Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-12-16 Bd Comm minutesMINUTES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OCTOBER 16, 1997 - 6:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: CA! ! TO ORDFR: Denita Gadson, Rick House, Sandy Kuhlmann, Jayne Moraski, Kathleen Renquist, Gretchen Schmuch, Bill Stewart Daniel Cilek, David Purdy Maurice Head, Steve Long, Traci Howard Vice Chairperson Stewart called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m. CONSID!=RATION OF SI=PTI:MBI:R 18. 1997. MFFTING MINUTt=S: MOTION: Renquist moved to approve the September 18, 1997, meeting minutes as submitted. Kuhlmann seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0. (Schmuch arrived at 6:38 p.m.) PUB! IC/MI=MBI=R DISCUSSION OF ANY ITI=MS NOT ON THI= AGI=NDA: Long introduced House to the Commission members. DISCUSSION OF CDBG/HOM!= R!::A! ! OCATION PO! ICY: Stewart said the existing CCN policy made sense. Schmuch said the only place they have had problems is determining if something has been an emergency or urgent need, but she would hesitate to clarify that more in the policy. She said if nothing else, they should change the title "CCN" to "HCDC" in the document. MOTION: Stewart moved to adopt the policy for allocation of uncommitted CDBG and HOME funds as presented. Kuhlmann seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 7-0. DISCUSSION OF CDBG/HOMF A! ! OCATION ISSUFS: Long referred to the list of questions in the packet and said these are the last four questions from the memo addressed to the Council regarding allocation issues. Long explained the reasons behind the questions to new Commission members. For question number 1, Moraski asked if HUD determines the fair market rent by taking the 40~ percentlie of the entire county or just the Iowa City area. Long said it is the metropolitan statistical area. Moraski asked if there was enough variance and balance so that rent rates in Tiffin would not be negatively affected by higher Iowa City rents. Head said they have not heard that people cannot find adequate housing in the Iowa City area using those rents. He said it seems that the Iowa City market rents are not so high that someone cannot find adequate housing with what HUD allows. Housing & Community Develop. Commission Minutes October 16, 1997 Page 2 Long said that the HUD fair market rent just went up about 1% on October 1, 1997. He said they use the fair market rent for all of the housing projects. Schmuch asked how someone would determine the Iowa City market rent. Long said a survey is annually conducted by East Iowa Commercial Real Estate Appraiseres. Moraski said they take a sample of units throughout the city and come up with competitive units. She said they find a rent rate inside a one-mile radius of the University campus, and another rent rate further off campus. Long said the sample consists of the larger apartment owners and complexes. Stewart said there may be a different set of numbers with the new Housing Market Analysis being done by Maxfield. Moraski said the East Iowa Commercial Real Estate Appraiser's study is very detailed, and it includes complexes over 12 units, but not single-family houses. She said the rental property owners that also have houses have been in contact with them to keep track of what similar area units are charging. Gadson asked what the per capita income for Iowa City and Johnson County was. Moraski said the HUD fair market rent takes the 40= percentlie of all rents, not incomes. Schmuch said all the vouchers and certificates are in use, so people are finding housing in Iowa City using the fair market rents. Moraski said within the mile radius of the University campus it might be difficult to find units at FMRs. Schmuch said that units inside that mile are set up for students not families. Head said it appears that the fair market rents are working, and people can find affordable housing with the certificates and vouchers. He said they have not had any feedback otherwise. Moraski said that fair market rents tend to work better in urban areas instead of rural areas. Regarding question number 2 andthe income guidelines, Long said that the median income for a family of four is $50,700. Head said 50 percent of a median income for family of four is $25,350, and asked if the Commission thought that was too high an income for whom we want to serve. Head said there is limited homeownership options for housing at $75,000 in Iowa City, figuring that a family can purchase housing using two to three times their annual income. Regarding question number 3 about additional job training opportunities, Stewart said the Commission should make it known that funding is available for job training opportunities. Moraski suggested putting such an announcement in the Chamber of Commerce newsletter to make people aware of available funds. Renquist said there would be additional job opportunities if there were additional funds available for them. Long said CDBG funds can also be used for technical training within a company. Head said there is no statutory cap on that funding, and asked members if they would support a project of that nature in the future. He mentioned the Torus Optical business that was providing permanent full-time jobs, but received a low rating by the Commission in the last funding cycle. Renquist said the Torus project was rated low because in her mind it was not going to serve low-income families. Schmuch said the Torus project had bank loan applications in, and other potential funding sources, so they did not seem to need the CDBG funding as much as some of the other projects. Moraski said that with the additional funds, projects would be able to hire employees that they would not have been able to without the funding. Kuhlmann said there is a new project through the Department of Human Services called Innovation Zones, and they are trying to target a similar group of people. She said they might be a good group to inform about the funding and application process. Long said David Schoon is the City Economic Development Coordinator, and they could work with him as well. Schmuch asked how long a job had to be to meet the category of permanent Housing & Community Develop. Commission Minutes October 16, 1997 Page 3 full-time employment in the Economic Development category. Long said three years, and it only has to be a position, not a specific person. He said the Commission could make vadous stipulations about the time frame and employment if they wanted to. Long said he called the City of Dubuque to ask about their CDBG economic development program and process because theirs is so successful. He said that they like to keep things very flexible, such as interest rates. He said they go by the basic HUD information, but are very flexible after that. That way they can design their own program to fit each company's needs. Gadson asked if there were other models in other cities that the Commission could look at. Long said yes. Kuhlmann asked if Dubuque could share a couple of projects that they consider typical with the Commission. Long said he would get their application package. Schmuch asked if Schoon told businesses or companies that he met with about CDBG funds. Long said he currently does not because of the Commission's set time line regarding funding. Long said that he would have Schoon come to a Commission meeting and talk about City Economic Development, using state funds and policies. Stewart said. that if Schoon sees funding needs outside of the funding cycle, the Commission could deem them as emergencies and fund them that way. Head said they would look at more advertisement and promotion regarding the job training funding, gather examples from other cities regarding their funding process and would have Schoon come to discuss this at a future meeting. Gadson asked how CDBG funding can be used to target individuals for self-employment or incubator projects. Long said that funds are frequently used to purchase a building or help subsidize cost. Schmuch said that the Institute for Social and Economic Development (ISED) has referred self-employed persons to the Commission for funding. Long said that is where the Torus project came from. Renquist said that she thinks it still has to do with the amount of money they are allowed to spend in that area. Kuhlmann said that some of criteria on the ranking sheet are skewed against economic development. Regarding question number 4 and funding target populations, Long said that this question came from the Council's concerns about funding projects used pdmadly by students, and gave some background on the River City Housing Collective's request during the last funding cycle for new Commission members. Schmuch said that there are so many different types of students that defining them is difficult. Head said that the Commission needed to decide who the target populations are that they want to serve, such as disabled persons, small and large families, elderly, transitional housing, etc. He said that maybe students would not be a pdodty when the other target populations are considered. He suggested Commission members compile a list of target populations and separate them into high, medium and low groups to get a handle on who the Commission wanted to serve. Long said that would be based on the CITY STEPS plan. Renquist said that the River City Housing Collective filled out their CDBG/HOME funding application based on CITY STEPS, the Commission made their allocation based on CITY STEPS and the project was still not funded. She said that almost half of the Iowa City population is students, and that needed to be considered. Schmuch listed other services funded through CDBG/HOME funds, such as the Crisis Center and the counseling services that students can use, so the Commission is indirectly funding services through other projects. Moraski said she is not comfortable making a ranked list of target populations the Commission would serve. Kuhlmann said she did not understand how they would rank the target populations; that low income (0-30 percent of median income) would Housing & Community Develop. Commission Minutes October 16, 1997 Page 4 be a target population. Moraski noted that many students fall into that group. Renquist said that many students do, and have no one to fall back on for financial support. House said that needs change from time to time in the different population groups, and asked if the Commission would like to stay flexible to try to meet those changing needs. Stewart said yes. Renquist said that students should not be taken out and ignored from the available funding. Long said the concern he heard from a Council person was that the students are experiencing temporary poverty, and when they are finished with school their incomes will more than likely rise. Schmuch said that a lot of low-income people are in that temporary category, and get out of it for different reasons. Head said that the comparison that Council made was that a person coming out of a homeless shelter might need assistance on a more permanent basis, so there would be a difference in terms of priorities. Renquist noted that the Commission did not allocate the River City Housing Collective money and ignore the other target populations. Kuhlmann said there is a greater chance that a student will have a living income at the end of their temporary low income status, than a person who comes out of a homeless shelter, takes a temporary job and is back in the system off and on. She said that she .would like to support students a little bit for a little while to get them out of the cycle. Schmuch said that part of the argument was that students were not a federally designated group, like eldedy, disabled and single-parent families. Head said he was headng that the Commission wanted the flexibility to look at all groups and projects requesting funds as long as they meet the tests of the CITY STEPS document and the Commission ranking sheet. Schmuch noted that the CITY STEPS document allows for assistance for a continuum of people, and that is how the funding pattem should also look. Gadson asked if the Commission'could place a stipulation on an application that a certain percentage of occupants or users were non-students. Long said yes, and Schmuch said that the River City Housing Collective was working on that for their new house. Stewart said he thought the Commission did their job with regard to the River City Housing Collective, and the Council has the ultimate responsibility to answer to the community. Renquist said there are new Commission members that may rank groups entirely different. Stewart said that some Commission members met with Mr. Jones, who said that the University did not currently have funds to enter into a partnership with the River City Housing Collective because they were funded with the idea that they would be self-sufficient in five years, and that five years was extended for five more years because the project was not self-sufficient. He said Jones thought the University did what they set out to do with regards to the project. Renquist said Jones provided some history about the River City Housing Collective about reapplying for funds to the University and that they own two houses. She said that the University has some problems with supporting their existing housing like creating a community center and building sidewalks at Hawkeye Court and they cannot apply for federal funds. Stewart said he thought the target population is those that need the funding as spelled out in the CITY STEPS program. Renquist said she felt comfortable with that. RFVIFW AND DISCUSSION OF THF PROPOSFD CHANG!=S TO THE ALLOCATION RANKING SHFFT: Schmuch said that she, Gadson, Kuhlmann and Renquist made some minor changes to the criteria/rankings sheet, and they are open to discussion and changes on any items. Schmuch explained the purpose for the rankings sheet in regards to the funding allocation process. She Housing & Community Develop. Commission Minutes October 16, 1997 Page 5 said that last year, the Commission discussed raising the lower threshold for the total number of points to save members from discussing projects that no one felt were worth funding. Schmuch said the change from 25 to 20 points under Need/Priority was because they wanted some more points put into the leveraging area. She said they scratched criteria number 4, "Project is not duplicating an existing effort," because they did not think duplication of a project was bad if someone had devised a way to do it better. She said they did not want to dock people points if they had a better way to meet a need. She said under the Leverage Resources section, there were various interest rates on the applications, varying from one percent to market rate, so they retained the 3 percent. She said they took the five points from the NeedlPdodty and gave them to Leveraging Resources to average out the process, so that if an individual could pay back more money it would not mean that they got more funding than someone that might leverage a lot of human or in-kind resources. She said that housing projects and projects that could raise more money would get more points than the Furniture Project that did not raise any money. In the Feasibility section, Schmuch said they omitted the fourth question about the project being able to be sustained without further CDBG/HOME funds because some projects are time limited and are good in their time. She said they added the question, "Has applicant documented efforts to secure other funding?" to try to get at the issue in a different way. In the Impact/Benefit section, they added "to the community" to the second question to help Commission members determine the question's intent. She said they shuffled the points around in this category to make all the categories have equal point values and because the outcome data is important. Renquist noted that projects with totals under 60 points, rather than those with 50 points will not receive funding. Schmuch said there are 100 possible points. Stewart said the changes make sense. Moraski said the deleted question under Need/Priority could be restated in a leveraging way if the same community projects are working together for the same effort. She said that she liked the question because duplication can be bad, and the organizations should say how they will be working with the community. Schmuch said the ranking/criteria sheets are meant to be guidelines, and there are many parts to the discussion and decision making process that should be considered that won't be spelled out on the sheet. She said that last year members got too tied to the sheet and did not ask enough questions dudng the allocation process. Stewart said they will see all the projects and what they are doing. Kuhlmann said she thought staff had a safety net about duplication. Long said if the project is a public service project, there can be no duplicates, and staff would check that over. Head said that CDBG is not supposed to fund the same public service project the next year unless they provide additional or expanded service not provided the previous year when they received the funding. Long said staff talks with the public service funding recipients toward achievable goals of providing additional services if they would be interested in receiving future funds. Schmuch said they discussed dividing up leveraging in various ways. She said that public services were getting docked points because they could not generate income, but they often serve the lowest income individuals. She asked if Commission members would want to give more than 10 points to projects that primarily target those individuals in an indirect way. Stewart said the rankings/criteria sheet is a very fluid document, and could be changed often, but he is willing to try this one. Housing & Community Develop. Commission Minutes October 16, 1997 Page 6 Head asked what they had in mind for in-kind financial resources because that question is worth quite a few points and that could be very similar to human resources or volunteers. Stewart mentioned Habitat for Humanity as an example that could get points for both questions. Renquist said she was thinking of a case where a nonprofit organization purchases city property, and the property becomes nontaxable so the City loses tax revenue. She said that some organizations provide the city with money for some city services in lieu of taxes. Schmuch said they had thought of leveraging money thorough banks and other institutions or at the state level. She said if they give $100,000 in HOME funds that could trigger substantial loans from both the private and state sectors, and that is considered other financial resources. She said that in-kind means donated materials, like wood, paint or land. MOTION: Stewart moved to accept the draft proposal of the ranking criteria for CDBGIHOME projects. Moraski seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 7-0. MONITORING RFPORTS: Renquist reported on the CCIA Youth Leadership Program. She said the Youth Leadership Program was allocated $17,000.00 of public service funding. John Boyne is the program director for the Iowa City and Johnson County area. She said she spoke with a VISTA volunteer, and Linda Miller, the CCIA program coordinator in Cedar Rapids. She said most of the funding went to the summer component of the program, and transportation is a big part of that. They have about $3,000 left to use during the course of the year. Renquist said the selected students to participate in 'the program are 6th, 7th and 8th graders from Iowa City, Coralville, Hills, Tiffin and North Liberty. She said students are chosen based on leadership skills, either negative or positive, having lots of unstructured free time and having the likelihood of continuing the program for a long period of time rather than people who are transitory to the community. She said that students participated in the program four days a week during the summer. Miller said the Clear Creek Amana School Distdct let them rent a bus to help save costs. Food costs were also down because Hy-Vee donated food at no cost for one day a week as long as the program used them for the other three days. Renquist said that sixth graders often participated and have high retention rates, and seventh graders had a higher retention rate because the counselors and volunteers worked hard during the after-school program to establish connections and relationships with the kids so they would want to stay. She said the eighth graders do not have high attendance or retention because they could have part-time jobs or be involved in other summer activities. She said they wanted to train some ninth graders for peer counselors so the kids can stay connected with the program as they get older. O~ D BUSINI=SS: Head said the Community Housing Forum's last meeting is scheduled for October 29, 1997. He said October 23 was the original date, but that conflicted with Victor Dover's presentation on neotraditional development. Renquist noted that businesses within these neighborhoods have not been surviving very well lately, and asked how they were going to address that. Long said getting the commercial part to work is the biggest struggle with that type of development. Head said the important part is finding the dght businesses to match the neighborhood and its needs, such as a day care center in a neighborhood. Long showed pictures of some of Dover's developments and other neotraditional developments in other communities. He said they had Housing & Community Develop. Commission Minutes October 16, 1997 Page 7 some controls with the peninsula property, including pdces of lots and homes. Stewart said he thought the peninsula property area was so separated from everything, and is worried that the City may make the project into something it does not want to. Long said that some of the neighborhood photos from other communities look very similar to the older Iowa City neighborhoods. Head said that the consultant is working on the Housing Market Analysis, and they have been requesting different information from staff every week. He said they hope to have a draft report in the next six weeks or so to share with the Commission. NFW BUSIN!=SS: Long said he included articles and information on a living wage, and the comparison of rental to owner-occupied units. He said that he is still working on the number of two-income families in the area, where they work and how far they live from work. ADJOURNM!=NT: MOTION: Stewart moved to adjourn the meeting. Kuhlmann seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 7-0, and the meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Minutes submitted by Traci Howard. I~od(:dbg/mirulx:dc I 016.doc . ' MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1997 - 4:30 P.M. LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM, IOWA CITY CIVIC CENTER MEMBERS PRESENT: Anna Buss, Robert Carlson, Gary Haman, Wayne Maas, John Roffman, John Staska MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Werderitsch STAFF PRESENT: Doug Boothroy, Gary Klinefelter, Dennis Mitchell, Andy Rocca, Kathy Zuekweiler OTHERS PRESENT: Ted Chambers, Mike Cooper, Gary Fitzpatrick, Larry Svoboda I. CAI J. TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 4:30 p.m. by Chairman Carlson, with Haman, Maas, Roffman and Staska present. 2. APPROVAl. OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 6. 1997 MEETING Roffman moved to approved the minutes of the October 6, 1997 meeting as submitted. Haman seconded. The motion earfled unanimously 5-0. Buss arrived at 4:40 p.m. HEAR A REQUI::.ST FOR A MODIFICATION OF SECTION 1006.15 OF THE BUII .DING CODE FOR A STRUCTURE AT 1411 YEWEI.I. STREET Carlson noted that neither the applicant nor a representative for the applicant were present. Carlson stated that the work on the structure was not being done according to either set of plans submitted to the City by the applicant and was not in compliance with the Building Code. Staska moved to deny the request. Haman seconded. Roffman asked if the Board would want to delay the vote on the motion in hopes that the applicant would arrive. Carlson agreed and the vote was delayed. HEAR A REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION OF SECTION 1202(b) OF THE 1982 EDITION OF ~ UNIFORM BUII.DING CODE FOR A STRUCTURE AT 624 S. GII.gERT STREET Carlson stated that at this property, laundry facilities had been installed in the corridor, contrary to code requirements. Chambers stated that he did know that laundry facilities were not permitted to be in the corridor, but noted that the building had undergone substantial remodeling in 1994 and wondered why the violation had not been noted for correction at that time when the laundry facilities could have been relocated with relative ease. Roffman asked ira permit was obtained when the 1994 renovations began. Chambers said that a permit had been obtained. Roffman noted that the placement of the laundry facilities had thus been reviewed and approved twice by the City. Carlson noted that the Board does not have the power to waive the requirements of the Building Code; it can only approve alternate materials or methods of construction. Carlson asked if any alternatives to this Iowa City Board of Appeals November 3, 1997 page two situation exist, such as a fire-rated shutter or door that could be placed in front of the laundry equipment. Chambers stated that these options would be too expensive. Chambers asked who might be liable for the expense of the correction since mistakes were made by the City in approving the plans with the laundry facilities located in the corridor. Maas advised Chambers that he would need to contact an attorney to determine liability. Carlson moved to deny the request, since the Board does not have the power to waive the requirements of the Building Code. Staska seconded. Buss noted that other buildings have the same code deficiency and have passed inspection many times. Carlson said that the location of laundry facilities in the corridor is a fire and life-safety issue and each building with the problem will be required to relocate the laundry facilities to a Building Code-approved location. The motion passed, 5-1, with Buss opposed. Larry Svoboda asked if an appeal had been granted by the Board for the structure at621 Iowa Avenue to not have a secondary fire escape. Roffinan replied that the skylights had been changed to be working skylights to provide a secondary means of egress. Svoboda wanted to know why a second set of staffs to provide egress had not been required, and said that it was his understanding that the Board of Appeals had waived this requirement. Carlson stated that he did not recall details of the specific request and the Board's action and would respond to Svoboda in writing. o I-IEAR A REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION OF SECTION 1006 OF TIqE BUII,DING CODE FOR A STRUCTURE AT 411 S. SUMMIT Carlson said that plans were submitted for a building permit for remodeling on this structure that showed installation of a new interior staircase. This new staircase was not installed and the existing stairs do not meet code specifications. Fitzpatrick said that no engineering had been done on the plans for the remodeling. Once the project had begun, Fitzpatrick said remodeling the stairs became a larger project than originally planned so the stairs remodeling was abandoned. Fitzpatrick also noted that the property is located in a Historic Preservation district, which adds considerations to any potential exterior stair addition or remodeling. Roffman asked what specifically were the problems with the stairs. Klinefelter replied that the interior stairs were only 26 inches wide. Roffman asked if the existing exterior stairs met code Specifications. Klinefelter said he was not sure. Carlson noted that since both interior and exterior stairs exist, if the exterior stairs meet code requirements for dimensions and egress, the interior stairs may not be required to comply. Klinefelter stated that Ron Boose would have to answer that question to ensure compliance with the Building Code. Carlson asked if the building is currently occupied. Fitzpatrick replied that it is. Carlson then asked if there would be any harm in delaying the decision on this appeal until the December meeting to allow Boose to be present at the meeting and to obtain more accurate drawings of the two staircases, showing exact dimensions. Carlson moved to delay a decision on this item until the next meeting. Roffman seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Iowa City Board of Appeals November 3, 1997 page three HEAR A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 14-5E-17K4 OF TI-1g. HOUSING CODE (CEIIING HEIGHT) FOR A STRUCTURE AT 1326 YEWEl ,l. STREET Carlson asked the applicant if this is a Moffit house. Cooper replied that it is. Carlson asked Rocca if the Fire Department had any objection to granting this variance. Rocca replied that the Fire Department had no objection. Carlson moved to approve the variance. Staska seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Carlson returned to the vote on Item 3, a request for a modification for Section 1006.15 of the Building Code for the structure at 1411 Yewell Street. The applicant had not arrived. Carlson stated that there were a motion and a second to deny the appeal. The motion carded unanimously. 7. OTHER BUSINESS Roffman asked what had happened with the other Moffit house that the Board had toured. Boothroy replied that the Board of Adjustment had granted the property owner a variance. Carlson reported that it is his understanding that Hodge's building at 130 Jefferson Street had been stabilized according to the engineer's specifications. Carlson stated that at the October meeting, the Board asked to send a memorandum to City Council regarding the Fire Department and a draft of the memo had been prepared for the Board to dimuss. Carlson stated that there was some sentiment that forwarding the memo to Council may be contrary to the best interest of the Fire Department and asked Rocca for his opinion. Rocca said that he felt the discussion needed to progress from the Board to the Council, however he would like to work on some of the wording of the memo before it was sent to Council. Carlson stated that some of the basis of the discussion which was not reflected in the memo concerned the Fire Department operating at 1972 staffing levels and the expanded population and geographic area of Iowa City. Rocca stated that he would like staff to work on the memo and represent it to the Board Chair for review. 8. ADJOURNMENT Roffman moved for adjournment at 5:05 p.m. Buss seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved and the meeting adjourned. Minutes submitted by Kathy Zuckweiler. Approved: Robert Carlson, Board Chair MINUTES IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE ROOM THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 1997 - 5:00 P.M. AGENDA ITEM 3A Members Present: Linda Dellspurger, Stephen Greenleaf, Mary McMurray, Mark Martin, Lisa Parker, Anne Spencer, Jesse Singerman, Chuck Traw Members Absent: Jim Swaim Staff Present: Barbara Black, Maeve Clark, Susan Craig, Larry Eckholt, Debb Green, John Hiett, Craig Johnson, Martha Lubaroff, Liz Nichols, Hal Penick, Bridget Quinn-Carey Others: Julia Venske, Practicum Student CALL TO ORDER: President Singerman called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. New Board member Linda Dellspurger was introduced to the Board and all Trustees welcomed her and introduced themselves. McMurray asked a question regarding her tenure on the Friends Foundation Board and whether her status changed with the addition of Dellspurger as a new Board member. The answer was that McMurray's tenure as member of the Friends Foundation Board was unchanged. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: SDecial meeting of October 14 Regular meeting of October 93. Spencer pointed out an error. She did not vote in opposition of accepting the Internet Policy as it stood. She was in favor. Greenleaf was opposed. Minutes for both meetings were approved as corrected. Spencer/McMurray UNFINISHED BUSINFSS " Kiosk I;)lacement Craig pointed out that it is Eckholt, not Penick, who met with Nichols, Craig and Swaim to decide on the kiosk location. After four site visits by Nichols and Eckholt and evaluation of the responses by the committee, the decision was made to place it in Sycamore Mall. It was felt the ideal location would not be a single store location. Eastdale and Sycamore Mall have multiple stores. In a mall, there would be more browsers and for that reason Sycamore Mall seemed to be the best location. The mall manager was supportive and gave every indication that we could put a book drop there in the future; he also will work with us to find a location for a Friends used Book Store. The cable and telephone hookup is ready. He also agreed to place the kiosk in a very high traffic location near Walgreen's and Baskin Robbins. Singerman asked for discussion. A motion was made by McMurray that we accept the recommendation to place the kiosk in Sycamore Mall. It was seconded by Martin and passed unanimously. Internet Dolicy ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES November 20, 1997 Page 2 Agenda item 3A This discussion was continued from the October meeting. Singerman stated there were two issues on the table that need to be talked about. One concerned unlimited access by children and the other concerned the possibility of a higher standard of parental permission at the library. What resources exist to implement the decisions, what resources are needed to do these things and what methods are available to do them? Singerman asked if there were other questions Board members felt needed resolution and attention. Craig reviewed what the staff had done in response to the Board's queries since the last Board meeting. A cover memo and contents page from Craig detailed the responses from staff which were included in the packet. In addition, Craig explained, there had been opportunity for staff input and further discussion which took place with management, the committee and at a full staff meeting. Department heads from two departments most involved with the public and internet access had brief statements. Debb Green spoke first. As Children's Services Coordinator. Green's remarks addressed issues of unrestricted access to ideas, ICPL's commitment and history of providing services and collections, which are inclusive in nature. Current policies are consistent in their recognition and support of the right of children to use the library to find information in a private and confidential manner. These policies give parents the responsibility and right to make decisions which restrict their own child's use of library materials. A policy which restricts access based on age or requiring staff to use outside commercial filter parameters sets a precedent for other restrictions and challenges from both sides of the "parental choice" fence. Maeve Clark, Information Services Coordinator spoke next. She addressed a central tenet of ICPL which is to provide access to information. She pointed out that as non-print formats of information have become available, the library has provided these formats to the public. Another value of the library is to educate our users so that they can better use the resources we have. She gave examples of various classes, open houses, tours and explained that for the past 18 months librarians have been teaching users how to use the World Wide Web. An educated user can become an independent user, freeing the library staff to better serve those who need more assistance. Limited access to the Intemet for a class of users would necessitate changes in the delivery of our service. During the previous 3 weeks, Information Services estimated that, roughly, 25% of internet users were under the age of 16. If these individuals suddenly had to have mediated service the staffing impact would be significant., In response to a question, the Children's Room does not now have a World Wide Web station. Nichols demonstrated the ICPL home page to display what will be available on our Web site. She demonstrated what features would be available on the kids page. She clicked on lists of books, programs, etc. and demonstrated links for children. Staff have gathered what they feel would be the best links for kids. She showed a search engine called Yahooligans which is specifically for kids. It provides some control over what kids can access. She mainly wanted to demonstrate that many, if not most, of our younger clientele in the Childrens Room are going to find a high percentage of their needs met through use of similar sites. If we are to be consistent with our existing policies, we would not typiclly restrict their access to only these sites. Since we let kids go to other sites in our collection, it is up to parents. Singerman opened the discussion by asking if it is possible to limit sites on only one computer? Penick explained that although you could find software that would restrict the sites there are so many sites, and they change constantly, it would be virtually impossible to keep up to date. It is possible to have different selections at different computers. ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES November 20, 1997 Page 3 Agenda item 3A For kids just learning, using the Yahooligan's page, would be helpful. One could get back to the ICPL Home page if they know how. When we do place the terminal in the Children's Room, with certain restrictions, should we enforce kids only using that terminal and when can they move into the rest of the library where there would unlimited access? One suggestion would be to have another childtens terminal in the Children's room, but not limit access to other computers. Singerman supports this option. Traw stated that he was aware of the effort and input made by staff. He would be disappointed if staff did not have the passion they do for open access. The Library and its staff is a bastion for us all. He stated that he was somewhat upset about the memo from Craig. Since it is part of the public record, he wants to be clear that he does not think that the Board's responsibility is limited to policies that relate to how the library conducts itself. He also said that no one on the Board suggested that the Library not take guidance from the ALA Bill of Rights. He disagrees with the concept that we interfere with parent-child relationship by doing something. Board or staff should not make decisions about what kids can access. But, in a public library, parents should be able to restrict access for their kids. Traw is interested in a policy that allows a parent to make that choice for their child at a certain age. He suggests a change in the policy so parents would have to give permission for children of a certain age to use the Internet. McMurray explained that she has fewer problems somehow with parents being informed that the Internet is available and that we don't filter. If they choose to have a kid come unattended then its their choice or between them and their kids. She feels we do have an extra duty to inform parents about what the policy means. She has some difficulty with policing each individual child. Parker asked what is done presently. Clark responded that patrons check in at the page station. If there is a terminal available, a page goes with them, logs them on, they can use it. When their time is up, page clears the terminal of what they were looking at. The terminal is ready for next person. There is a process to insure that nothing is left on the screen. No card is necessary. People don't need library cards for any in-building service. Dellspurger asked what the library does to limit access to minors in other parts of the collection. For example, the Madonna book. Do we' have restrictions to other materials in the library? The answer is that we do not have any restrictions. Dellspurger feels the issue is the same and access should not be restricted. We try to inform parents about our open collection policy. However, these materials are not located in the children's room. We could do the same thing; not limit access but put something different in the children's room. Traw has a difficult time with the difference between the collection and everything available on the Intemet. As far as the collection is concerned, he feels, some selection process has taken place. Traw's issue is parental permission. Singerman's issue is particular to the children's room site being different. Martin read an excerpt from Cedar Rapids Public Library policy that puts the responsibility on the parent. Library staff is not to police children, it means making clear to parents that it is available and they have to decide what type of permission to give their child. He suggests informing loudly to community that we have the availability of Internet access and parents who are concerned have to set rules and regulations for kids. Spencer says there is a difference between policing and kids who inadvertently access a site they didn't want to access. Our responsibility is to educate the users. A site in the Children's Room ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES November 20, 1997 Page 4 Agenda item 3A that has a selected home page makes the Intemet available as an educational and learning process. Library cannot prevent their exploring more. Parker questioned Traw about his parental guidance perspective. A working parent, for example, cannot come down with a child. If you don't want your kid to have access to materials, how do you stop that? But then you pass that need to control your child to the library staff. If you feel that you need to exert that control over your child, then you need a caregiver. Greenleaf shares Traw's concern about a parent friendly atmosphere and the practicalities that each format presents. Books are inherently limited beause of reading ability. Each media presents a different problem. He wants to find a way that maximizes a parent's ability to fe~l they can send their kid to the library and feel comfortable; this is a different technology and presents a different set of problems. Agreement seems to be in favor of promoting and encouraging parental guidance and not library censorship. The question is boiling down to do we want some kind of affirmative permission from parents to allow access. The Childrens page is good and channels exploration to age appropriate information. Do we want to require affirmative parental permission or do we want to just say to parents that when their kids come to the library we are not going to control their access7 Singerman asked whether when kids apply for cards, parents are with them. We don't require it now so that kids who visit the library with a neighbor or caregivers can get cards. Parents are informed by mail that their child has a card and that children have access to all the collections. Materials we mail have not been modified for the internet but should and will be. Since we have had public internet in the library, the letter we send to each school age child in the fall describing our resources and open collection policy includes information about internet access. Nichols says we could add something like a Safety Tips sheet to be included in the letter. Spencer sees the Home page for kids as protection and parents should know it's available. Parents can instruct their children about that terminal. What about other terminals in the library that are kid friendly and available? Craig asked Penick if the Info Page could make a choice so children would get a kids home page at whatever computer they were using. Dellspurger says kids are very savvy about this resource. You are not protecting kids the way you think they are. If a child has a plan he can get to where he wants. Spencer's suggestion is that we have multiple sites set up in the library that are user friendly to children making it easier for children to learn in a more channeled environment. Children's Room access is a year away since its not going to be set up until FY99. Spencer is worried about inadvertent access. Are they less likely to access all sites? Traw opposes policing what's available for children; but is in favor of making certain preselected sites easily available for kids. Greenleaf suggested a heads up letter for parents, publicizing the openness of access at library and parents responsibility to work with their kids rather than any kind of policing. Martin wants to make a distinction between policy and education. There is no way to control what kids can get too, Educate parents as often as we can, in as many ways as we can, He will oppose a policy that would put library and staff in the position of being police. Singerman asked if there were any motions to change the policy as it stands. There was no motion to change the policy. Singerman stated that there is not support to limiting access to children of any age. Traw says he doesn't agree with unlimited access but can't articulate it. Parker is on the fence and doesn't want to change the policy but believes we should followup on ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES November 20, 1997 Page 5 Agenda item 3A education of parents and continue following up on it. Is there a reason to include a phrase in the policy about responsibility to educate people? Martin suggested that several Board members get together to make the policy stronger and write changes in the policy that are educational in nature and informative. Greenleaf asked if a policy is the right place or is there another way to say that what the Board wants the community to know, like a resolution. He says that this policy is consistent with our other policies and would not change it. On the other hand, we need to educate the public, inform parents, find practical ways to make parents job easier, and not make librarians job more difficult. He volunteered to work on a resolution. Greenleaf, Parker, Spencer and Martin will work on it and have something for the next meeting. This will be followed up with a press release, article in Press Citizen, etc. NEVV BUSINESS Staff Reports Craig reported on her budget meeting with the City Manager and Finance Director regarding the FY99 budget. It was positive. The most questions related to the half time maintenance position. Arkins said he wouldn't recommend it but instead would recommend an hourly position in almost the same hours. The hourly incease in the pay plan, funds for extra sundays all seemed to meet his approval. Capitol improvements.included HVAC, phone, carpet, ICN room, remote book drop sites, etc. He believes the way they will handle them will be from revenue bonds, not out of the operating budget. Craig's impression was that except for the permanent position, he would move our request to the City Council for acceptance. Anything can happen when an entire budget is put together but he seemed in favor of everything except for the permanent staff position. The Legislative Reception was successful. Singerman, Greenleaf, Parker, and Swaim attended. All local legislators present are receptive to library issues. Dellspurger asked about state funding for libraries. Craig updated them on Enrich Iowa. They are trying to get it in the governor's budget. He is negotiating with them regarding the program. Craig is hopeful that we will see something in the budget. Issues this year are ongoing funding, philosophical issues related to possible restrictions to ICN and possibly removal of the exemption that libraries and several other institutions have regarding the obscenity laws. Partners in Reading. SE Jr. High, 8th grade lit teacher, Pat Schnack manages this 5 week project in which you are partnered with a student in one of her classes. You agree to read a book of your choosing. Student and partner write in and exchange a journal. We're trying to recruit from Library Board, to get a total of 28 people at the library to say they'll do it. You will meet your student after 5 weeks. Starts end of January and goes through January/February. New pictures of board members. We are going to redo the Trustees picture board and take new pictures. Please supply a new black & white 3x5 picture or we'll take one. We'll ask you again next month. Development Office report - included in packet. Mailing is going well. Book Gala went well. Singerman said she missed the presence of library staff talking about books at the Gala. Inservice Day reminder. RSVP to Lubaroff for all or part of day. ICPL BOARD OF TRUSTEES November 20, 1997 Page 6 Agenda item 3A The new Assistant City Attorney assigned to work with the Library is Andy Matthews. PRESIDENTS REPORT We need to choose a new Board Secretary due to Cox's resignation. Singerman asked for volunteers. Spencer volunteered. Dellspurger moved for approval. Greenleaf seconded. It was unanimous. Committee Reports A. Building Committee Singerman reported on the last meeting. There was good representation. CenterSpace had three people there. They reviewed the revised feasibility study on the project. It appears that the cultural project looks better financially than last time with lower operating costs due to scaled back size. The group wa~ also provided with other information regarding similar projects in the U.S. for people to contact. Library people asked CenterSpace group to flush out program in terms of what will actually happen in the space so we can have something concrete to present to people. Next meeting is January 19 and we're asking them to get it done by then. Greenleaf felt they realized they had to come up with a program to sell to the public and they were in agreement. Another thing is that our project seems to be tied with the idea that it will only go through with a sales tax which means that we have the hurdle of the sales tax. There is agreement to go to the City and ask for financial scenarios that included no sales tax and address issues of operating budgets and then vigorously attack this issue with new council with the understanding that we need a resolution to put proposal on ballot by June. Board members suggested that the City prepare these financial models. Franklin will take care of it. Martin reported that Summerwill was pretty clear about the fact that it is getting to the time when they have to get something going or free the library from this partnership They asked how they could allow us to go forward if it is determined this multiuse project is not feasible. They agreed that they would have to go very public with that. We also want to talk about methods of going forward to get public input. In response to Traw's question to Eckholt, fundraising for the project is on hold until we get a bond issue passed. DISBURSEMFNTS Review Visa expenditures for October. Approve disbursements for October. Martin moves for approval. Parker seconds. All approved. ADJOURNMENT: Traw/Martin Minutes recorded and submitted by Martha Lubaroff. POLICE CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD DECEMBER 4, 1997 - 4:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER Temporary Chairman P. Hoffey called the meeting to order at 4:06 P.M. Board members present: M. Raymond, P. Farrant, L. Cohen, $. Watson and P. Hoffey. Staff present: S. Bauer and M. Karr. Also present was ILJ. Winkelhake. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion by J. Watson and seconded by P. Farrant for adoption of Consent Calendar. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL * Adopt PCKB Bylaws as recommended by Rules Committee Iowa City Police Chief ILl. Winkelhake presented its Policy Manual Section of the Policy and Operating Procedures Manual. Some of these statements are particular to the Iowa City Police Department, but the majority are in all police departments. Chief Winkelhake requested comments and suggestions from the Board. A question and answer forum ensued. The PCRB Board decided it will discuss at a later time any further comments or recommendations with respect to these Policy Manual It was agreed that this presentation by Chief Winkelhake will be followed at future meetings with a presentation and discussion of Accreditation and then a discussion of the Iowa City Police Department Rules and Regulations. FUTURE MEETINGS Dates set aside by the Board for future meetings include: December 11, 1997, 4:00 P.M. - 6:00 P.M. · December 16, 1997 4:00 P.M. - 6:00 P.M. and at 6:30 P.M. - Reception and introduction to City Council. · December 22, 1997, 7:00 A.M. - 9:00 A.M. · December 23, 1997, 7:00 A.M. - 9:00 A.M. · January 8, 1998, 7:00 P.M. - 9:00 P.M. · January 22, 1998, 7:00 P.M. - 9:00 P.M. · January 29, 1998, 7:00 P.M. - 9:00 P.M. PCRB - Minutes 12/04/97 Page 2 ADJOURNMENT Staff encouraged Board members to let them know of any times in January they will be unavailable for other meetings. A general discussion followed regarding report-writing. City Clerk M. Karr noted staff availability to assist in this at any level the PCRB directed. Various options were suggested and discussed. It was a general consensus that staff should not write the reports, but legal counsel should review them. The majority of the Board agreed to share the responsibilities of report-writing amongst themselves, and to discuss its various options at a later date. Motion for adjournment by M. Raymond and seconded by P. Farrant. Motion carried, 5/0, all members present. Meeting adjourned 6:25 P.M.