Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-10-13 Transcription October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 1 October 13, 2003 Council Work Session 6:30 PM Council: Champion, Kanner, Lehman, O'Donnell, Pfab, Vanderhoef, Wilburn Staff: Atkins, Craig, Franklin, Helling, Holecek, Karr, Matthews TAPES: 03-70, SiDE TWO; 03-73, BOTH SIDES; 03-74, SIDE ONE REVIEW ZONING ITEMS a. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR OCTOBER 28 ON AN ORDINANCE REZONING APPROXIMATELY 13,500 SQUARE FEET FROM CENTRAL BUSINESS SERVICE (CB-2) ZONE TO PLANNED HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (PRM) LOCATED AT 512 S. DUBUQUE STREET. (REZ03-00021) Franklin/All Pets Veterinary Clinic. Item b concerns the--- Kanner/What's the purpose for that? Franklin/To construct an apartment building. Kanner/OK. So, this is at the request of the owners of the property? b. CONSIDER A MOTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR OCTOBER 28 ON AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF TItE ALLEY LOCATED TO TItE EAST OF 512 S. DUBUQUE STREET (VAC03-00002) Franklin/Yes. The new owners of the property. Item b is setting a public hearing for October 28th on an ordinance vacating a portion of the alley located to the east of 512 South Dubuque Street. The applicants requested expedited consideration here and you also have on your consent calendar a motion to set a public hearing for November 25th on the disposition of the alley. The scenario in terms of expedited consideration is that you have the public heating on October 28th and have first consideration on October 28th, second consideration on November 10th, and then on November 25th you would have the public hearing on the disposition, the resolution for disposition. Well, you'd have the final reading on the vacation, public hearing and disposition and the resolution on disposition all on the 25th, if you so choose. That's what's been requested. Kanner/Are there City easements over this for no building because of utilities? Franklin/This portion, this alley is virtually non-existent in reality; it's a very steep slope. I don't believe there's any utilities in that, Steven, but before we have the public hearing on this--this is just setting the public hearing for your next meeting--I'll make sure that I know if there's any easements in there or not. Kanner/So, I assume the new owners would like to build if they can and they're going to be, This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of thc Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 2 they want to build an apartment building there; that's what this is all part of?. Franklin/No, this--actually, the alley vacation, the purpose of the alley vacation is to enable the parking lot to be behind the building at 512 South Dubuque and there would be a retaining wall within a portion of the alley, which would enable the lot to consume the entire back part of 512 South Dubuque. When you see the illustration of it, it will all become much clearer. Vanderhoef/It's really a big fall-off there, so--- Franklin/ Yes, it is, it is. Vanderhoef/...a retaining wall is the only way to go. Franklin/Well, as I say, once you see the drawing of it, I think it will be much clearer as to what's happening, but this is just setting the public hearing tonight. c. 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) (PASS AND ADOPT) Franklin/Item c is pass and adopt on the rezoning for Oakmont Estates off of Foster Road. d. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF OAKMONT ESTATES. (SUB03-000019 AND SUB03-00034) Franklin/And then Item d has been requested indefinite deferral. When the applicants had the abstract completed on this property, they found an easement which they had not expected and are going to try to have that easement vacated before going ahead with the plat. And that is all I have. Lehman/Thank you. O'Dormell/Thank you. AGENDA ITEMS/COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS Lehman/OK, Agenda Items. Kanner/Are we going to be doing Council Appointments under this since we don't have it listed separately? Champion/Oh, oops. Lehman/Oh. Let's do it under Council Time because I see we don't have it. Let's go ahead and This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 3 do the Agenda Items and then we'll do appointments. 5.e.(2) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION FIXING DATE FOR A MEETING (OCTOBER 28) ON THE PROPOSITION OF THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $3,925,000 OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS (FOR AN ESSENTIAL CORPORATE PURPOSE) OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION AND NOTICE THEREOF. 5.e.(3) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION FIXING DATE FOR A MEETING (OCTOBER 28) ON THE PROPOSITION OF TIlE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $360,000 OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION AND NOTICE TIIEREOF. 5.e.(4) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION FIXING DATE FOR A MEETING (OCTOBER 28) ON THE PROPOSITION OF THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $585,000 OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION AND NOTICE THEREOF. 5.e.(5) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION FIXING DATE FOR A MEETING (OCTOBER 28) ON THE PROPOSITION OF THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $700,000 OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION AND NOTICE THEREOF. Kanner/Steve, in regards to the bond sales? Atkins/Yes. Kanner/What's the $700,000 limit? Atkins/That's a state law. Kanner/For--what (can't hear) over $700,000? Atkins/Under the definition of Essential Corporate Purpose, General Corporate Purpose in the state law allows you to sell up to $700,000 on a specific, a central, a general corporate purpose project without the requirement for direct referendum. There's a reverse referendum requirement for anything under the $700,000 for general purpose. Kanner/So, anything over $700,000 always has to have a general referendum--- Atkins/General corporate purpose, yeah. There's two rather extensive definitions in the Code, but it's the general corporate purpose. What we do is we have our Bond Council go through and identify each project to make sure that it does satisfy the requirements of the law. Kanner/So we have one at $700,000. Do we--is that being put there so it does not have to go to referendum at that amount? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 4 Atkins/I doubt that because these projects were put together a couple years ago. I'm assuming that each one of those has been identified by our Bond Council and the moneys have been distributed in that fashion. Essential and General Corporate Purpose is the definition that we need from the Bond Council. They decide that for us. 5. e. (1) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR OCTOBER 28 ON PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, FORM OF CONTRACT, AND ESTIMATE OF COST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WATERWORKS PARK BUTLER HOUSE/AMPHITHEATER TRAILS PROJECT, DIRECTING CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE OF SAID HEARING, AND DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PLACE SAID PLANS ON FILE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION. Lehman/I just have a question on e (1) in the Consent Calendar. Atkins/E- 1 ? Lehman/E-1 is plan specifications, form a contract for the construction of the Butler Park House/Amphitheater Trails Project. Atkins/Right. Lehman/Is that part of our CIP? Atkins/Yes. It involves the, as you know, the parking lot was constructed--- Lehman/Right. Atkins/...and this project is an accessible trail from the parking lot up to the Butler House. There's a small trail segment down to the amphitheater. The amphitheater is a grassy hillside with a concrete slab. It's nothing real elaborate. Lehman/Do we have the slab for it? Atkins/We will be building the slab for it, yes. Lehman/Oh. Can we know when we're going to do that? Atkins/I'm assuming we'll do it in the spring, given the date of these bids. And then a bike trail that will run through the northern section of the park. When this is--I'm just reading from the notes Terry provided me. With this project then the park would have about three miles of hard-surface trails, overwhelming majority of which are maintenance roads for the water division. But the big thing here is accessible trails to the parking lot up to the Butler house and the trail segment to the amphitheater. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page $ Lehman/But the Butler house is quite a ways away-- Atkins/Yeah. Lehman/...from, I mean it'll--- Atkins/From the parking lot? Lehman/...essentially it'll be a trail that goes nowhere. Atkins/Up to the Butler house. We're assuming you eventually--- Lehman/That's what I said, it goes nowhere. Vanderhoef/But that was part--- Atkins/That was part of the plan. Vanderhoef/Remember that was part of that grant? Champion/Yes. All right. Lehman/Is that part of the--why is, I thought we did that all at one time? Atkins/No, you broke it up into pieces. Vanderhoef/But it was part of the parking lot and the trail up to the Butler house (can't hear) restricting. Atkins/Yeah. The restricting. Lehman/We did the parking lot. Atkins/Yeah. And this is our, part of our share of the project. Lehman/OK. Atkins/And this goes to the Butler house. The Butler house has not been refurbished because we decided not to refurbish it until later on. Lehman/OK. Atkins/OK. 5. f. (6) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO CONVEY A TWENTY-FOOT- WIDE BY SEVENTY-SEVEN-FOOT-LONG VACATED PORTION OF THE This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 6 ALLEY BETWEEN AND ADJACENT TO LOTS 2 AND 7, BLOCK 9, COUNTY SEAT ADDITION, WHICH IS LOCATED BETWEEN SOUTH DUBUQUE AND LINN STREETS, TO VIEW PARTNERS, LARJ PROPERTIES AND JALIL & MAHROOYEH MOSTAFAV1, AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING ON SAID CONVEYANCE FOR NOVEMBER 25, 2003. Vanderhoef/OK, then number 6. I'm just curious. Sarah, did we have any appraisal on that or isn't it necessary at this point? Holecek/Dee, are you talking about the disposition of that alley? Vanderhoef/Yes. Holecek/It was not done by a formal appraisal; it was done when referenced to the assessed value of the neighboring properties. Vanderhoef/OK. Holecekd I think there's a memo from Mitch that outlines how those calculations were arrived at. Lehman/OK. Any other Agenda Items? 5. f. (5) CONSIDER A RESOLUTION REPEALING RESOLUTION 03-281 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF AN APPLICATION WITH THE IOWA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE IOWA CLEAN AIR ATTAINMENT PROGRAM (ICAAP) FOR THE ARTERIAL STREET TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECTION PROJECT. Karmer/Yes. Let's see. Number 5 f. (5), the grant from the Clean Air Attainment Program repealing the previous one and voting on the new one. Can you explain what the difference is why we have to repeal the old one? Atkins/The--we were made aware that if we repealed the original grant application and reapplied, we would be able to secure some additional funds which will allow us to locate at our Streets office, I guess for lack ora better--a signal control device--whereby if someone in the field were to call in the traffic signal at X and Y street is out, we can actually correct it from the Streets Division office, not have to send someone out to fix the controller. Lehman/That makes sense. Atkins/Yeah, it's a new way to save some time and hopefully some money. Kanner/So we're putting in $53,000-$54,000? Atkins/Mm-hmm. This represents only a reasonably accurate txanscription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 7 Kanner/This new grant is an additional $4,500. Atkins/Yes. Kanner/From local funds? Atkins/Yes. Kanner/OK. Atkins/By the 75-25 grant. Kanner/I have to read it a little more; I might be asking to remove it from Consent Calendar tomorrow. Pfab/I have a question. Is that going to be able to monitor--- Karr/Irvin, excuse me. Lehman/Your mic. Pfab/OK. With this control device, is that going to allow remote monitoring and remote control of those intersections? Atkins/As I understand it, it will allow us to regulate the signal at an intersection or intersections from the Streets Division office now. My definition of "monitor" is that if something goes wrong--- Pfab/Can you see the buildup or--- Atkins/No, it's not that elaborate. Pfab/Oh, OK. Kanner/Would this allow--there are a number of cities that are using, that have buses that have signals they send out so that they can go through (can't hear) green lights. Will this allow something like that to happen perhaps in the future? Atkins/For that, I'll have to ask somebody else about. We have those devices on our fire equipment routinely. I mean, that triggers the signal ahead of time. I don't know whether this project would accommodate that type of technology. I can ask that question for you though. Pfab/According to what you.just said, Steve, this control is already there. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 8 Atkins/Yeah. Pfab/If the fire department can do it, all you have to do is (can't hear) Atkins/Yeah. But whether this has a bearing on that or not, I don't know. I don't think it does. Lehman/OK. Any other Agenda Items? Lehman/We do not have appointments on the agenda for tonight, Marian. That, I assume, was an oversight. Kart/It was an oversight. Lehman/Why don't we do appointments at this time? Champion/Can we do them? Atkins/You just can't approve them. HolecelU You just can't approve them until. Champion/Oh, we don't do it anyway. 15. a. AIRPORT COMMISSION Lehman/All right. Airport Commission, we have one application from John Staley. Is that acceptable to the (can't hear) O'Donnell/That's fine. Vanderhoef/Yes. Champion/Definitely. 15. b. AIRPORT ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Lehman/Airport Zoning Board of Adjustments, there were none. 15. c. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Lehman/The Historic Preservation Commission, I believe, there were none there. Is that correct? Kart/Correct. 15. d. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Cotmcil work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 9 Lehman/Housing and Community Development, there were--them are two vacancies, there are three applications. There are two new ones. Wilbum/I have a conflict of interest with this. I work for an organization that receives funding from the Community Development Block Grant funds, and I cannot make appointments or deliberate this since they decide that funding. Lehman/OK. Champion/Well, I'd like to nominate Michelle and Erin. I think they both are qualified. And I think Rick is also qualified but his attendance record has not been good. Pfab/I would support that. Lehman/Is that OK with--- O'Donnell/That's fine. Champion/Go for it. And maybe Rick has had (can't hear) 15. e. HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Lehman/ OK, the Human Rights Commission? Vanderhoef/I would like to look at James McCue. Champion/Oh, absolutely, good one. Vanderhoef/...and Catherine Fribley. Lehman/Human Rights Commission--McCue. All fight, do we have consensus on that one? O'Donnell/Fine. Lehman/All right. And the second one is--- Vanderhoef/Fribley. Lehman/Fribley, is that--do we have any others? O'Donnell/Fribley's fine. Lehman/Are we OK? OK. 15. f. PUBLIC ART ADVISORY COMMITTEE This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 10 Lehman/Public Art Advisory Committee--we had either an art or design professional. We have three applications and one vacancy. Vanderhoef/I was curious whether there was possibly some conflict of interest for Kendra. Previously, Eagle's Nest has requested funding; I'm not sure that we've ever funded them, but they have requested funding. HolecekJ She is a volunteer, I believe, and her application indicates that she's a volunteer or has volunteered with Eagle's Nest. Vanderhoef/Mm-hmm. Holecek/So, it's not as if Eagle's Nest contracts with the City--well, I don't know, a subrecipient's agreement through CDBG--I mean, it's fairly remote in that she will have nothing to do with the allocation of funds for CDBG, which is where we would potentially have any kind of interface with Eagle's Nest. Champion/And it's a voluntary p~sition--- Holecek/Right. Champion/...so she's not receiving any sort of--- Vanderhoef/So that part i~ OK. Holecek/Yeah. Champion/I really like (can't hear) Vanderhoef/The only other question that I had for her is since she is a sculptor, does she understand the ramifications of the two-year before something of hers could be considered? Franklin/I think she does, yeah. Vanderhoef/OK. Franklin/I mean, we talked about the fact that she could not be commissioned for anything. Champion/I really liked Mark, too. Mark Seabold. He's an architect? Vanderhoeff Mm-hmm, I saw that one. Champion/At Shive-Hattery, and I was very impressed with him. Vanderhoef/He's got quite a history in art. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 11 Champion/Mm-hmm. Lehman/Well, what's your pleasure, folks? Champion/Anybody else have any preferences? Lehman/I think, I tend to think Mark's a good choice. I think they're all good choices. Champion/They're all good choices. Vanderhoef/Mm-hmm. Lehman/Are there a majority who would support Mark? Pfab/I was just--you know, I was thinking of Mark. What's the gender at this point? Vanderhoef/Two and two. Wilburn/Two and two. Lehman/So it's probably not a factor. Wilburn/OK. That's fine. O'Donnell/That's fine. Kanner/I would go with Elise Kendrot. Lehman/All right--how many for Seabold? One, two, three, four, OK. Mark Seabold. O'Donnell/Reapply. Champion/We always have really good candidates for that Commission. Franklin/Mm-hmm. Lehman/I just hate not being able to appoint everybody that applies. COUNCIL TIME Lehman/OK. Council Time. Champion/I just wanted to bring up something we've talked about before, and it's the parking situation at, OK, help me out, where the Skateboard Park is. This represents only a reasonably accurate ffanscription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 12 Lehman/Terrill Mill Park. Champion/And that parking lot is used by permanent parkers and it's hard to take, it's hard to go over there. I try to take my grandchildren over there to watch the skateboarders. It's very difficult to find a parking place, and they're not all skateboarders or people using the trails. I know we've talked about that and I don't know how we ever are going to address it. Atkins/We can sign it and give it very vigorous enforcement, which we did do during that recent tournament. Lehman/Right. Champion/Yeah. Atkins/And got ourselves a lot of complaints. But we did chase folks out of there that were parking overnight and leaving their cars, using it for a storage lot. I mean, I--- Vanderhoef/It's time to do it again then. Atkins/OK. Champion/I mean, what if we didn't allow night parking there? No parking after 10:00 o'clock? Atkins/We can do that. Champion/Maybe you'd still--maybe there's a lot of day parkers there, too. O'Donnell/You'd still have an all-day, that's all Mayflower parks. Atkins/Mike's right. It's overwhelming the Mayflower parking. Champion/So they do live there? Lehman/Well, but if you also perhaps had more restrictive hours, from 3:00 until 10:00 in the evening and then all day Saturday and Sunday. My suspicion is that at 2:00 in the morning, nobody cares if cars are parked there. Are the skateboarders there at 2:00 in the morning? I don't know. Champion/No, no, I don't care. But my problem is that they're parking their car there 24 hours a day because they live at the Mayflower. It's storage. And there's not that much parking in that park. Lehman/I know. Why don't--could we work that out with Terry? Atkins/Sure. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 13 Lehman/You know, and have some sort of regulation relative to the use of the park? Atkins/OK. Champion/But I am really glad to see a lot of kids using that Skateboard Park. Atkins/Yeah, it's busy. Champion/It's busy. Pfab/Speaking of Skateboard Park there, while we're on the subject, I was at a Stepping Up program; there was really a concern by these kids that are using this. First of all, it's not lighted. Secondly, there are no restrooms and there's no place to get a drink of water. Champion/Those are all things we talked about when they wanted a Skateboard Park there. Pfab/Yes. Champion/They chose--they wanted it there anyway. Pfab/Right, but I mean, it's--now it's proven its value to the community. I think we really have to take a hard look at lights and facilities there. And I guess sometimes they go across to the Mayflower while it's open during the summer. (Can't hear) now they chased them over there so there's no place to get a drink and no concession. Lehman/Well, I'm sure that's something we should probably refer to Terry. Pfab/Well, I mean, it's, it is something that--there was a lot of concern~-and I would imagine there's a lot of use in that (can't hear) down there; I think its success is probably way over the expectation that we thought it would be. Wilburn/There are apparently some conflicts going on, too, between some of the young people going over to Mayflower, you know, some of the younger folks mixing and mingling with some of the college (can't hear) over there. Lehman/I'm sure that's right. OK. Vanderhoef/Now, it's going to go on the CIP list with a lot of other things. Wilburn/I was just thinking like a Port-a-Potty or something like that. Lehman/Well, that's certainly a temporary solution. Wilburn/Yeah. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 14 Vanderhoef/Well, I think they did set one up for the tournaments. Champion/Yeah, that's a good idea. Wilbum/Yeah, or events like that. Pfab/Apparently the need is pretty intense. Kanner/Do we have our own Port-a-Potties in service--we have to rent those out, right? Atkins/We rent those. Yeah. Kanner/So those are probably what--like a thousand a month? Atkins/They're not terribly expensive. I think I can probably assure you it will be found floating in the Iowa River some evening. (Laughter) Atkins/I hate to tell you that, but that's what happens to--- Champion/ Or, speaking ofrestrooms, too, I want to compliment the Parks Department because I go to City Park a lot with grandchildren and those restrooms are cleaner than most restaurant restrooms. I don't know how they keep them clean there. Atkins/I'll pass the word along. Lehman/You know, also, we did receive in the packet a letter from the Airport Conunission relative to the United Hangar. Champion/Right. Lehman/I don't know how Cotmcil feels, but as far as I'm concerned, given the economic situation at the airport, I would accept their recommendation which is that they demolish the hangar rather than spend several, lots and lots of money to try to move it and reconstruct it. But I think we need to respond to that letter, that we have received it and we accept their recommendation. Vanderhoef/Don't we need a resolution for that because they still have to go through the historic piece? Lehman/I have no idea, but I think if it's OK with--- Champion/Do they--- Vanderhoef/Yeah, they have to document it somehow or other and I don't know This represents only a reasonably accurate U'anscription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 15 Atkins/Yeah, Dee's--it has to be documented but I thought they were doing that, Dee. That was part of their project. Vanderhoef/OK. If it is, then a resolution says that--- Lehman/All I guess I'm asking if it's OK with us, let's just put the ball in their court and let them proceed. Is that agreeable? O'Donnell/I think (can't hear) Champion/That's fine. Pfab/Fine. Lehman/OK, can we do that, Steve? Atkins/I'll take care of that. Lehman/OK. Atkins/OK. Lehman/OK, any other thing on Council Time? Kanner/Yeah, I had a couple. In, let's see, I didn't quite understand some of what Deb Mansfield's memo in regard to the gas and electric excise tax. I understood the part where they went from a property tax--- Atkins/Right. Kanner/...method to an excise tax method on the amount of energy used, and it would be revenue-neutral the first three years. Atkins/That's correct, yes. Karmer/And that even though we're no longer using, collecting property tax, we would count the worth of their property in our 5 percent--- Atkins/That's correct. Kanner/...debt limit. Atkins/Mm-hmm. Karmer/I guess what I didn't understand is gas or electric valuation versus excise tax revenues. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 16 It got a little hazy for me there. Atkins/Well, the excise tax--- Kanner/I didn't understand the lawsuit also, that MidAmerican brought--- Atkins/Yeah, they filed on the value of their property. Kanner/Well, no, it was--I thought it went to the court saying the value of the energy was too high and that they would use a different system and that therefore that's one of the reasons we would get less money. Atkins/I think one of the reasons we get less money is the state only guaranteed for the first three years. That's the primary reason. Now, that doesn't mean that we won't. We got-- gained a little bit because of the appeal on the assessment of the value of the property. And that's what we're saying. Champion/Their lawsuit said that they were overvalued--- Atkins/They were overvalued. Champion/...and they won. Atkins/And they won. Yeah. Simple as that. Champion/And they had been overpaying taxes. Kanner/Well, what does the gas-electric valuation versus excise tax revenues mean? Atkins/The gas and electric property tax valuation is a dollar figure. The excise tax, which is a consumptive tax, is a dollar figure. I don't have it in front of me, Steven. Kanner/OK. Pfab/What page are you on? Kanner/Well, this is in the info packet. Champion/Page 11. Kanner/Page 1 1. Well, I'll try to look over this with Kevin. Atkins/Maybe we should have a couple minutes so I can find a better way to explain it. It's not-- Kanner/I think there was more to the lawsuit than what you explained, and I need to get This represents only a reasonably accurate t~anscription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 17 Atkins/The lawsuit--- Kanner/...clear explanation, from Kevin perhaps. Atkins/OK. We'll talk about that then, OK. Vanderhoef/Emie, I've got one more thing. We had a memo in the packet on the community event and program funding, and in my mind we shouldn't be advertising for new and I don't know whether anyone else agrees, but I think they need to know if we're going to advertise, it's got to go out soon. Lehman/Did the memo say we weren't going to? Vanderhoef/No. It was recommended. Atkins/The memo said--it was a memo from staffto you all, basically, let's don't encourage it. Lehman/Right. Atkins/And unless I would hear otherwise, I would not intend to send a letter out and we will budget in accordance with what you adopted when you made reductions. Lehman/OK. I read that and--- Atkins/And you always have the flexibility during budget review to change your mind. It's just not--I don't want to mislead folks that there's money available--- Vanderhoef/No. Lehman/No, I don't either. Vanderhoef/I think it's unfair to advertise for new people to come into the program and then not have any money to do it anyway. Lehman/Right. But I read the memo as saying we weren't going to be advertising. Atkins/I was not intending to do it unless you instruct me otherwise. Lehman/All right. OK. Well, we're all on the same sheet for that. OK? Kanner/I have a concern that maybe we could talk about for a minute or at another time in regards to the memo we got from the intern in Karin's department working with Marcia Klingaman in regards to the, what-do-they-call-those, the plastic gloves, the pickup--- Atkins/Mutt mitts. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 18 Kanner/...which seems on the face of it good, but there's the question of veterinarians sponsoring those, paying money, and in essence having advertising. And it sounds like a good thing, but this is a hot topic throughout the country about how much you want to take private funding in sponsorship. And I wonder if this might be leading us down a slope of taking more and more. And in tough fiscal times, people would tend to say, Councils would tend to say, let's take it, what harm could it do? But how far do we want to go? It could lead to, you know, "This police car sponsored by---" (Laughter) Lebanan/I think that's--- Kauner/And that happens in cities, but it's just that, you know--- Vanderhoef/(can't hear) on buses. Kanner/And on buses. So we had some concerns about naming a building or a space after someone, let alone, someone who was honored--let alone, taking in essence advertising money for a municipal service. And I was wondering if we could talk about it to see what the policy is in Iowa City, what our history is, if we have any written policy on that in regard to general policy, and if we want to set a general policy on that. You know, maybe we might have something different, say it's OK at a smaller level and then at bigger levels, something different. Atkins/An example might be the Credit Union sponsoring the music for Farmers' Market. That's the kind of thing that you're talking about? Karmer/That's the kind of the thing, yeah. And I'd even question that. Atkins/Yeah. Kanner/That kind of thing and it's--certainly, they're a non-profit, and maybe that's a different standard. But it's something that we need to talk about and the budget getting tougher, we're going to probably look more and more to that kind of thing. And is that the kind of thing we want to do? So I was wondering if we could put that on a work session? Wilburn/I think it'd have to be a work session because it can cover other areas, too, like Scanlon Gym wouldn't have happened--- Champion/Right. Wilburn/...without some of those larger, and you know, other rooms are named. So I think it'd have to be dedicated to some time. Pfab/I have something. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 19 Lehman/It's a future work session item. Holecek/At this point do we proceed with the mutt mitts? Lehman/I think we have to do that. Lehman/Yes. Kanner/Sure. Franklin/Because there is interest. Champion/I think it's fine. HolecekJ And I can tell you that a policy specifically for this was drafted, so it has been addressed at least for this particular project. Lehman/OK. Kanner/Maybe we can get all those memos and that information and--- Atkins/I'm OK with that. Kanner/...see if we want to update it. Champion/We have a lot of co-sponsored things, too, like Jazz Fest and I mean I don't think it's a big problem in this community. Lehman/Well, no, but I think--- Atkins/Remember, Connie, that's where we're doing the sponsoring. It's kind of the other way around. It's when the private sponsors a public service, not the public sponsoring a--- Champion/ Oh, I see. OK. Atkins/Yeah, I think what you're, we're getting at, Steven, is the other direction. Champion/Yeah. Atkins/Yeah. Pfab/Right. O'Donnell/Well, it's down for a future work session. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 20 Lehman/OK. Karmer/And then one other item in regards to the draft minutes from the Senior Center on the info packet, number 18, page 39 in ours. They're going to open up a designated fund in the Community Fund of Johnson County. And I'd be interested in finding out why Kelly and Schoenfelder voted no. It was a 4 to 2 vote, to see what disagreements they might have had with that, to see if it's worth pursuing. Atkins/That's with the Johnson County Community Foundation? Kanner/The Senior Center's going to put $25,000--they have $157,000 in the Gift Fund. Atkins/OK. Kanner/And of that, they're going to take $25,000 and put it in the Community Fund of Johnson County, a designated fund, for the Senior Center. Atkins/I'll call and check for you and find out. That was Kelly and Schoenfelder? Lehman/That's the Investment Fund, is it not? Vanderhoef/Mm-hmm. So, they--- Kanner/Well, isn't it an endowment that people can contribute? Vanderhoef/Mm-hmm. Lehman/They get better interest than if they try to invest it themselves. I mean, that's the idea. Champion/You don't have to form your own foundation. Lehman/Yeah. Champion/There's one you can already funnel the money into. Lehman/Right. Kanner/So, the question is why did they--it was a 4 to 2 vote on the Commission. Atkins/We'll call and find out. Kanner/And the goal--they have 604 memberships sold so far. What was the goal in the first year? It's been going on a couple months now. Atkins/I'm sorry, Steve, I didn't hear the question. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 21 Kanner/They have 605 memberships sold at the Senior Center, and I was wondering what the goal was again, I had forgotten. Atkins/I don't recall either. Pfab/The number that jumps out, I'm remembering it's a thousand. Atkins/I think Irvin's right. That sounds like the right number, but I'll check for you. Kanner/Fifty percent of the previous membership which was like 4,000 or something? I thought it was greater than that. Pfab/I withdraw my comment. It might have been 2,000. Lehman/We can find out. Pfab/I had heard it but it just--- Lehman/ OK. Kanner/Thank you. Lehman/Any other agenda items? PLAZA TOWER AMENDMENTS Lehman/OK, Karin. Plaza Tower Amendments. 11. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AND THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEST AN AMENDMENT TO TIlE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR TIlE IMPROVEMENT AND SALE OF LAND FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY AND PLAZA TOWERS, L.L.C. Franklin/We have a request from the developers of Plaza Towers, Plaza Towers, L.L.C., the loan group to extend the deadline for conveyance of the property and for the start of construction. In your packet there is an amended agreement which addresses that date extension, the legal description of property that's eliminating the alley from the property that we would sell and then the pedestrian walkway over the alley, decreasing the height minimum from 18 feet to 15 feet 6 inches, I think. This is so that we can get a better connection with the Dubuque Street ramp. And it still meets our requirements for getting a track through. But the most important point in this is the extension dates, and Marc Moen is here to answer any questions from the Council and he also has a representative of his financing institution. Lehman/OK. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 22 Franklin/Marc? Kanner/But, Karin, can you tell me again the two points outside of the delay and who initiated those? The progressions? Franklin/Well, the elimination of the alley from the legal description was initiated by us. The intent was always to keep that as an open public right-of-way, so, and it's owned by it right now, so why sell it and then have it dedicated back for an easement? It didn't make any sense. And then the other part has to do with the bridge coming from Dubuque Street ramp and going to the building, the one that's required so you can go through the building and get to the library. We had said that it had to be 18 feet above the street. The mason for that was to have it high enough for a semi to get through there. I don't know where the 18 feet came from. It's actually 15 feet 6 inches or something that's the standard for DOT on the interstate to go under bridges. So we certainly don't need anything--- Vanderhoef/What about the fire trucks? Franklin/That's, it's fine. The fire truck can get through, the semi can get through, crane can get through--we checked all of those. Vanderhoef/Good. Lehman/OK. Kanner/Do you think perhaps it was a misprint--do you have any thought, did anyone--- Franklin/ The 18 feet? Kanner/No, yeah, the 18 feet? Franklin/No. Kanner/Did anyone come up with--can you find a reason why someone suggested that in your department? Franklin/It may have just been me. (Laughter) Lehman/There's nothing--- Franklin/I can't tell you how it got there. Champion/It doesn't matter anyway. This represents only a reasonably accurate lxanscription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 23 Franklin/I know why we wanted it there, but why it was 18, rather that 15-6, I don't know. Kanner/Because usually Jeff's pretty good at the Federal Codes of what the standards are--- Franklin/Yes. Yes, yeah, and who knows? Kanner/And maybe them was another reason for it? Franklin/Yeah, no, there was no reason for it. Lehman/OK. Moen/Thanks, Karin. I wanted you all to know how excited we are to get started on construction on this problem. We spent over a million dollars right at about $1.2 million so far. The project is completely designed. We're ready to start and we do have a representative from the lending institution here to answer any questions you might have. We've asked for a short delay in the start date from November 1 to December 1. The project has received overwhelmingly positive support from the people we've talked to. We have over 19,000 square feet of commercial space already spoken for, and half of the condos are spoken for. So, this is before we've even started marketing it. These are people that have come to us to lease and buy space. It's been very rewarding. I wish we weren't here asking for this short delay, but that's the fact, and we do need that time. I do have David--- Champion/I think that's a minor delay. Moen/David Dahlin, who is the senior vice president and managing director of BB Syndication Services from Madison, Wisconsin, which is a subsidiary of Bankers Bank in Madison. Kanner/David? Marc, excuse me, did you say you had leases already for half of the condos? Moen/We have 50 percent of the condos, the residential condos--we have people who have indicated that they will be purchasing those. Kanner/OK, but nothing in writing? Moen/We don't have written purchase agreements yet, but we will as soon as financing is in place. Kanner/Is there anything written or with these folks? Moen/Well, there's my correspondence and their correspondence and e-mails and I've met with all of them several times. Kanner/OK. And then what was the other thing that you said was leased? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 24 Moen/We have sales and leases of 19,000 square feet of the commercial space. Kanner/And can you remind me again out of how many total? Moen/There's about 60,000 square feet. Kanner/And you have a committed grocery store? Moen/We do not have a committed grocery store; nor have we sought to, a ~ommitment from a grocery store at this point. Kanner/OK. When will that be sought? Moen/During construction. Kanner/OK. Lehman/This construction period is what? Moen/Two years. Lehman/Two years, OK. Kanner/I thought before you had said you had someone in mind and you could not reveal it but you had someone, that they didn't wish to be revealed at this time? Moen/We actually have two people that would take it, but we haven't committed to them. There are two groups that would take the store. Lehman/Marc, is your finance folks, your finance person who is, I understand, here--are you comfortable with the 30- or 45-day starting time of December 1 st? Moen/Yeah, I think David can probably respond to that better than I, but yes. Lehman/All right. That would be good. Dahlin/Am I comfortable with the start date of December 1 ? Lehman/Well, are you comfortable--obviously the intended time--my understanding is that this project now has gotten to the point where it's about a $27 million project, and also, from my perspective, an integral part of a much larger plan for downtown. And you have asked for a 30-day closing, a 45-day extension for the time construction would start. Are you comfortable with that 30-day extension and being able to get the financing in place so this project can start? Obviously, a lot of work has been on this and where--- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 25 Dahlin/You bet. Our process is normally from the date we sign an application with the developer to issuing a commitment is a 30-day timeframe. So we'll be right on that. We've agreed to terms, and the financing is slightly different than the typical institutional lender. I work for an organization that bands together the community banks throughout Iowa and Wisconsin to fund this project. So we would have 350 banks that would have a very, very strong interest in this type of project in Iowa City. So I'm extremely confident. We like the project. We like the developer. We like his team. Lehman/Are them questions? This gentleman really needs to be in Texas. He would be here for (can't hear) (Laughter) Lehman/Really, if we have questions that we'd like to ask, he has agreed to stay. Champion/No. Lehman/If we do not have questions, I respect your time, and from my perspective, them is no reason you would have to be here. So, if there are questions from Council? Vanderhoef/The only thing that I see on the agreement that we're signing is that this has to be taken care of at our December meeting, and that we will vote to either accept the proposal because the finance is in place or that it should be terminated at that point. Lehman/Karin? Franklin/You will have no action if the financing is in place. We would proceed with the closing per the agreement. The only action you would have to take would be if it did not come to pass and then at your December meeting, you would presumably formally terminate the agreement or reconsider or whatever. Lehman/All right. Franklin/Our intention is that this will all be done, the conveyance will be completed and that would happen no later than November 28th, and construction would start December 1st. Vanderhoef/And if it doesn't, then--- Franklin/Then your December meeting, you would have some--- Vanderhoef/Our December meeting is termination. This represents only a reasonably accurate ~anscription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 26 Franklin/That would be--- O'Donnell/Or extension. Champion/A possibility. Lehman/Or extension. Franklin/...up to you all. Lehman/Right. Champion/My only question is what Ernie's question was and that is--- Lehman/ Is that enough time? Champion/Is that enough time? I mean, because it seems like such a short span to ensure that kind of financing. I hate to have them come back to another Council meeting and not have it done. So, I don't know--if there's any way we could provide a couple days' leeway in there or say it has to be completed by our next Council meeting. I mean, maybe it's not important but--- Lehman/Well, the biggest thing is your level of comfort with what you're requesting. Dahlin/But, and we're very comfortable with it, but obviously there's things beyond your control. If there's any cushion, absolutely, we would take it, but our full intent with the signed application is that a commitment would be delivered on or before November 15th. O'Donnell/That' s fine. Pfab/My question is, I'm puzzled here why was the extension needed in the first place? What went wrong? Moen/Well, we had, back in '01, we had a financing commitment from First Star. First Star then merged with U.S. Bank. We checked during that merger process and afterwards to make sure that commitment was still in place, and they told us it was. Very recently, the spring of this year, we were told--I flew up to Minneapolis because we were starting to get, for the very first time, some signals from U.S. Bank that there may be a problem with the financing. And I flew up to Minneapolis to talk to the people there that are the decision makers. I met with, in a joint meeting with them, and our local--the people we'd worked with locally with U.S. Bank for decades. We were told in that meeting that there was a moratorium by U.S. Bank on projects of this nature, and that that moratorium had been in place for a year but nobody had told us that. So, we were back at square one in the spring of this year. And putting a $27 million project together does not happen overnight. So, we've been working diligently since then to get to where we This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 27 are now, and we're very pleased to tell you that we're on the verge of getting this done. Pfab/But what puzzled me was when this was approved, there was a bond, representative for a bonding, I believe, stated how, one of the comments he made which I questioned about, he said, according to his appraisal that the land is worth nothing underneath it. And I was under the impression that that person was working with your financing. But that was not true then? Moen/I don't remember any bonding person being here. Pfab/The gentleman that came and--- Moen/That was your counsel. He was bond counsel for the City. O'Donnell/(can't hear) exactly who that was. Pfab/He kept filling me in on the details. I must, I missed something or else--- Franklin/ What you're recalling, Irvin, is the appraiser--- Lehman/Appraised value. Franklin/...of the project. Pfab/Right. Franklin/It was an appraised value after, with this project being required on this land, and so we had an appraisal of the land, if you were to sell it on the free and open market to a willing buyer. Pfab/Which we had. Franklin/Well, no, because when we went out for request for proposals, we said we want X on this land. If you're going to develop, if you're going to buy this land and develop it, you must do these things that were in the RFP. The second appraisal then was to appraise that property with those restrictions on the property that you had to do exactly this project that we had in our RFP. And that is where the new value came in that was a negative value. Because when you said after the Council had selected this particular project that this is what you have to build on this ground, the result was a negative value because of the stipulations that then were placed on the land. It's like you put an inordinate easement on it. So that's what you're recalling. Wilburn/I have a question for your financer. And I'm sorry, I've forgotten your name, sir. Dahlin/Dave Dahlin. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 28 Wilburn/Dave, OK. You'll have to excuse my ignorance about your type of financing institution, but I'm trying to think of a parallel. If someone were to try and buy a home, they would try and get some type of prefinancing so that when they went out, they would give some type of indication that, yes, they do have the financial back there. Are you essentially saying you're here giving us the prefinance so that it looks as if this is going to go through the channels? Dahlin/Yes, it's not an exact parallel, but--- Wilburn/(can't hear) but again, I'm not familiar with your type of organization. Dahlin/We've done enough due diligence where we've come in and we've met the architectural team. We've met the developer. We've seen the site. We've done similar projects to this all over the country and a, you know, a multi-use project, mixed use development. Where we're at now is in a very short time, we found out, yeah, we like it, we issued terms under which we'd agree to finance it. After short discussion we agreed to terms. TAPE 03-73, SIDE ONE Wilburn/Thank you for walking me through that; I appreciate that. Lehman/OK. Kanner/Marc? Moen/Yes? Karmer/And perhaps David. We're in a partnership with you in this because we needed, if we're going to collect money in the long run, we need it to work. Are the terms different that you're getting now that you're getting now with Bankers Bank than you had originally planned on with First Star? Moen/Not significantly. Kanner/So they--what is the difference in the interest rates you're getting? Moen/Oh, I think, within a fraction ora point. Lehman/I don't think that's relevant. Kanner/Well, I think if we want to examine whether or not the project is a go, I think we need to make a--- Moen/Well, I can tell you the terms of--- Kanner/...if it has significantly changed--you're saying it's not significant--- This represents only a reasonably accurate t~anscription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 29 Moen/...I can tell you it's not significant--- Kanner/...(can't hear) we need to perhaps take a look at it. Moen/I can also assure you that the terms offered by David are better than the terms that were offered by U.S. Bank. Kanner/What are they--the differences? Is it because the economy is different two years from when you originally got the money? Moen/I think the interest rates are lower, yeah. Dahlin/I think you can address that--my guess would be is that the options he had from First Star at the time and us were a fixed rate option and a floating rate option. Well, if you look at two years ago where prime was, if they used that as an indices compared to today, naturally, it's cheaper and then the fixed rate has to be that much closer to the floating rate at that time. So, more than likely, I would guess that his financing cost has gone down, just over this amount of time. You know, just because rates have gone down, if you're competitive in the market, you know, you have to come down with it. So, if he was at prime plus 1.5 two years ago compared to now, you know, it's a 2 percent swing downward, just because of Greenspan and what the Fed has done. Kanner/So the rates are better that you're getting now. Moen/Yes. Dahlin/They should be. Kanner/Oh, OK. And Karin, how does this--- (Laughter) Kanner/...how does this affect our funding for when we'll receive funding for HCDC project? Franklin/It will not affect it. Let's assume that we do meet the 30 days and we have the conveyance sometime between November 15th and November 28th of this year. The plan had been and will continue to be that the revenue that's generated from this site will go into the pot of money that the Housing and Community Development Commission will evaluate and recommend to you that will start--their process will start in Jamiary and will come to you in March, so no change. Kanner/So, when is there a problem with that as far as being able to use if for '05? Lehman/If we don't sell the property. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 30 Franklin/Yeah, if we don't sell it and we don't have the money, but I'm--- Kanner/No. Franklin/I don't understand. Kanner/What, how far can we go before we say, well, it's sold after this date and we're not going to be able to use it in '05; we'll have to use it for '06 or something like that? Franklin/Well, certainly, December 31st, but you could conceivably or theoretically even take it to June 30th since the moneys that we allocate in January, February, and March are not actually expended in July 1 of '04. I would not suggest that. It's a little ambiguous so I would say December 31 st. Kanner/Thank you. Atkins/Karin? Vanderhoef/Karin? Can you tell me why this extension was not brought forward to us prior to this since our finance agreement with the development agreement that we signed in July of '02 says that the financing will be in place by July 16th of Franklin/Yes. Vanderhoef/...and now we are here into October and this is the first we've been asked for an extension? Franklin/Yes. Vanderhoef/So they aren't in compliance with our original agreement that was voted on by Council. Franklin/We made a judgment, which you may disagree with, but we made a judgment at a staff level that the date of July 16th, 15th, whichever it was, should not jeopardize us if we can make the October 15th conveyance. We believed that it was possible, as Steve pointed out in his memorandum. Obviously, that did not happen. That's unfortunate. But this is the point at which there needs to be some kind of extension because that act of conveyance is not going to happen on October 15th. There was no action that was directly related to the July 15th date. Vanderhoef/Well, this is the second time that our contract or our resolutions haven't been met, the timetables. Our original resolution in '01 after they became the preferred developer said that they would respond and have their project resolution together in 90 days. And the 90 days came and went and we were clear into this July 1. So we've lost a full contract season because of delays from this developer all along. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 31 Franklin/I don't understand what you're referring to there, Dee. Vanderhoef/OK. The resolution in October of '01 was the preferred developer and in that it said 90 days to have our project agreement signed and ready to go. So that would have been January 1, basically of '02. Franklin/Mm-hmm. Vanderhoef/We didn't get it until July of '02. Now we say July of '02, we're going to have our money in place by July of '03, and now we're here at October of '03 having an extension happen. I mean, when does this end? Franklin/What would you like? O'Donnell/In 45 days is the answer to that. You know, folks, we're not building a double garage here. It's a $27 million project. We have a proven local developer who I'm perfectly willing to grant this 45-day extension to--- Champion/ Me, too. O'Donnell/...I think we're getting off target here a little bit. Vanderhoef/Forty-five days is not anything to go at this point. I don't care about the 45 days. What I'm trying to say is do we truly have a good commitment here or do we have someone who has just put it off and put it off to do other projects until--- Moen/Well, we've got other examples of project designs--- Vanderhoef/(can't hear) like he isn't being involved. Lehman/Anybody who spends $1.2 million on a project with engineering and architectural fees is pretty dam serious about it. I don't think there's any question about that. This is a very complex project, $27 million is a huge investment in our downtown, and I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that there aren't going to be some bumps in the road. Now, I consider this to be a pretty small bump. And if you're comfortable with the 30 days, which I think is critical that you say that you are, I don't have any problem with it. Now, is there a reason why Dave should be here ? Champion/No. O'Donnell/No. Vanderhoef/No. Atkins/No. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 32 Lehman/You are excused to go to Texas. Dahlin/Thank you. Lehman/Thank you very much for being here tonight, and, Marc, thank you. PLANNING FOR PARKING ON NARROW STREETS Lehman/Kadn, planning for parking on narrow streets. Franklin/I think it should be quite simple. Lehman/I think it is quite simple. Franklin/We, as I explained in the memorandum, we had a request I think from the Fire Chief or the Fire Marshal to take parking off of a private street that was 22 feet wide. Dee called and suggested that we maybe want to look at this a little bit sooner, and that seemed like a very reasonable suggestion and so we have already started when we look at plans and plats to--when we've got anything in which a narrow street is involved, look at having that parking prohibition or that parking limitation from the outset as we go through the development process. We're also looking at some language in the Development Code in the subdivision regulations that would address that issue, which of course you would approve or disapprove. So, unless you all think we ought to be going in a different direction, I think we can just keep going where we are. O'Donnell/Good. Pfab/So the idea is on a narrow street, don't park. Franklin/On one side. Champion/For one side. Lehman/On one side. Franklin/Yeah. Lehman/That's a good idea. Franklin/OK. Vanderhoef/I hate it when they come back to us after the fact, after they've had parking and then we tell them they can't. Lehman/It's better that they didn't have it in the first place. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 33 Vanderhoef/Right. Lehman/And so I think--- Vanderhoef/So when they buy their property they know that there's only going to be parking on one side of the street. That makes a lot more sense to me. Lehman/And that's what we're proposing to be doing from hence forward and forevermore. Vanderhoef/Thank you, Karin. Lehman/Until the next Council changes it. Thank you, Karin. Oh, we have been--have a break requested, is that what was said? We're going to take a break for about 10 minutes. Are you coming back? (BP~AK) MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC Lehman/I think we're ready for Andy. Before we start this discussion, I would like to encourage anyone from the public who has questions relative to the Latham study to submit those questions to one of the Council members or preferably to the City Clerk's office by Wednesday so that they can be included in the list of questions that we send to Mr. Latham for our November 17th meeting. So, if anybody has any questions, submit them to the City Clerk by Wednesday, and they will go along with our questions. And certainly that's not the last time people can ask questions, but they'll be asking questions for a long time on this. Andy, if you'd like to start us off. The purpose of this meeting is to accept questions from Council members that we would like to see Mr. Latham address when he meets with us on the 17th and after we go through that, I would like to also discuss the format for that meeting. But for now, let's talk about the questions. I think, Andy, you had sent us a couple memos. Matthews/Yes, and City staff sat down and put together a list of a few questions, certainly not detailed questions one would ask in connection with a thorough review of a feasibility study, but more as a starting point for Council to get some direction or at least highlight some of the--if not more important--at least the more obvious questions, and we provided a memo to Council dated October 9th, setting out, I believe, approximately seven questions and related subquestions, the perspective of municipal power feasibility study, at least the preliminary study that was conducted. You should have all those in front of you--I'm not sure in terms of the format how you would like to proceed tonight. Lehman/Well, I just think now--I had given--I had prepared personally seven questions. There are a couple of others I would like to add to that list. So, let's just go around but we are obviously taking minutes of this meeting. Any question that comes up from any one of us will be recorded and will be transmitted to Mr. Latham, so whatever questions we This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 34 have, feel free to ask them. Vanderhoef/Well, I have a series that's sort of on one subject. Matthews/That's fine. Champion/Yeah. Vanderhoef/The assumption is that at least to begin with, is that the City will choose to start a utility primarily outsourcing for services and for competitive vendors. Matthews/It's certainly one of the options and often an easy option for a new municipality in the business. It's less initial startup costs upfront. Vanderhoef/Right. So, with that in mind, I've got questions like how many bids could the City expect for the various services and who they might be from. And would all of these be from the private sector or--I don't understand for sure how much the Iowa Association of Municipal Utilities are capable of providing, if any. Matthews/The Iowa Municipal Utilities Association has indicated that they would be willing to assist where they can. They had indicated some interest and ability to assist with, for example, power purchase issues and the like. They can put us in touch with other municipal utilities and perhaps RECs to assist in some of the other outsourcing issues. Vanderhoef/OK, but as I tmderstand it, they are nonprofit. Matthews/Yes. Vanderhoef/So, does that come in then as a bid to do that for us or do we have to request it or how does that work? Matthews/With respect to the Iowa Municipal Utilities Association? Vanderhoef/Yes. Matthews/A lot depends on what kind of costs they would incur, if it's more advisory in nature based on the knowledge they've acquired in that business, that's one thing. If they have to go and hire outside experts, counsel and the like, well, certainly, that wouldn't be something that--- Vanderhoef/So then it would be fee for service. Matthews/Right. Vanderhoeff OK. Well, that's one series. Go ahead, somebody else. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 35 O'Doimell/I had a question on--I know there was probably a depreciation formula used in arriving at that $12 million asset value. And I'm wondering how that was achieved and how accurate that is? Matthews/Well, that remains to be seen if they're, if the City were to petition the Board, I guess I'd at that point, the IUB would make that evaluation/determination. I can tell you in the Sheldon case various formulas were used and I think I alluded to that in my memo. Of course, of, from the municipality's point of view, original costs minus depreciation would be the most attractive. That was rather summarily dismissed by the IUB in the Sheldon case, and it has some precedential value. Certainly the Board could revisit that, but on a number of levels, at least to me, it seems to make sense and more to the point with respect to the method of depreciation in the Sheldon case was the actual amount of depreciation to be arrived at using the replacement costs minus depreciation given the condition of the equipment. I think in the Sheldon case the Board viewed the IPS as expert and knowledge as to the specific conditions of the system. I think they gave greater weight to it than Sheldon's expert who had not visited all of the distribution system. Champion/The other thing that I don't understand is how, if you decide to start a system, the startup money--where does that come from? Matthews/Revenue bonds? Atkins/Not much. Champion/All of that? Lehman/Same as sewer bonds, used to be bonds with a charge. (Laughter) Vanderhoeff However, I would presume that we wouldn't be able to pay off revenue bonds until we had the Municipalities started. Champion/Right. Vanderhoef/Therefore, we would have to be paying on those bonds from our General--- Matthews/ You'd need some startup funds, no doubt. (Several talk) Champion/That's just it--where did that money come from? Matthews/Well, it's not going to be in Steve's bottom drawer, I can assure you that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 36 (Laughter) Lehman/No, no, but my assumption is that we could probably, if we chose to go that way, we could borrow the money from another fund. For example, the Landfill Fund, which has significant amounts of money. If we knew we could get that repaid within a short period, there are probably ways that that--- Atkins/Ernie, I'd be real carefully about answering those questions. I think you ought to just ask them tonight, because that landfill thing is a state-regulated fund. Lehman/Right. Sorry about that. Matthews/And I do not purport to be an expert in financing. Champion/Well, that is my main question--where does the startup money come from and how is it paid back? Lehman/Now, in order to do this, we are required to have a referendum indicating approval from the population of the community that they would like to see us move forward with a municipal utility. From my personal perspective at this point, there is not enough information to make an intelligent choice yay or nay on a public utility, which means we've had a preliminary study which we've gotten a report from. I guess my question is how much more information is necessary before we could legitimately expect the public to make an educated vote yay or nay? How much information and how long it would take to get that information and what would it cost us to get to that point? And I'm not asking you because I don't think you know. (Laughter) Matthews/No, that's probably a better question for Bob on the 17th. I know there are going to be two roads you can follow. You can--having received at least from Latham and Associates a prospective report indicating the feasibility of moving forward. If you were to go before the IUB, you would need a far more detailed feasibility study. Whether it merits getting that before you submit it to the voters or waiting to see how the voters feel before you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a detailed feasibility study, which would be needed when you go before the Board, that would certainly be a Council decision. Lehman/This is kind of a chicken-and-an-egg thing, if we got approval from the voters and then we spend a half a million dollars finding out that it isn't feasible, we're going to have some pretty unhappy people. Matthews/But it's cheaper than the cost--I wouldn't think the election would cost that much. Lehman/Oh, no, no, OK. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 37 Vanderhoef/So is it not a binding, it's just an indication that they're interested in moving forward, but not necessarily the final vote on actually starting. Matthews/Well, all the referendum does and is determines whether or not you can move forward, not that you have to move forward. You can hold the referendum. You can get a favorable vote and then for a variety of reasons you can sit back and do nothing-- either in the short term or the long term. You could receive a favorable vote at the referendum and sit back and then decide OK, who's going to be the test case on this? And wait to see who the test case is, see how that goes through the IUB, and then reevaluate given the IUB's pronouncements where the City would stand were it to file a similar case. Vanderhoef/Well, I would appreciate then a timeline kind of presentation to us. Mr. Latham gave us something, this sort of off the top of his head when he was here two years ago, when he was giving us the pros and the cons. And my recollection isn't necessarily real strong on this but he had something upwards towards ten years and as I recall $500,000 just to go through the permit process to get it as far as the 1UB. Matthews/I'm not sure if the ten years was for one particular city or with respect to all the cities that were involved in the feasibility study. Vanderhoef/This was prior to talking about multiple cities. Lehman/Right. Matthews/It would be--- Vanderhoef/It would still be (can't hear) at that point. Matthews/It would probably be a number of years because it will take some time to get the case prepared while IUB has a more restricted or more fast track on their heatings than you would find in federal court or state court. A lot has to be done before you get to that point. Lehman/As I remember, Dee, and I may be wrong, but I remember the $500,000, and I thought he told us that it would be four years, two to four years before we could have anything ready for the 1UB. Vanderhoef/Mm-hmm. Lehman/And we could very likely still be in court after ten years as I remember. Vanderhoef/Now this--- Matthews/ That sounds more accurate because the actual proceedings before the IUB might not take that long, but certainly there's judicial review, too. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 38 Vanderhoef/OK. So then how do we equate what we have presented to us now in possible numbers for savings and costs and so forth when we're trying to work it out with a long timeline? If you can frame that somehow to make sense for me, I would appreciate it. Matthews/OK. Lehman/Steven? Kanner/A couple things, just to follow up on some things. Could we get the reasoning behind Bob Howard's statements in regards to the Sheldon case of why he felt that it was winnable on appeal? Matthews/I can't answer that. I'll ask Bob if he can either attend or provide some information or if he kept--- Kanner/Well, or Latham, perhaps could use his expertise. And in regards to his expertise, also if we could ask him what he feels the political climate of this 1UB--this 1UB the word is tends to be more liberal and forward-thinking than the one from 20 years ago, and I'd like to hear his estimate of that evaluation of where he feels they're at now. They're a Democratic-governor-appointed, I think most of them, and I think it might be a different story. I'd like to hear that evaluation. Matthews/I don't think Bob Howard was invited at the November 17th--- Kanner/No, Latham, I'm saying. Matthews/OK. Kanner/I'd like to hear Latham's evaluation, and also I'm sure he knows about the IAMU's feelings that they wanted to appeal it and I'd like know if he has an answer of why they felt it was appealable. What were the grounds for the appeal? Matthews/I think, just in past discussions with Bob, some of it had to do with the issue of stranded costs. That became something of a hang-up in the Sheldon case. While I don't mean to put words in Mr. Howard's mouth, I don't believe he believes there are significant stranded cost issues with respect to the present climate, and to a certain extent, from the feasibility study, it looks like Latham and Associates also believe that. Kanner/And even 20 years ago, he felt there was something that was appealable and I'd just like to know what that is. In regards to what Dee was saying for outsourcing operations, what leads Latham to believe that outsourcing would overstate the estimated cost? Actually, he's saying that if we outsource and this figures into his scenario, it's costing more and it underestimates savings. So why does he say it's a conservative approach? Matthews/I would write that down to ask him. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 39 Kanner/Then and how much does he feel that outsourcing--how does he break that down? Because my understanding is that most of the outsourcing that perhaps they're talking about is perhaps for energy, and I'd like to get a little clearer picture of how much he is expecting to be energy versus actual day-to-day operation, to find out a little more. And just clarifications. I think we had some information that was not correct or is potentially not correct in as far as when the election can be held, can be called, and I think we need to have that clarified. There are two parts to it: a citizen initiative, I think almost everyone agrees that it would two years, but there's some issue as to when a City Council can call an election. Matthews/I'm not sure that's something for Bob to answer. Lehman/That's something for your office to answer. Kanner/But it's something that we need--in the papers it made it seem that it was only two years definitive--and I think we need to try to clear that up as much as we can, and hopefully Bob can shed a little light on his experience on that. And the other misinformation that needs to be cleared up--my understanding is that the new report says savings would be over 25 years, approximately $61 million? Lehman/Right. Matthews/Under the Scenario 2 Feasibility Review. Kanner/So what some people are operating under the assumption is that the new scenario would only be $20 million over 25 years. And so I think we just need to clarify that. The reduction in savings under scenario 2 is $20 million to $25 million, and not a total of $20 million which is what was reported in the paper and people were responding to that. So we need to make sure that that's clarified. Matthews/OK. Kanner/But I am correct in saying this Scenario 2 says $61 million? Matthews/I don't have the numbers right in front of me. That sounds about right. Lehman/(can't hear) Matthews/As opposed to what--S87 million? Champion/$51 million compared to $83. Matthews/Or $83, OK. Kanner/And that's in today's dollars? This represents only a reasonably accurate t~anscription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 40 Matthews/Yes. Kanner/So, he figures a 4 percent inflation rate essentially? And he goes conservative on the estimate of the rate that utilities might raise. So while inflation for savings are up at 4 percent, inflation for rate increases are 2 percent average. Matthews/That, I believe, was his assumption for the feasibility study. Kanner/Then why does he have--I'd like to know what he has that difference. Why does he say 2 percent for the utility company versus 4 percent? So, again, it's a conservative--it looks like a very conservative estimate. He's using low-ball figures as far as savings. So, could the savings be even much greater? Wilburn/I had more (can't hear) Lehman/OK, Ross, you have questions? Wilburn/I think my questions are aimed more for Council, making that decision--- Lehman/Right. Wilburn/It's the chicken-and-egg thing, because I would think that at the point where we're comfortable with the numbers that they look favorable, there may be some savings, if that's indeed what the study shows, that it gets back at that financing thing, and what the Council at least would present to the public. Should we do this, here's what the City will do--I mean, here's what the costs will be--and at that point, I suppose, even discussion on how it would be financed to get the money to get it going. Decision to talk about what we would be willing to give up in order to finance that and then put that out because once it's put on for referendum, then both groups will do their own campaigns to the public and individual Council members at the time, whoever that may be, will decide which side they want to help advocate for. So. Lehman/All right. Irvin, do you have questions? Pfab/As of right now, there's none that are sticking out that somebody else hasn't already asked, but my point would be as a question, how soon after we basically sort this out can we go to a referendum? In other words--- Matthews/Is your question when's the earliest it can be? Pfab/Right. Suppose that the Council looked at this and said, well, from what we can see it would be a savings, so the Council says OK; the indication we got in from the public is much, let's have a referendum, so the Council has the ability to call a referendum, which I believe shortens the time up considerably. It doesn't answer all the questions but at least it finds out where the public is. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 41 Matthews/It doesn't necessarily shorten the time. There's some question whether or not referendum can be held outside a normal election process, whether a special election can be held. There's some question because the statutory definition of what a special election is, the way it's defined in the Code suggests contemplation of electing officials. Not ballot measures, so that's something our office would have to study a little bit further. Pfab/Where are you, how far along are you in this? Matthews/I'll have to visit with the City Attorney, and she's not available this week. Pfab/OK. Lehman/I have another issue. I do have a list of question, which I turned, Marian has copy of them, which I would like. I mean, I'm not going to go through those because they're already written down. But Latham used a depreciation schedule for the assets, which Mike alluded to. Did he provide for capital replacement during this 25-year period? Obviously, many of the assets, according to his computations would be very near the end of their usable life and would need to be replaced theoretically during that 25-year period. So I guess I need to know--do his calculations include replacement of capital assets during that 25-year period, or are they limited just to repair and maintenance of the system? I think there's a huge gap there between what we project as a depreciated value and many of those assets, if initial values are correct, could not be or would not be serviceable through that period. Matthews/And would have to be replaced. Lehman/Yeah. And I don't, I can't--- Matthews/ And I can't tell you, (can't hear)--- Lehman/ I mean, I don't pretend to be able to understand his numbers but I can't tell whether that's been included, but I think that could be--well, obviously, I think that's a significant item. Matthews/Good question. Champion/The other question that I also wanted clarified, you know, this, frankly, I cannot read all these tables and get--- Lehman/Nobody else can either. Champion/All right. When this goes to the Iowa Utilities Board, the amount of money, I mean, they can deny the whole thing, is that correct? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 42 Matthews/Certainly. If they can find--they have to make a determination--if it goes to the IUB and is contested, then they have to make a determination whether it's in the public interest to grant a certificate of authority. Champion/OK. And then my follow-up question to that is do they also determine the amount of money you might have to pay to your local utility company for improvements that they've made? Matthews/Yes. Champion/Do they determine that at that time? Matthews/That goes, that's part of the valuation issue. Champion/OK. Matthews/Yes. Pfab/It's part of the decision process. Matthews/Right. It's part of the issue of how much the system is worth. Pfab/But I think Connie's asking what time do they make that? When they make that decision, that's all included. Matthews/Yes. Champion/But it's not made until that time? Matthews/Well, each, if it goes to that, each side will have their own thoughts and numbers and experts to opine as to that and then the Board will make its valuation determination. Champion/Now, do they, when they make the valuation of improvements and equipment and all that stuff, do they include that before they make their decision or after they make their decision? Matthews/It's all part of the decision-making process. Thank you. Champion/OK. Thanks. Matthews/And to a certain extent, the numbers will lead them down one path or another with--in the Sheldon case, the numbers led them down the path that it wasn't--- Champion/Feasible. Matthews/...in the public's interest; I think the conclusion was that at least as to what was This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 43 presented to them at that time, the likelihood was that the rates would increase. Champion/OK. O'Donnell/Andy, what did it cost at that point to reach that conclusion? Matthews/Well, the IBS in their filings indicated it cost them almost $500,000 to contest it and they sought reimbursement for that, but IUB ruled absent statutory provision, those weren't reimbursable expenses. I'm not absolutely certain how much the City of Sheldon spent pursuing it, but I've heard that it was close to that amount, too. Lehman/Now that there's another issue, if we can establish and perhaps go through all of this study and spend the $500,000 for this in-depth study and if we can show on paper that there's a reasonably good opportunity for the City of Iowa City to be able to save our residents money, percent doesn't make any difference, but we can show on paper and it works. Financially, this works. Could the Board refuse to approve it because even though we save money, it isn't in the public interest to allow us to do it? Matthews/Well, the Board could look at it as in the overall public, not the City of Iowa City's public interest, but with respect to all customers being served by MidAm and what effect that would have on them. That could all go into their determination on whether it's in the public interest. Lehman/Well, one of the questions that I had written is that I believe that the total number of communities involved in this Latham study represents 14 percent of MidAmerican's revenue. If all of those communities chose to go to municipal power, what would the, how would the Iowa Utilities Board respond to MidAmerican's application to recover that 14 percent of revenue that's being lost and would have to be recovered by increased rates to everybody else? I think that's a huge question. It's a much bigger question than Iowa City. Vanderhoef/And it's part of the stranded (can't hear) Pfab/You think we might not be buying some of their power? Kanner/Yeah, I think that's the discussion that--- Lehman/That's the discussion, right, yeah--- Pfab/So I mean, that power, it doesn't just sit out there. Lehman/No. Pfab/I mean, and they sell it all over the country, all over at least the continent. Lehman/It could be there far enough. But anyway I do think there's a much larger issue if large This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 44 numbers of cities look at municipal power. I think there's a public issue that the Board probably at some time would have to address if the Legislature doesn't. All right. Other questions? Vanderhoef/The study referred to new jobs and I felt that that was maybe a little strong to say new jobs because we have those jobs here right now and it might be the same worker hired by someone else. It might be someone new in the position and that person, the present worker will move to another community. But I don't see it as "new jobs," and that struck me strangely for them to say that new jobs are going to--- Lehman/ There would be some new jobs from the management level, but below that them would not be, I think you're exactly right. Vanderhoef/Yeah. So, I don't see that it's mom than almost a (can't hear) O'Donnell/I agree. Lehman/OK. Other questions? Kanner/I have a few questions. I'd like Latham to comment on the recent votes in Winter Park, Florida, which voted for municipal and in the process they went through there--it seems like it might be a close to our size--and also what's happening with Emmetsburg in regards to--they voted also to see where they are in the process and--- Matthews/ Right now, they're in the wait-and-see phase. Kanner/OK. And how much money in this process of applying to the IUB--can you elaborate a bit more on how much potentially could be saved in working with other cities? Matthews/I can't but maybe Latham and Associates can. Kanner/These are questions, a lot for him mostly. So, I know he won't have specifics but if he gives us a little more perhaps than just a general you-can-have savings, as much as possible. And I'd like to know either from you for from Latham, is it possible, one of the big issues is reconnecting MidAmerican's power grid. Their distribution system to other cities if we were to disconnect--- Matthews/ You mean reintegrating MidAm's? Kanner/Reintegrating. The question is, is there room for negotiation? Does it have to be an all- or-nothing? Can we say, can we negotiate with MidAmerican and the IUB, and say, well, perhaps we'll continue to have some arrangement with you where you can continue to service UI or perhaps Coralville or some other places that were cut off. Is it an all-or-nothing proposition? Matthews/That's possible. Theoretically, it doesn't even necessarily need to go what I would This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 45 call a contested case proceeding if Mid, if the parties can agree that they would be willing to sell and we'd be willing to buy, that a mutually agreeably price can be arrived at. Unlikely, but that's theoretically possible and certainly, you know, some aspects of it if it, you knows, goes to the IUB, perhaps theoretically, some aspects of it can be either conceded or stipulated. I don't know. Kanner/That's the kind of thing I want to explore is does it have to be an all-or-nothing thing because that' s--- Matthews/ It generally becomes that because, you know, the parties are generally adversarial in nature and have a different perspective on what valuation should be. Kanner/But we're both saying we're working in the interest of Iowa Citians and maybe this is something if we do go, so I'd like to find out what Latham has to say about what kind of negotiations could happen and what the IUB might be willing to accept. Also, I'd like to hear Latham's experience of if he's heard of other cities that became municipal where they incorporated the union as a whole into their workforce. My understanding is that our contract with AFSCME says that anyone that joins the workforce, the police or fire, that management has to be AFSCME. So the question to Latham is ifAFSCME were to agree to allow IBW to come in as a union. Give us a feel of how that might work and if it's possible and would they be able to--one of their concerns is losing benefits and losing seniority. Can you bring the whole union in? Matthews/OK. Kanner/And see what his experience is with that. And then a little more discussion from Latham would be good on the depreciation issue. My understanding, of course, is that MidAmerican is taking depreciation on their equipment, on their distribution system. They're getting financial benefits in terms of taxes that they might pay on the federal level. How did that compare to this whole issue of which depreciation or what's going to be used, what type of depreciation if it's allowed at all. What are they saying, what are they getting in actuality and what would they argue for perhaps in a case? And how do those differ? Matthews/All right. Champion/Have there been areas where there have been groups of communities have gone together to form a municipal power distribution, whatever. Like if Coralville and University Heights, Iowa City--- Matthews/ See, we don't really have that good a track record in Iowa to compare because most of the munis were formed many, many years ago. Champion/But it's possible? Matthews/There could be some cost sharing, if that's what you're getting to, among the various This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 46 municipalities. Yes. Champion/Well, I'm not talking about cost sharing, I'm talking about one utility. Matthews/One utility serving numerous--- Champion/Mm-hmm. Or there'd be tremendous possibilities. Matthews/I'll defer to Latham in this subject. Kanner/Is that allowable under State Code, the interest? Champion/Mm-hmm. Kanner/I'd like Latham to comment why the consumers' counsel felt that rates should be going down from 2000 to 2005 from MidAmerican, and this will be part perhaps of your questions that you came up with, the whole idea of rate freeze or can there be revenue adjustments? So, I'd like that to be part of the discussion. And also in regards, Latham, if he could talk a bit about what's the potential for alternative and promoting alternative renewal energy and also energy conservation and efficiency at a greater rate than MidAmerican does now. Matthews/I'm not sure--is the question as to how you factor that the city's operations, were it to operate a muni? Kanner/Well, when you talk about energy efficiency and conservation, that's looked at as potential savings for your whole system and it will--- TAPE 03-72, SIDE TWO Kanner/...or saved in the future. And so how could that factor in, if we put, let's say MidAmerican does 2 percent of their gross revenues. If we went to 4 percent, I know he's not going to have exact figures, but in rough terms, how could that help us in the long nm and possibly affect savings if we put more than MidAmerican is doing into promoting these things? Lehman/Well, while we're thinking of questions, we need to discuss the format for the meeting with Mr. Latham on the 17th. I would--I think it would be best for him to explain his analysis that we have received in layperson's terms. Address the questions that he will at that time had an opportunity to look over and in other words give him whatever time is necessary for him to ask those. I believe there should be an opportunity at that point for us to answer any questions that, you know, his report to us may raise as many questions as it answers because I'm sure that we're going to have questions as he goes along. I was very impressed with him when he talked to us two years ago; he scared the living daylights out of me but--how do we want to handle from my perspective I believe it is best that that be a public meeting where everyone who has any question be This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 47 allowed to submit that question. But I also think it's a meeting where if we allow folks to pontificate at the microphone, we're going to get more editorials than we're going to get questions, Champion/I would never be able to stay awake long enough. Lehman/Well, no, no, but I think that anyone who has a question we should be able to receive those questions and give those to Mr. Latham. So I guess what I would like permission from Council to do is to have any questions from the public be submitted during that meeting to the Council and we would then ask Latham the questions. But I really think that this is a situation where questions that are put in writing probably will be better questions. There won't be as much editorializing and we may be able to get a more meaningful meeting than if we just open--if we open it up for public discussion, we're going to have a lot of discussion that really, I mean, we'll have someone who takes three minutes. If you editorialize before they answer the question and in which case, depending on which side they're on, will probably embarrass the other side or try to. I just think we'll get more accomplished if we require the questions in writing. Pfab/There might be another alternative is that is have an official timekeeper that says you got a minute and a half or two minutes to ask your question. O'Donnell/Irvin, that doesn't work. Pfab/Well, it does work if you enforce it. And be done. You ought to conform. O'Dormell/Who would be better at enforcing that than Mr. Lehman? (Laughter) Lehman/Well, anyway--- Pfab/It's not a public forum like that. He's at a Council meeting. Champion/I think it's a very good idea. A lot of forums are handled just that way. Lehman/If that is all right, I would like to set the Council up as we normally set up a Council meeting, making room in the front of the room for Mr. Latham. We would then not need a podium. So we can have the room full of chairs. Anyone who has a question can hand the question to Marian or to whoever. Vanderhoef/Andy. Lehman/Andy. Then--it doesn't make any difference--but the question then can be read to Mr. Latham and he can respond to it. O'Donnell/It's a good idea. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 48 Champion/It's a great idea. Lehman/Does that work for us? Pfab/I have no problem with that. Lehman/All right. Then that's the way I'd like to do it. O'Donnell/OK. Lehman/Now there's another issue that I think particularly with us in the middle of this discussion at some point, particularly if we ask the public to look at this issue seriously, I think they need to know what the alternatives are. I think we need to know what the alternatives are as well. I also think we're in a position where MidAmerican probably is far more interested in discussing things with us than perhaps they would have been two years ago. I would like to see Council direct the staff to negotiate a franchise agreement that we can look at and say this is what we can do with a franchise agreement. This is what we--so we have a comparative to look at. This is going to be so much money, this is going to be the opporttmity, so Council can look at the two and make a decision. I think you really need to have the alternative. Champion/I think we need to have it, too, Ernie, but I think it's too early to ask for that. Pfab/Yes, I--- Champion/ I think we need to get beyond--- Lehman/If we wait until such time as we decide that we do not want to use a muni, we are in a much less competitive position to negotiate a franchise agreement. If we wait until we decide we're going to go with a muni, we will not have the option of looking at what's available with a franchise agreement. Champion/Except that at this next meeting, it's just going to be--- Lehman/ No, no, I'm talking about something that would be available after the first of the year. Champion/Oh, yeah. Lehman/Oh, no, no, not--- Champion/I thought you meant here--- Lehman/...no, no, no, that's way too soon for that. Champion/Right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 49 Lehman/But at whatever time we have received Mr. Latham's report, answered his questions and when we get back to seriously looking at this issue, I believe it would be in the best interest of the Council and the public if they can see the alternative. O'Donnell/I do, too. Kanner/Well--- O'Donnell/Good idea. Kanner/...the question in this is--we've heard a little bit of this from Andy in the past and from the legal staff, but a question for Latham, again to reiterate, how much can we get out of a franchise agreement and under State Code, there's not a heck of a lot you can get. Perhaps our biggest negotiating was we, with this effort, rates are apparently frozen to 2010 and maybe that's the biggest thing we got out of them right there. And that's often the case when that happens, they sweeten the pot in that way. And we got some wind energy firm, but--so I would recommend holding off the bid on that. I don't see much that we can get out ora franchise agreement at this time. And we don't know--I think we should wait to hear what some of the issues are perhaps to see if we could ask for much more. Matthews/Well, there are other issues involved in franchise agreement apart from what the costs are because you can't really negotiate a rate. Lehman/Right. Matthews/But you can negotiate a pet project or two that the City might be interested in, and the utility could put a value to that. Kanner/And that's why I would say wait until after the forum. A couple of--hopefully, my goal would be to have this form that you're talking about in the format that you're talking about and then we start promoting dialogue, facilitated discussion, where people do get to talk and so we either do study circles or we have people talking with each other instead of at each other, and then we promote that--- Champion/Right. Kanner/...here, kind of thing--- Matthews/ I'm sorry, go ahead, Steven, go ahead. Kanner/...I would think it would behoove us to do a little bit of that before we start asking the staff to have direct negotiations with MidAmerican at this point. Wilburn/I would agree. I think it's too premature to do that. I think one, it sends a conflicting This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 50 message about whether or not you are taking the study seriously. And two, I am trying to imagine putting staff in a position of negotiating essentially an arbitrary, abstract, theoretical contract. I mean--- Lehman/I guess I wouldn't consider it arbitrary or abstract. If you're ready--- Wilburn/More abstract, I guess is--- Lehman/ I just think if and I don't know this and this is not something that I would be interested in even seeing until after the first of year, but I think that at some point in time there needs to be something that the Council has to compare with the options. We need to see what the options are, what the risks are, and whatever they are. And I also think we're in a much better position to negotiate with MidAmerican Energy in the next couple three months than we have been for the last several months or will be. If we choose, if we decide at some point that a muni is too risky and say we're not going to do it, I don't think we have anything to negotiate with. If we decide we want the muni, I think we need the ability to look at what's available in a franchise and make that decision based on what we know is there, so I mean it's just--I think it needs to be prepared for sometime after the first of the year, because I'm sure that at some point after the first of the year, we're going to have to decide, yes, we are going to go further with this or whoa, we're not going to. But I think you have to have apples and apples. You have to have something to compare it with. But that's your call. Champion/Ernie, let me throw just something out. You're going to, we're going to have this meeting November 17th. Lehman/Right. Champion/We do need to have some public meetings after that--- Lehman/Oh, I'm sure we will. Champion/...with some direct conversations with people. We're going to already be into the first of the year. We don't have that many meetings in December. Matthews/Right. Lehman/Right. Champion/So, I think to ask for that now is really premature. We're nowhere near even (can't hear) Lehman/It may take three or four months to negotiate a franchise. I don't want anything on a franchise until January or February. But at whatever time, if we have meetings, public meetings, we discuss this, we said, well, now, we need to make a decision, I don't want to have to say, Well, now we need to go back and negotiate a franchise, and then go This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 51 two or three months negotiating a franchise and then looking at the two and saying, well, we don't like the franchise. I think it could be ready for us to look at in January or February after we've had an opportunity to have public meetings, to discuss it with Latham. I just think it's a process--- Vanderhoef/To do that--- Lehman/...that we need to start at some point. Vanderhoef/...it's information collecting from both sides right now, simultaneously. Champion/Mm-hmm. Right. Vanderhoef/And that shortens the timeline and gives us something to work with. So to get the process started sometime in the next month, I say fine. Pfab/Well, let me ask--- Lehman/Well, we'd have a significant problem--I shouldn't say problem--there will be at issue that Mr. Atkins is going to beat us over the head with if we decide to pursue the--we need to make a decision early on next year whether we're going to pursue this--- Champion/Oh, right. Lehman/...or whether we're not because it's going to have an incredible impact on our budget. And I think we need to be ready to look at the options and I don't think you're going to be ready for the options if you wait until 15th of January and say, well, let's see what we can do for a franchise and we'll make up our mind after the first of March when we have to certify our budget. Pfab/Did MidAmerican offer us a franchise after the other one expired? Lehman/I think that MidAmerican has been interested in getting a franchise since probably a long time before the last franchise. Pfab/But have they offered us one? Champion/We have no idea. Matthews/We were engaged in preliminary negotiations quite some time ago regarding the renewal of a franchise but when the talk of possible muni power came up, we were directed to look at a shorter, at minimum, a shorter franchising period and for the shorter period that the City was interested in, MidAm wasn't. Pfab/OK. So we made an, we offered, we made a suggestion to them, make us an offer, and they chose not to. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 52 Kanner/No, they wouldn't agree--- Matthews/ They were not comfortable with a short period for a franchise. Pfab/So, they said, you know, basically take it or leave it. Champion/No. Lehman/No, we never had anything to take or leave. Vanderhoef/No. Pfab/Well, they didn't, maybe put anything on paper, but you said what about a franchise, they said no. Matthews/Negotiations, you know, didn't go beyond that because at that point the discussion of possible or the feasibility ofmuni power came and essentially that, refranchising was put on hold. Kanner/Actually, my understanding is that they came out with a proposal, but longer like a 20- year franchise agreement, and then we came with a shorter one, and I think they were agreeable to the one that essentially would have been about 10 years, if they would have invoked some clauses, it would have been a 10-year agreement. So they were in agreement. I don't know if that's so much the point. I think, Ernie, actually the first step is we have some discussion and then within about six months, we see if we want to put it on the ballot. The ballot is an inexpensive way to go and that's the first step and then that gives us a public voice whether or not we want to continue into possibly more expenses. Lehman/But did you want the public to have the oppommity to see what the options are relative to a mtmi or a franchise? Vanderhoef/Absolutely. Kanner/I want them to have a discussion. I think that the options right now are minimal or the benefits that we can get. And actually the reason I believe that they're doing rate decreases, that they're coming, that they did agree to a lower, a shorter (can't hear) because we came up with the pressure of saying no, we're not going to sign it. So they come back to the table with a better deal. And I think if we continue to talk about a possible election in six months that we'll get whatever deal we can get will be even that much better, and I think we keep moving along. I think the benefits are very minimal for a franchise agreement and it's not worth putting the staff effort into it at this time, and there's possibility of some adversarial positions, and I don't think negotiating at this time on a franchise agreement is the right thing to do. So I would say hold off, at least until after we had a few forums. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 53 Pfab/I think we ought to stay focused on the study and find out if it's, as we look at it, it's beneficial to the City and stay focused on that until we get that on or offthe table. Lehman/Our job is to do what's in the best interest of this community. Pfab/That's right. Lehman/Whether that be a franchise agreement or a municipal utility. That's our job. If we don't know what's available on both sides, we can't make an informed decision. At some point we have to make a decision if we're going to move forward with a municipal or if we're going to seriously consider a franchise. I personally would like to be able to look at what we're able to negotiate at a point where MidAmerican probably is most interested in negotiating. Matthews/You know, one thing that, you know, hasn't been discussed except I think when Bob was here that one time--- Lehman/Two years ago. Matthews/...many months ago or years ago--- Lehman/Almost two years ago. Matthews/...was the possibility of going to what's referred to as a muni light, where, you know, you do the referendum, you get the authority, but you don't actually proceed with the purchase of the distribution system, and there are options within that under state laws, at least to my understanding, that a City utility can purchase power for its facilities like its water, wastewater, and the like. There could be some cost savings there. You could, you know, formulate that with a new franchise as well. So there are all sorts of things that go into the puzzle. But one thing I didn't really see in any detail in the feasibility study is any risk analysis. Champion/Yeah. Matthews/And ultimately, of course, that's your decision but I would think you would want some guidance on the ramifications Lehman/That's the last question of mine. (Laughter) Vanderhoef/I think that there's one more that I just thought of. Lehman/Yes. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 54 Vanderhoef/The tax ramifications now that we're switching over from a property tax for MidAmerican, moving into this other system, and the fact that when it becomes a-- when it became a municipal, we wouldn't be paying tax to ourselves, so how that impacts our general fund for dollars that we have regularly received. Matthews/And I can't really provide you with a great deal of insight as to that, but--- Vanderhoef/No, but that's something I want Mr. Latham or someone--- Champion/Why wouldn't you just tack that onto the revenue, with the revenue? You would tack that on. Vanderhoef/Well, that's the whole point is, but I don't see it in the study that they have made any--- Champion/ Oh, I see. Lehman/The study assumes that they've--- Matthews/The study assumes similar replacement taxes. Lehman/You pay the same taxes they're paying now; the study assumes that. Matthews/Right, that's what the study assumes. Kanner/So, payment in lieu of taxes would--- Lehman/Right. Kanner/...continue--- Matthews/ Well, it's not really payment in lieu of taxes--- Lehman/ The state requires it. Matthews/Well, I don't think it's referred to that, but it's similar to that and I think the Latham study indicated that, you know, it would be similar to that, and I'm not familiar enough with that part of the law to know all the details about it. Kanner/So, to answer Dee's question though, they're paying in taxes--what is it for electric only, $600,000 a year or $500,000? Somewhere around that amount. Latham in this study is figuring that the City would make those payments--- Lehman/ Continue to make, fight. Kanner/...make those same payments. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 55 Champion/Mm-hmm. Vanderhoef/They'd pay them from the utility into the General Fund, but then are we in a position where we're borrowing money and still paying on bonds and still paying the City? Lehman/Well, but he factored that in so that his savings--- Vanderhoef/He didn't factor in the cost for borrowed money to be buying a system. Lehman/Well, I think the only thing that Doug factored in is the startup costs. I mean, they're factored in but they're spread over 25 years or 33 years or whatever it happens to be. They're all factored in. And his savings of 2 to 5 percent or 2 to 7 or whatever it happens to be, is predicated on the City paying ourselves--- Champion/Right. Lehman/...the same amount that MidAmerican is paying us now, and still resulting in a 2 to 5 percent savings. That's on page 6 of his report. Matthews/Mm-hmm. Champion/But my nightmare about this--I mean I'm sure we all have one--and I'm not saying that it's good or bad, but if we do go forward with this, then we wherever we get those startup costs and if we borrow them, pay them back eventually with revenue funds, and then maybe we're a year old and we're getting our feet wet and nobody's had terrible power outages yet, but now we have the great wind. Lehman/Ninety-eight comes again. Champion/Ninety-eight. You know, where it had to be millions and millions of dollars in repair work. Lehman/Yeah, but that's covered too. Champion/Yeah, well, how is that covered? Lehman/There are mutual aid agreements between utility companies and I think that's in here where they would--- Champion/We'd still have to pay for it. Lehman/Well,--- Champion/ I'm talking about paying for them; I'm not talking about just the help to fix it. I'm This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 56 talking about the money to pay for it. I mean, I would like to have some idea about where does that kind of money come from? I mean, that was a disaster. Pfab/I guess--well, how did municipals handle it? Kanner/How did MidAmerican--- Lehman/They spread it over their (can't hear) Pfab/No, no, how did, presently, they're supposed to handle it? Champion/That's the question. They've also been there for a long time and have some reserves in costs. Pfab/Well, but they have the costs, they know what the costs are--what did it cost them? Champion/Yes--that's not my question. My question is how did they then finance that when they're already financed and they don't have any backup yet? They haven't been there-- we haven't been there long enough. Those old munis that have been long enough, they have a reserve. They don't--- Pfab/Maybe we file the reserve as we start out, part of the cost we put in it. Lehman/Well, those are issues--- Kanner/Ernie, a couple other questions to relay to Bob Latham. Lehman/Yes. Kanner/Andy, one, could he talk a bit on the potential savings on if we went to a municipal cable network? Vanderhoef/That wasn't in the study though. Kanner/No, but--- Lehman/You're going to--- Kanner/One of the things is that a lot of cities have, that have municipal electric also have municipal cable, and there's savings because of the infrastructure is already owned by the city. And I know he's not going to have specific information, but that's one thing I think to consider down the road about potential muni cable. And this might be a little too out--municipal gas, too, I'm just curious about that. Municipal gas, my understanding is it's even easier to go through the municipal process. But if he could talk about that--- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 57 Champion/I think we should talk about one thing at a time. Vanderhoef/Mm-hmm. Pfab/Again, losing focus, I suggest--- Kanner/Well, I think, certainly municipal cable is something that's talked about by municipal electric advocates--- Matthews/ Well, the system's already in place if the City already owns the distribution system, it makes the cable acquisition far less problematic, but you know, it wasn't part at all of Bob's feasibility study to factor that in. Kanner/But if he could just mention, you know, what's his experience working with other municipals about going that route and down the road, do they save money, is it a pain? Because at the State League of Cities, I heard a number of cities talk about this issue. This was a couple of years ago, and I'd like to hear his perspective. And then the question is where, if he can get in a little more word of it, where does the savings come from? Could he explain that? What are the economies of scale? My understanding is you save money because if you mail something out for a water bill, you stick in an electric bill, you save the cost of that stamp, and if you do that to 20,000 customers, that's quite a bit. That's one of the economies of scale. Matthews/Or another is you can use your existing utility billing system with some changes to your software, that's one potential savings. You also have some equipment that can be diverted to dual use rather than single use. Kanner/Exactly. And did he look at things like tree trimming, I'd be interested. I understand we spend about--- Matthews/ I think he used those as examples in his feasibility study. Lehman/He did. Kanner/OK. If he could elaborate a little bit more on that, I'd be interested in hearing about that. And then I think this is my last question for him at this time. If he could comment on his understanding of how much private investor-owned spend on average compared to people promoting municipal efforts in regards to city campaigns, the money supplied. So for instance, what was the ratio that the private investor used in Emmetsburg versus those that were promoting the referendum? Matthews/Do you mean what did the utility spend to fight against going muni, and what did the other groups spend to offset that? Kanner/Yeah. What are groups and cities up against when they go against the private investor- owned? How much effort did they put in, if he can give us, paint a picture of what it's This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 58 like? My understanding is it's quite significant what they put into it in trying to hold onto their property, and if he, with his vast experience if he can talk to that a little bit, I think he could paint a good picture of what efforts might be up against. O'Donnell/I'd like to know how many municipal power studies that Latham's done in the last five years. I'd like to know when the last municipal power company was formed in Iowa. Matthew/I believe it was--was it the '20s, '23? Vanderhoef/Uh-huh. O'Dormell/But that's never been clearly defined, I don't think, and I'd like to know the reason why. And I understand over like a, between a 10- to a 15-year period, they're projecting, was it 2, 3 percent amount of saving? I'd like to know--- Kanner/Two percent. O'Donnell/Two percent? Kanner/The average. O'Donnell/I'd like to know what the cost is to reach that savings at that period in time. Champion/What? Lehman/That's in here. He says after you pay all your expenses, you save 2 percent. But the thing, the risk costs are the ones that we need to try to put a handle on. Matthews/Which aren't really quantified. O'Donnell/That's exactly the question. Kanner/You mean the risk like Connie's talking about, if there was a storm or--- Lehman/ No, no, well there are the risks--- Matthews/ Power costs can increase. Power purchase costs can increase--- Lehman/Acquisition costs. Matthews/...acquisition costs--- Vanderhoef/Labor costs. Matthews/You know, a whole mix of the utilities now studying and planning for expanding This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 59 generation and generation capacity, all that can affect the value and the cost of acquisition. Kanner/That's good, he had to see if he made very conservative projections or if he made very liberal in terms of some of those risks. Lehman/OK. Now. O'Donnell/You know, that'll take him three days to get out of here. Lehman/I don't know that--I know that some of us want to at least start preliminarily looking at a franchise agreement; I don't know if some of us don't. Vanderhoef/I do. Lehman/Is there a majority that would like to at least start preliminarily looking at that so we can have something ready in three or four months? O'Donnell/I think we need it, Ernie. It's a tool we're going to--- Lehman/ Can we start it so that it's ready in three or four months? O'Donnell/Yes. Lehman/Well, I think we have permission to do that. Vanderhoef/There are four? Wilburn/I disagree with it. Lehman/The four are Vanderhoef, O'Donnell, Champion, and Lehman. Matthews/OK. Kanner/Wait--what are you trying to say, Connie? You said it's a waste of time? Champion/I wonder if it's a waste of staff time and if we don't have the right figures yet--- Pfab/I--- Lehman/ At some point we have to do it. Champion/No, I agree, we do have to have it. I don't know what's the difference between now and January is fine. Lehman/It's going to take a while to get it done. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 60 Champion/Right. O'Donnell/And we're not going to have it until--- Lehman/Right. Vanderhoef/And it may be that we just leave it to staff. We know we want it done and staff feels that it's the right time to move into that. Atkins/Ernie, did I get a go on that? Lehman/Yes. Atkins/OK, now. You do understand that will put us into conversations with MidAmerican while this other debate's going on. Lehman/Are you--if I would certainly defer to your judgment if you don't--- Atkins/I'm not uncomfortable with it, I just want you to be aware that that's what we'll be doing. O'Donnell/Well, I think everybody involved would like to know where our stands are, when we do. Lehman/I think so too. All right, sir. Atkins/OK. Lehman/Thank you very much. Matthews/Thanks for having me. O'Donnell/Connie wants a break. Champion/Oh, stop! Lehman/I don't know if--Connie may not want a break, but somebody else is breaking. We're going to take another five or ten, all right. CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES NOT UNDER COUNCIL JURISDICTION Lehman/The next item is consideration of issues not under Council jurisdiction, and I think, Ross, that you kind of asked that this be on the agenda and I think we all agree that it This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 61 was a good item. So--- Wilburn/I don't think there's any clear line. Each of us, basically it comes down to your own judgment as to which falls under jurisdiction, to what level and then what you're going to do about it, and I think, for me, part of what goes into it have to do with things that are under our direct jurisdiction. And I was just hoping we'd have just some conversation, just to kind of hear for those types of things, how we all think and consider those. Some folks will, you know, use our discussion words here to, you know, do a "well, you said," and try to make whatever criteria--I'm not looking at it as criteria. Again, I think it's a judgment call and some people will respectfully disagree. I look at the, you know, there's formal action the Council takes and that's the ordinances and resolutions we pass; there's a lot of informal actions that doesn't really get quoted in the paper; some people value it; other people do not value it, or they think that, they'll tell you they appreciate that effort but they really disagree and that you should take formal action. I think that our formal action includes, you know, we, in some areas where we have included this, the mayor's proclamations, letters from Council, again informal action but addressing different issues. For example, like when we have a department that's working on some type of grant funding or you know supporting some type of grant application, I think also what some people value in the community and others don't are just individual ways that we represent ourselves; in other ways, using the title in the case of like talking about the war in Iraq and then to a certain extent, the Patriot Act. I've, you know, made, I've been very out-front and upfront with--part of my reason, certainly just part of my reason for supporting Governor Dean for presidential candidacy. I think that's another way that we choose or not choose to express ourselves, and in those cases, I choose. Also, just individual letters from Council members. You know, I wrote correspondence about the concerns about the war and aftermath and, you know, some senators send you correspondence back, others don't. I've done some visits and done some visits with groups on other issues, but I value these informal things, given that we are part-time legislators. We are part-time; we're not full-time. There are certainly a lot of things that go on in Des Moines and a lot of things especially in Washington, D.C., that we could fill up our docket with, you know. Again, some folks kind of pooh-poohed it when I threw out or said there's no way this could happen, I said, you know, I don't think it's something that Council should be discussing--Roe versus Wade, Affirmative Action, some of those broader issues. I think there are other ways that we can express those, and I've tried to do those. Again, though, I think it's ajudgmem call. Some folks have articulated and talked about the oath of office that we take, to uphold the Constitution of the United States, you know, how you uphold that, that's certainly a choice, too. This contextual I look at it as, you know, laws that we--ordinances that we pass will not be illegal. We've taken the responsibility when there's something that's, the state has found that the City doesn't have authority to do, we've certainly taken those off thc books. And I look at that as part of upholding that, and again, I defer back to some of the informal action that I've chosen to do with different issues, a lot of youth and family issues as part of that upholding. I used to be in the Army Guard--I took an oath to defend the Constitution. You know, again, it's contextual; in that context, it talks, you know, in the military it's (can't hear) take a life and defend. So again, that's just kind of the thinking that I try This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 62 and go through. Again, there's no clear line. Certainly, folks are here tonight and some will comment tomorrow about that. We'll talk about, you know, whether or not we're being democratic and things like that. Well, you know, we are representative democracy and we take all the input whether it's the letters that we get, our experience in the community, the people that we interact with, that we use to try and represent that view, and the public does and I think much more so here at the local level have an opportunity to have those other views when they disagree with Council or think some of these broader issues should be addressed. We've got, you know, the public comment where folks can use that opportunity to get some of those views out. They don't have that right in Des Moines. They certainly don't have that right in Washington, D.C., but hopefully that, you know, folks will respect the choice that we make and just if we agree or that we disagree that we disagree. So I'd just be interested to hear from others what thoughts you put into those type of judgments. Champion/I agree with you partly, and I think you were very articulate in expressing yourself, and ordinarily I would agree with you totally, but I do think the Patriot Act does affect us very much locally. I also think that it does fall under our jurisdiction because we have sworn to uphold the Constitution, and those of us who don't like the Patriot Act--I shouldn't say that because I'm sure people who don't like it also don't think we should do anything about it so I won't say that. But I think that the government has taken away liberties with the Patriot Act that people have died to protect. It's, you know, contrary to me that they're trying to solve one problem by creating another one, and that's a problem that I have with it that I think it is unconstitutional and I can't wait for it to be tested at the Supreme Court level, but I do think we have the right to act on this. It does take away people's rights and the country is based on people's rights, whether you're an immigrant or a natural-bom citizen or somebody who has snuck into the country-- you still have certain rights in this country, and I think that this act--because of the fear from September 1 lth--the government needed to adopt that. Wilbum/Mm-hmm. Champion/And I think all of us kind of forgot it because we were all so afraid, but I think it's time that this act be done away with. Lehman/So, what would you suggest that the City do about it? Champion/Well, I think we, I think you can do a resolution that you oppose the Patriot Act and send it to your congressman. As a City Council, I think you have every right to do that. Lehman/We have a right to do, I think, whatever we want, but a resolution has the same--it becomes part of the Code of the City. The issue here--I don't disagree with you. I think parts of the Patriot Act are very egregious. On the other hand, I have some problem with passing resolutions or ordinances that have no weight. They have no fome of law. I don't have a problem, for example, in letting our Congressmen know that the people of this community are very unhappy with the Patriot Act and something needs to be done about it, and I guess my personal feeling is that communication to our legislators This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 63 with that message has just as much force and just as much effect as a resolution, which has no effect. Champion/There's--- Pfab/Can I, Connie, while you're thinking--- Vanderhoef/There's one more piece to upholding the Constitution. and, Connie, I, too, would welcome this to go to the Supreme Court because that's where it has to end up to say whether it's constitutional or not. So I don't disagree with that piece at all. But there's another piece of the oath of--and I think that was what probably prompted the library to take a stronger look at it, and I don't pretend to speak for the library and their conversation. But to uphold the laws of the land. Right at the moment, this is the law of the land. So it's a combination of upholding the Constitution and the law of the land until the Supreme Court said that law of the land is not constitutional and forcing it off the books. Lehman/Or until Congress changes, I think. VanderhoefJ Well, Congress can change it, too. O'Donnell/When they change it, it's no longer (can't hear) Lehman/Right. Vanderhoef/So the other piece of it is in a letter to our legislators to say we don't agree with parts of the Patriot Act, and yet we are upholding the law of the land until it is changed and we (can't hear) sooner rather than later. Wilburn/Can I just go back to--you know, them are other things that we can do as individuals and using the title. And again I'll look to hear more about how you decide you do that. But even, you know, I appreciate the effort that this group has done here, but there's something in the resolution they put, that I think we can do without a resolution. Direct the City Manager to report to the Council and make public available and to the extent legally permissible the number of requests by Federal agents under the Patriot Act to the police, Iowa City Police Department for information or collaboration regarding residents. I think it'd be something similar to we ask for use of force reports. I mean, we can give a directive. We don't, you know, it's, I don't think we need a resolution to do that. I think it would be in line with something that the, you know, I commend the library trustees for posting notice of that. We can post notice of any requests or the number of requests on the website and things that were suggested here. So, again, it's how you choose to uphold, defend or express your discontent with, you know, some of the extremes. (can't hear) thing about the Patriot Act is the no judicial oversight. We didn't (can't hear) Pfab/I guess one of the things I probably am in touch with my two senators and my This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 64 representatives on an occasion of about four or five times a week, I have been for the last year or two. I interact with them by letter and whatnot. I also have to ask if 167 cities now have made stands saying that they are opposed to the Patriot Act, I think that's probably telling us something. And I think if we are a democratic organization supporting the people that we are elected to serve, I think when we see some strong opposition to that and they contact us, I think that we have an obligation to put that in somewhat of a formal or informal way and pass that on and react in a public way. So, I think a resolution or whatever is, as a body, if we agree, and if we don't, then that's fine. But I think we should go on record as to say do we support what the citizens are telling us they are for or do we agree with this, that it's something that causes us gmat pain? Lehman/Irvin, I think that you make a good point, but I also think we need to recognize that as egregious as that Patriot Act is to a lot of people, to other people it is something that under unusual times, you have to take unusual measures. And--- Pfab/But--- Lehman/...no, just a minute--- Pfab/I will. Lehman/...and I'm not--- Pfab/OK. Lehman/...I'm not for a moment defending the things that I disagree with in the Patriot Act, but for a Council to pass a resolution, an official action on something that is particularly controversial, we serve those folks who oppose it and we do a disservice to those folks who think it's OK. Now, I have no problem with notifying officially, as a Cotmcil--- Pfab/That's fine. Lehman/...notifying our legislators that large numbers of people in this community are offended by the egregious portions of this act and please do something. Now, to me, that represents a contingent of our folks, perhaps a very large contingent. Yet, it doesn't have the force 0flaw, we do not pass an ordinance that has no effect on anybody, doesn't become part of our Code, and yet it does tell our legislators how the people of this community feel. Pfab/I think if we act as a Council and make that statement, I think that's fine. It doesn't have to be a resolution, but I think we have to say our constituents are telling us and we agree that there are parts of this thing we totally object to. Whether it's a resolution or not, that's, I think, immaterial. But I think we have to take a stand if we agree. If we don't agree, we should say we don't. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 65 Lehman/Any other comments? O'Donnell/You know, Ross, I agree with everything you said, and that's unusual for me. Lehman/I was waiting for that. (Laughter) Wilburn/Does that mean you support Governor Dean, too? O'Donnell/I said almost everything. Same bracket, different person. Wilburn/OK. O'Donnell/And I believe dissent is a very important part of patriotism. The Patriot Act has things that I know many of us are offended by. I've written letters myself. I choose to keep them private now. But what Ernie said about a resolution becoming a voice for our City, you know, because there are people within this City that agree with the Patriot Act. Yeah, I'm not one of those, but I think the appropriate way to handle it is a letter to our representatives who can actually do something about it. Champion/Are you willing to send a letter to our representatives from the City Council? O'Donnell/Well, I, you know, I've written them, and I think other people on this Council have. Pfab/I think Connie's question was a little different. I've written--- O'Donnell/I heard what Connie said. Wilbum/We've done it in support of grants and things like that. Lehman/I don't have a problem doing that. I really think that in this case it may be very, very appropriate. I just have an aversion to us getting into very, very controversial issues, passing resolutions that purport to represent the majority of the people, and it's very controversial. I don't think there's anything controversial about writing a letter to encourage our representatives to take a look at these egregious portions of the Patriot Act and do what's within their power to get rid of them. Pfab/And, Ernie, as a Council? Lehman/Yes. Holecek/I just want to jump in--if you do that as a Council, I believe that you're going to review that letter and vote on it. Lehman/Oh, no, we know that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 66 Holecek/OK. So that you know all the text that you are--- Lehman/Just like a letter to the Board of Supervisors. Holecek/Exactly. Lehman/Yeah. Holecek/Good analogy. Wilburn/Yeah, it's not the controversial part that, again and there's no clear line of demarcation, but you know I talked about since we are a part-time body, not Council, not discussing Roe v. Wade, Affirmative Action, death penalty, you know, and I understand and appreciate other cities have decided to take certain action. My understanding is there are some cities that have even given resolution directing City staff--now I haven't seen this but it was alluded to in a question that I was asked on a videotaping--directing City staff not to, essentially not to cooperate, to--- O'Donnell/I've heard that. Lehman/I read that. Wilbum/And this group that has the resolution in front of us, they did not do that and I acknowledge that and appreciate that, but I told in this video interview yesterday, I said, you know, I'm not going to pass a policy directing a clerk here in the building or someone at the library, you know, to put themselves because of something that I'm telling to do, at risk for you know arrest or contempt, that type of thing. And the other thing is, you know, I, you know, other cities, you know, they've got Council members that will make their own, pick their own choice, but you know there's lots of cities that have sales tax, there's lots of states that have death penalty, you know, we're--- TAPE 03-74, SIDE ONE Pfab/...Patriot Act. I think probably 90 percent or more of the people that had passed it had never read it. It was brought out in the middle of the night and said, here, pass it. And most of them had no idea what was in it, but they signed. It was a panic situation. It was how legislation was enacted for the country in the most egregious way that was possible. Champion/I disagree with you, Irvin, because--- Pfab/No, and I--that's fact. Champion/...I think (can't hear) for a long--- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 67 Pfab/That's fact, that's fact. You don't need with me, but it's still a fact. Champion/It would have been gone. Lehman/All right. So what's your pleasure? O'Donnell/So we're going to send the letter. Lehman/Is that--- O'Donnell/It's fine. Kanner/I like to respond--- Lehman/Go ahead. Kanner/...Ross, and I'll divide it into the two issues that I see listed here. The first one being this general consideration. I think that as a representative government that we have, when we make decisions, oftentimes, I think I do this, I think a lot of people, we do it. If you're in the minority and you say well this is what everyone wanted and the majority, you say that this is what the majority of our citizens wanted and, but maybe the majority of the representative Council, the City Council voted the other way. Or if it goes the other way, you say this is what the majority says but we don't always have to go with the majority of what the polls say the citizens, we're doing something different. That's the nature of representative government is sometimes you go with the majority; sometimes you go--you feel that it's in the long-term best interests to not go with the majority. Having said that, I think that, so we are free to a certain extent to make decisions on these kind of issues. And then there's different levels of support that we can do, that we do on all these things. We start off with just individual letters where you might mention although I'm not speaking on behalf of Council I am a Council member and I am in support of this. And then there's a letter from Council. And then there might be a resolution, which is even stronger. So there's different--they mean different things. And I think it's good for us on some of these things that the community had strong opinions on to have that debate and make those decisions as a Council if we want to support it or not. I think it's good to vote on it. We could limit debate. I think it's in our best interest and it empowers the resolutions and proclamations that do get passed, and actually I think in the long term we'd be better off not having mayoral proclamations, that basically anyone submits and then they get by the mayor and they don't have as much meaning in some ways. I was with a group that submitted one, and certainly they're good to have. But ! would like to see us give more meaning to them by having Council vote on them, perhaps on the Consent Calendar, because most of them are controversial and I think that would empower the whole process even more. But we do have proclamations here that are in support ora number of national, international, local issues that one could say that they don't directly affect us, that we're making proclamations through the mayor who is our representative. He's the Council representative. And so for the first point, I would say, let's have the debate, let's vote This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 68 on it. People feel it's too long, let's set some strict terms about how long we can do it, and we'll vote on it. We'll say either yes or no. I don't think it's a big thing to do. Personally, to answer your specific question, I work in a number of different areas for progressive social change and being on City Council is one of those, and I try to use all those different things to move a progressive agenda forward and work within different groups. And City Council is one more group, and I think it's powerful if we could add our voice to other cities and other people to make a movement go forward. I'd have to look into this, but I would bet we find the Council weighed in on other issues. But I bet City Council discussed Roe v. Wade, and that issue and probably passed some things that we should look into that. Champion/I don't think so. Lehman/I don't either. Kanner/But whether or not they did, there were probably a lot of corurnunities that did and those communities had an effect and now we have a community in Iowa City that's very accepting of being pro-choice. We have two clinics that offer abortion, which is very rare in the state of Iowa and maybe in most of the country. It was done because of grassroots groups and people pressuring local entities to speak out on it. And so I think if we can make it better for citizens here in Iowa City, even a little bit, even if there's a little chance, let's do it. ree with the fundamentals of that issue, then I'd say vote against it, and we'll move on. We have majority rules. But let's have a bit of the debate. We've had the debate for a bit of a year; let's do a resolution. So I personally think we should be voting on this resolution. For me, it's not strong enough. I think we do need to be a little more proactive and make it different because I'm very fearful of our constitutional rights with this Patriot Act that has been passed. And it's very harmful to our citizens in Iowa City, there are a number of people at risk, especially with our foreign students that come to the University of Iowa, and people in situations where they're not as well connected, perhaps. It's very scary what the Patriot Act can do. It lowers the level, lowers the bar of what law enforcement agencies have to do in terms of arresting people and holding people, things that are the bedrock of our country for hundreds of years. And I think it's being stripped away and so I think we have to speak out specifically against the Patriot Act, and I think we should just take a vote on it and see if we could accept this resolution. Wilbum/Just to respond, there are a couple of things that you brought up. There are many of our institutions and organizations that use--you talked about the rights of the majority versus minority--there are many that use versions of some type of rules of order, and many of them there's a threshold that has to be met in order to have something even discussed. So, you know, that, I mean, that's the way it is. In terms of you talked about the proclamations, again, I'll back to I see that as an informal mechanism and action that can be taken. And while I don't know about Roe v. Wade being discussed, I know there are certain other proclamations and things that have talked about some of those broader issues. You know, so, again, I just think we disagree and some community members may not value my opinion on that and that threshold and the value of informal This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 69 action. And in terms of whether joining the voice of other cities, again this is my opinion, I just believe it's got to be more meaningful if I'm Senator Whomever in Washington, D.C., that a thousand individuals and individual Council members and whatever sending a letter as opposed to a list of cities making different political statements based on the makeup of their councils has more meaning. Now, you may disagree with that, but we disagree with that. And I see some folks shaking their head, but we just disagree. Kanner/What if both happen? What if both of those things happen? Thousands of people writing, Council members and cities--maybe it's only a small thing. Don't you think that could have some impact? Wilburn/Again, I don't think it's as meaningful as individuals and groups, but I still go back to looking at the role of the part-time legislator and what else we have on the docket to discuss. And if you disagree, disagree. It's nothing personal. Lehman/IfI were a legislator and I get a resolution from an organization that has absolutely no authority whatsoever in that area, I don't think I'm going to pay a whole lot of attention. If I get a letter, indicating the feeling of an individual or a letter from a Council representing the feelings of many people in that community, I honestly think that has more weight than a city taking a legal action on something over which they have absolutely no jurisdiction. I think it's well to express ourselves, but for us to make, pass an ordinance, which in effect is law, over something over which we have no control; it isn't even in our own jurisdiction, somehow I think that kind of--if I were a representative, that is someone insulting. A letter that expresses their feeling and purports to represent a large number of their constituents certainly to me has a lot more- O'Donnell/I think it's more perspective. Lehman/It is from my perspective. O'Donnell/Well, Emie, let's see if there aren't four people who feel that way. Lehman/What do we want to do with this? O'Donnell/I'm in favor of a letter. Champion/No, I don't think we're going to get a resolution and I can understand your reasons for it, and I think Dee put it actually quite well that it's a law overriding a law that we can't override. I would love it if the Council would agree to send a letter to our Congress, senators, and I would be happy to help write it. Not a resolution but a letter about how the community, or how we feel the community feels. Lehman/Well, we know that large numbers of the community are offended by this, and I think that we can say that. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 70 Champion/Well, I think--yeah. I think so too. And actually I think it's more than offended by it. O'Donnell/Sure. Pfab/If there's a hell--- Champion/ (can't hear) threatening by it, feel threatened by it. Lehman/Is that--- Wilburn/Well, I think first just in fairness to the folks that asked be put on should ask the question resolution and if there's not enough support to have that put on, this is my opinion, then this second question about a letter. Lehman/How many would favor a resolution? Pfab/I have no trouble with a resolution. Lehman/All right, how many--- Wilburn/Well, that's also the threshold to have, isn't it to have--is that work session or to have something put on the agenda? Lehman/Well, we're actually, what I think what we're trying to determine is what may appear at the next formal Council meeting which would be a week from. If we, four of us, how many would favor a letter? Wilbum/I would. I would go in support of a letter. Lehman/Now we've got--- O'Donnell/Irvin, you voted twice. Champion/Well, if we did--- Karmer/What's the threshold for putting something on the agenda? Karr/The work session is three. Lehman/The work session is three, but this is a work session tonight. We're talking about something in above--- Kanner/But for the formal agenda? O'Donnell/Three. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 71 Champion/Four. Pfab/Three. Wilbum/I thought it was three. Karr/I think it is three. Champion/On the formal agenda? Wilburn/I believe so. Pfab/If you have four, it's already passed, why do you need it on the agenda? Kan'/It doesn't pass. It's just a matter of putting it on. Kanner/If there's three of us, I'd like to--- O'Donnell/I don't think--I didn't see three. Lehman/All right, let's start over. How many would like to see a resolution on the agenda for a week from tomorrow? Champion/I would like to see a resolution. Lehman/All right. There will be a resolution. Champion/But I'm withdrawing my vote, because I don't want something on the agenda that's going to fail. Lehman/In other words, you're not supporting a resolution to be on the agenda a week from tomorrow. Champion/That's going to fail, no, I'm not. Lehman/So, how many support a--- Kanner/Maybe four people will vote (can't hear) Lehman/...resolution to be put on the agenda a week from tomorrow? O'Donnell/Repeat that, Ernie, I couldn't hear you. Lehman/How many support a resolution to be on the agenda a week from tomorrow or I mean at the next Council meeting? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 72 Karmer/The 27th and the 28th. Atkins/Two weeks. Champion/No, wait a minute, wait a minute. I'm going to just stop, Mr. Mayor. Lehman/I am stopped, believe me. We're all stopped. Champion/The discussion is the U.S. Patriot Act, not whether there will be a resolution or not. It's what we can do about it as a Council. So to say--- O'Donnell/It will be a letter or a resolution. Champion/Whether it be a letter or resolution. But if three of us want a resolution, that doesn't end the discussion. Lehman/Oh, no, no, no. Champion/OK. Lehman/But if we have a resolution--are you favoring a resolution on the 27th? Champion/I am favoring a resolution but I-- Lehman/ OK, fine, we have three. O'Doimell/But wait a minute, wait a minute. We went through the vote because it's--- Champion/No, this doesn't end the discussion. This is not a formal vote. This is an informal vote. Lehman/We're deciding what goes on the agenda, Connie. Holecek/What would be the body of that resolution? Champion/It would be a proposed resolution, but because I'm not willing--I don't want something on the agenda that's going to cause a lot of public discussion and it's going to fail, no matter what. I think that's a waste of our time and the public's time. And I think that's ridiculous. I don't think the discussion should stop here. I know there isn't support for a resolution. I think we ought to compose a letter for the whole Council to vote on where it might get sent. Lehman/OK. Do we have four votes who would like to see a letter on the 27th? Kart/The 27th or 28th formally? This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 73 Lehman/The 28th, I'm sorry. O'Donnell/We had six. Lehman/We have six people who would--and Connie, you and I will get together and discuss, and obviously, we'll have a letter composed. I'm sure that there will be changes to that letter, but we will then have a letter that we can vote on at the Council meeting, and then if it passes, will be sent to our three legislators. Champion/I don't (can't hear) they just prolong things; it doesn't get our thing across at all. It will be January or February before even the possibility of a letter is sent. Karr/OK, Mr. Mayor, we will have then a letter on the 28th agenda. Has there been any decision on consideration of issues not under Council jurisdiction? Champion/I think that's obvious--- Lehman/Well, the only thing is I really would like to see Council have some sort of consensus that we do not do resolutions--- Wilburn/I was just looking for a general discussion. That's all I was looking for at our work session. I wasn't looking for any formal policy; I was--just to have it out there and discuss. Pfab/So you walk away a happy man. (Laughter) Wilbum/That's a little strong, but--- Champion/Well, he does make a valid point. Are we going to start discussing--- Vanderhoef/Everything that comes forward. Champion/Yeah. Vanderhoef/This is the concern that I have and I've had people speak to me about it, that they feel like we are spinning our wheels, we are wasting our time when we continually listen to requests for things that we cannot change. And so, the initial--- Champion/The open mike and that's not bad. Vanderhoef/The open mike is there, but for Council to spend an inordinate amount of time discussing each one of these things as they come along, they feel that that isn't necessarily the best use of--- This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 74 Champion/I think we've only discussed two in all the years I've been on the Council. Wilburn/Well, the other thing, I didn't want any formal--I just (can't hear) discussion is, I mean you can't, I already prefaced that I think it's an individual judgment call as to where you're at and I'm not looking at trying to bind future Councils. I just wanted to--- Lehman/ We are not having a policy relative to the next to the last item on the agenda. Kanner/Connie, to respond to your thoughts before about it wouldn't be worth having a resolution, in many ways feminist process says that the process is important actually. And when you look at this in some ways it's a battle of education and getting the word out. You have someone, the attorney general comes to Des Moines and gets tremendous press coverage to promote the Patriot Act. Just our discussing it, if there was a resolution, just now discussing it gets press time, and gets the word out more and more about why them should be change. That's, I think, one of the main merits of a resolution that the Council discusses is the community gets to discuss it even more. The news media puts it out there and that's, I think, a wonderful thing. That's what we're about here is getting the community involved as much as possible. We all talk about trying to get them involved and oftentimes we don't get a response and when there's something like this that really strikes many of us a lot of different ways, it's great to help facilitate that discussion and that's what putting a resolution formally out there, I think, does. Lehman/Wouldn't a letter do the same? Champion/Yeah, the letter would be on the formal agenda. Lehman/So, the same amount of discussion will happen except we don3t make fools of ourselves in passing a law over which we have no, on something we have no control over. Kanner/Well, that's a lot of weighted stuff when you say "make fools of ourselves." I don't think we're making fools of ourselves. I think that's how the country has moved along and it's never, as Frederick Douglas said, "Power concedes nothing without a straggle." It's always been a struggle taking on those in power and whatever level it is, it's important to do that. Lehman/We're going to take them up. We're going to do that. Champion/But I feel empowered that we're doing something period. I mean, I do. So you know what? We're doing it. It may not be exactly what I want, but you know what, it's happening. O'Donnell/But I think it's more effective. Lehman/I really do, too. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003. October 13, 2003 Council Work Session Page 75 O'Donnell/So, see you tomorrow night? Lehman/All right. This represents only a reasonably accurate transcription of the Iowa City Council work session of October 13, 2003.