HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-11-10 Bd Comm minutes FINAL/APPROVE
MINUTES
IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS
MONDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2003, 4:00 P.M.
EMMA J. HARVAT HALL
IOWA CITY CITY HALL, 410 E. WASHINGTON STREET
IOWA CITY, IA
MEMBERS PRESENT: Doug DuCharme, Gary Haman, Steve Buckman, Tim Fehr, John
Roffman, Wayne Maas, Anna Buss
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Tim Hennes (Sr. Building Inspector), Sue Dulek, (Asst. City
Attorney), Jann Ream (Code Enforcement Assistant acting as
minute taker), Norm Cate (Sr. Housing Inspector), Roger Jensen
(Fire Marshall), Andy Rocca (Fire Chief), Doug Boothroy (Director-
Housing & Inspection Services), Loren Brumm (Building Inspector)
OTHERS PRESENT: Sarah Franklin, Vanessa Miller, Craig Brown (media), Tom Vrban
(Vrban Fire Protection), Dean Smith (Freeman Lock & Alarm),
Don Crum, Kent Holdeman, James Wachendorf (Sigma Phi
Epsilon), Phillip Ranford (Delta Upsilon), Janine Baumback (Alpha
Xi Delta), Eisa Federse (Delta Zeta), Devon Dietz (Alpha Tau
Omega), Dan Wilkes (Acacia), Kevin Smith (Delta Upsilon), E.
Ann Ford (Delta Gamma), David Findlay, Kris Schultz (Iowa Fire
Equipment Company), Bruce McAvoy (University of Iowa), Bob
Fontanini (BIackhawk Sprinklers), Kelly Mitchell (Summit Fire
Protection), Gary Penniston Sr. (Tri-State Automatic Sprinkler),
Barney Murphy (Sprinkler Fitters Local 669), Dominick Kass
(National Fire Sprinkler Assoc.), Dick Donohue, John Shaw,
Justine Zimmer, Tom Rosenberger, Jerry Full (Englert Theater)
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL: None
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson Roffman called the meeting to order at 4:03 P.M
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES:
Minutes from the August 4, 2003 meeting were discussed.
MOTION: Haman moved to accept the minutes. Maas seconded. Motion
passed unopposed.
Public discussion of proposal to require automatic fire sprinkler protection in existinq fraternities
and sororities.
Jensen presented an informational slide show and video concerning the retrofitting of sororities
and fraternities with fire sprinkler systems. The proposal before the Board of Appeals and which
will ultimately be considered by City Council is that all existing Iowa City sororities and
fraternities be retrofitted with automatic sprinkler systems within 5 years of adoption by
ordinance and that plans for approval by the Iowa City Fire Department be submitted within 2
and 1/2 years of adoption.
Jensen reviewed the national fire problem in sororities and fraternities presenting statistics that
demonstrated the frequency of fires and fire deaths. From 1990 to 2000, there were 1400 fires
and 50 fire deaths in all university housing and sororities and fraternities. One half of those fires
and three quarters of the deaths were in sororities and fraternities. Jensen stated that this was a
telling statistic when assessing the specific risk for sororities and fraternities. NIST (National
Institute for Standards and Technologies) did a study which showed the combination of
sprinklers and smoke detectors would reduce fire deaths by 82%. Jensen talked about a fire
which occurred in Chapel Hill, N.C. in 1996 in a fraternity in which 4 young people died. The
investigation report concluded that fire sprinklers would have saved their lives. He spoke of two
fires in fraternities in Iowa City. One fire was in 1987 in which there were 6 injuries to fire
fighters and one fire in 1994 which destroyed the entire structure. In that fire, 6 residents had to
be rescued off the roof and 2 residents were taken out of windows. Jensen then showed a video
about another fraternity fire in Columbia, MO in which a young man died.
Jensen went over the actual requirements of retrofitting sprinklers in the greek community. The
National Fire Protection Association provides the codes and standards that apply to particular
building situations. Different standards were presented including what type of water supply
system and back flow prevention device would be required. NFPA13R is the standard that
would be appropriate to retrofitting sprinklers in sororities and fraternities. Jensen presented
some estimates on how much it might cost to retrofit a system. He said costs would be
somewhere between $1.75 to $3.50 per square foot depending on if the pipes were run internal
or external to the walls. He explained that the plans had to be designed by a licensed engineer
or a someone with a NICET Level III certification. Jensen spent sometime explaining what
prescriptive codes were and how all codes allowed exceptions to the those codes if acceptable
alternatives were proposed. These alternatives have to provide an equal or greater amount of
fire protection in order to be allowed. Jensen's point was that a fire sprinkler system could go a
long way in helping a building meet other code requirements. Roffman reminded Jensen that
time was limited in the hall and to please try to condense his presentation. The purpose of the
presentation was to present the information and then open the meeting to public discussion.
Jensen stated that there are other costs besides the cost of installation that would have to be
considered such as water tap fees, permit fees and yearly maintenance fees. He explained that
currently, there are no government programs in place that would help a fraternity or sorority with
the costs of retrofitting a system. The money would have to come from fund raising, increased
membership costs and savings from insurance costs. The difference in yearly insurance costs
once a building was retrofitted with a sprinkler system is substantial. He also mentioned two
proposals that are being considered by the federal legislature: the CoIlege Fire Prevention Act
would provide actual grants to help with initial costs and the Fire Sprinkler Incentive Act would
provide tax incentives for those organizations who installed sprinkling systems.
Roffman opened the meeting to public discussion. He explained that there would be no vote on
the issue at this meeting. The proposal would be incorporated into the next code cycle which
would not be discussed or approved until early in 2004. Devon Deitz asked Jensen what could
be done so that the installation of sprinklers in attics would not be required. Jensen explained
that NFPA 13R exempts attics from the requirement of sprinkling. Deitz said he was on the
board of the Alpha Tau Omega fraternity. He said he recognized the need for fire sprinklers in
fraternities and was motivated to install them since their original chapter house at 828 N.
Dubuque St. was destroyed by fire. However, he did question the economic ability of the
fraternity to install sprinklers. His own investigation into cost estimates of retrofitting the
fraternity revealed estimates of $37,000 to $40,000. Since their chapter house is newly
purchased, they didn't even have equity built up to secure a loan. Jim Wackendorf identified
himself as the president of the Sigma Phi Epsilon Alumni Board and said cost is the biggest
issue. He was concerned about the hidden costs of annual maintenance. He asked Jensen to
provide a cost estimate of what those costs would be. He also was concerned about the heads
going off accidentally or because of vandalism and the water damage that would occur. He said
that saving lives was important but that you couldn't protect people from everything all the time
and that a cost/benefit analysis was appropriate. Dominick Kass - National Fire Sprinkler
Association - stated that smoke detectors warned you that you were about to die but fire
sprinklers could actually prevent your death. He explained that he had been in the fire life safety
business for 30 years and been close to situations that convinced him that fire sprinklers were
the best option. He wanted people to know he was a resource to answer any questions they
might have on fire sprinkling systems. Ken Haldeman asked what the actual probability of a fire
in a fraternity or sorority in Iowa City was. Jensen said that was hard to determine. Roffman
stated that this wasn't a Las Vegas crap shoot - how much is human life worth? Haldeman said
it is terrible when a person dies but it is more likely that someone would die in a car crash than a
fraternity fire and whenever making decisions of this type, there is always a cost benefit
analysis. Don Crum - Sigma Phi Epsilon Alumni Board ~ stated that he had been associated with
fires. He was a Younkers manager when they had a fire in Des Moines and 13 employees lost
their lives.
He said he believes in fire protection but thinks that other options should be explored first such
as added exits and fire escapes before requiring sprinkling systems. Dan Wilkes - board
member of Acacia House - stated that 12 years ago, the chapter houses were required to do a
lot of fire upgrades. He said that everyone wants to make sure that their members are as safe
as possible but he would like to see something like this instituted in a different way. He
suggested that whenever a chapter house was undergoing a major remodel, then that would be
the time to require the sprinkling. Barney Murphy - Sprinkler Fitters Local 669 - stated that he
had heard previous people speak to the cost of putting in sprinkling systems. He said that if a
sprinkling system saves one life, then the cost is well worth it.
David Findlay - Iowa Fire Equipment Company - said he had a unique perspective because he
had been a fire fighter for 10 years before going to the private sector. He said what people did
not understand was the special high risk that fraternities had for fires because of the nature of
the membership and the way they are managed and there is nothing that fire inspections can do
to change that. Kevin Smith - Delta Upsilon - stated that finding funding for retrofitting these
systems will be tough. Craig Brown asked about sprinkling in University residence halls. Jensen
stated that University buildings would not be affected by the proposed ordinance. In fact there is
no ordinance that could require the University to go back and retrofit all of their existing
residence halls. In spite of that fact, the University is going forward and doing just that.
Mayflower, Daum, Stanley and Currier residence halls have all been retrofitted with sprinkler
systems. Work is underway to install systems at Reno, Parklawn, and the Quadrangle. So even
though the University is not required to do so, they are proceeding with the installation because
it is perceived as the right thing to do. Jensen stated that off campus apartments that are over
two stories or 16 units that are built now must be sprinkled. Public comment closed at 5:25 P.M.
LicensinR
Jensen stated that he had received several letters from companies requesting a different testing
procedure for fire sprinkler fitters. There were also concerns about requiring NICET certification
and the licensing of individuals instead of contractors. He said various contractors had
communicated with city staff about solutions and, based on that input, staff had come up with a
recommendation. With regard to the examinations, staff recommends that the Board approve
the following examinations: a minimum NICET level II certification for automatic sprinkler
systems or the United Association Fire Sprinkler Fitter Mastery exam given at the end of the
successful completion of a five year apprenticeship program for a journeyman fire sprinkler fitter
such as offered by the AFSA (American Fire Sprinkler Association), the NFSA (National Fire
Sprinkler Association) or Sprinkler Fitters local 669. Jensen said that when investigating the
testing procedures and provided course work of these apprenticeship programs, city staff felt
any of these programs would demonstrate competency in order to obtain a license as a fire
sprinkler fitter. Jensen stated that there was a another issue that contractors wanted addressed
and that was the number of licensed individuals required on a job. Currently the required ratio is
that one in three individuals on a job be licensed. Jensen said that staff is recommending the
language be changed so that only one person on a job is required to be licensed.
He wanted the Board to understand that this change to the number of licensed persons would
extend to all of the other trades but staff felt that this would be acceptable.
Dominick Kass - National Fire sprinkler Association - said that it is the position of his
organization that a responsible managing employee is all that is necessary for a fire sprinkler
contractor to provide proper workmanship - licensing of individuals is not necessary. He felt that
licensing only increased the price of installing a system. Tom Vrban - Vrban Fire Protection -
stated that individual licensing is very important for any trade. Since electricians, plumbers and
gas pipe installers are required to be licensed in Iowa City, he saw no reason to exempt fire
sprinkler installers. He wondered how the "responsible managing employee" concept would
work in reality. David Findlay - Iowa Fire Equipment Company - stated that he was fine with the
concept of licensing but he works for a company that operates in 9 states and having to license
people in each municipality is very difficult and expensive. He said NICET certification is very
difficult. He suggested using the NFPA 25 inspection form and training class as an alternative.
He stated that currently his company is installing a system at University of Iowa Hospitals &
Clinics and no one is required to be licensed there so why is it acceptable there and not in the
City. Haman pointed out that the University allows unlicensed electricians to work in the hospital
and Iowa City does not allow that either. Bob Fontani - BlackHawk Sprinklers - said that his
company could agree with individual licensing but he felt the Experior testing was expensive for
a contractor that travels. He thought using the apprenticeship programs was fine. Barney
Murphy stated that he was not pleased with the current Experior testing as well; he thought the
apprenticeship program would work. Haman said the City never required NICET certification for
the installers just for the designer and person pulling the permit. Henries clarified that what is
being proposed are three additional ways to obtain a license: NICET certification, the AFSA
apprenticeship program and the NFSA apprenticeship programs. He was concerned that by not
requiring a national 3rd party exam, reciprocity with other jurisdictions would be difficult. Maas
stated that he thought it was very important to have an independent test from the apprenticeship
programs. Roffman asked if the Experior test is really relevant to what an installer does. Hennes
said that some of the installers felt that some of the questions on the Experior test were not
relevant to what they actually did on the job. Barney Murphy presented the AFSA test as a 3rd
party test that the City could use as a test for all installers to take. Roffman suggested the Board
defer a decision until more information on different examinations is made available to the Board.
DuCharme asked Jensen to compare some of the different tests and make a recommendation.
MOTION: Maas moved to defer staff's amendment recommendation on licensing testing
requirements until the next meeting when more information is available. Buss seconded.
Discussion: Hermes asked if this motion included the issue of the number of required licensed
individuals on site. Roffman said that was a separate issue and would be a separate motion.
VOTE: Motion passed unopposed.
Roffman requested discussion on the staff recommendation that there just be one licensed
person on a job site. Haman felt there should be some sod of ratio; one person could not
supervise a large number of people. Hennes said the majority of jobs would not have a large
number of people working but there are projects where that could occur and that was a staff
concern. Hennes reiterated that this amendment would affect all of the licensed trades in Iowa
City. Maas stated that this would not be a good idea. Jensen wondered how reasonable it was
on the part of the City to require one in four people be licensed on a job site for out of town
contractors. Bob Fontani told the Board that his company required one journeyman for every
apprentice on a job site so this amendment would not affect them at all.
MOTION: Maas moved that this amendment also be deferred until the next meeting. Buss
seconded. Motion passed unopposed.
Appeal the decision of the Buildinq Official because: a)There are practical difficulties involved in
carrying out provisions of the code and b)Any material, alternate desiqn or method of
construction not specifically prescribed by this code is appropriate.
Because this issue involves the Englert Theater, 221 Washington Street, two Board members,
Doug DuCharme and Tim Fehr excused themselves from hearing the appeal because of a
possible conflict of interest. Hennes explained the issues in front of the Board involve a
required landing on a stairway so that a door does not swing directly over a stairs and a breach
in a required fire rated ceiling. He asked John Shaw, the Englert architect, to present his case.
Shaw stated that his application demonstrated their request. He explained that the Englert
project has been a long process and has actually bridged an entire code change in the City.
There was language in the 1997 Uniform Building Code and the Conservation of Buildings Code
that backed up decisions that were made in the planning process. With the code change to the
2000 International Building Code, that language was changed. Shaw explained that they wanted
to put doors back to where they had existed historically. This would place the doors where they
would swing out directly over stairs. Shaw said it would be the policy of the Englert that the
doors would be blocked closed except during the exiting of a performance when they would be
fixed open. These are not required exit doors. Shaw said he had tried to design landings for the
doors but the vestibules are very small and a landing would remove the use of the vestibule. He
felt that keeping the doors blocked unless they were secured open after a performance did not
present a life safety issue. The second issue involves a breach in a fire rated ceiling. Shaw
explained that they had to cut a slot in the theater ceiling for the theater lighting. The ceiling has
an unusual configuration and it does not allow for scaffolding in the back corners where lighting
could be placed. The slot would allow access to the lights from a constructed catwalk above the
ceiling. The slot is more than 20 feet above any accessible floor area or landing below it. The
building code allows forgiving the required fire resistive rating when any floor area directly below
the opening is 20 feet or more below the opening. Shaw said they also planned to put heat and
smoke detectors in that area to add more protection. The slot is approximately 24 inches wide
and 20 feet long. Maas asked if there was anyway to build a one hour containment above the
slot. Shaw explained the area had to remain open in order to operate the lights. There might be
a way to protect the whole area above the ceiling but it would be very expensive and Englert
has a very restricted budget. Shaw explained that the 1997 code allowed open and exposed
structure in ceiling members as long as there were no concealed spaces. The addition of heat
and smoke detectors could be used as an alternative method of construction in order to
eliminate any concealment; the 2000 IBC does not provide for that allowance. Roffman asked
for clarification of the problem since there would not be any landing closer than 20 feet to the
slot. Hennes explained that there are other areas of the floor that are within 20 feet of the ceiling
even though they are not directly underneath the slot. Brumm explained that the IBC code
manual specifically requires the entire ceiling assembly retain the fire resistive rating if any part
of the floor is within 20 feet of that assembly. Roffman asked if the entire building had been
retrofitted with a sprinkling system. Shaw said no that just the stage and basement area had
been retrofitted and the exception in the code that would forgive the fire resistive rating only
references fully sprinkled buildings.
Dick Donohue - McComas Lacina Construction -spoke to the issue of the stairs. He explained
that introducing landings into those stair structures would remove historical features of the
theater and add more cost to the project. He mentioned Sec. 3406.1 does allow some discretion
in historic buildings as long as life safety issues aren't compromised. Hennes said staff does
feel it is a distinct safety hazard to have a set of stairs directly opposite a door especially in an
emergency event when panicked people could be rushing down those stairs. Dulek clarified that
there were two issues on the matter of the stairs. First, the Board had to determine if the stairs
do constitute a life safety hazard and then, if that is the case, the Board has to decide if there
are practical difficulties in rectifying the problem. The final issue of the slot for lighting is one of
alternative methods and materials. The issues should be approached one at a time. The Board
addressed the slot in the ceiling first. Donohue said he was trying to protect the interest of the
Englert and there were alternatives but they were very costly. Discussion occurred determining
the exact nature of the problem of the breach in the ceiling and what options existed to solve the
problem. Dulek clarified that the first issued to be determined is if the building official has
correctly interpreted the code in stating that because some areas of the ceiling assembly are
within 20 feet of a floor or landing, then the breach cannot be allowed. Then, if the building
official is found to be correct, alternative materials and methods of construction could be
considered. Discussion occurred again about the fact that directly below the breach there would
be no floor or landing within 20 feet of the opening. Others areas would be protected by a fire
resistive ceiling. Buckman stated that it was his understanding that one aspect of the
requirements of fire resistive ratings was to give people time to get out of the building. He felt
that people would have enough time to exit the building as long as the breach was 20 feet or
more above the floor. Shaw said the slot could be made smaller as well. Hennes asked how the
slot was going to be used - was there going to be a person with the lights above the slot. Shaw
said that would be the case. Hennes pointed out that a heat source that did not exist before was
being introduced to that space. Dulek stated that was not the issue; that first the Board had to
determine if the code was interpreted correctly and then, if that is found to be true, then
alternative methods and materials could be discussed.
MOTION: Maas moved that the Building Official did correctly interpret the building code in not
allowing the breach in the one hour fire resistive ceiling. Buss seconded.
VOTE: The Board voted 4-1 to approve the motion with Buckman voting in the negative.
MOTION: Maas moved that there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions
of the code and the placement of heat and smoke detectors in the breach area above the fire
resistive ceiling meets the intent and purpose of the code and does not lessen fire protection
requirements and is at least the equivalent of that prescribed in the code and should be allowed
as an alternative method and material. Buckman seconded.
VOTE: The Board voted 5-0 to approve the motion to allow the breach in the one fire resistive
ceiling on the condition that smoke and heat detectors are installed.
Roffman stated that the next issue to resolve was the steps. Discussion occurred about the
exact nature of the problem. Buckman said he had a concern that in an emergency situation,
people would try to exit out of those doors; and, without a landing on the exit side, people would
fall down the steps and create a pile up of people. Dulek reminded the Board that the first
question to answer is if the stair situation is a distinct life safety hazard and if the building official
has interpreted the code correctly. Donohue stated that the doors in question at the top of the
stairs were not required exits. Roffman asked why not just permanently fix the doors closed if
they are not required. The doors could still preserve the historic design but not be used. The
code simply does not allow doors to swing over stairs.
MOTION: Buckman moved that the Building Official did correctly interpret the code correctly.
Haman seconded. The motion passed unopposed.
Hermes asked if any alternative method would be proposed. Shaw said that the doors would be
permanently affixed and would be non-operational. He also said that they would not look like
doors from the theater side so that they would not be confused with an operational door.
OTHER BUSINESS: The next meeting was scheduled for November 3, 2003 if there is an
appeal.
ADJOURNMENT: Maas moved to adjourn the meeting. Haman seconded. The meeting was
adjourned at 7:40 P.M.
John Roffman, Board of Appeals Chairperson Date
ictYLibrary
MINUTES
IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
MEETING ROOM C - REGULAR MEETING
September 25, 2003
Members Present: Thomas Dean, Shaner Magalh~es, Linda Prybil, Pat Schnack,
Jesse Singerman, Tom Suter, Linzee McCray
Staff: Barb Black, Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Barbara Curtin, Debb
Green, Heidi Lauritzen, Martha Lubaroff, Liz Nichols
Call Meeting to Order
Meeting was called to order at 5:03 pm
Public Discussion
None
Craig introduced Stephanie Sueppel, who recently started work as the new Adult Services
Librarian.
Magalh~es welcomed Linzee McCray, new Board member. Individual Board members
introduced themselves.
Approval of Minutes
Minutes for regular meeting of August 28, 2003 were approved after a motion made by
Suter and seconded by Singerman. All were in favor. Motion passed 7-0.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Public Hearing for bid on AV equipment:
A motion to open the public hearing was made by Dean and seconded by Suter. All in
favor. Motion passed 7-0. Magalhges declared the public hearing open. The bid
documents contain a list of all the AV equipment, primarily in meeting rooms, and
specifications on installation and coordination with other furnishings. Because it is over
$25,000 it has to go out for bid. The most expensive equipment will be in the public
meeting rooms and the Story time Room for presentations and videotaping. Logsden and
Agenda item 3A
Page 2
the architects worked together to prepare the bid. The bids are due several days before
the next meeting. The contract will be awarded at October's Board meeting. The
information about bid documents is distributed by the City of Iowa City and is publicly
advertised. It goes up on the City's Web site and vendors watch for it. It goes to the
lowest responsible bidder and staff then makes a recommendation to the Board.
There were no public comments and Magalh~es declared the hearing closed.
Building Project:
In Miller's absence, Craig reported on the progress. She pointed out that yellow
weatherproofing was put up on the east side of the building. Next week we should start
seeing brick on the east side. The large windows on the south side should start going up
next week as well. We are expecting to expand into a major portion of the second floor
between the end of November and the end of December. Craig led a tour of the east
building for trustees.
County Task Force:
Additional questions have been posed. Craig drafted some recommendations for
responses.
Craig does not have a problem with a contract similar to SEATS if the county prefers
that. The SEATS contract is a 4-5 year contract which means the Board would have to
renegotiate every several years. Singerman raised the issue of the discrepancy between
what Iowa City residents pay and Johnson County residents pay. There are reasons
historically why our library has been willing to accept this discrepancy. Although
Johnson Co residents can go to all county libraries, they do not have the same opportunity
for input in the budget or policies that Iowa City residents have. Their opportunity for
input is through their representative on the Board. County sees that their budget costs are
rising as county libraries are growing. County residents live further from the library than
City residents do.
Administratively it would be difficult to deny many services, such as reference
assistance, to residents of rural Johnson County. Craig's sense is that those who were
seeking greatly reduced funding may have moved away from their earlier position. There
seems to be some interest in preserving what we have. Prybil said that everyone in the
county contributes through his or her property assessments. She added that there are
people in Iowa City who use the library and do not contribute. Craig said that the only
Iowa City that we do not receive revenue from are people who live in University housing
which does not pay property tax. Commercial, including rental, properties have higher
taxes and bring in more revenue than owner-occupied homes. A response to the Task
Force is needed by next week.
Singerman would be prepared at this point to say that if funding were cut, we would have
to reduce services somehow. Prybil asked whether Craig had visited with other library
Agenda item 3A
Page 3
directors. She responded that other libraries feel much the same. Asked about the
SEATS contract, she said that although it would be difficult to renegotiate every several
years we could deal with it. The consensus was that we respond with our preferences;
starting with keeping the same contract, using the SEATS model and lastly reducing
services if funding was cut. Craig will draft a response and Magalh~tes will review before
it is sent.
NEW BUSINESS:
Set a public hearing for library furnishings and equipment:
Prybil moved that we set a public heating for the library furnishings and equipment at
next month's Board meeting. This is the last bid package for the building project and
includes all the new furniture and miscellaneous items like coat racks and trash cans.
Suter seconded. All in favor voted Aye. Motion passed 7-0
Leased Space:
Craig reminded the Board that we had a subcommittee meet to formulate guidelines and a
timeline, which the Board approved. We need to move the process along and she is
recommending that we work with a realtor. Asked for input from Board about selecting a
realtor. Dean wanted clarification about property being owned by City and how that
affected taxes. Craig has consulted with the City Attorney who said that when it is leased
for commercial use it would generate tax revenue. Craig asked for direction about the
process of choosing a realtor. Consensus was that Magalhaes and Craig interview
realtors and make a recommendation to the Board. We will make an effort to contact
realtors and invite them to participate. Singerman wanted to make sure the solicitation
went to all potentially interested parties. The rent will go into the operating budget as a
new income stream for the City.
FY05 Budget:
Craig has just received City guidelines about budget but this first draR does not include
those figures. She reviewed the expenses in the budget and explained that supplies were
increased because of the increased size of the building and the need for additional items
to stock more bathrooms, service more computers, etc.
We are asking City for funds for planning. We are behind a year on our strategic plan
because of the building project. The budget contains fees for a consultant and fees to do a
community survey for the planning process.
We are not asking for much in the way of capital items for the building because of the
building project. It seemed like an appropriate time to upgrade the computer and
equipment replacement budgets to cover the expanded inventory. Replacement funds do
not need to be spent every year, but are available as equipment ages.
Agenda item 3A
Page 4
Grand Opening Project Expenses. These are pretty flexible numbers and Board needs to
have a discussion on how they want to be involved in the planning for grand opening
events.
There is an item called Web Bridge in the proposed budget. This software will provide
us with the ability to link items from our catalog to other resources. It is a new
component developed by our library systems vendor.
Craig believes that this budget fulfills the Strategic Plan and includes what we need for
an expanded building.
Prybil asked about the expenses for being open Sunday. Our overtime budget on Sunday
is a result of the labor agreement, which covers full-time and 20 or 30-hour permanent
employees.
No motion is necessary at this time. Craig is asking that Board give her the go-ahead to
proceed and she will work with City numbers and finalize items over the next month and
ask for formal Board approval in October. All agreed.
Staff reports
On Oct 15, Moen will close on 64 1 A property and surface parking on that lot will be
gone.
A question was raised about the newsletter. Sueppel will be the editor and Sara Brown
will be the graphic artist. We bid it out for printing and it probably will not look different
this year, but there will be fewer issues due to budget cuts.
Wireless Internet access is being offered and patrons are very happy about that.
Development Office:
Lolly Eggers, June True, Barbara Curtin and Susan Craig attended the induction of John
Buchanan into the Junior Achievement of East Central Iowa Business Hall of Fame.
Patriot Act: Articles from the Daily Iowan and Press Citizen were given out at the
meeting. Interest is being fueled by what is going on nationally and the group that asked
us to take action is speaking to the City Council. Craig has had one complaint about our
position and several compliments.
Craig included memo to Board informing them of her decision not to grant a request by
the Johnson County Democrats to use our meeting rooms for a precinct caucus.
Literary Walk. Needed a signed contract by October 1 to the artist so after consulting
with Karin Franklin, staff moved ahead to use authors that had been previously approved.
Sorry not to have involved Board but the contract needed to be done.
Agenda item 3A
Page 5
A reminder about the video on Legal Issues for Libraries to be viewed here on October 9
was included in the Board packet.
Committee Reports
Singerman reported on the Foundation's planning session, which is still in process. Fund
raising committee is working on an activity for the Spring. She will be asking for
Board's help when things are settled.
Disbursements:
Review of VISA expenditures
Move approval of disbursements for July and August. Suter moved. Singerman
seconded. All in favor. Motion passed 7-0. These were delayed due to City's change
over in systems. Should be on time from now on.
Set agenda for October
Grand opening discussion
Budget
Something from County
Update on Realtor
Building
Adjournment
Meeting was adjourned at 6:30 pm.
Minutes taken and transcribed by
Martha Lubaroff
FIN/IL/.4 PPR 0 VE D
POLICE CITIZENS REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES - October 14, 2003
CALL TO ORDER Chair John Stratton called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
ATTENDANCE Board members present: Candy Barnhill, Loren Horton, Greg Roth and John
Stratton; Legal Counsel Catherine Pugh and Staff Kellie Tuttle present. Also in
attendance was Captain Mat~ Johnson of the ICPD, and Public, Kevin Halstead.
CONSENT
CALENDAR Motion by Hot,on, seconded by Barnhill to adopt the consent calendar.
· Minutes of the meeting on 9/09/03
· ICPD General Order #99-08 (In Car Recording Devices)
· ICPD General Order#00-08 (Weapons)
· ICPD Use of Force - August 2003
· ICPD Use of Force - September 2003
Stratton noted that on Order #00-08 (Weapons), a word was left out on the first
page (i.e. authorized automatic weapon, any department issued automatic
weapon which the officer has met, should be: weapon for which the officer has
met approval). He also asked about the meaning of "official color of duty".
Motion carried, 4/0.
REPORT FROM NOMINATING COMMITTEE
Barnhill reported that she and Horton had discussed having co-chairs for the
coming year due to busy schedules. It was later decided that Horton would be
chair for the coming year, and Barnhill would be vice-chair.
MOTION TO FIX METHOD OF VOTING
Members were asked if they agreed to use a voice vote as in the past; all
concurred.
NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF CHAIRPERSON Loren Horton for Chair.
Motion by Barnhill, seconded by Roth.
Motion carried, 4/0.
NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF VICE-CHAIRPERSON
Candy Bamhill for Vice-Chair.
Motion by Horton, seconded by Roth.
Motion carried, 4/0.
Stratton announced new Chair and Vice-Chair, and then turned the meeting over
to Horton.
PCRB-Page 1
October 14, 2003
FIN~4L/~4PPR O VED
NEW BUSINESS No new business.
OLD BUSINESS No old business.
PUBLIC
DISCUSSION No public discussion.
BOARD
INFORMATION Stratton noted that he was contacted by a reporter from the DI, in regards to
recording devices. He said there was a story in the DI and he will try to find the
article for the Board to look at.
STAFF
INFORMATION Turtle noted that the City Council would be announcing the vacancy on the PCRB
during the Council meeting. Deadline for applications is Wednesday, November
19th at 5:00pm.
EXECUTIVE
SESSION Motion by Stratton and seconded by Barnhill to adjourn into Executive Session
based on Section 21.5(1 )(a) of the Code of Iowa to review or discuss records
which are required or authorized by state or federal law to be kept confidential or
to be kept confidential as a condition for that government body's possession or
continued receipt of federal funds, and 22.7(11 ) personal information in
confidential personnel records of public bodies including but not limited to cities,
boards of supervisors and school districts, and 22-7(5) police officer investigative
reports, except where disclosure is authorized elsewhere in the Code; and
22.7(18) Communications not required by law, rule or procedure that are made to
a government body or to any of its employees by identified persons outside of
government, to the extent that the government body receiving those
communications from such persons outside of government could reasonably
believe that those persons would be discouraged from making them to that
government body if they were available for general public examination.
Motion carried, 4/0. Open session adjourned at 7:14 P.M.
REGULAR
SESSION Returned to open session at 7:30 P.M.
Motion by Stratton, seconded by Barnhill to investigate PCRB Complaint 03-05
and PCRB Complaint 03-06/03-07 at the level 8-8-7(B)(1)(a).
Motion carried, 4/0.
Horton noted that the City Council had amended section 8-8-8 A(1 ) of the City
Code. A copy was included in the meeting packet.
PCRB-Page 2
October 14, 2003
FIN~4 L/APPR 0 VE D
Motion by Stratton, seconded by Roth to extend the deadline for PCRB report 03-
05, 03-06, and 03-07 for 45 days.
Motion carried, 4/0.
Motion by Roth, seconded by Barnhill to move meeting from November 11 to
November 10.
Motion carried, 4/0.
MEETING SCHEDULE
· November 10, 2003, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room
· December 9, 2003, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room
· January 13, 2004, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room
· February 10, 2004, 7:00 P.M., Lobby Conference Room
ADJOURNMENT Motion for adjournment by Roth and seconded by Stratton. Motion carried, 4/0.
Meeting adjourned at 7:36 P.M.
PCRB-Page 3
October 14, 2003