee to Abolish the House and American Activities
Committee was considered communist. The Southern Christian
Leadership conference was considered a black hate group. Almost all
black student groups were considered black hate groups. New Left was
defined as "more less an attitude". The motive was for protecting national
security, preventing violence, and maintaining the existing social and
political order by disrupting and neutralizing groups and individuals
perceived as threats. Techniques ranged from anonymously mailing of
reprints to attempting to break up relationships to falsely accusing people's
informants to encouraging street warfare between groups to trying to get
people fired. I could go on for quite a while. They attempted to get
Martin Luther King disbanded from different groups. Attempted to cause
a breakup um, attempted to even get him to kill himself. This is all
disclosed in the Church Committee reports that are publicly available. It's
probably about the worst type of abuse that we can imagine of the system,
and these regulations with the Patriot Act rolls back were designed to
prevent this sort of thing from ever happening again. So I personally do
support it but I believe it should be up to the citizens and I strongly
encourage you to put this issue on the ballot. Um, and uh, I would like to
thank you for your time and also would like to encourage you to, just as a
second note, follow through on public power. It's looking pretty good so
save us some money.
Kanner: Karen, just clarifying information.
Pease: Uh huh.
Karmer: Did I hear you say that Senators Harkin and Grassley, and Congress-
person Leach are all working to repeal the Patriot Act?
Pease: Individually, to repeal different portions of it, yes.
Kanner: Different portions but not entirety? They all voted for it originally, right?
Pease: I do not believe that any of them have attempted to appeal it in its entirety
yet.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page21
Kanner: And they all voted for it originally?
Pease: Correct.
Kanner: Okay. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you. This is going to be the last one because at 8:00 we will
proceed with our regular agenda.
Mueller: Good evening, Council, my name is Dawn Mueller. Also, good evening to
the staff. I have two items upon which to comment. I had only come to
comment upon one but I would also like to add a follow-up comment to
what has been said. I'm not a member of the Bill of Rights Defense
Committee and have not been involved in that effort, but I do have a
personal experience that I would like to relate to you that I believe is
relevant. A month ago Attorney General John Ashcroft gave a speech in
front of law enfomement officers in Des Moines. Because I am not
satisfied with relying upon media coverage of various events, I often take
it upon myself to investigate personally. So I drove to Des Moines and I
attended this event. This event was held in a hotel outside of the airport,
and in the lobby, before the conference room, the law enforcement
officials were congregating prior to being let into the conference area, and
I approached and very politely spoke with various groups of officers and
police chiefs and other law enforcement officials there, to convey to them
the concerns that many people in our community have with respect to the
civil liberties issue and the Patriot Act, and the proposed Victory Act. For
the most part the officers were respectful. I was very concerned though
that two officers behaved towards me in incredibly inappropriate ways.
Such that when you're surrounded by a room full of guns on hips and the
testosterone level is high, when somebody responds to you like that you
become very concerned. I then was not permitted into the conference
because that was only for law enforcement officials, but I sat outside on
the other side of the wall and I could hear Attorney Ashcroft speak, and I
will say that I am incredibly distressed by the way he addressed the law
enforcement officials. I believe that he spoke specifically to stroke the
grief that these officers felt with respect to loss of colleagues in the 9/11
incident. One of the officers who had a very, very serious emotional
reaction when I was speaking with him, yelled at me that I did not have a
colleague die in 911. So I could tell that what was happening here is that
these officers' emotions were being stroked by the rhetoric that Attorney
Ashcroft was using. I'm very distressed by what this man had to say and I
was also very concerned to see our own police chief, Chief Winkelhake, in
attendance at this event. It's my understanding that this was not a
mandatory event, and I'm concerned that the rhetoric that I heard found its
way back home. So that is one concern that I have. The other thing that I
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page 22
wanted to comment on, which is tmrelated to that, is that there was a
community service event last Saturday that I wanted to share with you.
Governor Howard Dean, when he has been in town and across the state,
has been speaking with state and local officials about the impact of budget
cuts upon the residents, and he's become concerned and he's asked groups
of citizens to get together to try to do community service acts to try to help
out agencies and organizations that have been hit by budget cuts. So a
group of us that have conservation, environmental and conservation in
mind, decided to jump into Ralston Creek on Saturday and try to pull out
some of the "gunk" that has accumulated in there. I'm happy to report that
we pulled out 1,300 pounds of mostly metal in an hour and a half with just
thirteen people, and I really wish that we had had a City dump truck
because I'm sure that we could have filled it. We had to leave the mattress
springs and some other things behind. I have written a piece of
correspondence on this. The reason I want to bring it to your attention is I
am very concerned about the amount of metal that we did pull out of the
water. We were able to pull out four bicycles, an exercise bike, metal
chairs, a portion of a file cabinet, a typewriter, and a vacuum cleaner, and
other scrap metal just in this portion right out here, outside of City Hall. I
was also very concerned that as I've been going through the community
looking for a spot to clean up, that I'm seeing increasing signs of
homelessness in our community. More ..............
Lehman: You need to wrap it up, Dawn.
Mueller: Okay ...... more personal possessions stashed under brush and under
bridges, and I'd like to request the City to be extra prepared to be able to
address the issues ofhomelessness this winter because I think the economy
is hitting people pretty hard. Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you, Dawn.
Kanner: Dawn, I appreciate the points you bring up. I do want to advise people,
New Pioneer used to go into Ralston Creek for an annual clean-up day and
they stopped doing it because of fears from the former Mid-American
predecessor plant gasification residue that might be in the creek, and so
hopefully people that do go into the creek in the future take extreme
caution, especially in that area there.
Mueller: I am aware of that situation, and before this event I did review the EPA
reports and the Mid-American reports. I consulted with Assistant City
Attorney and also with Public Works who informed me there was no
problem for people just doing basic clean-up efforts. After having
reviewed all the documents and spoken with the city officials, and having
looked very carefully over the situation, I very carefully warned anybody
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#5 Page 23
who participated in the event of that situation, but what the Assistant City
Attorney told me was the City is trying to take extra care of liability
concerns just by making an awareness of that issue, but there really is no
harm according to the reports for people just doing general cleanup work
like we did.
Kanner: Thank you.
Champion: Thank you very much.
Mueller: Thank you.
Lehman: We are gong to take a break until 8:15 and then we will resume with
Planning and Zoning issues.
(short break)
Karr: Mr. Mayor, could we have a motion to accept correspondence?
O'Dormell: So moved.
Pfab: Second.
Lehman: Motion to accept correspondence, second. All in favor? Opposed?
Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#6a Page 24
ITEM 6 PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS.
a. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 8.7
ACRES FROM INTERIM DEVELOPMENT (ID-RS) TO SENSITIVE
AREAS OVERLAY-LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY (OSA-5)
LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF FOSTER ROAD. (REZ03-
00017/SUB03-00019) (SECOND CONSIDERATION)
O'Dormell: Move second consideration.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Move by O'Donnell, second by Champion. Discussion?
Kanner: Just as soon as my computer gets up.
Vanderhoef: Do you want to expedite?
O'Donnell: They asked that this be expedited, yeah.
Champion: I don't have a thing.
Vanderhoefi Do we need the other resolution?
Wilbum: Move that the rule 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 to be suspended, that second consideration and vote be
waived and the ordinance be voted on for final passage at this time.
Vanderhoef: Second.
O'Dormell: We have to withdraw ours first, don't we?
Champion: I did, I mean I did withdraw my second.
Lehman: You withdraw your motion. We have a motion and a second for expedite
consideration. Discussion?
Kanner: Especially in something that has some controversy, um in regards to
sensitive areas ordinance, when it's a judgment call on the Council, I
would ask that we not expedite this. I think it would be in the best interest
to take all three votes on this.
Pfab: I would support that. I still am not totally satisfied with this tree business
of putting trees in and being, after you take out huge, mature trees and
replace them with considerably smaller trees, that have a limited survival
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#6a Page 25
rate, whatever the number is, and without a guarantee that those that do
not survive will be replaced. Until that's resolved I, there's no way in the
world I can be for expediting this.
Lehman: Roll call for expediting. Motion fails on a vote of 5 to 2, Kanner and Pfab
voting in the negative. Do we have a motion to approve?
Wilburn: Move to approve.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Motion by Wilbum, second by Vanderhoef to approve. Discussion?
Karr: Second consideration.
Wilburn: Second consideration.
Lehman: Yes, I'm sorry, second consideration.
Kanner: One of the concerns that I have, and perhaps Irvin also, is that under
sensitive areas ordinance, you can take out 50% of wooded areas, which I
think is bad to start with, and that shows some of the weakness of the
sensitive areas ordinance. It does allow you to take actually more than
50% of a wooded area if it's replanted in other areas, and that is some of
my concern, in that I've been told that there are no specific words in the
deeds and other recorded documents about these replanted trees, about the
responsibilities of the owners and homeowner's association or whatever
legal entity might have control of them. So I'm also told by Terry
Robinson who is our forester in the City of Iowa City, that although he's
had success, the City's had success, survival rate on trees for three years is
above 95%, through casual observations, I'm quoting out of tree planting
on development sites, it's my belief that the survival rate at three years is
lower than our rate but not below 60%. It's important to note that almost
every tree can make it through one growing season. Thus perhaps the
guarantee by the nurseries for one year. We found that it is years three
through five that are the break points, with usually year three being the
most decisive. So I think by that time often times people forget the
original intent of why those trees were planted and we've been told that
this is an ordinance that is a complaint basis. That people have to
complain if the tree dies, and it's going to be very hard for people to
remember three to five years down the road why these trees were planted.
To paraphrase one of our City Council candidates, the SOA, the Sensitive
Areas Ordinance, was passed so that we wouldn't continue to have new
housing developments that are called Oakhollow Hideaway with no oak
trees, or Running Water Estates without any water. That's in part why we
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#6a Page 26
passed the Sensitive Areas Ordinance because these things were
happening. There were remarks made yesterday, the developers certainly
want trees to live, and in a certain sense they do, but on the other hand,
their bottom line is making money and we had to pass the Sensitive Areas
Ordinance to insure that we continue to have oak trees in Oak Harbor
Hollow and running water in Running Water Estates, and I think we need
to make it stronger in the language about these trees and so at this time I'll
be voting against it, perhaps on the third reading I'll change my mind if
I'm convinced that there'll be full protection for these trees.
Lehman: Other discussion? Roll call. Motion carries 5 to 2, Kanner and Pfab
voting in the negative.
Champion: I'm just going to ask some clarification. What is, what do we need for an
expedited vote?
Dilkes: Six.
O'Donnell: Call the questions is five.
Dilkes: Five.
Lehman: Five.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#6b Page 27
ITEM 6. PLANNING AND ZONING MATFERS.
b. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY REZONING 5.69
ACRES FROM LOW-DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-
5) TO LOW-DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM-12)
LOCATED AT 1715 MORMON TREK BOULEVARD. (REZ03-00018)
(PASS AND ADOPT)
Champion: Move adoption.
Vanderhoefi Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion, second by Vanderhoef. Discussion?
Wilburn: Just a reminder the conditional zoning agreement, is that agreed on now or
is that to be agreed on if the developer, the residential development,
takes place?
Dilkes: The CZA's been signed.
Wilbum: It's been signed. Okay, thank you, never mind.
Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#7 Page 28
ITEM 7. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE REPEALING TITLE 6, "PUBLIC HEALTH
AND SAFETY," CHAPTER l, "NUISANCES," SECTION 2, "PUBLIC
NUISANCE DEFINED;' PUBLIC NUISANCES ENUMERATED,"
SUBSECTION (Q), "VEHICLES ILLEGALLY PARKED, STORED,
PLACED, OR KEPT ON PRIVATE PROPERTY." (SECOND
CONSIDERATION).
Wilburn: 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 it is finally to be passed, suspended. That the second
consideration and vote be waived, and the ordinance be noted on at
this time.
Vanderhoef: Second.
Lehman: Motion by Wilbum, second by Vanderhoef to expedite. Discussion?
Kanner: Um, this is going to be a tough one. Even though I'm in favor of repealing
this, Ross, my position has been that controversial ordinances, which I
feel this is one, should have the full readings. I think it's healthy, and
I'm not sure ifI'll vote for its repeal at this time if we expedite. I have
to think about that for a minute. That might throw it the other way.
Lehman: Has there been one comment from anybody against support?
Wilbum: I think more, or at least for me, excuse me for interrupting, Emie, more
relevant, is that this is an ordinance that didn't hold up in court and has
been recommended by Legal to remove this from the book of
ordinances.
O'Dormell: This is just to move it off the books.
Wilbum: Yes, that's correct.
Lehman: Right.
Pfab: Steven, I would speak against it. This thing has such a stench. The
quicker we get rid of it and clean up the air in the City I think it's well
worth (can't hear).
Lehman: Roll call on expediting. Motion carries.
Wilburn: Move that the ordinance be finally adopted at this time.
O'Donnell: Second.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#7 Page 29
Lehman: Motion by Wilburn, second by O'Dormell. Discussion? Roll call. Motion
carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#8 Page 30
ITEM 8. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2003-2004 DEER
MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR IOWA CITY.
O'Donnell: So moved.
Champion: Second.
Lehman: Moved by O'Donnell, second by Champion. Discussion?
Pfab: I believe this is, from the information that you have in your hand, I just
believe that we ought to postpone this and take another hard look at it.
Our sister city in Cedar Rapids has been able to do this, control deer,
without shooting, and we are finding that the more we kill the deer the
faster they reproduce and it's a fail system. It's extremely costly, and
if we're going to spend $100,000 to control the deer, let's spend it
locally to help individual citizens, and put up signs, as I'm sure
Councilman O'Dormell will say, car accidents, maybe we have to
enforce speed limits and give the deer a chance to get away again,
especially within the city limits of Iowa City.
O'Donnell: Well, Irvin, since you directed at me, I don't think the deer can read signs.
Pfab: People can.
O'Donnell: Yeah they can, and I understand Cedar Rapids does have a substantial
problem.
Pfab: Well .........
O'Donnell: You may be talking to an individual.
Lehman: Irvin, this...
O'Doimell: Go ahead.
Lehman: Your report is five years old. They have a significant problem today,
confirmed that today by phone. Cedar Rapids does have a significant
problem.
Pfab: Well, have they taken any effort to shoot them?
O'Donnell: You know, this is not a vote that any of us likes to make. It really isn't.
This is going out and shooting these deer. It's a matter of safety to me
when a deer runs in front of a car, unnoticed, by the driver, lrvin. It
can be a tragic accident. And a motorcycle, it's, there are simply too
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#8 Page 31
many deer within our city limits, and I would also like to seek the
cooperation of the University of Iowa.
Pfab: Well if shooting is so effective, why do we have to keep doing it, and
doing it, and doing it?
O'Donnell: Well we didn't last year, remember?
Pfab: Well, and so now we're at it again. This is what, the third crack at them,
and at some point in time we ought to learn. You know, if we keep
doing things that don't work, there's a term for that kind of behavior.
It's called crazy.
O'Donnell: Well we'll have to disagree in an agreeable way then.
Pfab: I disagree in an agreeable way.
Lehman: Let me point something out. This plan is not something that came up last
week or last month or last year. This is something that has been
worked on by Deer Committee in this community for a number of
years. The committee that came up with the recommendation worked
long and hard. They looked at every possible known method of
controlling the deer. They determined that the most humane way of
handling the deer problem was sharp shooting. They also determined
that we created the deer problem. We created the overpopulation with
the way that we develop. And it's up to us to control that. Now we
had done sharp shooting in the past. It has been highly successful. We
are not shooting any place where we've shot before. Where we did the
sharp shooting, the deer population has been reduced and it was
successful. This is part of a much, much larger plan. It's something
that's a long-range plan by that committee. I have no problem
whatsoever continuing a program that has been successful.
Pfab: Well, I question your term successful. If that's the case now obviously
after you shoot deer two or three times, the survivors figure out that
that not probably the place where they want to go back and get shot at.
Champion: They're all going to Cedar Rapids and they have a problem now.
Vanderhoef: lrvin, if you would remember, when we started this program, the experts
told us that we would have to have an ongoing program. They never
said that once we had deer reduction that they wouldn't be back. They
tell us that we get a 30% increase in deer every year, no matter whether
we do anything or not. So, this is not an unsuccessful plan. This is
working exactly as we were told it would.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#8 Page 32
Pfab: I'm just saying that in perpetuity now we'll be shooting deer every second
or third year?
Vanderhoef: That's the way it was presented to us originally.
Lehman: Until we find a better way of doing it.
Pfab: Well, I think we've found out that this one doesn't work.
O'Donnell: Maybe we should vote on this.
Lehman: Is there other discussion?
Karmer: Yeah, I had a couple questions and some comments. Is Lisa or anyone
else from the Deer Taskforce present? The chair?
Lehman: I don't think so.
Kanner: Okay, usually she is, someone is present here. I don't understand why no
one's present this time.
Atkins: She didn't come at my ...... she asked me if she should be here. I told her
the program's the same as it's been the last several years. I didn't see
the need for her to be here.
Kauner: Well, bring up some points, in the Deer Taskforce meeting of July 8th, uh,
there was discussion about reflectors being ineffective and that she
would ask Jeff Davison to do a news list search on the effectiveness of
reflectors, and haven't heard back on that.
Champion: You read the list in the report of how many deer were hit in the area where
they have reflectors. It was pretty high.
Kanner: Well as they teach in statistics, it's tough to draw, sometimes it's not
appropriate to draw causal relations. It could be that there are more
accidents there because that's where deer are compared to other places,
so that's maybe why there are more deer accidents. So we still don't
know, haven't had a clear answer actually in the last couple of years on
the reflectors, we're told that they're not maintained well. Maybe we
need to put money into that. We're told in those same meeting notes
that liquid fence, a product, is somewhat effective in deterring deer
from plants, and landscaping, and that's one of the major complaints. I
think that's what drives the deer kill more so than the accidents. And
certainly, Mike, we're all concerned about safety. All the time we're
making decisions on where we want to put resources. In my mind it
would be more effective to take some of that $100,000, put it into
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#8 Page 33
budget like more fire fighters, which I believe would probably save
more lives, which I don't know if we've lost any life from the deer.
We've had a couple accidents and it is dangerous. I think it'd be more
effective to put it into extra patrols along those areas. And I think it
would be more effective to give incentives to developers to develop
different types of areas, perhaps nearer roads where people go slower
and have more concern about the environment. I think, Emie, you hit
it right on the head when you talk about development, is one of the
major ways that we're getting more deer and I think we can solve that
by looking at the development issue instead of looking at this bang-
bang killing deer as the solution. I think we have to put more
emphasis on the development angle.
Lehman: I agree with that, Steven, except that one of the heaviest populated areas of
Iowa City is also one of the oldest ones, where Mike lives, and that
certainly is not an issue of development. Not at all.
Kanner: And I have to look at statistics, but people tend to go slower there and I
would bet there aren't that many serious mn collisions with cars going
down those streets. Those are narrow streets, and people are not
zooming along.
Champion: No we just have deer mn into houses and schools in the older parts of
town. They're there and they're intrusive.
Kanner: They are but I don't know if that merits shooting them as the only solution,
as the main solution not the only solution. Certainly they're looking at
other solutions to the problems, but I think contraceptive is around the
comer.
Lehman: That's the key word, arotmd the comer.
Champion: And that would be a good thing.
Kanner: Well we ought to pursue that a little harder, and I know that they are
pursuing it to a certain extent, but I think there are other solutions we can
look at and .......
Vanderhoef: Have you taken those to the Deer Committee?
Karmer: I've brought remarks here and there, over the years, to the Committee.
I've also ............
Vanderhoefi And have they been adopted by the Committee?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#8 Page 34
Kanner: Some have been adopted, some have been recommendations in terms of
development, and I think we need to act harder as a City Council in
moving in that direction, especially in terms of development.
Lehman: Anyone else who would like to speak to this issue?
Pfab: I .........
Lehman: No, someone who hasn't spoken. Anyone? Okay, go ahead.
Pfab: In my lifetime, I'm just trying to recall, I think I've hit six or, seven or
eight deer with my, driving a vehicle, and every time I was probably
traveling in quite in excess of 60 miles an hour. I'm still here. Some of
the deer, I don't know where they are. (laughter)
O'Dormell: If you're going 60, Irvin, the odds are pretty good. (laughter)
Champion: Oh my gosh, can we just vote please?
Pfab: So ..........
O'Donnell: I would like to call a question on this.
Champion: I'll second that.
O'Donnell: I've heard everything and I'm convinced we need to do this.
Lehman: Have a motion to call the question and a second, by O'Donnell, second by
Champion. That's a roll call vote?
Dilkes: No, that's a motion but we need a hand ...........
Lehman: All in favor of calling the question indicate by raising your right hand.
Those opposed. Are you going to vote?
Kanner: No.
Lehman: The call to question passes by a vote of 5 to 1, with Pfab voting in the
negative and Kanner abstaining which makes his vote in the affirmative.
Now all those in favor of the resolution, that's the roll call.
Champion: That's a roll call.
Lehman: Motion carries, Kanner and Pfab voting in the negative.
Karr: Can we have a motion to accept correspondence?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#8 Page 35
O'Donnell: I would love to do that.
Lehman: We have a motion to accept correspondence, and a second. All in favor.
Motion carried.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#9 Page 36
ITEM 9. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO
ATTEST A CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE SCOTt PARK
TRUNK SANITARY SEWER PROJECT.
Lehman: Engineer's bid was $450,000. We received looks like eight bids. The low
bid was $216,361.60, Bockenstedt Construction or Excavating.
Vanderhoefi Move to ......
Lehman: Board of Engineers recommends awarding the contract to Bockenstedt.
Vanderhoef: Move the resolution.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, second by O'Donnell. Discussion?
Pfab: Yes, I have a curious question hem. We, in the last year or two, we see
some very, very favorable bids and I'm wondering if we're receiving
savings and they're budgeted for these higher amounts, where does the
savings go and why is there such an effort to reduce the police force
and the fire department?
Lehman: Irvin, these are revenue bonds. They do not go into the General Fund, and
they have no affect on the General Fund.
Pfab: But paying them back does come out of the General Fund?
Champion: No, it comes out of your taxes.
Lehman: They're revenue bonds. They come from when you pay your sewer bill.
Pfab: Okay, this is an example but there's other ..............
Lehman: Any time we build a project and we sell bonds, it has no affect on the
General Fund.
Champion: We just don't sell as many bonds.
Lehman: Payment for general obligation bonds are added to your tax bill. They do
not go into the General Fund.
Kanner: But, I think we've discussed this before and we've had reports on, along
this issue. We do have some savings over projected budgets in other
areas of the budget and maybe it might be good to have another report
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#9 Page 37
on what our total "savings" is over our projected budget and what does
that mean. Does that mean that we could lower the capital portion of
our property tax?
Atkins: You can't, and you (can't hear). That number is, it's easy to fix during a
particular budget year because you've already got your debt in place.
You know what your debt service is. You know what your tax base. If
we do not use all of the projected debt, we just simply reduce the tax
rate accordingly. You'll see that in any budget projections that you get
from us.
Champion: It's a good bid.
O'Donnell: Great bid.
Atkins: And this is sewer revenue, and not general obligation. It's paid for by the
sewer users.
Pfab: So that means they'll get a reduction.
Atkins: In this case, we're attempting, you'll note the project to be funded by
sewer revenue and tap-on fees. This is not a bond. We're going to our
reserve position that, just simply makes our reserve position that much
stronger because of the good bid.
Lehman: Okay, roll call. Motion carries.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#11 Page 38
ITEM 11. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION authorizing THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND
THE CLERK TO ATTEST TO AN AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE A NINE-
UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING FROM GREATER IOWA CITY HOUSING
FELLOWSHIP (GICHF) AND to ASSIST GICHF IN THE FINANCING OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE PENINSULA.
Wilbum: With item # 11, um turns out Greater Iowa City Fellowship as part of their
component is using TDBG and home funds. I have a conflict of interest
with items that use such funding because I work for an organization that
has received such funds and am not allowed to participate in decisions or
deliberations of such.
Lehman: Thank you, sir.
Wilbum: Yep.
Vanderhoef: Move the resolution.
Pfab: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Vanderhoef, second by Pfab, and I think, Doug, would you like
to explain what, just give us a quick over-view of what we're voting on,
for those out there and here who don't know.
Boothroy: At the time the Peninsula project was put together, there was an allocation
built into the contract for selling the land that provided for 10% of the
units to be affordable, and this is following through on a portion of that.
This particular project is 16-units. The Housing Authority, or the City of
Iowa City, by this particular agreement, would be getting the 9 units back
from the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship who are acting as the
developer. Let me explain a little bit about the 9 units. These 9 unit
apartments are 1 and 2 bedroom apartments. They're fully accessible and
visitable. We have an elevator in the building, as I've mentioned to you
before. These are targeted to folks with disabilities. I think I've
mentioned in the past that one of the, well I can give you some numbers
today. I checked on it. Right now we have a waiting list at the Housing
Authority of about 1,725 families. Of that waiting list, 692 are requesting
1-bedroom, 606 are requesting 2-bedroom. If we look at the composition
of those individuals that are seeking 1-bedroom units, 346 individuals with
disability are looking for 1-bedroom units in this community. 97 folks on
our waiting list with disabilities are looking for 2-bedroom apartments.
We've talked about this briefly before, there is a very severe need for 1
and 2 bedroom apartments. That's not economically feasible for the
private sector to provide that. This particular project brings on-line much
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#11 Page 39
needed units that will serve folks with these types of needs. Um, I think
that's about it. The project is scheduled, with the approval of this
agreement, we were looking at... Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship,
was looking at bidding this out within the next 30 days.
Lehman: And how are we paying for our (can't hear)?
Boothroy: Uh, it's a combination of HUD monies. There's some CDBG money that
was awarded by the Housing Conunission and by the City Council a
couple years ago. Uh, there was a home, estate home grant, which was I
think as we reported once, was the largest home grant that the State has
ever done with regards to a project like this, so I think that's quite an
endorsement for the quality of this project. There are some general
obligation bonds, that you passed a resolution a year ago to authorize, that
would be paid back through the revenues from the rents of this particular
project, and then the Housing Authority, in order to make this project
feasible, is also putting in a cash of $171,000 and some odd, $171,000
some dollars, so that is basically it. So we have a grant and some low
interest loans, plus some cash equity going into it.
Champion: Sounds terrific!
Lehman: Thank you.
Pfab: I have a question that came up last night in the work session. Are these,
are any of these units um can they be converted to ownership at any time?
Boothroy: Not at any time. They, uh, the CDBG money .............
Pfab: Do they have the potential to be individually owned?
Boothroy: The nine units I can speak to. The nine units will all be separate metered
and could be converted to condominiums and sold off. Both the State
money and the City's CDBG money have built into it a 20-year time
period that they have to be maintained as rental. But after that point in
time, they could be marketed for home ownership.
Pfab: Now that would be ............
Boothroy: We would market those, because of the character of the design, they would
be marketed primarily for individuals with disabilities because they're 1
and 2-bedroom, they're small units, and they would not probably market
very well for families, with children I should say.
Pfab: But, so the City would maintain ownership and if they decided to sell them
as starter homes for, or .......
This represents only a reasonab!y accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#11 Page 40
Boothroy: The building would be owned by the City, and it would be only the City's
decision at the end of that 20 years. There's no, there's no approval that
would be required through HUD or anything like that. That's correct.
Dilkes: And it would require that the condominium conversion was allowable in
20 years.
Boothroy: Well, yeah I don't know (laughter) I don't know where you're going to be
in 20 years, but I probably ............... no me neither! I'm assuming that
we'll still have condominiums here. (change tape)
Kanner: Our Housing Authority program is funded I guess essentially 100% by
federal funds, correct?
Boothroy: Yes, that's correct.
Kanner: So, there's federal funding to manage these 9 apartment units, that's
guaranteed that we'll have that money to manage this addition?
Boothroy: All of these units will be on the Section 8 voucher program, all 16 units.
Kanner: And so if you offer more Section 8 there's funding that comes with that for
management of additional apartments, such as upkeep and maintenance,
and so forth?
Boothroy: No, there's, uh, we get an administrative fee based on utilization, and not
to get into a lot of detail here but HUD has penalties for housing
authorities where their occupancy rate or their utilization of voucher rate
drops below 96% of those that have been awarded. So, there's strong
incentives for housing authorities to get anywhere between 96% and 100%
of all of their vouchers out to families and have them being used, and our
revenue for our administration is based on the number of vouchers that are
being used cause we get a certain dollar amount per voucher. But the Iowa
City Housing Authority has maintained 100% occupancy for several years,
therefore, we're maximizing the administrative fees that we can collect,
but it could be less if we were to drop.
Kanner: We had 9 apartment units that were going to be managed by, previously
where the plan was to have them managed by the Greater Iowa City
Fellowship.
Champion: No.
Boothroy: No, it never was going to be managed by Greater Iowa City Fellowship.
Kanner: Okay, it was always going to be managed by the Housing Authority?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#11 Page 41
Boothroy: Right.
Karmer: So they were going to own it but we were going to manage it.
Boothroy: No, we were always going to own it in the application.
Champion: We just used the Housing ...........
Boothroy: The Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship is the developer and once they
develop it, the building is being sold back, in effect, to the Housing
Authority for ownership and management.
Kanner: So ........
Boothroy: That's what this agreement is all about.
Kanner: Then I'm a little bit lost. This was planned all along, this sale?
Champion: Yes.
Boothroy: Absolutely.
Kanner: Okay. I thought one of the reasons we were doing it, it wasn't planned and
that we were getting favorable interest rates as opposed to ..........
Boothroy: No, that's ......... I don't ...... no.
Kanner: Our rates that we get are lower than the ...........
Boothroy: Well the resolution approving the GO Bond Financing, we're paying back
that at the current rate at the time those bonds are issued and those should
be at a lesser rate than if you were getting private financing, in terms of a
mortgage or something like that from a bank. So that, and then the CDBG
money, I don't remember exactly the interest rate but it's a very low
interest rate on those monies, and then keep in mind that the State Home
Fund which is over $700,000, was a grant so there's no payback on that
except the condition of 20 years. So that's sort of the low interest or grant
monies how that plays out, and Maryann's here tonight if you have you
know any more questions about that.
Kanner: No, I apologize. I had forgotten that this had been planned. I did not
know that.
Lehman: Needed a little refresher. Thank you, Doug.
Pfab: I appreciate your report and I think it helps benefit the public also.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#11 Page 42
Lehman: Any other discussion? Roll call. Motion carried 6 to 0, Wilbum
abstaining. Welcome back!
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#12 Page 43
ITEM 12. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE BUDGETED POSITIONS
IN THE SENIOR CENTER BY ADDING ONE HALF-TIME CLERICAL
ASSISTANT - SENIOR CENTER POSITION.
Champion: Move the resolution.
O'Donnell: Second.
Lehman: Moved by Champion, second by O'Donnell. Discussion?
Kanner: This is a double-edge sword, or maybe triple-edge sword in that I think it's
good that we're getting people benefits but it means that perhaps some
temporary workers may lose their job and also it certainly affects the City
budget in a somewhat negative fashion. But overall I think it's a plus to
bring people in with benefits.
Lehman: Roll call. Motion carries.
Honohan: Thank you.
Lehman: Thank you, Jay.
O'Donnell: Good night.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#14b Page 44
ITEM 14. ANNOUNCEMENT OF VACANCIES.
b. Previously-Announced.
Lehman: Certainly a lot of opportunities for people to become involved in some
really important Boards and Commissions here at the City, so if you have
an interest, contact the City Clerk's office or call one of the Council folks.
We'll be happy to help you out.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#15 Page 45
ITEM 15. CITY COUNCIL INFORMATION.
Lehman: Council time. Irvin?
Pfab: That's it for me.
Lehman: Okay, Connie?
Champion: Well I do want to bring up the group tonight with the resolution about the
Patriot Act. I really feel that we do take a pledge to uphold the
Constitution of the United States. I am concerned about some of the areas
of the Patriot Act and if the Council's willing I think we should at least
discuss those areas and talk about a possibility of a proclamation.
Pfab: I would support that 100%.
Lehman: More people would like to put that on for a work session item?
Wilburn: As part of that would you be willing to have um a, and it's just I'm
interested in heating what others think about the threshold for
conversations or resolutions, action on our formal action, on our part um
with those broader, national ..... I would like as part of that discussion to be
just hearing each other's thoughts about you feel would be .......
Champion: Absolutely.
Lehman: ...... would be appropriate.
Witbum: because I mean I remember and you know I was one who had
conversations with this some members of this group and uh a separate
issue, some others had chastised me for talking about just the role that
Council plays in this and that, and putting out the idea about Council not
discussing, or since we are part-time, by not taking formal action on things
like abortion and things like that, and I was chastised for that and you
know I don't know how many of you also did but I've been receiving
several postcards with aborted fetuses on them, and so you know the idea I
was told was no one is going to want to discuss those, but anyway, I would
like to see that be part of that discussion, then I would be willing to.
Pfab: Ross, I've been getting those postcards too so.
Lehman: We all have but I think, Eleanor, would it not be appropriate if we were to
put the Patriot Act, or the discussion of this, on a work session, that we
could at the same time discuss the appropriateness of Council taking any
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#15 Page 46
source of action, resolutions, whatever, on various kinds of issues which is
what I think you're looking at.
Champion: Yeah, and I certainly don't have any objections to that, Ross. I know we
felt the anti-war resolution was certainly um not appropriate at the time,
but we do take an oath to uphold the Constitution and that makes it a little
more appropriate, but any discussion you want ..........
Lehman: It'll be on a work session.
Pfab: And one other thing, the power that we have comes from the willingness
of the people that are governed, and I think we have an obligation to
support their interest.
Lehman: Anything else, Connie? Mike?
O'Donnell: Just one thing. I mentioned last night skateboards and bicycles on the
sidewalks downtown. I had a third call today. I don't know if anybody
else has received any calls on that?
Champion: I'm the one making the calls! (laughter)
O'Donnell: Oh you are? You're disguising your voice.
Lehman: I'm the one who sees them and calls Connie who calls you! (laughter)
O'Donnell: Okay. Well I've had three of those calls.
Champion: Well I can believe it!
O'Donnell: I think we need to look at that. There's damage going on downtown
and....go ahead.
Dilkes: I didn't mean to interrupt.
Lehman: Okay. Dee?
Dilkes: Emie, before Dee starts, you might want to give some flexibility in terms
of setting the agenda to the Mayor, because you've got now for the 13th I
think Historic Preservation is going back on, Municipal Electric is going
on, and now Patriot Act is going on so I don't know how much you can
cover.
Lehman: Well that may have to wait for a later meeting.
Champion: There's always flexibility.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#15 Page 47
O'Donnell: Fine, just put it on .............
Lehman: It will be as a work session item. Fine. Dee?
Vanderhoef: This past week I had the opportunity to fly to Ames, and it was not at City
cost (laughter). Well, this is a continuation. We both had this opportunity
to fly up and extend good will to our neighbor to the North, and the loss of
their football team at Iowa State. However, we were given the opportunity
to view from the air a project that they're doing up in Ames. A year ago
now I brought back a glossy picture of a plan that Ames had done for their
community that involved Vision Iowa, it involved a bond issue, and
collaboration with County and so forth, but what they're doing is
reclaiming some rock and sand quarries out north of the city and making
them into park amenities and trail opportunities. I brought it back and said
"You know, we're moving southward in Iowa City and at the south end of
our river trail we are going to be bumping into some gravel pits that are
now not producing any sand, as far as I know." So I would like Council to
just think about looking at that area and envisioning what we might be
able to do in the future in creating an amenity since we already have the
water and gravel pit out there, and it might be an addition to our river trail.
Champion: Great idea.
Atkins: Is the one you're talking about it, Dee, on Sand Road south of the public
works?
Vanderhoefi It's where Sand Road goes down and actually where the Mormon Trek
Extension comes across the river, it's at the north edge of where these are
so in the very near future we're going to be looking at some development
down in that area and I think we could just vision along and see what we
might be able to put together for our City.
Champion: Dee, does that area include those sand turtles?
Vanderhoef: No, those are on the east side of Sand Road, up close to Napoleon Park.
Champion: What about the Sand Prairie?
Vanderhoef: That's where the turtles are.
O'Donnell: Actually I don't think they are there.
Lehman: They may move, just gotta wait and see.
Vanderhoef: Well, we'll see, but that's the general vicinity.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#15 Page 48
Pfab: Well, they might have got buffed with dump trucks.
Vanderhoef: No, this is not where, to my knowledge, there aren't sand turtles down in
this area.
Champion: Okay.
Wilbum: Just two things. A reminder for the public that we are in the United Way
Unified campaign period and please consider supporting organizations
related with the United Way, or the United Way itself. The second thing, I
just want to thank the people of all ages who've been using the, utilizing
the, skate park because I was down there, I biked down there last Saturday,
and it was just jam~packed. Some really good athletes there!
Kanner: Thank you. A few things: one, to let the public know, as many of you
read in the paper, we have our muni, municipal public power feasibility
study, that came back to us recently, and there's some, what I would say
are exciting potential results with that. The City Council last night
decided that we'll be taking an initial look at that at our next meeting, our
next informal work session on October 13th, and the public is invited to
talk to Council Members before then and to staff, with your questions and
concerns. We're going to throw some of those around, and then the goal
of that meeting is to set a public forum of sorts where we bring in our
consultant, Latham & Associates, to talk about the feasibility of a public
power utility here in Iowa City, and also want to let people know that it
was reported, not quite fully about the election date possibilities. There
were quotes that said the only possibility is two years hence, and at the
current time I am, also the City Attorney's office, are requesting the
Attorney General give us an opinion about when elections can be held, and
there is a distinct possibility that they can be held much sooner than two
years from now, so if Council does decide that they want to move forward
on this, and put it on the ballot for people to vote on, which is the State
law, it could happen in a much shorter time period. We probably don't
have to wait the full two years. Um, I wanted to report that an
acquaintance of mine was a victim of a hate crime. She called it "queer
bashing". She was walking with another woman and a man came up to
them and yelled homophobic remarks at them late Thursday night, and
then punched one of them in the face. Luckily there was no permanent
harm in the physical sense, but these things still go on. We have a
community that's very accepting, but I think it's important that we
continue to work on this issue of being an accepting community and not
tolerating that kind of action, and work against attitudes in an educational
sense that are fostered in part, I would say, by things like hate radio and
the Patriot Act which makes us fear other people that are different. I think
that's a small part of it, and I think we have to continue to work on that as
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#15 Page 49
citizens and as leaders here in City Council. So, we have a Human Rights
Commission that works on this issue and I'll urge that we continue to
work on it as a Council. Um, we got a memo from Norm Cate from
Housing Inspection in regards to a new policy regarding housing
inspections. It was reported in the paper and there's going to be four
changes which lessen the amount of inspections that will be done at rental
properties, and some of this is due in fact because of budget shortfalls, but
I'm not quite sure where we left this discussion of future housing
inspection, financing. Are we planning to have a work session on this? I
think it's something we need to talk about. The recommendation is that
this revamped schedule of inspections that they're implementing this year
will only last two years with the current staffing rate, and so it seems we
have to talk about this if we want to accept the different standard than
we've been used to. I think one of the things that makes Iowa City very
attractive is that we do have a very high standard. There may be some
complaining by building folks, but all in all I think that that attracts people
because they know they're coming into a safe community. So I was
wondering if there is any interest in talking about this issue and some of
the changes that are recommended and other issues in regards to staff.
Champion: We did vote down a way to finance a new City inspector, did we not?
Atkins: Yes you did.
Kanner: I'm sorry, Connie, I didn't hear what you said.
Champion: We voted down a way to finance a new inspector so we'll probably be
discussing ......... we did vote down a way to finance a new building
inspector. I'm sure it's something we will be addressing again at budget
time.
Kanner: I wonder if we should address that sooner.
Champion: Don't think we have time.
Lehman: Would it not be wise for us to see how the new inspection proposals work?
If they work and they work sufficiently well to maintain the quality of
housing stock that we have, we may not have to address this issue for a
couple years.
Atkins: We believe that those proposals still allow us to do a quality program.
However, the number of units of multi-family housing continues to grow.
Lehman: We will have to address it at some point.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#15 Page 50
Atkins: There's an inevitability that sooner or later you're going to have to make
that decision. You also made a decision that the housing inspection
program would be self-supporting, which it now is with the new fee
schedule, but that did not include a new inspector. And so the nmnber of
units which will generate additional fees compared to the need for a new
inspector at some time in the coming years, is still going to be with you.
Lehman: I assume that the, should we be talking about this?
Champion: Or you're going to be the lawyer now?
Dilkes: That's good!
Lehman: We probably shouldn't be talking ........... this will come back to us I'm
sure at budget time at some point.
Atkins: Oh you will see it at budget time because remember we adopted a 3-year
budget. You're going to have to deal with it ultimately.
Kanner: Well I bring this up as something we might want to talk about because this
change in inspection is a philosophy change and I think it's something that
a public forum would facilitate some good discussion back and forth, and
it's something we might want to bring out into the public and talk about.
Do we want to go in this direction? And if we don't, then we have to find
out what we're going to do to change it. Or, do we want to accept it?
There's some good things in here, but I think the community has to set the
standard of what they want, and I think it would be good to do it before the
budget, to focus specifically on this.
Lehman: I have no problem with the proposal from the Housing Department for
inspections.
Dilkes: You just need to decide if three of you want to put it in a work session
before the budget sessions.
Lehman: Housing inspectors and inspections and those sorts of things, and the
budget ..........
Pfab: I, I ...... that would interest me because .......
Lehman: Okay, we have two people. Is there a third? Okay, did you have anything
else, Steven?
Kanner: Yes, I did. We had a notice, hold on just a second, from Stepping Up
regarding establishing, they're calling a meeting for a task force, a
community task force. The purpose of this is a kick-offmeeting on
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#15 Page 51
October 1st to form a task force to work towards reducing or eliminating
the negative impact of high-risk drinking in Iowa City neighborhoods, and
I think if this is um a wide-ranging, has a wide-ranging membership, it
could be a really good thing, so I would encourage people to attend the
meeting October 1st at the Cottage Bakery. Actually I didn't write down
the time. I think it's in the afternoon for this. But Stepping Up or our city
offices can tell you the time on October 1st, and a corollary to that is our
neighborhood associations, which this is addressing to a certain extent,
they give out notices mostly to water bill payers. Recently I had the
opportunity to pass out some information for Longfellow Association that
I'm a part of, and we were working hard on including non-water bill
payers who happened to be renters, and there seems to be somewhat of a
division between renters and homeowners in some neighborhoods, and I
think we have to make sure that if we're going to be supporting
neighborhood associations and communicating, that they have to make a
strong effort at communicating with the rental people also, because we
seem to be leaving them out. I don't know how many associations are
making efforts to get to the renters also, and I was wondering if we could
find out that information. If there are any associations that are making
efforts like the Longfellow to um reach non-homeowners, because that's
the key, I think, to solving a lot of problems is working together on that.
Atkins: I'm not sure how to do that.
Kanner: Well we could first ask Marcia if there are any things going on.
Atkins: Yeah, something that's going to be real easy to find or there won't be any
in between. Let me think about that.
Kanner: Maybe just ask the association presidents if they are making attempts,
through Marcia. Um, and then at another time, and I'll probably submit
this in the packet, but we had our fiscal year '03 budget analysis which I
think is very good, and I urge anyone in the public to check that out
because it shows how good we're doing in actual money spent and taken
in compared to what's projected the year before. This is a new procedure
that's implemented by Kevin and the finance department, and I know that I
appreciate it very much. One of the issues is in regards to sewer, regard to
waster water treatment. We have a large excess of reserve funds actually,
and the question is "can we reduce rates for that?" like we did for water.
Atkins: Most of the reserve position for sewers is due to bonded indebtedness.
What you have to do is maintain a reserve equal to one year's bond
payment, and so if you sell a bond for twenty years, you pay the first
nineteen and then the 20th year is paid for. That just simply improves the
credit rating and that's why you rather large reserves. Those are restricted
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#15 Page 52
reserves and it would be tough to ........ and we also have to have the
capital improvement reserve of $2,000,000 also maintained. That's why
the reserves look as big as they do.
Kanner: Urn, thank you. A couple other things that are interesting and stick out,
bus use is up 127% which leads to greater revenue from our busses and
it's ........
Lehman: 127% or 27%?
Kanner: No, no ........ 27%, it's up.
Lehman: Thank you.
Kanner: And
Atkins: It's 127% of what it was.
Kanner: What it was, yeah. I'm never quite sure how to say that, but in part that's
because of higher University of Iowa subsidized bus passes according to
the report. Another interesting thing is gas and electric tax is down 93%,
and my understanding is we're trying to find out why that is. That's Mid-
American which has lowered the amount of taxes we're getting from them,
and it's quite interesting um if that's a trend that's going to continue to go
down, and I think it could have an impact possibly on municipal efforts in
what we might pay for a system.
Atkins: And my gut reaction is the trend, it will go down. The State is playing a
much stronger role now in how they reimburse us for that. They've taken
over; substantially taken over, tax policy as it relates to public utility.
Champion: But they're taking over the money.
Atkins: Then they peel the money off.
Champion: Right!
Atkins: You understand how it happens? Okay.
Kanner: And again, as mentioned before, the landfill is quite healthy and I think we
had talked about the reserve fund is quite healthy, perhaps even beyond
what is required by the State, and there was request by some citizens a
month or two ago about looking at that issue and I was wondering if, what
did we decide in regards to it, I forget exactly.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#15 Page 53
Atkins: Well I remember about three or four years ago we lowered the rates, and
the cash position in the landfill is very healthy, as you point out. There's a
couple ways to look at it. We have an obligation to pledge sufficient
financial resources to close the landfill and maintain it for 30 years. Now
that is in effect a 50-year decision because we estimate about a 20-year life
on the landfill now plus the cost of closing it and then the cost of
maintaining it. I mean it's virtually becomes a generational issue. We
pledged cash and our debt position because our debt position being as
strong as it is. We have done our best to create the cash position as
opposed to the use of debt simply because it's a user-based system, users
should be paying for it, we would like to avoid selling debt, which in
effect would be a tax on all the tax payers. Again, those reserves are very
healthy but it's a very deliberate effort on our part.
Lehman: In that case, if we sold that thought, the Iowa City taxpayers would be
funding the post-closure cost even though that landfill is used by the entire
county.
Atkins: Absolutely, and that's why we .........
Lehman: So we are much wiser keeping ahead ......
Atkins: .... as much cash as you can, yeah, and remember it's in effect your money
and it's available to you to use for ...... as you know we occasionally will
borrow from it but we also repay ourselves at going interest rates.
Kanner: Well the question is, is do we want to see more ..... I'm not so keen on
lowering the cost for using the landfill, but if we want to use some of that
money to expand programs at reducing waste and in recycling. So we give
out, what is it something like $25,000 in waste reduction grants? We
might want to expand that, and expand it as a loan program perhaps for
repayment at low interest loans. We might want to hire a consultant to
look at something else but so those are things that these issues bring up
here, and things we might want to look at. And then, a couple more
things. The Sandhill and Water Works Park, we got reports that Sandhill,
the Parks & Rec is going to reconnnend that we take 20 acres from the
developers and um that should be a positive movement, and that there's
going to be volunteers planting prairie at the Water Works Prairie Park and
that's going to take place in November. They're going to plant about six
acres. And the last two items, elections are October 7th and hope people
will be voting, primary for City Council, and in regards to work sessions, I
would recommend that we have some work sessions without formals the
next day to work on some of these things, some of these issues. We have a
light calendar through December, and these things tend to build up and
there's no reason not to have work session here and there. And the last
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#15 Page 54
announcement is uh like to wish uh the Jewish community a Happy New
Year, (Jewish holiday), the high holiday is this Friday night and Saturday
is the first day, and then also a good Yom Kippur, day of atonement,
which is a traditional fast day on Sunday, October 5th. I'll be celebrating
with my family this weekend, and I wish everyone a sweet and Happy
New Year. Thank you.
Lehman: A couple things. Dee indicated that we did fly to Ames. That was not at a
cost to the City, and I want to personally thank, and I think Dee does too,
Dean Thornberry a former Council person who used his airplane to fly us
up there, and Matt Whittaker questioned that in a letter to the editor. Matt,
my number at the store is 337-2375; call me if you have a question. It'll
save you the trouble of writing a letter. Ross, congratulation on the 39th
anniversary of your birth last Sunday. Happy Birthday!
Wilbum: Thank you!
Lehman: Homecoming will happen before the next meeting. Also the City/West
football game, I think, is the same night. Big events for Iowa City, and
there's also a really big event tomorrow which I will be attending and
would certainly encourage anybody who's free to also attend. 10:00
tomorrow Blooming Prairie is having a groundbreaking for a $9.6million
addition which is huge. That's been facilitated by (loud noise on tape) and
a lot of good folks and the support of the City of Iowa City, so I will be
there tomorrow at 10:00 and certainly encourage anyone else who would
like to be there to also be. Steve?
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.
#16 Page 55
ITEM 16. REPORT ON ITEMS FROM CITY STAFF.
Atkins: Not a thing, sir.
Lehman: Eleanor?
Dilkes: I need to clarify just a couple comments that Steven made about the
election for municipal electric. Number one, city officials can't request
Attorney General's opinions, so any requests for Attorney General's
opinion would have to come from a State official, so I, although I
recognize the ambiguity and the statute and we are looking at that issue, I
can't, I personally can't request an Attorney General's opinion.
Kanner: My understanding is the County official is requesting it at, partially at a
request or discussion of City Attorney's office.
Dilkes: Tom Slockett and I have discussed the issue and I think we see eye-to-eye
on what the ambiguity and the statute is. I was not aware that he was
requesting an Attorney General's opinion. He may be. Urn, secondly, the
ambiguity in the statute relates to when an election will be held if Council
itself, by motion, calls the election. Um, there isn't ambiguity as to when
an election would be held if it's called by petition of citizens. That would
have to be in, the earliest would be 2005. So ......
Lehman: Okay.
Pfab: Just a follow up and information to the public, the report that we're talking
about, the municipal study, is on-line on City web page and it's under
September 18th Information packet, so anyone can go to it on the web site.
Lehman: Do we have a motion to adjourn?
O'Donnell: I would love to.
Wilbum: Second.
Lehman: All in favor. Motion carries. We are adjourned.
This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City City
Council meeting of September 23, 2003.